'There is no proof that God exists.' Do you agree?

Question

This is a question on my Philosophy and Ethics homework and I thought it'd be interesting to see other people's views.

Please try and post intellectual answers (:

Answer 1

I definitely agree. Both with the concept of proof as in mathematical or logical proof and with the concept of proof as simply evidence.

The only logical proofs come from argument from ignorance. We don't know how the universe began, or if there are other universes. We don't know therefor god.

There is no physical evidence that indicates a god. Given the proposed abilities of a god, we should see common place alterations of physical laws. When placed under stringent test, prayer does no better than chance.

Life needs a large and old universe only if it is a rare probabilistic event. If there is a god who can make the correct conditions where ever it wants, a much smaller universe would be sufficient.

*edit*
I also disagree with the two separate magisteria idea (i.e. science and religion do not overlap). Religion makes numerous claims about the structure of the universe. A universe that includes a personal god is very different than a universe that has no god, and the difference should be testable. The reason believers say god shold not be tested is because every stringent test for a god fails and they don't want to admit failure. It's easier to keep believing when you makeup excuses than to admit to the results of the tests.

Answer 2

theres no proof either way. i personally don't believe that when i die i'm going to be judged by some superbeing. look how much trouble is caused over peoples belief in god or allah or whoever. i think the whole thing is silly. christians complain that they were/are persecuted...what crap! look what they've done to people over the years. what about when people believe in ET's. these poor folk get laughed at and ridiculed...usually by so called christians. as far as ET is concerned im also on the fence with that one. why can't people keep an open mind? i'll recommend a book for you. its called the archaic revival by terence mckenna(RIP) read what he has to say on the subject of god, ET, philosophy and ethics. you might believe what he's telling you or you might think he's full of s**t but its certainly an eye opener!

Answer 3

I would agree that there is no proof of God's existence. Unless you argue the definition of the word God. If you say that God is whatever created the universe then there is proof because how else would the universe have gotten here besides something happening to create it? trippy.

Answer 4

Proof? Yes there is lots of proof. Scientific proof? None. Science should not be used to prove religion/God as religion/God should not be used to prove science. Both are real, both exist, and both are independent of one another. It is like using Botany to define a social problem or in contrast, using Sociology to define a botanical problem. Two independent theories or disciplines of thought.

Answer 5

Personally, I see the hand of God in many, many things. I feel God's presence in my daily life. I put my faith and trust in His love and mercy.

Now, is there "proof"? It all depends on how you define "proof".

Is it "proof" enough that the Holy Bible exists? Is it "proof" enough that so many churches exist? Is it "proof" enough that so very many people have faith?

For some, it is. For others, it isn't.

For a Philosophical argument, you could easily take EITHER side.

Fortunately, I am Christian and would gladly accept the "argue FOR" position. The most common argument AGAINST would be "well, if God made us, then who made God?". This is the old "stacking turtles" logical fallacy. The "who made God" argument assumes that there is an infinite number of creators. Logic itself argues against that. The statement that God (the original and first creator) *IS* the beginning is logically sound.

Best wishes.

Answer 6

We build things every day using our common sense - but first we build it first in our mind, then we build it in our reality.

And why not with our spiritual awareness to believe in something that is logical and possible, then probable.
And to test it with logic and reason is good, to find the flaws that it could not exist...

Religions of course fail the logic and reason test - showing them for what they are. For them, having us believe in inaccurate and misunderstood myths (eg. the Book of Ezekiel is all about a flying craft witnessed by Ezekiel, a UFO) which is wrongly interpreted today.

Scientists are telling us that life must exist elsewhere in the universe, and there must be civilisations greater than our own, in terms of technology and knowledge.
Therefore the likelihood that we have been visited by them, is not so far fetched anymore - that they were our 'gods' and even 'God' who gave us the knowledge to feed, clothe and house ourselves - which all ancient mythologies say happened....

The gods lived in heaven, which simply means skyward.

Now, I think I've proved that god exists, all of them...
note - the correct interpretation about the God of the Bible, is that he was one of many - but he, was the one God for that region. He was the local ruler, who was superceded by his son... 'God' being a term of office, like the 'President' is... etc.

Answer 7

There is a difference between propositional and non-propositional evidence. There is definitely no scientific evidence for God's existence. Usually attempts to provide such come in the form of "I can't explain X, therefore God exists."

There may be other types of "evidence" such as experience or personal faith. But this can hardly be considered evidence unless we accept everyone's equally (Muslims, Buddhists, Alien Abductees)

Answer 8

Aesity means self-existence. Aesity explains the metaphysical nature of God as a purely self-existent being that exists in complete actuality. God is not a being that is created by another god; neither does God create himself into existence. Rather, God has always existed as an unchanging, completely actualized being.


God has his Being of himself and to himself such that he is Absolute being and the definition of existence.
Since God’s essence is his nature and God’s existence is the same as his essence it follows that God is existence.

Answer 9

There is no proof that God exists. Correct, however, we know that one day, the day we die, we might see our Creator. For if we were created, that would be the logical time that He might face us to account for our actions.

There are lots of things for which we have no proof of existence, but none are as important as the One who created us.

Answer 10

John Denver in Rocky Mountain High..."Talk to God and listen to the casual reply" for me the casual reply is nature. I live on 40 acres with sunny meadows all around me. A pond and water feature that attract all sorts of critters. It out there that I'm closest to God because I feel him all around me. There's my "proof" because I have faith. When you have faith, you have proof, so it is illogical to be forced to explain that. Have you ever had faith in a football team? Can't prove one will win over the other.
But my best scientific answer...look at a moth. Turn on your porch light and go out at night. The moths that look like tree bark. This is one gorgeous example of natural selection. What?? Yes, In college I was a science major and I believe in evolution. I believe in natural selection. But c'mon, look at the moths, can you really credit all of this to that one scientific phenomenon?? Sorry, that's the best I can do. Good luck.