2007-10-20 01:17:18 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
well take the big bang for instance, people say that god didn't create the world because science has proved that the big bang did happen but.......god could have very well created this big bang himself, god is the most powerful figure in lots of people lives sure there is quite some evidence against him but there is a heck of alot for him. i personally think god exist!
2007-10-20 03:16:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They say you can't prove a negative, but I think there are a number of proofs which discount any notion of a god, at least one having the qualities most humans ascribe to it.
Omniscience: On one hand theists say god gave us free will to choose good vs. evil, on the other hand they also say god knows everything. The two are fundamentally incompatible. The only way free will can exist is if we and only we make our choices, and by definition that involves more than one choice that can not be known with certainty in advance. Similarly, quantum mechanics has proven that real, genuine randomness does exist in nature. It is a logical impossibility to know a completely random outcome in advance.
Omnipresence: Again, physics (this time with the Pauli exclusion principle) has proven that two things can not occupy the same space at the same time. The only way that could happen would be if god were in some alternate dimension physically separate from our universe, but then that runs into the problem below.
Interference/intervention in our world: For a god to do anything or have any effect in our world, he has to interact with it. And if that's the case, then a god (or his effects) should be physically measurable and verifiable. There should be an abundance of pre-existing and easily obtainable verifiable physical evidence that meets scientific standards of proof. And yet, there is not.
Omnipotence: People ask questions like "can god create a stone so heavy that even he can't lift it?" These are actually very good questions to ask, and I have yet to see any answer that doesn't prove the logical impossibility of omnipotence.
One can construct similar arguments against god or gods on a number of other grounds, including moral, historical, psychological, biological, supposedly being all-good, etc. I think it's case closed that gods are indeed nothing more than the products of the human imagination and our fervent desire to believe.
2007-10-20 10:20:17 · answer #2 · answered by R[̲̅ə̲̅٨̲̅٥̲̅٦̲̅]ution 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The toughest argument against God' existence is theodicy or the problem of evil; but that has its problems. First, of all where did evil originate, is it necessarily God's fault? That is being a bit presumptuous, because when did evil originate? Secondly, the idea of perfection and goodness are contrary to evil and imperfection, so both set of properties could not be necessarily true of God at the same time. This would lead us to say that God is either absolutely good and perfect or the exact opposite. Choose your poison, if God were necessarily evil and imperfect it would follow that things could be much worse than they are presently. Evolution, which is man's attempt to eliminate God has only raised more questions then it has answered. Evolution as theory may be plausible, but the problem of time is a sticking point, this is where the Law of Thermodynamics cause much heart ache for evolution. Though Hume presented strong arguments in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, these arguments are vulnerable to rebuttal. The Infinite regress argument is a double edged sword because it demands a definite alpha point of beginning, because if there is an omega point, then it stands to reason there is an alpha point. Time itself is contingent, so there must be something/one that/who is necessary. Evolution provides no satisfactory alpha point because all causes are contingent, whereas God is necessary and uncaused.
2007-10-20 08:47:58 · answer #3 · answered by tigranvp2001 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'll derive from 'seahock's' answer:
Trying to get evidence against god would be akin to fishes trying to get evidence that there really is no water anywhere, whatsoever!
2007-10-20 09:41:17 · answer #4 · answered by Katie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
God, according to every religion, is, what is envisaged in its scriptures (pictorial, graphic or in script form), Whose definition should be deemed correct ? If one goes by poll, then the religion most followed in the world stands to gain. Should we take their explanation of God as correct. God is a fear psychosis created in our minds through the ages. It all started with the fear or terror of natural agents like wind, fire and water. When the early man saw them work and couldn't see anyone doing them, he gave the doer a name : God. Every religion is a bye product of the circumstances at the time of its origin. All that's written in scriptures of all religions, about customs and practices to be followed can be logically traced to surroundings and circumstances prevalent during that era. So there's nothing for or against God, but lets clarify to ourselves, who are we addressing to?, a person? , a power? or just satisfying our the religious beliefs, that we were taught.
2007-10-20 09:04:35 · answer #5 · answered by sanjay k 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
evidences against God are as useless as the evidences for God.
2007-10-20 08:37:43 · answer #6 · answered by don.tachos 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You can't have evidence against something that doesn't exist in the first place. In other words, you can't have evidence against the existence of pink unicorns, because you can't test something that's never been discovered or seen by anyone. You have to base your conclusion on reasonable assumptions.
A more accurate way to word it would be, "What is the evidence of other theories that contradict the concept of god, therefore making 'god' useless and irrelevant?"
2007-10-20 08:31:04 · answer #7 · answered by Uliju 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Our reason leaves us free to believe that behind the thing in itself there is a just God. Our moral sense commmands us to believe it. Moral sense is innate and not derived from experience.
Thanks for asking. Have a great day!
2007-10-20 08:51:16 · answer #8 · answered by Third P 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we made him up, thousands of years ago when we knew sod all, we had to to make sense of our world ,i mean how many gods were they ,at first there was the mother godess, fertility, then the romans with mars the god of war, vulcan...volcanos ect.. then came christianity, and it has a big following and then it got weird ,methodists ,calvinists mormons, and these cults . sorry i dont buy into the whole god thing ,if youre going to worship something worship the earth because without her we are buggered
2007-10-20 09:00:34 · answer #9 · answered by beverleybiffboff 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
To quote Jeffrey Dalmer, after he got saved in prison, and
believed in God...." To NOT believe in God or a higher being,
or creator.....cheapens LIFE".
2007-10-20 08:56:23 · answer #10 · answered by CraZyCaT 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋