Proof that there is no God!

[jac006]

Luck? I don't think so my friend. Luck cant pull out the exact amount. Nothing but a God could. And what do you mean I didn't prove anything. I just gave all the evidence in the world. Read it! There's so much there that its not even funny. My doctor, who graduated from ucla with a nice p.h.d said, himself, who is also an aetheist that, even though he believes in no God, the human eye is something apart from everything else. For the human eye to have been created, there needed to have been the exact right amount of everything to be together at the same time, and frankly those chances are 1 to about 1,467,356,676,345,657,786,345,456,768,023,723,966,324,034,871,239,345,219,651,646,108,197,127,574,129,623 and so on and so forth. Very slim. And if u say I cannot prove that there is a God then how do u suppose that we got here?

 

[Giancarlo]

Luck? I don't think so my friend. Luck cant pull out the exact amount. Nothing but a God could. And what do you mean I didn't prove anything. I just gave all the evidence in the world. Read it! There's so much there that its not even funny. My doctor, who graduated from ucla with a nice p.h.d said, himself, who is also an aetheist that, even though he believes in no God, the human eye is something apart from everything else. For the human eye to have been created, there needed to have been the exact right amount of everything to be together at the same time, and frankly those chances are 1 to about 1,467,356,676,345,657,786,345,456,768,023,723,966,324,034,871,239,345,219,651,646,108,197,127,574,129,623 and so on and so forth. Very slim. And if u say I cannot prove that there is a God then how do u suppose that we got here?

HERE WE GO WITH THE GOD MUST EXIST BECAUSE YOU SAY SO ARGUMENT. This is starting to get on my nerves. Luck can most certainly pull the exact amount. How does this prove god? How? It doesn't. In fact you don't have the evidence. Everything around in this world is supported by my views. Read it and weep. Everything around you is part of my belief system. There is so much evidence for my beliefs you will be crying after you start reading it all.

www.talkorigins.org

I'm atheist and I find it ridiculous that you continue to speak in logical fallacies. You must stop using the "well god exists because I say so" argument. Your number is ridiculous by the way.

We got here by evolution. You can't prove god because there is ZERO evidence for it.

Crazy christians.. you guys are true fundamentalists...

And what is with this human eye thing? The eye developed by evolution, dude.

 

[jac006]

ok,fine. I agree that I cannot provide an argument that will convince all thinking people. But what does this tell me? Does this tell me anything about God? No. This tells me more about the nature of proof than it does about whether God exists. I cannot provide an argument which will convince everyone, without a possibility of doubt, that God exists. That is no problem. You see, I cannot provide an argument for any interesting philosophical conclusion which will be accepted by everyone without possibility of doubt.

I cannot prove beyond the possibility of doubt -- in a way that will convince all philosophers -- that the Rocky Mountains are really here as a mind-independent object. I cannot prove that the entire universe did not pop into existence five minutes ago and that all of our apparent memories are not illusions. I cannot prove that the other people you see on campus have minds. Perhaps they are very clever robots.

There is no interesting philosophical conclusion that can be proven beyond the possibility of doubt. So the fact that arguments for the existence of God do not produce mathematical certainty does not by itself weaken the case for God's existence. It simply places the question of God's existence in the same category as other questions such as that of the existence of the external, mind-independent world and the question of how we know other people have minds.

Does this mean that arguments for the existence of God are useless? Not at all. Sure, I cannot provide an argument which will convince all thinking people but this does not mean I don't have good reason to believe in God. In fact some of my reasons for believing in God may be persuasive to you. Even if you aren't persuaded to believe that God exists, my arguments may not be useless. It is reasonable to believe that the mountains are real and our memories are generally reliable and that other minds exist. It is reasonable to believe these things even though they cannot be proven. Maybe some argument for God's existence will persuade you that belief in God is reasonable.

So how can we know that God exists? Instead of looking for undoubtable conclusions, we weigh evidence and consider alternatives. Which alternative best fits the evidence?

 

[Giancarlo]

ok,fine. I agree that I cannot provide an argument that will convince all thinking people. But what does this tell me? Does this tell me anything about God? No. This tells me more about the nature of proof than it does about whether God exists. I cannot provide an argument which will convince everyone, without a possibility of doubt, that God exists. That is no problem. You see, I cannot provide an argument for any interesting philosophical conclusion which will be accepted by everyone without possibility of doubt.

I have no issues with you believeing in god. Just don't try to cram this stuff down my throat. You can have your own personal beliefs, and that is fine by me. I'm a free thinking person, and I think people have that right to believe in what they want. But as far as I'm concerned, I'll be standing up for my own views.

It simply places the question of God's existence in the same category as other questions such as that of the existence of the external, mind-independent world and the question of how we know other people have minds.

The arguments for the existence of god are merely based on beliefs and faith, nothing of true substantial nature.

Even if you aren't persuaded to believe that God exists, my arguments may not be useless. It is reasonable to believe that the mountains are real and our memories are generally reliable and that other minds exist. It is reasonable to believe these things even though they cannot be proven. Maybe some argument for God's existence will persuade you that belief in God is reasonable.

Your arguments just don't add up in my mind.. that's my own set of thinking. I just can't see how your arguments add up. Actually there is no argument out there to prove god's existence, because there isn't any shred of evidence for it.

That's the way I think.

So how can we know that God exists? Instead of looking for undoubtable conclusions, we weigh evidence and consider alternatives. Which alternative best fits the evidence?

Right now, I believe the evidence points to the fact there is not a god.

 

[135791]

who is that to matt?

everyone that takes part in this thread, that will no doubt tun into a argument

 

[Giancarlo]

everyone that takes part in this thread, that will no doubt tun into a argument

I'm not insulting anyone, for the record.

Also one thing I want to add, I wouldn't want to believe in something that only deems some people worthy enough to go to "heaven". That breeds hatred.

 

[jac006]

Well fine you can believe what you want to believe. I know I cannot convince everyone. But I just want to say that that is what I belive in and even though I have given substantial evindence it is ok that you believe what u belive and I still love you (in a cf way) for who you are and what you are. Ok. Done with all this crappy arugemnting. The reason it wasn't the best argument that I could've put up was because one im typping a French paper right now (je suis desole, mon anime) and it is almost 1 in the morning. Ah well. It was good debating with ya gian.

 

[Giancarlo]

Well fine you can believe what you want to believe. I know I cannot convince everyone. But I just want to say that that is what I belive in and even though I have given substantial evindence it is ok that you believe what u belive and I still love you (in a cf way) for who you are and what you are. Ok. Done with all this crappy arugemnting. The reason it wasn't the best argument that I could've put up was because one im typping a French paper right now (je suis desole, mon anime) and it is almost 1 in the morning. Ah well. It was good debating with ya gian.

Look I believe in what I want because I just can't accept a religion that condemns me to hell. I'm sorry but I have to be blunt about this. I certainly don't accept the existence of god. Some of us are believeing what we want. You haven't given substantial evidence actually.. it is pretty weak based on something we call "ad hoc/slippery slope" and "non-sequiturs"... a form of logical fallacy. No offense.. i'm not insulting you.