have i PROVEN that god doesnt exist? my MECHANIC THEORY

[jassi4010709]

ok,i have come up with a theory, and i will post it here and i would appreciate any feedback to see how accurate I am.

ok here we go.....




the atheist belief that there is no god, is because of the lack of physical evidence...
"theres no evidence of god, so he doesnt exist"- usual atheist quote.

the christians believe that there is a god,because he cant be proven that he doesnt exist...
"if god doesnt exist, prove it!"- usual christian quote.


so, we have both sides, one who has no evidence that god exists, and one side that has no evidence that god doesnt exist...
THERES THE PROOF!!!

do you see?

YOU CANT GET PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, OF SOMETHING THAT DOESNT EXIST.

think of something made up.....now get a friend (dont tell him/her where the source of this thing came from) and try and get him/her to try and find evidence that it does or doesnt exist,...
IT CANT BE DONE.
thats why there is no evidence ,for or against the existance of god.


now.....some deluded idiots will say this.....

"god exists, you can see it all around us...the world, life, the bible etc etc"

so this is where my MECHANIC THEORY  comes into play.....


now, Imagine a mechanic lives at the end of your street...
how do you know the mechanic exists? because you can see him, locate him,talking to him etc etc etc....thats how you know he exists.

now, imagine you wake up one day, and you see a different neighbours car....and it has brand new alloy wheels on it...
are the new alloys on your neighbours car, proof that the mechanic exists?
(remember, just like god, the mechanic has not told you, and you never saw the work in progress)

so,are the new car alloy wheels proof of the mechanics existance?
answer= of course not.
there are millions of ways the new wheels could of got there....maybe the owner did it, maybe its a new car, maybe they have always been there and you just didnt notice......the fact is, the work is not proof that the mechanic exists.

just like the bible is not proof that god exists.

if we see god, that would be different.

but just like the wheels.....the bible could of been made by anyone and IT IS NOT PROOF OF GOD.....just like theres absolutely no evidence, directed in any direction of god....because god doesnt exist.

am i right or wrong?

[Neoncamouflage]

I like it, I'll be sure to use it and tell you how it went. Plenty of Christians around here that love a chance to argue with me.

You know I can already hear it now, "But God's not a mechanic"...

[jassi4010709]

I like it, I'll be sure to use it and tell you how it went. Plenty of Christians around here that love a chance to argue with me.

You know I can already hear it now, "But God's not a mechanic"...

yeah, im waiting to hear that too.

[Will]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. As much as I'd love to create logical symphonies about how god doesn't exist, one cannot absolutely disprove that for which there is no evidence.

Instead, most people use that logic model on other, equally absurd things in order to provide a more objective look at the logic. Take your pick: flying spaghetti monster, celestial teapot, and invisible pink unicorn (like our logo!).

[joeactor]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Will, you took the words right out of my head.

It is not possible to prove a negative hypothesis.

I'm sure that less than 100 years ago, Eskimos would have trouble believing in something as absurd as a coconut or a platypus or even a giraffe.  That doesn't mean they don't exist.

This is why both Theism and Atheism fall in the classification of "Belief".
Nobody knows.  And for some questions, it may not even be possible for us to know.

Put me in the "no proof either way" camp,
JoeActor

[Neoncamouflage]

Ah, the platypus. If God does exist, at least we know he has a sense of humor...

[SteveS]

Yup - I'm with Will and joeactor on this one.  I would modify the atheist argument a little bit and say:

"There is no evidence that God exists, therefore I don't believe that he does".

I find it hard to believe in things of which there is no evidence, but as joe points out, this doesn't mean they must not exist.  This is why I term myself an "agnostic atheist".  I don't know, but I don't believe (because I don't know).  The important thing for me to ask theists is "why do you believe when there is no evidence?".  There's no evidence for lots of things - why do the theists pick one god for which there is no evidence, yet disregard the other gods for which there is no evidence?  Why choose Jesus over Zeus?  Or the biblical god over Thor?  That sort of thing.

[joeactor]

The important thing for me to ask theists is "why do you believe when there is no evidence?".  There's no evidence for lots of things - why do the theists pick one god for which there is no evidence, yet disregard the other gods for which there is no evidence?  Why choose Jesus over Zeus?  Or the biblical god over Thor?  That sort of thing.

I'm stumped by that one myself.

Although I believe there's *something*, I haven't a clue what it is or how to define it.
And I certainly haven't met anyone who was so inspiring that I'd buy their take on it.
It was that kind of thinking that let me away from the Catholic religion in the first place.

Thor might get really pissed if you believe in some other god, but not him.
If you didn't believe in Thor, I'm betting a few rounds at the bar would smooth things over...

JoeActor

[jassi4010709]

i think some of you have  missed the point on this.


the point i was making is ......THERE WILL NEVER BE EVIDENCE.

because evidence is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE if it the thing your trying to find evidence for,doesnt exist in the first place.

thats the evidence...theres no proof in any direction, for or against.


it seems the bible writers werent as stupid as we first thought.

the fact that they can mess people up like this even at present day, shows how well they did this.

[SteveS]

Haha, hey joeactor, I wasn't aiming my theist question at you.  You have an unusual take on being a theist.  More like deism, or something, that is much harder (for me) to object to.

I was thinking of common theists like Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. that do believe in a very particular definition of a god (without any particular evidence).

Think of it this way: if there were no churches, and no religions in the current aspect (that come along with their authoritarian applications), then the difference between an atheist and a theist would merely be an interesting coffee-shop discussion.  A basic (and admittedly speculative) philosophical difference, nothing more, nothing less.

There'd be less conversation like:

T: "Repent of your sins!  Accept my one true god, who's name is (fill in the blank), or ye shall burn forever in hell!"
A: "Oh for goodness sake, get this nonsense out of my face!  Honestly, what's wrong with you people?  How can you buy that crap?"
T:  

[Will]

i think some of you have  missed the point on this.


the point i was making is ......THERE WILL NEVER BE EVIDENCE.

because evidence is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE if it the thing your trying to find evidence for,doesnt exist in the first place.

thats the evidence...theres no proof in any direction, for or against.


it seems the bible writers werent as stupid as we first thought.

the fact that they can mess people up like this even at present day, shows how well they did this.

This is circular. "There is no evidence today, therefore god doesn't exist, therefore there will never be evidence." There could be evidence some day. Science has shown us time and again that reality isn't always intuitive. Some things surprise us when we discover them. But isn't that what makes science so incredible?

[SteveS]

Hey jassi,

I think I do understand your point, namely:

i think some of you have missed the point on this.


the point i was making is ......THERE WILL NEVER BE EVIDENCE.

because evidence is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE if it the thing your trying to find evidence for,doesnt exist in the first place.

thats the evidence...theres no proof in any direction, for or against.

I don't really think anyone will find any evidence either, but I certainly don't know this.  The point of missing evidence is that we just have to ultimately reserve judgment.  Believing without evidence is foolish.  But, believing the contrary is unsupported.

In short, I find your argument to be an excellent advocation of "agnostic atheism".  If some evidence should ever come to light, I'd consider changing my mind.  I'm not a strong atheist, because the lack of evidence makes it impossible to "know" that there is no god.  However, since there is an equal lack of evidence in favor of a god existing, how can I possibly believe that one does?

The problem is that there are two cases in which we could find no evidence for god:
1) (This is the one you lay out): we find no evidence because god does not exist
2) (The other case): we find no evidence simply because we've found no evidence yet

Switch this to another topic and I think you'll see that it makes sense - like a court analogy.  Suppose someone accused you of murder, but there was no evidence to support the charge.  We would have to find you "not guilty", but this doesn't mean we've proven you didn't do it.  It just means we can't prove that you did.

Lack of evidence is inconclusive.  Period.  It neither supports a hypothesis nor the logical negation of the hypothesis.  That's all.

[jassi4010709]

i think some of you have  missed the point on this.


the point i was making is ......THERE WILL NEVER BE EVIDENCE.

because evidence is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE if it the thing your trying to find evidence for,doesnt exist in the first place.

thats the evidence...theres no proof in any direction, for or against.


it seems the bible writers werent as stupid as we first thought.

the fact that they can mess people up like this even at present day, shows how well they did this.

This is circular. "There is no evidence today, therefore god doesn't exist, therefore there will never be evidence." There could be evidence some day. Science has shown us time and again that reality isn't always intuitive. Some things surprise us when we discover them. But isn't that what makes science so incredible?

your response is not circular, its permanently on going and infinite.
it will always be he same response no matter how far science advances......in ten million years ,if god is still not found..."it still might oneday"
this is the point im making....its like looking for a needle in a haystack....and the needle isnt there....but just because you havent found the non existant needle,,,,its no reason to give up hope, because you might find it oneday....of course you never do,so you keep searching.

this had been said for 2000 plus years so far,  wonder how long this will continue.

of course, this "supreme being" who "created the universe"....couldnt quite manage to write a book himself  or just come and say hello, thus ending the search.


strange.

[Will]

your response is not circular, its permanently on going and infinite.
it will always be he same response no matter how far science advances......in ten million years ,if god is still not found..."it still might oneday"
this is the point im making....its like looking for a needle in a haystack....and the needle isnt there....but just because you havent found the non existant needle,,,,its no reason to give up hope, because you might find it oneday....of course you never do,so you keep searching.

this had been said for 2000 plus years so far,  wonder how long this will continue.

of course, this "supreme being" who "created the universe"....couldnt quite manage to write a book himself  or just come and say hello, thus ending the search.

strange.

It's like looking for a needle in a haystack as big as the universe, and the needle PROBABLY isn't there. It's not about hope, though, it's about logic. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

[jassi4010709]

strange.[/quote]
It's like looking for a needle in a haystack as big as the universe, and the needle PROBABLY isn't there. It's not about hope, though, it's about logic. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.[/quote]

i wish people would stop taking this quote from the "disclosure project"

we are not talking about u.f.o's that have been proven to exist ,but the government hides them....

we are talking about something with absolutely no proof, for or against ever since its creation.

but either way.....you can keep looking for nothing,
or you can accept that the evidence doesnt exist.