Is it harder to prove or disprove the existence of God?

Question

Please give examples .

Answer 1

One cannot prove a negative. The default philosophical stance concerning a positive assertion is non-belief until such positive assertion has been adequately demonstrated to be true. Therefore there is no need for anyone to "disprove" God because the burden of proof rests squarely upon the shoulder of those who make the positive assertion ("God exists" is the positive assertion). In failing to do so or being otherwise unable to provide such proof, one is justified in taking the stance of non-belief.

But to even attempt to prove something, one must at least possess a minimal comprehension of the terms and concepts being used. "God" is a muddled, incoherent concept that lacks any sort of conceivable nature, traits and comprehensibility. Therefore debating the existence of this "God" is like debating about the color of Thursday... both are nonsensical and cannot yield meaningful results.

Answer 2

A few points:
1) You cannot prove a negative
2) Burden of proof lies with the proponent of the theory, not the negative
3) The existence of God cannot be proved until evidence to the contrary might be brought
4) The non existence of God can be assumed until such a time evidence to the contrary can be brought
5) It is most likely, in evidential terms, that God does not exist - as regular sources of proof have turned up fruitless (e.g. sight, sound, touch, taste, smell)
6) It is proposed that God himself wants to keep himself hidden, and being omnipotent, is able to do so in order that faith be attained by humans. This theory can only be upheld if God fails, which contridicts the notion that God is infallible.

Therefore, it is easy to prove that there is no proof that God exists, but this does not neccessarily mean that such proof might be found at some point in the future.

Answer 3

It depends on what you beleive God is...

If God where, as some claim, to be in everything (the Universe), then everything would be God, and neither Science or Religion could really accept this answer.

Religion demands faith without proof, and science demands proof without faith.

Most religions see God as a separate entity to everything, and that only in one or two occurances throughout history has God ever taken Human Form.

Science may find or already have found proof of the existence of God, and this proof may be nothing more than a string of numbers or letters on a page; meaningless other than being the answer to a question.

Answer 4

Agreed with others--it is a matter of faith. If God could be proved we would need no faith at all. Thus, we would not have to believe.
Now, having said that, does it really matter? I think it was Voltaire that said it costs nothing to believe so why not believe?
At the same time, I don't think I would want to go about attempting to prove that an invisible, all powerful, but none the less globally ineffective entity existed. Maybe so, but why push the issue?
Pushing the issue is what gives Evangelicals a bad name, expecially the ones in offshoot churches and those I class as "nut fundamentalists."

Answer 5

I don't see how anyone can believe in God, they can only have faith. Faith is belief without proof.

I don't see how anyone can prove or disprove in the existance of God.

Sometimes people say God must exist because of the beauty of the earth, but beauty is totally relative. What does a tapeworm or dung beetle find beautiful?

Some people are living hell here and now, on this Earth. Most of us are doing too little or nothing to help.

In my experience a lot of peoples outward good intentions are a camouflage for some selfish motive. People are almost totally motivated bt selfishness. That or fear.

If there is a God very, very few people are going the whole way to try and please him.

Answer 6

Hi Bill,
I find it very easy and here's the example. If I go into a cave where people told no one ever entered. And when i go in i find an empty bottle, chocolate paper, traces of fire and veal ribs. This is a proof that someone entered that cave and not only that, but that person drank ate and lit a fire. God trace and proof of existing is his creations.

THE ORANGE
We often take things for granted while it is amazing. You water a tree and it gives you an orange that tastes great, sugary and has lots of vitamins in it. It also have a cover with an expiry date if green: don't eat yet orange: eat brown:rotten. How is all that related to watering the tree? Who put sugar, vitamin C and taste in it? Amazing device.

FINGER PRINTS
Amazing. But why? There is no technology on earth that is able to make so many codes in such a small area. Not only that but every ear, eye, nose, liver, DNA, cells etc. is different from the other. But why are we coded? Because someday we will be retrieved.

HUMANS
If we can create a robot that walks, talks, runs, swims, dives, feels, invent, has it's own mind, REPRODUCE, CROWS etc... Wouldn't be amazing? If you can invent anythin even a peace of plastic that grows or reproduce than you're a billionaire.

The list goes on and on and I don't want to wear you out here but the most amazing of all is the univers. Astronomy will show you a definit proof of God and how he is Great, Powerful, big, the ultimate chemist, phisician.

I'd like to thank God for: my automatic heart, digestion, liver function, my semi-automatic breething to hold it underwater. Thank God for the accurate orbit of the Earth (the north pole is too cold and the equator is too hot any change in the orbit means we're all f****) thank God for ganting me two humans that fed me and took care of me when I was a helpless defensless baby.
Read the books of the jews, christians and muslims. This where i got my moderate wisdom.

Answer 7

It would be impossible to prove God does not exist. How would you know you had covered all angles and all possibilities You could if you found a way prove he existed by presenting GOD. therefore the only way to prove he does not exist is to prove that he does..... Could get quite complicated really.

Answer 8

I'd have to say it's easier to prove, the first example being that polls consistently show that most people believe God exists.

My second example is myself - I looked for absolute proof either way and found only the proof that God does exist.

So, personally and globally, the evidence says: easier to prove.

Proof - The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.

Answer 9

Personally I'd argue that it's harder to prove. There is nothing tangible to prove that God exists. You cannot show someone God, only a concept and belief system. Proof demands evidence.

Answer 10

You cannot prove Gods existance, thats why its called faith...

scientifically things would appear that any Bible and/or religion is not really correct on the whole thing of creation... with the huge omisions and contradictions and flaws found in the bible.

Scientifically you could prove 1000 reasons why there is no god, but sometimes people with the faith, have the 1 reason thats good enough for them to beleive.