Atheists: If you had absolute proof of the nonexistance of God...?

Question

would you release such information to the world, or would you keep it to yourself? Think about all the broken hearts, would you really want to do that to so many people? Think about the repercussions, too.

Think about this first.

I personally believe in God, it's a hypothetical question.

Answer 1

there is only one truth, and the realization of it is beautiful --- all beings know the truth (somewhere inside themselves), so i have few problems with what you describe as "forced enlightenment"

p.s. i'm not what could be called an atheist, i'm something different


11:11

Answer 2

There is no logical reason, ever, to hide the truth regarding any subject. It only retards humanity in the long run. They tried it when Galileo proved that the earth was not the center of the universe. He was held under house arrest by the Pope for the rest of his life.
Only fools would want to continue believing in something that isn't true, no matter how disappointing it might be.
The disappointment would only involve the generations that grew up on that information. The following generations would be taught the truth as children, and probably laugh at what they consider the foolishness of the generations before them.

Religion is the result of mans fear of death and his inability to explain his existence. It's based on "faith" who's literal meaning is "belief without proof." It has been used to exploit and contol the masses and their money throughout time. If you can promise them life after death they will give you anything they have. The Catholice church is by far the most succesful, in light of the fact that they have convinced their members to send them untold billions over time. Religion continues to be the most succesful business of all time.
There is only one truth...mathematics, not religion. It's what rules the universe and all things, and that certainly includes mankind.
The study of Astronomy (not astrology) and cosmology will open a far more wonderous world for you than any of of those silly beliefs that insult your intelligence, because they can be PROVEN!

I absolutely believe something created all this, but unlike others, I make no claim to know what, or who, it is. But, I'll bet whatever it is, it's out there somewhere appalled at the ignorance that prevails, and the bloody, horrific wars people are willing to wage over the differences in their unprovable religious beliefs.
Why would any intelligent person want to hide such an important truth as that?

Answer 3

If you had absolute proof Santa did not exist would you keep that a secret? How about the Easter Bunny? Tooth Fairy? People's hearts are broken all the time. If I had the proof then of course I'd tell the world. People can deal with the information and the heartbreak. The only people with more explaining to do would be the evangelists who claim to speak with God. Most religious people don't care if there is or is not proof of God. It is comforting for them to believe the soul goes somewhere after death. Most atheists don't care if someone else has faith in a god. Religion or lack of one is a choice. Proof is relative, some believe it some won't. Make a choice with information you'd be comfortable with.

Answer 4

There is no such thing as proof of nonexistence. What does exist is a total lack of evidence of existence...like the evidence for Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster.

If I were to somehow come across such strange evidence, however, I would not have a problem with releasing it. Truth is preferable to lies...even pleasant ones. Besides, it would be unlikely to change anything. The believers would just proclaim it to be manufactured by the devil or faked somehow and go on their merry way. Just like they do now.

Answer 5

There exists a lot of scientific and empirical evidence disproving certain events in the Bible and none-the-less many people accept it literally. Fact doesn't necessarily play a role in whether or not many people believe in a religion to begin with. If science ever comes down to showing how life started, and it had nothing to do with a god: I tend to think that it would take a long time for that to sink in to the bastions of religion. Let's face it, our society is not scientifically "literate". So if science proves the origins of life to be based in natural causes most of the populace would not understand the proof anyway. To answer your question-If I could prove the "nonexistence of God" I would definitely release it.
I cannot comment on the repercussions, because I do not know what you assume those repercussions would be.

Answer 6

I can't imagine having absolute proof of the nonexistence of gods, but I had such proof, yes, I'd release it to the world.

I do think that you raise a good point, though. Atheists are more concerned about truth than about compassion, while believers sacrifice truth often to show compassion. I do believe that in the long run we'd be better off with honesty, though.

Answer 7

The fact of the matter is that believers would continue to believe, no matter what the evidence is. Religion has a powerful way to make people believe the most outrageous things, even if there is no evidence.
They don't care about evidence.
Intelligent believers open an exception in their minds for absurd thinking and illogical reasoning.
It is more like a neurological issue. For instance, it would be very difficult to make liberals or conservatives to change their minds, even if facts contradict their opinion.
Atheists would embrace the idea of a living God if there was objective evidence, that could be corroborated by others. We seek the truth.
We just don't respect believers with hatred or those who feel they speak for God. We are simply honest in our thoughts.
We don't bargain our thoughts and actions for eternal rewards.

Answer 8

Ahh... The conflict between "Truth" and "Belief", the choice of doing "what is right" and "what is easy"...

It would be easy to just "say nothing" to avoid the broken hearts, but it wouldn't be right in the long run. Everyone deserves to hear the truth, even if they don't want to listen. (After all, isn't that the message that Christians are working on when they send missionaries out into the world?)

I would say something. If by repercussions, you mean "death squads intent on silencing the truth", then I'll just risk it. It's not like anyone's listening to me now when I tell them... ;)

Answer 9

I would release such information as fast as it Humanly possible in order to push us to the next level of evolutionay developement. The first sign a species is becoming sentient is when they have evolved to the point where they can abstract enough to invent a god. The first time a species achieves sentient maturity is when they get rid of their gods.

Answer 10

Religion is a two bladed sword. It soothes folks that need a
crutch to cling onto, but at the same time it fuels fanatics
actions - Witness what is going on in Iraq. Dont forget other stuff
like the inquisition, suicide bombers in Israel, etc. Wonder whose
God is saving the folks in Darfur?, etc. If there is a God, then he
is either evil or incompetant.

Answer 11

First you have to consider if what we all have been told is true. If you take that into consideration, then we could not have incontrivertable evidence to the absence of a higher deity.

Second, if indeed there is proof of a deity non-existence, who's to say that this may not become a religion of its own say like something like: "Empirical Theology."

So would I tell people about it? probably, just due to the fact of inconclusive and contradictory evidence that is given in the old and new testaments of what christianity should be.