Assertion: The existence of God is PROVABLE.

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
just try to find God(s) just in case they exist, or you might go to hell

That's akin to saying just believe in Santa Claus. in case he really exists and you miss out on all the presents.
Josephw and Whodey have offered some thoughtful responses on their belief. I hope at times I've done the same on my alternative view.
Your argumet is the argument from insurance - believe just in case.
And I would suggest it's a waste of time.

How about the prophecy in the OT, about God bringing back Isreal in the last days? Written thousands of years ago and whola!, Isreal becomes a state in 1948 and is surrounded by her enemies. Coincidence? Just a thought....

Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
just try to find God(s) just in case they exist, or you might go to hell

On the other hand, you may just be wasting the small quantity of life that you do have chasing after imaginary constructs.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
How about the prophecy in the OT, about God bringing back Isreal in the last days? Written thousands of years ago and whola!, Isreal becomes a state in 1948 and is surrounded by her enemies. Coincidence? Just a thought....

Actually, I believe that was Britain, not God.

Originally posted by checkbaiter
How about the prophecy in the OT, about God bringing back Isreal in the last days? Written thousands of years ago and whola!, Isreal becomes a state in 1948 and is surrounded by her enemies. Coincidence? Just a thought....

Of course it's a coincidence.

Consider studies purporting to show psychic abilities in humans. People recount thinking about a friend of theirs, only to have that friend actually call them on the phone at that instant. Wow, freaky, right?
Wrong.
That's a result of our ability to filter out positive results and dimiss negatives in our never ending efforts at finding patterns. You may think about your friend 100 times in a month. If he/she(it?) rings you while you were thinking about them for 1 of those times, what about the 99 other times? We ignore them and focus on the positives.

Likewise for prophesies like the one you mention.

Originally posted by whodey
One thing is for certain and that is if God wanted to "prove" himself he would if he really exists, no? However, he has proved himself to man before and what did it get him? Adam and Eve knew he existed and then sinned. The children of Israel knew he existed and then built a golden calf to worship instead. God looks at the heart of man and this is why I t ...[text shortened]... Christ is who I want to be rather than someone I feel compelled against my will to be like.

You are looking at the situation from "damage control" point of view. God created humans, who he found to be naughty later. He then went to such an extent of telling them to be good; but failing this went on to kill them off. He event went to the extent of sending his own son to save us all (according to the bible).

But this makes no sense. God is supposed to be perfect. He knows everything and he can do anything. He should have created only good people in the first place. No criminals, no serial killers, no rapists. We would be free from all these animals. He knew from the very beginning that Adam and Eve were going to fail; he knew that Hitler was going to be a mass murderer; he knew so many bad things long before they happened, and yet he continued creating them all. And then after he created all these animals, he took actions which he said was for our own good. And while pursuing this 'cleansing' of the world from such bad people, the innocents also were affected. Don't you think it is a stupid thing to do?

If god really cared at all about this world being a better place, then why only do something now? Why not don't create those problems from the beginning? Unless you are saying that god wants to show off his powers, then that's a different story.......

Originally posted by amannion
Can I have a go at exploring it by denying your assertion?

I don't believe in the existence of a god, and I'm sure this biases my perspective on the topic, however having read through many arguments here and in other places, I don't think it's possible to prove or disprove a god's existence.

I can claim that a particular supernatural creature exists - ...[text shortened]... I think you can definitievly prove or disprove any supernatural entity's existence.

if you know for a fact that God can NOT be proven one way or the other.

then why do you NOT believe?


I mean why dont you just say "Im not sure if God is real?"

Originally posted by MikeBruce
if you know for a fact that God can NOT be proven one way or the other.

then why do you NOT believe?


I mean why dont you just say "Im not sure if God is real?"

I can't prove Elvis is dead either, but I believe he is, I don't go around saying I'm not sure if he is alive or dead.

Originally posted by MikeBruce
if you know for a fact that God can NOT be proven one way or the other.

then why do you NOT believe?


I mean why dont you just say "Im not sure if God is real?"

Good point.
I don't believe in a God. I can't prove this, but it makes sense to me that there is no god or gods.
Likewise I would guess that many religious people could argue essentially the same thing but for a god.

Originally posted by MikeBruce
if you know for a fact that God can NOT be proven one way or the other.

then why do you NOT believe?


I mean why dont you just say "Im not sure if God is real?"

You call it the balance of probability. He has admitted that he can't prove god's existence or inexistence. I think if he has to choose one of the two, it's easier for him to believe that god doesn't exist, because it makes more sense to him. I'm pretty much a fence-sitter myself. On the one hand, I'm inclined to believe that there must be a designer/creator; that we didn't happen randomly. On the other hand, if there really is god, then all the religious explanations about him do not make sense.

Oops!... looks like you beat me to it.

Originally posted by ckoh1965
You call it the balance of probability. He has admitted that he can't prove god's existence or inexistence. I think if he has to choose one of the two, it's easier for him to believe that god doesn't exist, because it makes more sense to him. I'm pretty much a fence-sitter myself. On the one hand, I'm inclined to believe that there must be a designer/creato ...[text shortened]... gious explanations about him do not make sense.

Oops!... looks like you beat me to it.

Yep, that's pretty much it for me to, except that I'm NOT inclined to believe in a creator. The notion carries too much baggage for my view of the world.

Originally posted by amannion

And neither do I think you can definitievly prove or disprove any supernatural entity's existence.

All hail the Church of Bob!
Look, you can't prove the non-existence of something. It is up to the claimant to prove or at least show the probability of its existence.

Originally posted by buffalobill
All hail the Church of Bob!
Look, you can't prove the non-existence of something. It is up to the claimant to prove or at least show the probability of its existence.

That's the whole problem. As far as they are concerned, they have shown the probability and evidence of god's existence. To them, the mere fact that the universe is here is evidence enough of god's existence.

Originally posted by buffalobill
Look, you can't prove the non-existence of something.

Sometimes, however, absence of evidence can be taken as evidence of absence—


“There’s a unicorn in your refrigerator.”

“No there isn’t.”

“Yes there is.”

“Isn’t.”

“Is.”

“Isn’t.”

“Just go look.”

Goes and looks; comes back. “Nope, none there.”

“Well, he won’t show himself while the door’s open...and even then only if you believe in him.”

“And why would I believe in such a thing?”

“Here’s a book all about unicorns...”

Originally posted by buffalobill
All hail the Church of Bob!
Look, you can't prove the non-existence of something. It is up to the claimant to prove or at least show the probability of its existence.

Yes, but consider the reality.
No religious person is going to try to do that. They believe. That's their starting point. From there, they may try to develop some sort of viable rationale for their belief. But the belief will always be the starting point.
Which of course makes no sense.
But that's my point - many beliefs make no sense.