Evidence VS the Theistic mindset

[KebertX]

Is it possible at all to prove or disprove anything that doesnt exist?
Can you prove that ive never had sex with your mother?
can you disprove that a invisible unicorn is standing right behind you?

I might be able to disprove that you've had sex with my mother with some medical examinations, or disprove that an invisible unicorn is standing behind me with thermal imaging, or some spray-paint.

God CAN be disproved to some degree.  You can see that there is no one living in the clouds using satellites.  When this was proven, theists simply stopped saying that he lived in the clouds.  You can disprove the existence of God as described in the bible, by...

Uncovering more and more and more and more and more and more evidence for evolution, or the big bang, or the age of the Earth (4.5 billion years).
Finding paradoxes in his attributes:

If God is Omnipotent, could he create a boulder so heavy that he himself would be unable to lift it?

Can God sin? If God cannot sin, is He truly omnipotent?

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?

Can omniscient God, who knows the future, find The omnipotence to change his future mind?

A little extra thought shows very plainly that omnipotence contradicts itself, and therefore, cannot truly exist.  Omniscience and Omnipotence disprove each other, and Benevolence cannot be attributed to an all powerful being (and vis versa).  So God could definitely not be Omnipotent, Benevolent, or Omniscient.  So if he does exist, why are we calling him God?  It is impossible to deductively prove a negative argument.  Inductive reasoning, however, can strongly indicate nonexistence.

A quote I picked up from someone else on here: "Absence of evidence of a thing that is claimed to be common and plentiful, everywhere that humanity is able to search, is for all practical purposes, evidence of absence." It's entirely true.

[Ellainix]

It's very transparent and any atheist who genuinely wants evidence would seek it themselves.

We did seek it. There was none. Thus we are Atheists. If you have evidence, please present it.

When an atheist asks me for evidence,what I hear is "I don't really want evidence, I've made up my mind already, I just want to ridicule you".

You probably wouldn't think that if you actually had evidence that a god existed. An atheist would probably ridicule you because hundreds of theists have come before you, each with their own idea of what a god is, none able to prove that the idea is not just made up. Essentially to some, you are nothing more than a door-to-door salesmen or a telemarketer, selling products that are useless, phony, or simply a gimmick.

But asking Atheists for evidence isn't really being honest because when the question is asked the motives are usually ridicule rather than really wanting to see evidence.

I added an 'a' somewhere in there, now the phrase reflects how things actually work out in the real world.

[KebertX]

Filanthropod: Why did you join this Forum if you have such a low opinion of Atheists?  You have a very low bar of what it means to be ridiculed.  When we point out flaws in your logic, we're not Ridiculing you.  We're applying a Socratic method, arriving at answers by asking questions.

You say that we are missing some obvious evidence for God's existence, and then recoil into an astounding level of denial and defensiveness when someone ask about the nature of this evidence. PLEASE, If anyone start ridiculing you, I, personally will go off on them.  You have my word on that.  Tell us all, open a new thread, shout it from the rooftops, THIS IS THE EVIDENCE OF GOD!!!!

I am open to a lot of spiritual concepts, and I'm glad to listen if something in the Bible is confirmed.  I am an Atheist, not because I've locked myself into closed minded dogmatic rejection of all things spiritual.  I'm an Atheist because I have always wanted to learn everything.  What I learned in that process taught me that The Bible isn't true, and God probably isn't real.  But I still want to learn everything.  So please, tell me what this magnificent evidence of God is.  What have I been missing out on in my Atheist Ignorance?

[Thumpalumpacus]

The Christian conception of god is easily disprovable on logical bases alone.  But a larger conception of god is not, as you obviously understand, is not so easily done.

Interesting. Please explain.

Sure.  An omnipotent, omnibenificent god would certainly not have made such a screwed-up world; and the god which had made this world is either amoral, evil, or plainly incompetent.

So far as a deist god is concerned, there are no such firm holds on such a slippery object.

[Martin TK]

"Hi, i've often heard the following from ALOT of Theists and Agnostics.
- Nobody can prove God, and nobody can disprove God, so the most logical conclusion is that he does exist."

This argument and discussion is as old as the belief in gods, it truly is.  There are a lot of arguments like yours out there, and like yours, they have merit.  I agree with the premise from one respondent that the burden of proof lies with the one making the claim.

I do find one thing particularly interesting in my 30 years of studying the bible and doing the whole thinking process thing.  Most atheists have a greater understanding/knowledge of what is in the Christian bible than do most Christians.  Recently a poll showed that nearly 2/3 of all modern Christians could NOT name one single prophet from the old testament and nearly half believed that Moses was one of the 12 disciples.

I challenge any theist to read a few books written by atheists, then once they understand the stance most atheists will take, come and debate your belief system, but I also warn them to read their own bible, and to do so with eyes yet unseen, meaning to read it from the position of someone who has not been indoctrinated.  Therein lies a huge problem though, because FAITH and BELIEF have usually been such a part of the Theist's life, it is virtually impossible to step back and look at religion from a different perspective.

Again, just my carefully thought out position, open to discussion and dismissal...

[i_am_i]

The Christian conception of god is easily disprovable on logical bases alone.  But a larger conception of god is not, as you obviously understand, is not so easily done.

Interesting. Please explain.

Sure.  An omnipotent, omnibenificent god would certainly not have made such a screwed-up world; and the god which had made this world is either amoral, evil, or plainly incompetent.

So far as a deist god is concerned, there are no such firm holds on such a slippery object.

But I think there is a pretty firm hold. Why would there be any reason for a deist to suspect that a "deist god" exists and created the universe? I see no difference beween gods. They all come from the same place, don't they?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I agree with your outlook.  I'm just addressing each their individually-assigned "attributes".  It is in that sense that I regard the deist god as more difficult to refute, because there are fewer positive claims made.

Also, my god comes from Hoboken, NJ.