Question for 100% absolutely KNOW there-is-no-god-atheists?

Question

in simple terms, you dont have to explain it out if you do not want to, what is your proof (personal proof)?

im an atheist if you didnt know, so dont attack me.

and dont evade the question and degrade your selves to christian tactics, really just answer the question.

Depth to Perception:
that is a fallical reason. there is no proof of magical unicorns, but that isnt PROOF they do >not< exist

Answer 1

The basis for my disbelief is the whole absurdity of Salvationism. And it's not because I don't understand it. I understand it all too well. I used to buy into it, hook, line, and sinker.

After the absurdity of Christian doctrine as a whole, there is the problem of the Bible itslef. It is the ONLY evidence of God that exists, and it clearly was not written by God. It wasn't even written by somebody pretending to be God. Never before has their been a book full of such atrocities, contradictions, errors, and outright lies.

Next, there is the archaeological record. The events in the Old Testament are completely unsupported. As are many events in the New Testament. For example, the town of Nazareth.

Almost as important is the historical record. The events in the New Testament are not supported by history. The earliest Christians did not agree on anything related to their new religion, including the existence of Jesus. There is no evidence that he even existed. While on the contrary there are mountains of evidence that he did not.

Finally, there is Science -- our understanding of the universe and the evolution of life (and even the anthropological study of the evolution of religion). God did not create the earth, and he certainly did not create mankind. To suggest that he did, is to say that God is quite impotent and incompetent. You also come into direct competition to 1,000 other religions who make the same claim. I prefer the logical alternative: God simply doesn't exist. Never did.

Answer 2

Good luck finding an atheist like that--they're a whole lot rarer than theists would have you believe. Regardless, keep in mind that the burden of proof lies on theists, if they wish to regard their faITH as faCT. Proving a universal negative is obviously impossible.

I, an atheist, don't believe in a god or gods, because there is both no evidence, and the fact that it's EXTREMELY improbable.

Would you think someone foolish for declaring, "I'm sure I won't get struck by lightning today"? Of course not. Why then would anyone fault an atheist for saying "I'm sure there's no God," something that is SO improbable that it makes getting struck by two bolts of lightning at the same time look like a sure thing by comparison?

Atheists are playing the odds, that's all. The fact is that for a theist to be correct, they need to overcome not one, not two, but three MASSIVE improbabilities, which stack on each other:

1. That there is a god or gods at all (considering that there are an immeasurable number of natural hypotheses that must be logically ruled out before a supernatural one can even be CONSIDERED, it should be obviously why this is such an improbability)
2. If #1 is true, it has to be no other god except for the god that you specifically worship. There are thousands of known gods, so this is also a very small probability of 'getting right.'
3. If #2 is true, you have to have defined your god correctly, or else you're STILL wrong. What if there is a god (#1), he's the Christian God (#2 for Christians), but he's actually malevolent, throwing people in Hell at random just for fun? In other words, nothing like the vast majority of Christians have defined him to be like? Then even after overcoming the vast improbabilities of #1 and #2, guess what? The theist is STILL wrong!

Once you try to REALLY determine what the odds are of getting ALL THREE RIGHT (which is the ONLY way a theist can be correct), atheism makes itself obvious as the only logical and rational choice.

Answer 3

Can you give an example of a proof of a god not existing?

Can you give an example of anything not existing?

The atheists I know work the other way. They do not believe in something just because it cannot be proven the something does not exist. They believe in something that can be proven to exist.

So are you believing in unicorns? That is what you seem to be proposing. If you cannot prove it does not exist then you have to believe in it. There is as much proof to back up the existence of unicorns as there is for a god. They are even mentioned in the bible. So why should a person believe in a god and not in unicorns?

Answer 4

(1) - the argument from motion. If you see some dominoes in a long row falling down, you know someone pushed them, nothing moves itself. And neither does the whole universe. Think of the universe as an enormous chain of dominoes, all moving. Something outside the chain must have started the movement in the beginning. Otherwise it couldn't move, because nothing can move itself.

(2)- The very existence of things, not just their movement. You need a first cause of existence just as you need a first cause of motion, because nothing can make itself exist if it isn't already there. Nothing can cause itself. If there's no God who eternally exists, how can existence begin? If there's no God who has existence by his own nature and doesn't get it from any cause, how can the gift of existence be passed down the chain of creatures, who borrow it from each other?

(3)- Everything dies, or ceases to exist. Now if there were no God who never died, who never ceased to exist, then eventually everything would die and nothing could begin again. And then there would be nothing at all.
The second law of thermo-dynamics says all energy gets dissipated, wears down. Even the galaxies get cold, if there were no God the universe would have slowed to a stop by now.

(4)- The fourth one is an easy one. In the universe some things are better than others, right? So there must be a best, a standard of goodness to judge all the relative "betters". One thing is closer to it than another. And this standard has to be absolute goodness.
You may say that everything is relative. There's no absolute. To what? Only God Himself.

(5)- The argument for design. Design proves a designer. And nature is full of design. Therefore there must be a Designer behind it all.


Love Rev: J.P. Hermanson

Answer 5

as a 99.99[large number of nines]% atheist I am comfortable answering this, although I am not in the "absolutely know" camp.

This universe is a natural universe. It is governed by natural forces. We can understand these forces and do to a degree. We can build models and predict future behavior (again, to a degree). These forces can be demonstrated, experiments can be done, results can be verified and when repeated they will yield the same results.

Supernatural beings (because we have many god-claims) would stand out like lighthouses on a dark night. They would be extremely self-evident. Strangely, for omnipotent omniscient omnipresent beings (or a subset of those attributes commonly ascribed to gods) they seem extremely elusive.

I also can't prove invisible purple dragons don't exist but people don't seem to get their panties in a knot over that.

Answer 6

If you can show that a particular definition of god is self-contradictory then he can be shown not to exist, in the same way you can prove a circle-square cannot exist. The definition of a circle-square is an object that is a square AND a circle. No object can have the qualities of each at the same time in normal space.

God as defined in the bible is self-contradictory. He is said to be omniscient and omnipotent. If he is omniscient, he knows what he will do in the future and therefore is not able to do anything different. That makes him no longer omnipotent. If omnipotent, he can change his mind, but that means he was wrong about what he will do in the future. Both qualities cannot exist so God does not exist.

There are others like this. God is shown in the bible as being able to think, and is also shown to be unchanging. Thinking requires change. They can't coexist so god does not exist.

[EDIT: disproving God is different from disproving a unicorn. I CANNOT disprove a unicorn because it has no self-contradictory qualities. I CAN disprove God though.]

Answer 7

OK, a sincere response for a sincere quest.

I use both deductive and inductive logic to establish that God does not exist in objective (physical) reality. Deductive logic cannot prove a negative assertion (God does not exist), but it does confirm that the burden of proof is on the believer to provide evidence that their positive assertion (God exists) is true. If a believer could provide deductive proof of their assertion, it would mean that God's existence was as certain as any mathematical theorum and no reasoned argument would even be possible. Unfortunately for believers, no such proof appears to be possible. To resolve the issue, we are thus forced to use inductive logic, which is not as infallible as deduction. (For similar practical reasons, criminal law courts generally use inductive logic to determine truth.)

Wikipedia estimates the total number of human beings to have ever lived is approximately 100 billion. Certainly the great majority were religious and thought about philosophical issues. The fact is, during the one-hundred-thousand years humans have occupied the Earth, not one person has been able to provide the slightest proof of any god's tangible existence. Believers make a great deal of noise about their subjective religious experiences, and frequently imagine such experiences support their beliefs, but no objective physical evidence has ever been found. Given that in the entire history of humanity, not one shred of tangible evidence supporting the objective existence of any god has ever been found, it is safe to inductively conclude that the likelyhood of the Christian God's existence is infinitessimally close to zero.

Answer 8

Okay, but it's going to be a long answer. I realize that some people believe that it is impossible to prove the unexistence of anything, but they are wrong. It can, for example, be proved that there is no even prime number greater than two. Other people use to say that there is no way to prove if there is a god or not, or even that we cannot get any knowledge of god (agnosticism). My opinion as a strong atheist, is that we can in fact prove that god does not exist in the physical world.

If the evil in the world is intended by god he is not good. If it violates his intentions he is not almighty. God can't be both almighty and good. There are many objections to this, but none that holds since god is ultimately responsible for the existence of evil. Besides, if only god can create he must have created evil. If somebody else (the devil) created evil, how can one know that god, and not Satan created the universe?


There are things that are impossible to do. For example nobody can cover a two-dimensional surface with two-dimensional circles, without making them overlap. It is impossible to add the numbers two and two and get 666. You can not go back in time (without passing an infinite entropy barrier). The number of things that are impossible to do are almost infinite. If god were to be almighty he would be able to do them, but it's impossible to do so.

Some people say that he can only do things that are logically possible to do, but what is? Is it logically possible to walk on water? Is it logically possible to rise from the dead? Is it logically possible to stand above time, space and all other dimensions - and still exist? I'd say that everything which violates the laws of physics are logically impossible and thus omnipotence is logically impossible. Besides if omnipotence is a relative quality there is no way to tell omnipotence from non-omnipotence. For omnipotence to be a valid expression it must be absolute, but we have no objective criteria to measure omnipotence so the word itself is useless.

Another way to disprove the almighty god is that omnipotence leads to paradoxes. Can god make a rock that is too heavy for him to carry? Can god build a wall that even he can't tear down?

Also, if god knows everything, he knows what he will do in the "future" (in any dimension, not necessary the time dimension). He must have known that from the very start of his own existence. Thus god's actions are predestined. God is tied by faith, he has no free will. If god has no free will god is not omnipotent. Another way to put it is that to be able to make plans and decisions one must act over time. If god stands above time he can not do that and has no free will. Indeed, if god stands above all dimensions god is dimensionless - a singularity, nothing, void!

Besides there can exist no free wills at all if god is almighty. If you had a free will, god wouldn't know what you would do tomorrow and wouldn't be omnipotent.

Answer 9

So the universe just poped up?

That is just the ultimate thing to explain creationisim.

The universe started with the big bang, but why did that bang happen? What was the thing that big banged? Where did that thing come from?

Accoriding to modern science, somethhing came out of absoultuly nothing and became everything... or something was always there and became everything.

For the first one so that thing just poped out?

fr the second one why did that thing suddelny explode and become everything, their must be a trigger

Answer 10

There is a considerable amount of evidence for Santa Claus, mostly in the form of presents left under trees, and milk-and-cookies gone. That said, there's a better explanation for those things than the existence of Santa Claus.