• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What evidence would convince a theist that God doesn't exist?

firedragon

firedragon

Veteran Member
There are debates on Gods existence. I believe that a lot of these debates commit the burden of proof fallacy. For example, when a theist opens the debate by saying "I believe God exists, unless you prove he doesn't" and to be fair when an atheist opens by saying "I dont believe God exists, unless you prove he does", both are committing the burden of proof fallacy.

When you propose something, you should provide the evidence to support your claim. When you propose something, negative or positive, and you base your argument on the opponents evidence that proves you wrong, thats the burden of proof fallacy.

But theists must have the empathy of the mind of the atheist as well. Thus, I wish to ask this question.

What evidence would convince a theist that God doesn't exist?
 
SalixIncendium

SalixIncendium

अग्निविलोवनन्दः
Staff member
Premium Member
There is no objective evidence in favor of or against the existence of any sort of god, and there are so many varying perspectives on what god is, I find any argument for the existence or nonexistence of god an exercise in futility.
 
leov

leov

Well-Known Member
firedragon said:
There are debates on Gods existence. I believe that a lot of these debates commit the burden of proof fallacy. For example, when a theist opens the debate by saying "I believe God exists, unless you prove he doesn't" and to be fair when an atheist opens by saying "I dont believe God exists, unless you prove he does", both are committing the burden of proof fallacy.

When you propose something, you should provide the evidence to support your claim. When you propose something, negative or positive, and you base your argument on the opponents evidence that proves you wrong, thats the burden of proof fallacy.

But theists must have the empathy of the mind of the atheist as well. Thus, I wish to ask this question.

What evidence would convince a theist that God doesn't exist?
Click to expand...
something appeared to me a long time ago and declared 'I am God'. it did not direct me to prove anything to the the others.
 
Salvador

Salvador

RF's Swedenborgian
The double-slit experiment refutes the hypothesis of an all-knowing all-seeing God.

If there were an omni-God always observing and knowing which slit of a double-slit apparatus that a particle went through, the particle should always go through the double-slit apparatus only as matter behaving like a particle rather than a wave, such as observation collapses the particle's wave-function. However, unobserved matter appears to have a wave-like interference pattern as it passes through a double-slit apparatus. Since there are unobserved particles as evident by their wave-like interference pattern formed as they go through a double-slit apparatus , there is apparently no such real thing such as all matter always being observed nor thereby any omniscient being.
 
Last edited:
shmogie

shmogie

Well-Known Member
firedragon said:
There are debates on Gods existence. I believe that a lot of these debates commit the burden of proof fallacy. For example, when a theist opens the debate by saying "I believe God exists, unless you prove he doesn't" and to be fair when an atheist opens by saying "I dont believe God exists, unless you prove he does", both are committing the burden of proof fallacy.

When you propose something, you should provide the evidence to support your claim. When you propose something, negative or positive, and you base your argument on the opponents evidence that proves you wrong, thats the burden of proof fallacy.

But theists must have the empathy of the mind of the atheist as well. Thus, I wish to ask this question.

What evidence would convince a theist that God doesn't exist?
Click to expand...
Science and Atheists are incapable of providing proof that God does not exist. Philosophical naturalists operate within a framework which by itś own standard eliminates the supernatural. The supernatural that is part of the human experience. It is simply dismissed because it doesn't fit within the self limiting rules used.

Until science can prove, not hypostulate or theorize, the exact beginnings of the universe, and the beginning of life, for me personally, I will never change my views.
 
leov

leov

Well-Known Member
shmogie said:
Science and Atheists are incapable of providing proof that God does not exist. Philosophical naturalists operate within a framework which by itś own standard eliminates the supernatural. The supernatural that is part of the human experience. It is simply dismissed because it doesn't fit within the self limiting rules used.

Until science can prove, not hypostulate or theorize, the exact beginnings of the universe, and the beginning of life, for me personally, I will never change my views.
Click to expand...
atheism is the last place i would check when looking for God...
 
Audie

Audie

Veteran Member
Salvador said:
The double-slit experiment refutes the hypothesis of an all-knowing all-seeing God.

If there were an omni-God always observing and knowing which slit of a double-slit apparatus that a particle went through, the particle should always go through the double-slit apparatus only as matter behaving like a particle rather than a wave, such as observation collapses the particle's wave-function. However, unobserved matter appears to have a wave-like interference pattern as it passes through a double-slit apparatus. Since there are unobserved particles as evident by their wave-like interference pattern formed as they go through a double-slit apparatus , there is apparently no such real thing such as all matter always being observed nor thereby any omniscient being.
Click to expand...

In stories of someone betting against Satan,
that they can outsmart him?

They always lose.

If there is god, there is no way anyone is
going to outsmart him.
 
George-ananda

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
firedragon said:
What evidence would convince a theist that God doesn't exist?
Click to expand...
Well as a pantheist, no evidence for anything beyond physicalist operation of the universe would make me see no reason to be any kind of theist.

(The paranormal/mystical has convinced me there is 'more'. And I have come to believe masters/gurus that have delved the deepest can tell us of this 'more'.)
 
Audie

Audie

Veteran Member
George-ananda said:
Well as a pantheist, no evidence for anything beyond physicalist operation of the universe would make me see no reason to be any kind of theist.

(The paranormal/mystical has convinced me there is 'more'. And I have come to believe masters/gurus that have delved the deepest can tell us of this 'more'.)
Click to expand...

You have been telling us that.
 
9-10ths_Penguin

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
firedragon said:
There are debates on Gods existence. I believe that a lot of these debates commit the burden of proof fallacy. For example, when a theist opens the debate by saying "I believe God exists, unless you prove he doesn't" and to be fair when an atheist opens by saying "I dont believe God exists, unless you prove he does", both are committing the burden of proof fallacy.
Click to expand...
Not accepting a claim until there's reason to believe it's true isn't a fallacy; it's skepticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top