Proof against the existence of God?

[Nakosis]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

That people can convince themselves of God's existence whether a God actually exists or not.

Therefore a person convinced of God's existence does not support God's existence.

And since we only have testimony from people convinced that God exists there is nothing that supports God's existence.

You can't however prove the non existence of something however you can argue that something is unlikely to exist because there is no evidence of it existing.

It is then a reasonable position to have that a God is unlikely to exist until evidence shows otherwise.

Not so reasonable to say something Unknowable exists since whether it exist or not is unknowable.

 

[Heyo]

I would suggest that if you’re looking for God, or just looking for meaning behind the word, the internet is probably the last place you should be looking.

I've found that the internet is a place where people go to discuss such questions. Or as someone else put it:
"The internet is a place where religions go to die."

 

[RestlessSoul]

I've found that the internet is a place where people go to discuss such questions. Or as someone else put it:
"The internet is a place where religions go to die."

You're looking for a dead religion? Then that's what you'll probably find.

Seems to me the internet is where people who have very strong views already, go to become more entrenched in them.

 

[Dawnofhope]

I've studied the spiritual beliefs of the indigenous people from my local area. Not that much is known these days but I don't think a giant Emu that created the land and now lives with his 2 wives bears little resemblance to the Christian God.

It doesn't look that way.

By leaving I mean not believing the existence of the Christian God

Ok. Looks like you are in the majority 'no religion' category.

The complete lack of any contact for me personally.
The vast number of differing Gods.
The bible being used to justify some very evil things in history.
The bible being so open to interpretation.
Children dying because of a drought. Surely a loving God as advertised by Christians could make it rain to spare their suffering.
Church leaders of various denominations using their influence/power/position of trust to molest children.
Lack of credible evidence for the existence of God.
Suffering.
Childhood cancer.
Contradictions in the bible.

That's quite a list. Its quite compelling.

 

[syo]

Fake religions have fake gods. True religions have true gods.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Who is the proof for? Ourselves or for others, to be convinced that we believe something they can understand because they can see it?

 

[Mock Turtle]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

Perhaps my strongest argument - It is an unnecessary proposition, given that we can explain much of existence at the moment (often and mostly through science), and if humankind does progress into the future then we might explain much more than we already have. But perhaps never fully explaining everything. Even if many will not accept the explanations currently given - but then that mostly might be down to their god-space being filled already.
(It seemingly being rather natural to believe in God or gods).

As to much else - suffering, the existence of evil, and much else - I see these 'problems' merely as coming from the existing religions and not really true explanations as to such. My explanation would be that we are evolved animals and come with such baggage as to produce the frictions and divisions - within ourselves as much as between ourselves. So no blame placed on any God there - given I mostly don't believe such exists.

PS I suppose the God explanation might be viewed as a value-added explanation, but given the area has such a wide spectrum of such beliefs, and the troubles they often cause, perhaps not as much value as many think.

PPS And I'm not sure we could prove this issue either way.

PPPS And not for me to worry over.

 

[Twilight Hue]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

Because no God is actually there that can be pointed out. . It's quite simple.

On the other hand , it's also quite clear God exists in people's minds and imaginations.

 

[PureX]

First, we would need to determine for ourselves how to define "God". As asserting or negating someone else's God concept is just a waste is time and energy. And we would need to develop a God-concept that we can accept as being the most plausible, or we're not really being honest with ourselves.

Then we would need to test that idea out for ourselves by living in accordance with it to see how it interacts with our experience of existence. As that is ultimately the best way to validate questions regarding the nature of existence.

Very few people will ever actually do any of this. And instead, they will just accept whatever God ideal they're handed and either drop it or run with it as they please.

There is or isn't evidence or proof depending on how we define god. And how we define evidence. And what we accept as proof. Thus, the whole issue is an "inside job". And is entirely based on our own choices.

Not much to debate, then, really.

 

[ChristineM]

New What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

Typically the lack of evidence.
Then science has filled many of the gaps typically occupied by god/gods

As for creator gods. Again science fills in the gaps.
Personally i see the futility of prayer, childhood leukemia, the mosquito as pretty good arguments. Certainly they have never been convincingly contradicted.

 

[LuisDantas]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

Strictly speaking, I am not. I am more of an ignostic and an apatheist than of an atheist (and I am a very solid atheist, trust me).

By saying that I am an ignostic, I mean to say that it makes little sense to even contemplate the matter of whether there is a god before attempting to clarify what would a god make. The word is actually meaningless. There is no core meaning to speak of.

But I am also an apatheist, which means that the matter has no true significance to me either way. I only bother to call myself an atheist, apatheist or ignostic because there are people out there who lend significance to the idea of a god. Myself, I don't miss even the concept.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

Since you are a Bahai, I will assume that we are talking here about some version of Abraham's god.

Those conceptions of gods are slightly less ambiguous than the unqualified word "god", because there are so many mutually exclusive conceptions of Abraham's god yet there is also a bit of a core that can be presented.

Let's assume for the sake of discussion that we are talking about a version of Abraham's god that has at least these few characteristics that are often attributed to it. Most Abrahamic and Abrahamic-adjacent forms of theism include quite a few more, but there is considerable divergence there.

1. It is in some sense conscious and aware.
2. It has the ability to perceive and understand human thoughts and emotions, at least under certain circunstances.
3. It is credited with the creation of existence itself, yet also above or beyond that same existence.
4. For some reason (or perhaps for no reason at all) it is aware of individual human beings and cares enough about their behavior to want to communicate some form of instructions to them.

You will notice that the third attribute roughly describes the form of divinity that pantheists believe to exist, but the other three do not. There are always exceptions, but I think this is a fair description of the ideas involved.

So, what about the Abrahamic gods? Why and how can I say that they do not exist?

I actually can not. I can however say (and do) that such deities are not convincing enough, even hypothetically, to deserve consideration or indeed the time that I spend describing them even once.

The first two attributes are of course no big deal. We know for certain that entities with awareness and reason exist. We call them sentients and include ourselves in that group without too much controversy.

The idea of an uncreated creator, however, is simply not useful even in the abstract. It amounts to a play on words to attempt to satisfy a specific, unnecessary form of anxiety. But it truly means nothing. It is the expression of the desire to validate both the question of whether existence was in some sense "meant to be" and a very arbitrary answer to that question. Nothing more. Its only worth is as an illustration of a certain aesthetical sense that is closely associated with theism and perhaps even more closely with Abrahamic theism.

The deal breaker, though, is the last attribute. God as the uncreated creator is just a play on words with no particular significance, and therefore mostly harmless. But god as a decreer of behavior rules is an actively harmful idea, because it actually inhibits moral discernment and development.

On a slightly subtler level, the Abrahamic conceptions of gods also have another strike against them. Their believers claim that their gods have the ability to communicate with them, often through written or even spoken words, yet somehow there is a very significant failure or refusal of those same gods to help their believers achieve any meaningful measure of mutual understanding or consensus where it really matters.

So no, I can't technically declare that there are no gods. But it makes little difference in practice.

 

[Nimos]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

To me, I would say what appears to be a lack of interest in such a being's creations.

I would think God(s) would care much more about what they created, not only humans but all life forms. Such as the dinosaurs not going extinct, how animals eat each other and so forth. I have a difficult time believing that there is an intelligent creator behind this, who somehow thought that it was a good idea.

 

[Fool]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

you can't actually capture an image of what is is dynamic and really has no form. it has action but no actual definitive form because it is constantly in motion in any and all directions.


it isn't unknowable. it's just undefinable.

 

[nPeace]

Well I'm not sure how much of the Bible Bahais believe, but there are plenty of examples where God provided proof of His existence and still expected faith, which he didn't always get. Why doesnt God do that presently?

From what I have seen, God still does.
We have to understand that faith is not needed only in one area.

For example, most people, when they hear the word faith, they apply it exclusively to whether God is or not.

However, faith involves more than that. It involves trust, confidence, conviction... So trusting that God would do X, or having confidence that doing A would definitely result in B... All of that is faith.

God did show his power, but would those seeing that have faith - trust, confidence - that if they did A, B would be the result.... and so forth.
We have many examples. Hebrews 11:3-40

Today, the same is true. The only difference, is that we don't actually see miracles like the sea parting that we can walk across, of fire from heaven igniting the wood, we put to cook our food, etc.
We however see evidence of God's hand.

 

[nPeace]

"God could exist in spite of all the suffering in the world since there is really no correlation. However, in light of the fact that God created a world wherein He knew there would be so much suffering, even though God does not directly cause it, I cannot believe that God is All-loving."

No, that is not my feeling part, that is my reasoning part.
Of course, Baha'is have their apologetic, that suffering is good for us, but that does not cut the mustard for me.
That is just a way for believers to try to cover for God so they can still believe He is loving, since they need to feel loved.

How logical is it that a loving God would create a world that is a Storehouse of Suffering?
Baha'is do not use reason, they believe on emotions.

Wait! What?

 

[nPeace]

Do you think suffering is a bad thing or something to be avoided? Why would God not allow suffering?

I admit the concept of an All-loving God is highly problematic.

I don't see anything wrong with allowing suffering for good reason.
We do that when we fo to the doctor, or take our children to them... Especially when surgery is involved.

I don't understand then, why you think the "concept of an All-loving God is highly problematic".
I would be interested in hearing why.

 

[nPeace]

Humans are superstitious animals that tend to invent all kinds of magical "explanations" for things they don't understand.
.

I don't think you are saying that those who don't believe in God, are not human.
So if humans are superstitious animals, why isn't everyone a believer in gods?

 

[nPeace]

According to the Gospel of John, Jesus is God and through the advent of Jesus, we could enter into a personal relationship with God Himself.

Huh? Did you mean according to some religious people?
Are you certain John said Jesus is God?

He made Himself know through the Lord Jesus Christ. He also made Himself known through Moses and Muhammad according to the Jews and Muslims. The narrative is someone different within these three Abrahamic Faiths but there are important common elements.

So then would that not make Moses and Muhammad God?
I don't understand. How could Jesus be God, if he was a prophet of God, like Moses and Muhammad?

 

[HonestJoe]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

I'm not completely convinced of the non-existence of anything that could be described as a god, but I've not been convinced by any of the various beliefs, clams or assertions I've seen and heard about the existence and actions of any specific god or gods.

The most common blocker in my experience is the absence of any clear and consistent definition of exactly what any particular god is meant to be or do and why proponents believe in particular gods over any of the countless alternatives. Indeed, that is sometimes quietly acknowledged in many religions, with various concepts of gods being "beyond the understanding of humans" (or at least non-believers) or generally "unknowable" (as you state yourself). I've never heard a satisfactory answer to the obvious contradiction from anyone who claims to know there is an unknowable god.

 

[leroy]

What is the strongest or most compelling argument in your view for the non-existence of God or gods?

I'm sure this question has done the rounds on RF ad nauseum. I'm curious as to why people would be completely convinced about the non-existence of God.

The strongest argument I would put forward, is a personal one. I have never seen God and to my knowledge, nor has anyone else.

That being said I am a committed theist and the the God I believe in is an Unknowable Essence.

The argument from evil.

It´s hard to reconcile the idea of God, with the fact that it really seems that we don’t live in the best possible world.

1 If God exist we would live in the best possible world

2 we don’t live in the best possible world

3 therefore God doesn’t exist.

I guess the theist could challenge premise 2 arguing that we really have not enough information to make such a statement. (maybe a world without cancer would produce a long term effect that is worst than cancer)