After all, none of us know everything, so to say flatly, "God doesn't exist" is presumptuous isn't it?
2007-05-10 02:11:17 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
i do agree
and have said before
anyone who claims to know " there is no God "
cannot know
and yes it is presumptuous
I would have every respect for people who just dont believe because they have no reason to believe
2007-05-10 02:15:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely. To flatly say that God doesn't exist is most definitely presumptuous and arrogant.
Since at this particular point in time (and the time may never come) we don't have the ability to either prove or disprove the existence of any God or Goddess. All we can go by is what we FEEL is right in our hearts.
Either you believe in a God or you don't, but there is no empirical proof that God, any God doesn't exist.
Did that make sense?
2007-05-10 04:40:00 · answer #2 · answered by meg3f 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
Any good scientist will tell you that you can't prove non-existance.
Which is why the ultimatum that started the Iraq war was so idiotic.
Further, you CAN prove anything. All you need is a witness, but unless every witness can reproduce and support their proof in a quantifiable way, it's still not valid.
Better to leave the God question in the realm of opinion.
2007-05-10 02:16:17 · answer #3 · answered by kaplah 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
you are right it is. But it as we don't know everything it is also presumptuous to say god does exist. So people rather should say they believe in god than god exists. It logically follows that I like best the agnostic view, we don't know if god exists or not.
But then there is also the small matter of which god we are talking about...
2007-05-10 02:15:34 · answer #4 · answered by convictedidiot 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Saying "God doesn't exist" is just as honest as saying "God does exist." Both are beliefs, or could be said to be "working world views." The belief in God is supported by articles of faith, whereas the belief in the nonexistence of God is supported by preponderance of observed empirical evidence and the interpretation of that evidence in favor of a universe without a "god" or "gods." Since we're stuck with a pretty backwater point of view, even with regard to our own galaxy, this preponderance of evidence is, of necessity, limited. Thus, it might fall under the same rubric as scientific theory, although the latter doesn't usually set out to prove that something *doesn't* exist but to explain those phenomena that *do* exist.
To say "I don't believe in God" is simply to acknowledge one's limited view within the universe and slough off the mantle of omniscience that so many scientists like to try on for size. One can accept a working hypothesis of "there is no God," but one should always be seeking truth, not cleaving doggedly to said hypothesis as given fact.
It is all truth as observed through human eyes, but with varying presumption. Believe what you will; it is all honest if it is truly sought out and tested, rather than accepted without evaluation, whether that evaluation be spiritual or logical in nature.
2007-05-10 02:33:46 · answer #5 · answered by Black Dog 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The first tells you something about the speaker, and as such, is undeniable.
The second is a hypothesis, and as such, is open to confirmation or disconfirmation.
Perhaps you are more comforted by the first because it is a conversation starter.
And in contrast, statements of God's existence or non-existence, without the consequent investigations, tend to have the effect of throwing down the gauntlet, and so result in competition of some sort.
2007-05-10 02:16:13 · answer #6 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, I think it is more honest. It's acknowledging the fact that truly, none of us know whether God exists or not. Those who believe base their faith on just that...faith; those who don't are no smarter than those who do.
2007-05-10 02:44:13 · answer #7 · answered by nomadic 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think you are missing the point that it is down to belief, not knowledge. As is nearly always true, this assertion can be reversed into "I believe in god" is much more honest than "God exists", and be just as valid.
2007-05-10 02:14:25 · answer #8 · answered by Dharma Nature 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
It would require complete knowledge of everything (which no human has) in order to declare for certain that there is no God.
Saying "I don't believe in God" is just a personal opinion. At least it's honest.
2007-05-10 02:26:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
But you could say that about anything. We don't know anything with 100% certainty. When we make a statement about the world the fact it is only true to a high probability is assumed.
2007-05-10 02:23:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
nicely, some human beings have stalkers that detest them and it does no longer count what they stated it may be an computerized thumbs down. i assume they parent their total existence circles around those dumb thumbs and that they could in basic terms be overwhelmed in the event that they have been given a thumbs down. it is style of humorous extremely.
2016-11-26 23:53:27 · answer #11 · answered by borucki 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋