I wanted to put this question out there to see how strongly everyone feels on this subject. Being that most of us trust in scientific fact and reasoning, I was wondering if everyone is absolutely, undeniably, 100% sure that a god doesn't exist.  I personally take into account that there is no proof of any cosmic creator so therefore I am about 99.9999% sure that there is no god. However we all agree that science is an ever evolving field and I don't think that there will ever be any proof to support the existence of a supreme being, but I can't be 100% sure until there is concrete proof against one. I would like to know what all of your thoughts on this.  

Views: 11986

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We live in a culture that embraces a god belief based on the ignorant assertion of our forbearers of power and wisdom to proclaim as known the unknown decrying the unknown to be god. God is nothing and represents the something unknown to the wisdom of vanity denying our own ignorance with arrogance. God and the question of god exists in and of this paradigm alone. Even as Atheist we are trapped by believers into this mindset. Leave being an atheist, step outside the box into a world where god never was an imaginary answer nor a something such as a social bonding mechanism confused for a driving power of god's spirit. step out and away into nature as it evolved into the complex from the simple from powers such as exploding stars the cooled into planets and stars and later life forms that emerged because the it simply could as it could not in other places and did not in other ways. step into that world searching for the reason life caught a foothold and life as people now looks back upon itself. we as natures entity building a body of information that informs anew, each generation without reverence to the infallible or outdated wisdoms of the past assessments, grow that human conscience to an understanding of self and nature, such that we traverse the black-hole in the center of our earth through wormholes out into other galaxies and back through particle data streaming. Now that we are outside that paradigm of old into what is natural, what is possible, and what becomes real, we have arrived to a new paradigm that is 100 percent free of god. It is only the precedent of religion preceding science much like ignorance precedes knowledge or bad habits learned first rear their ugly heads, that we are not 100 percent sure those old myths may have some place in life.

Jon T, it isn't easy to parse your sentences, but a black hole at the center of the Earth would doom us all in exceedingly short order. It would be disastrously evident in a matter of perhaps hours, were one ever to appear at the Earth's core. I don't dispute your other conclusions (if I understand them correctly), but you can't be serious about this idea.

My point is that god is an imagination of old ideas that we debate endlessly because we imagined it to be true first, and ignorance as does knowledge shapes belief if sprinkled with imagination. There are many things we are 100 percent sure do not exist like the imaginary infinitesimally small black hole that pulls matter into it at the center of the earth.

yes

Hubris, Madhukar; evolution yes, origins no. Any headway in understanding origins only begs the question. A bit deeper into the unexplored cave goes the spelunker. On what rational basis can the spelunker be said to know what is beyond known limits?

Glen Rosenberg

I am wondering: wherefrom my name comes here? I am not in this discussion for long time.

Madhukar, it does get confusing and I am constantly trying to find the thread of a conversation. There are some things I want to chat with you but taxes are taking too much time. My dear family came for dinner tonight, but one of my sons and his family live far away and couldn't join us. We had 12 at the table tonight, ranging from two years old to 76 ... and I am so grateful for and proud of this splendid family. Life is sweet!  I'll get back for a chat in a day or two. Hope all is well with you.

Although this post has many many replies, I feel I need to add my 1/50th of a dollar. Basically "only the Sith deals with absolutes". Leave the absolutism to the zealots and the fanatics. Nobody can with 100% certainly know the outcome of anything, but as had been said - we can predict, based on past patterns and experiences, outcomes with very high confidence.

Do you exist god? Answer yes in the brackets. Waiting for God to fill in the blank here: [     ]? Any answer implies yes, and all blank answers imply no. If you are 100 percent certain god does not exist, you need not check back for the reply!

MK, I was responding to your latest comment re evolution and origins.

Now the truth is we don't know why or how everything has come into existance without a designer or some sort of structural procedure that would require inteligence. HOWEVER, what we have a substancially bigger knowledge than the people did that brought to us the believe in a single or multiple gods. So to believe in a god would require us to submit to EXACTLY what the monotheistic religions present to us as truth. You are not talking of "god" if you mention the possibility of a designer or even as some people do a force, because the people who gave us the word god were very clear in what they said he was and what he wasnt. That is the first thing. The second is just because we havent found a scientific prove yet that gives us the explaination of our existance doesnt mean that there has to be a devine hand in our creation! It seems to me that Religious "authorities" have moved from the statement "god is as he is in the bible or whatever scripture" to "god is the potential reason for the big bang or whatever other theories exist" and if several "facts" of the old testament can already be disproven shows that all of it is questional by its very nature. So simply focusing on gaps is not a prove for anything, as science has at least made huge progress andis continuing to do so! So let me conclude, it is even less evident that god can exist compared to the fact that we have disproven "his own words" and that is already evidence enough -that whatever the answer to this question is - can be compared to the archaic and all powerful being described in so many scriptures and teachings

The best candidate for a "structural procedure" requiring no intelligence would be the conservation laws (there are more yet to discover at different levels) that define boundaries and restrictions, e.g., self-assembly at the nano-level is all about conservation law. It's all combination after that.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service