Are there any facts that support the notion that a supreme being does not exist?

Question

Are there any facts that support the notion that inferior beings do not exist?

Is Atheism logical?

bestonne...,
I'm a deist. I don't believe in any of the man-made religious descriptions of God. My definition of "God" is "the most advanced being in the universe, whoever that may be." I don't know exactly who that person is, but it's common sense that such a position does indeed exist.

Forget all the religious versions who embellish the definition for the sake of religious competition. God is the person who no one can outdo, whoever that is.

Answer 1

The absolute lack of any evidence that one exists is sufficient.

Answer 2

Depends on what supreme being you are talking about.

Some of them contradict reality and those ones we have very good reasons to believe do not exist (since they could not possibly exist) while others are of the proving a negative variety (the most common concepts of a god do happen to be ones that can be disproven).

But that's no problem for an atheist since without evidence the rules do require one to withhold belief.

With the evidence that we have atheism is the only thing that is rational.

Answer 3

A theist is a person who believes there is a god. An atheist is a person who is not a theist. I simply lack belief in god(s) and I don't know of any atheist who says "there is no god." If there are any I'll gladly call them out for being illogical.

Certain gods cannot, ergo do not exist. A square circle can't exist and neither can an all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful being. Even if this weren't the case I still wouldn't be a theist, which makes me an atheist.

Answer 4

All affirmations are true in some sense, false in some sense, meaningless in some sense, true and false in some sense, true and meaningless in some sense, false and meaningless in some sense, and true and false and meaningless in some sense.

It is illogical to assume that because something does not impinge your limit awareness at this very moment that it does not exist.

How do you manage to prove a negative hypothesis? In order to do that you would need to have knowledge of everything that ever existed, exists now, or will ever exist. In order to do that you would have to be Immortal, Omniscient and Omnipresent. How could you do that in a physical body on one small planet in a backwater corner of the multiverse? You would have to be an eternal disembodied entity and as such you would immediately disprove you own theory.

Answer 5

Considering that logic does not prove the negative, your question is not logical.

Seriously, this principle is self evident in logic and does not just apply to religion. The burden of proof is on the claimant and sense you claim a god exists, it is up to you to present proof, just as it is up to me to prove why one algorithm is better than another.

Answer 6

Exactly the same facts that support the notion that purple Moon monkeys don't exist.

Answer 7

No, you cannot prove that something DOESN'T exist.

But there is NO proof whatsoever that any of the thousands of gods created by your ancestors exist, either. And not believing is a whole hell of a lot easier once you realize that.

Answer 8

It's always been there right under our noses written on the pages of The Bible that the God Yahweh exists. It was "our" lack of scientific knowledge that kept us from "seeing" what we have been reading.

Answer 9

The fact that there aren't any facts supporting the notion one does.

Answer 10

You can't prove a negative....it's like saying....I can prove that leprechauns don't exist. Well...knock yourself out....

It's logical to not believe in that which is unbelievable....