The Existence of God

Thing is, no one believed in Pluto until there was evidence of it.

 

Why does it matter? That logic will always be wrong, because you can't say that something doesn't exist until you have evidence for it's non-existence, which will require searching the whole universe for it.

 

Yep.

You can't make the negative OR the positive assertion until evidence is provided.

There's your root for agnosticism without logic fail.

 

You're basically saying that literally everything is possible, unless there is proof for it not being so. But no matter how much evidence is collected, there is always a theoretical possibility of that evidence being wrong. So that means you should never take a stand in any matter whatsoever, in fear of being wrong.

Good luck with that. You're adopted by the way, prove me wrong.

 

Of course anything is possible, but it's irrational to go believe in just anything. If there is say, a 99% chance of something not existing and a 1% chance of it existing, then you can't say something doesn't exist, because there's always that small chance of it existing. You would just say that in all probability, or most likely it doesn't exist. Same thing with the small possibility that some evidence is wrong, you would say in all probability this evidence is valid.

 

I'm agnostic. I believe everyone has a right to religion as long as that stay responsible. Lots of the wars are based off of religion. If everyone could learn to respect eachother's religion then things in the world would run a lot better.

 

Maybe technically correct, but that's really just silly. It means I can't say there's no such thing as leprechauns, or martians. For all practical purposes, we can say that god doesn't exist.

 

Practical purposes? By saying God doesn't exist, you are dropping to the same level of argument as people that say that God does exist. Show me the proof of this non-existence?

Claiming non-existence means you would have to search every corner of your domain and leave no stone unturned, which would be pretty hard since we don't even know our entire domain yet. Until you have done this, you can't claim the non-existence of anything.

If you go around claiming that leprechauns and martians don't exist, first thing I'd ask is why? Is there a dogmatic regime created by leprechaun and martian believers that is converting people to their beliefs and killing it's opponents?

It is irrational to say that something exists without evidence, but the most rational response would be a neutral answer of "we don't know if it exists or not."

 

I agree with you, that's completely true. But the fact that there is no evidence for the hypothesis "God exists" clearly means that it should be rejected.
Rejecting the assertion "god exists" is not the same thing as saying god definitely does not exist.
But in common talking it's ok to tell people that god doesn't exist, just like it's ok to tell a kid that leprechauns don't exist.

 

There is no "god" that you read from the holy bible.. or the blah blah.. however though it is possible that there is a higher power.. for example.. we are living in a hypothetical virtual world.. and "god" would be the operator of the machine... the machine would be the universe.. and we are all pwns of that machine..

logic note

**god in the sense of religion does not exist.. and if ur gonna use bullshit like.. oh prove it doesn't exist... then ur a moron..**

1. If ur using logic like above .. please take into account the below information..

- prove monsters doesn't exist..
- hell prove ghost doesn't exist..
- prove heaven/hell doesn't exist...
- etc, etc, etc

Therefore the logic "prove it doesn't exist" is a whole lot of nonsense.. we need only to prove it exist.. if no such proof is present.. that thing/idea does not exist.. or will only be a belief and never a fact..

THE END


**edit**

BTW KEYWORD BELIEF

 

Yeah that's what I'm saying, but rejecting the hypothesis that god exists is not the same as saying god doesn't exist. Of course it's ok in common talk, but in debate it gets a lil complicated lol.

I'm not using the fact that you can't prove that God doesn't exist as an excuse for me to believe in God. I'm saying it's irrational to say that something exists without evidence JUST AS MUCH as to say that something doesn't exist without evidence.

There's no proof for the non-existence of any of those, doesn't mean you should just go and believe in whatever the fuck you want.

 

That is a serious logical fail though...

Rejecting the null hypothesis does NOT prove the alternate. You can easily say that you don't believe in God, but atheists that run around preaching non-existence are just as fallible to the fallacies that they preach of. I don't believe in Leprachauns. But with the trillions of galaxies out there, I wouldn't be surprised if a Leprachaun shaped animal existed.

In a debate on whether or not Leprachauns existed on earth, you certainly shoudln't be citing Russel's teapot as your source of logic. You should cite the varying shades of probability given by practical knowledge. Because the evidence of such could be easily proven, and if proof existed, the proof would be plentiful... there's much less to debate about.

 

I believe in God, and not because I fear Hell, but because I have faith that someone is watching us, that someone cares about us. I'm not going to try and force anyone to believe in God, nor will I let anyone else try and sway me.

Just because there is no proof of somethings existence, doesn't mean it isn't real. Look at love, there is no proof that it exists, yet when you love someone, you put your faith in them and believe they love you back.

 

The logic of someone saying "God exists." is the same logic of someone saying "God does not exist." However logic is a bit hard to apply to a subject like this. Believing in God comes down to one thing, faith.

And you ARE correct, saying "Give me proof he doesn't exist." is the same as asking for proof that ANYTHING doesn't exist, which is why it's really better to just not ask that of anything. Until man has explored every part of the our entire plain of existence, the non-existence of anything cannot be proved.

 

I love the flying spagheti monster that lives under my bed. He loves me back and watches over me

I think that's pretty much the same thing. Tell me how that's any different..

 

I would tell you my dad and brother can agree with me.

It's the same thing. How would you respond if someone asked you about any documented actions performed by god? You can show them the bible..I can show you my monster's bible that I happen to have at my house..

 

Allah is the one and only god, just because you live in a different timeline and don't have any proof you start disbelieve. Our ancestors had proof, they didn't rely on faith. If you ask why did god stop giving us proof or why is there no proof now, then there would be no point as god will have to keep giving proof every 200 years as people who don't see visual proof start to lose faith.

It's up to you to believe, no one else can force you but you'll find out after you die and you will regret it for eternity.

 

Most religious books are not primary documentation. There was little way to document proof then, either.

Nowadays, with advanced documentation techniques, we can really see if "miracles" are miraculous.

 

This thread is proving exactly what we started with. There is no way to prove or disprove God. I myself am a Christian through personal 'proofs' which amazingly I can't show to any of you. ironic...

 

...yes, but it's irrational to believe something without proof darth.