I always here people saying God doesn't exist and that there is so much evidence to prove it. They want people to prove that he does exist, yet cannot prove that he doesn't.
2007-01-12 12:13:20 · 17 answers · asked by adam W 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They can't prove it, they'll demand proof that he does exist and even if you provide them with proof they will reject it. They try to say they have the logical choice not providing any proof that it is logic, there is plenty of proof all around us that God exists they will reject it because to accept it they would have to be accountable for themselves and they don't want that. They tend to point to science, they try to say science can make what God makes which isn't in least bit true they can only work with what God has given. For instance you can say to a scientist well make a flower and the scientist will say easy enough I just plant a seed, so you say to the scientist make a seed, they can't do it.
God the logical choice.
2007-01-12 12:27:02 · answer #1 · answered by Angelz 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It cannot be actually proven that God does not exist yet, but it can't be proven that God DOES exist either. If god's existence hasn't been proven, then why should it be believed that he does exist?
In fact, not only hasn't it been proven, but there are not even significant signs that makes it possible, let alone probable that God exists as is the case with developing science theories.
Add to that the great number of irregularities in the bible and the doctrines of Christianity, and perhaps you'll be able to understand why some people are skeptical.
2007-01-12 12:59:27 · answer #2 · answered by [operatic stock character] 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"I always here people saying God doesn't exist and that there is so much evidence to prove it."
No you don't. You just made that up.
What makes you think that lying does you any good? When you're a little older you'll realize that your reputation is important, and you'll regret trashing it like this.
As for the third sentence, pay attention to the folks who explained the burden of proof. They've given you good advice on how not to keep making a fool of yourself this way.
2007-01-12 12:22:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I AM SO GLAD TO SAY THAT I CAN NOT DO THIS AS JESUS SAID GOD EXIST
EXCEPT OR REJECT JESUS GENEALOGY AND 2007 CALENDAR TIME
~~~~ Gen.1:1,2 All Exist. 1:3-25 Earth prepared. Space Job 38:30-32;
0130 Adam Gen.5:3
0105 Shem Gen.5:6
0090 Enos Gen.5:9
0070 Cainan Gen.5:12
0065 Mahalaleel Gen.5:15
0162 Jared Gen.5:18
0065 Enoch Gen.5:21
0187 Methusalen Gen.5:25
0182 Lamech Gen.5:28; 1056 Noah born.
0600 age of Noah, Flood Gen.7:6; 1656 flood year at 1656 after Adam.
0000 Noah 350 years Gen.9:28,29; Shem 502 years Gen.11:10,11,
0222 Gen.11:10,11, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22,24 is Terah at, 222 years.
0205 427 Gen.11:32 [ 205 dies ]; Gen.12:4; Abraham age 75. Matt.1:1-17;
0430 857 Exo.7,7; 12:40,41; Gal.3:16-18 [ Abraham & 430 to law ];
0040 897 Num.33:38,39 [ Deut.34:7 Aaron & Moses die ];
0000 898th after flood. Josh.5:6,10,12; 14th day of New Year.
0000 Judges 11:26; 300 & 898 after flood, is 1198. 1212 BC
0000 Acts 13:20 450 & 857 is 1307 after flood. 1103 BC
0000 1Ki.2:10,11 David [ 1037 BC ]. Ruth 4:18-22; 1Chr.3:1-17;
0480 1Ki.6:1; Promised Land 897 to 1377 after flood. 1033 BC
0036 1Ki.11:42 Solomon dies 1413 after flood. 997BC
3069 & 997 & 2007 is 6073 after Adam as LOST to SAVED.
0000 Rev.20:6; 1000 year reign of Jesus. 1000 is 7072 years accounted for.
THIS IS NOT THE AGE OF EARTH AS IT EXISTED AND WAS IN PREPARATION.
2007-01-12 14:00:33 · answer #4 · answered by jeni 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I see no way to prove that he doesnt exist because I see so much evidence that he does
2007-01-12 12:22:53 · answer #5 · answered by GroundZERO 63 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
You are the one saying that something exists. When I said something exists, I'll try and prove it.
2007-01-12 12:17:56 · answer #6 · answered by Marlon 1 · 3⤊ 1⤋
you can't prove the non-existence of something, we all know there is no such thing as a neon pink polka dotted giraffe but we can't prove that, your logic is illogical, if you can't prove the existence of something the conclusion is it doesn't exist but you can never prove the non existence of something, your arguement isn't valid
2007-01-12 12:28:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sorry to burst your bubble of ignorance but the burden of proof is on YOU to prove god exists, not the other way around.
Let me put it in terms you can understand;
If I were to tell you that I worship a magic milk jug that never runs out of milk no matter how much I pour out of it, would you believe me?
No, of course not, only a moron would. You'd want proof? And if I refuse to provide proof, it can only mean one thing, that I'm lying.
Same thing with your magic sky-pixie. You provide no proof yet continually say that he exists.
So either you're insane, or you're lying. Which is it?
2007-01-12 12:22:43 · answer #8 · answered by Yoda Greene 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No matter how many times this question is asked there is no way to intelligently answer this question.
This question is kinda like the chicken and the egg.
I suggestion if you believe in God then forget about the people who don't.
No matter what we say about not believing....your belief will stand strong....just go with that.
2007-01-12 12:23:34 · answer #9 · answered by daljack -a girl 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
You can't logically prove a negative. But we don't need to. You're the one claiming there's a god; you prove it. If I claimed to have a cure for cancer, you'd want some proof before shelling out a million bucks for it, right? What if I said 'prove me wrong' - would you risk it?
2007-01-12 12:22:53 · answer #10 · answered by eri 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋