Is it possible to disprove that God exists?

Is it possible to disprove that God exists?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=aTL0-RH2LfU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

no, not at this point in time, but the argument "it can't be disproven" is pretty retarded the more you think about it, in general when you are in this sort of position it really wouldn't make sense by default believe that it infact does exist considering that it still has no hard evidence to suggest that it does exist

That depends on the type of God you're talking about.

If you believe in an all-powerful god that intervenes in human affairs and listens to our prayers then unless you make up some bullshit rules as to why he won't, it should be easy.

For example, if there is an all-knowing God that wishes to make itself known and can intervene in our affairs, then I simply request that he changes the word written below from I DON'T EXIST, to FAGGOT.

I DON'T EXIST.

Assuming it doesn't say faggot above, then we've ruled out one kind of interventional God. Or at the least deduced that if there is a god he won't do anything to prove his own existence - which pretty much rules out any intervention that could not be more easily assigned to the natural behaviour of the universe.

Is it possible to disprove that you are a faggot?

FSM Principle applies

Schrodinger's deity

I think it's also pretty possible to prove that those who claim to believe in God don't really have the conviction they claim.

If you're a believer and you believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing creator of the universe...

Then the simple question is... why have you not utterly dedicated yourself and your life to your religion?

If you truly believed in what you claim to believe, this would be the single most important aspect of the universe you can imagine.

Jobs, sex, marriage, normality etc. would pale in comparison to the knowledge that you could follow the directions of the creator of the universe itself.

Or let me put it another way - if you genuinely knew that there were a hundred million dollars that could be yours if yours if only you gave up your current life - you'd most likely do so.

Now I put this to you... is your God and the secrets of the fucking universe really LESS important to you than money?

Literally anything can be filled into this space and it would be just as valid.

actually hitler tested this theory and disproved god.

supposedly if you try to kill a bunch of jews, god shows up and will even part oceans for them so the jews can escape safe and sound. he supposedly did it for 400,000 of them. apparantly that didnt happen even after 4 million of them died. no burning bushes. no parted seas. no 9 plagues. nothing.

For something to be taken seriously, you require evidence, not lack thereof.

/thread

>implying every single person on this planet thinks the same way as you

Autist detected.

>Bob ate McDonalds for lunch last week
>Today McDonalds was open but Bob wasn't there
>Therefore Bob does not exist

Seems legit.

Try forming a coherent argument.
Are you seriously implying that anyone with an IQ higher than potato, given access to the keys of the fucking universe, would ignore it in order to pleb their way through life?

Or, is your God only marginally more interesting than the boring shit humans get up to?

how would you do that? he is almighty, he could be chilling in the 17th dimension. there is no way to disprove god!
you can disprove religion but not god.

youtube.com/watch?v=aTL0-RH2LfU

That shouldn't be a criterion for whether or not you believe in him.

You really need to define what you mean by god and any limitations or lack of them that god would have.

How can you even start to prove something that you can't even define?

For example, does god intervene in human affairs? How so? What are the limitations? etc. etc.

The burden of proof.
You cannot disprove this, you can only prove it.
Any proof that conflicts it can be up to interpretation.
Any scientific evidence is "all the devil", etc.
Anecdotal delusions are not proof.

My point is that 99% of so called believers treat God/Religion in an almost identical way to a hobby like Yoga or Tennis. It doesn't really scream conviction that you believe you're in touch with the ultimate answers to life, the universe and everything.

You are clearly a homo faggot who has a huge crush on the handsome lad in the pic so you just want a reson to keep posting that pic. Fuck off...

>be atheist
>claim there is no God, it's common sense
>implying burden of proof doesn't apply

So go ahead Mr.Atheist, prove it. If you can't, then how can you possibly know there is no God? Check and mate.

Shit tier bait

all we have to do isa wait for you to prove god exists (protip, you wont) and then youve answered your2nd question. check and mate.

I'm agnostic lol.

god is almighty. he could intervene if he want and make it look like he don't. almighty means no limitations. that's my definition of god. if he's not almighty, he's not (a) god.
no human will ever know if he is real or not until he wants us to know.

personally i think there is a possibility that he/they exist, nothing more nothing less.

Don't be a fallacy Phallus.

Bob hasnt entered into a covenant with McDonald's like God supposedly enters with the Juden.

This only works if Bob is omnipotent and omnipresent.

>Bob went to McDonald's
>Bob created the earth in 7 days.

Okay interesting point but it creates more questions than it answers.

Serious question, how would you be able to distinguish between God and a hyper powerful intelligent alien who wishes you to believe they are God?

Atheists aren't claiming there is no god. Atheism isn't a claim, it's a lack of belief. You fucking retard.

there is no god, god is not real, but he fits nicely into your belief system by making you feel ok and therefore you feel god exists when in fact he is no more real than the easter bunny

Samefag. Also tl;dr

Why would an omnipotent being not be able to do what it wants? Then it wouldn't be omnipotent? What law says an omnipotent being has to eat burgers for lunch all the time?

>2017
>lrn2 BURDEN OF PROOF FAGGOT

I say no one can disprove that invisible fairies live inside my butthole

Edgy.

The way I see it is like this

If I'm right that the is a God and you're wrong, I get to live forever in paradise after I die and you'll be tormented in hell for all eternity.
If I'm wrong and God isn't real, and you were right that there was never a God, then nothing happens to either of us. We go into the ground and nothing happens.

The only real question I see now is which religion is right?

Um, yes - I didn't realise there was a one post per thread per fucking individual rule on Sup Forums.

What this is called is a "conversation" where one or more points can be made by those involved - and do not all need to be made in one concise clairvoyant monologue.

i can't.
the superalien can when he shows that he is not almighty.

Why would you want to live forever with a being that would torture people simply for not believing in him? Especially when he makes no effort to make his existence evident.

how do you know? what if god don't want you to know if he is real or not?
and i'm talking about a universal god, not a specific religion god.

That's a painfully simplistic way of looking at things.

Why assume any religion is right?

Also, is it not a coincidence that most people follow the religion that is historically dominant in their geographical location?

A better question is does God care how Apes live their lives? Do apes get judged for heaven and hell?

If not why not?

Why do you consider your own species to be special in the universe? Isn't that incredibly convenient for you personally?

Chill out, Mr. Grumpy Gills.

It's an important point.
You'd essentially need to be God to be able to prove or disprove that what you are dealing with is God and not a hugely powerful imposter.

...

Furthermore, as most religious people dismiss the scientific method, how on earth would you establish fact from fiction. I'm pretty sure "fuzzy feelings" or "faith" won't cut the mustard.

right
humans will never be able to prove or disprove god. that's excactly my point.

template #1

I just grew a fedora out of my head by reading this.

There is an expression in the Wasteland: "Old World Blues."
It refers to those so obsessed with the past they can't see the present, much less the future, for what it is.
They stare into the what-was, eyes like pilot lights, guttering and spent, as the realities of their world continue on around them.
Science is a long, steady progression into the future. What may seem a sudden event often isn't felt for years, even centuries, to come.

its not how it works, you have to prove that something exists first, so we can disprove it.
i can ask you if you can disprove the powerful almighty green frog of death watching us from another realm but whats the point

No, but it's also irrelevant to the theistic argument. The burden of proof lies with the theist. If they fail to provide sufficient evidence for the existence of their god, the claim that a god exists has no meaning and the atheist "wins".

template #2

What if there's a god who cares about whether or not people think critically and rewards atheists for not being fucking retards?

Checkmate, theists.

you don't need science to understand the problem with omnipotent beings. well, they are omnipotent. your neighbor could be god and you would never know until he wants you to know.

there is no scientific method to disprove a omnipotent, almighty being. we will never get a answer until god gives it to us. and when he don't exist we will keep believing in what we want.

Except atheists don't necessarily care about the existence of other things besides gods, so the word atheist should also be blanked out. You could at least make it say A____ISTS

IMO, coffee and chocolate proves (or disproves if you've read the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy) that not only is there a God, but that said God is kind and benevolent.

>No two stimulants are more useful.
>Not two stimulants affect our physiology more perfectly.
>They had to have been made for us.
>Thus, their maker exists
>Thus, God exists
That both are coincidence stretches beyond credulity.

at this point I can't even tell what is bait and what is a genuine retard anymore, thanks Sup Forums

I know this is bait but for any genuine believers lurking this is a stupid arguement as anybody who states something exists has to provide proof for it not the other way round

Can't rule out giant orbitless water spheres that consume sun's. Just because we haven't seen one doesn't mean they don't exist.

At it's core atheism is about requiring reasons for believing things, but it's an easy enough thing to do.

Actually, that's agnostics. Atheists don't necessarily make claims regarding the ability to prove the existence of a god unless they're also agnostics.

Lack of belief ≠ claim about the impossibility of knowledge

>At it's core atheism is about requiring reasons for believing things
No, that's rationalism. Atheism is the lack of belief in gods, nothing more.

I'm never sleeping again.

No but the same can be said about yoda Gandalf and unicorns.

Water Can't put out a Gigantor fusion reactor silly.

However, there is a little something like that called fucking black holes.

Except Yoda is a real puppet, Gandalf is a real Ian McKellen, and unicorns are... narwhales.

Yoda and Gandalf are characters that have been portrayed by various puppets and actors over the years. You wouldn't say that god is really an actor because he was portrayed by one in a movie once.

Oh then in that case, god is a real Morgan Freeman, and Jesus is a real Ewan Mcgregor.

Are Atheists really this retarded?

Oh yeah? Explain why that statement was retarded, I read about a Unicorn in an old ass book, who's to say it's not real?

Exactly. Now you understand.

Hey /b,

God here.

Just omnipotently passing through.

To put this thread to rest, I do exist.

>god
>doesn't even get dubs

Dubs are a mortal concern.

I know, right?

They're not a concern, they're a symbol of righteous holiness.

>Autism, the thread
Also B8

They could have had bits of dried grass coming out of Kevin Sorbo's shirt in that movie and I would not have noticed.

you have to prove it exists.... as far as im concerned, i dont have to give you proof about something not existing if you dont have any proof of its existance in the first place

You want me to prove my divinity with dubs? OR would you prefer something more trips, quads?

I'm God. You are too. Life is the universe experiencing itself. It's all a dream. And death is waking up.

No, that's new age bullshit.

I'm the one true God.

Behold my splendour.

God sucks, enjoy your goodie-two-shoes dick sucking contest in heaven, faggots. I'm going down to hell where all the cool kids hang out.

See

>splendour
>god is british
Fuck this, I'm still an atheist.

Aye. Fall to your knees at bong 'o clock and do the thruppany waltz in praise.

Sweet Jesus.

...

Blessings be upon you.

No, but its impossible to disprove that a magical pink rainbow kitten controls the world.

...

Fuck y'all of you dissing, he is talking the truth.

You can ''easily'' find all this shit out by start looking into the right direction with the right attitude, its easy as long you keep connecting the right dots you will understand it more and more.


You are the part of the creator, You are a creator of your own reality. you can ''easily'' find all this shit out.

It gives shit load of benefits, but bitches keep believing we are just some random piece of meat walking here on this earth.

KEK OUT

Yes, it is possible, it is called falsification and it is a method of science.

learn2college