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: 13607

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Gnostic atheists make us normal agnostic atheists look bad.

Gnostic atheists have formed their own religion with as little credibility as any other religion. 

As atheists we're supposed to champion reason and we acknowledge that we can't be sure and we can't disprove God. All atheists do not believe in religion or a god but gnostic atheists are as bad as the religious.

Worse even, because they make me and the secular movement look bad.

Agnostic atheists make us normal gnostic atheists look bad.

Agnostic atheists have formed their own religion with as little credibility as any other religion. 

As atheists we're supposed to champion reason and we acknowledge that we can be sure and do not need to disprove God. All atheists do not believe in religion or a god but agnostic atheists are as bad as the religious.

Worse even, because they make me and the secular movement look bad.


You would make a great theist. You believe in a bunch of imaginative bullshit anyway.

Only in your imagination can you know 100% there is no God. You hold an illogical position that you were indoctrinated into by your surroundings. But I guess I can't logic you out of a hole you didn't logic yourself into.

We atheists had a mighty fine description built up for us as reasonable. In the end, people like you who can't live without religion in their life so they make atheism into one might mess this up for us.

If adherence to objective knowledge formation, noncontradiction and causal choice make me a religious person who does not pray, consider any book or person or group of persons an ultimate authority, congregate with others about these ideas and chant, or hold or celebrate any mystical ideas, then OK. I'm fine with being what you cal religious. I don't know how you define religious, but then it doesn't matter how you define anything because anything can mean anything to a skeptic who is skeptical when they should be certain.

There is no absolute certainty. There are only probabilities. If you have dabbled even the slightest in quantum physics you'll agree that it's quite natural, since with the multiverse theory things that are extremely improbable not only become probable, they become inevitable. That said, in our universe, here, now, there has been no evidence what so ever brought forth that would prove the existence of a god or gods, and thus that existence is extremely unlikely - but you cannot at all be absolutely certain. "Only a sith deal in absolutes."

Are you sure? Not at all? Doesn't that make you Sith-like, then? Being sure that one cannot be sure is an absolute statement and is therefore a blatant contradiction, since its claim is that it(self) is not possibly valid. Skepticism, as a fundamental principle, fails at the outset. It is appropriate when faced with an unsupported claim or in the presence of contradictory evidence, but not appropriately applied to well integrated noncontradictory contextual valid knowledge.

I am no physicist, but I am fairly well acquainted with modern particle physics. And as I have explained already many times on this thread, we do not need, nor can we use physics, to establish a proper opinion on god. So many physicists and physics enthusiasts know not when they leave what can be possibly known and begin to violate more basic epistemological laws that their science and process of verification rely upon. No doubt, current quantum theory is very good at predicting certain things probabilistically. But so was Ptolemy's model of the cosmos more predictive relative to the clearly more correct model put forth by Copernicus. Appearing, as random, or able to act at a distance, is very different than actually doing so or being able to explain it. Quantum uncertainty is a demonstration of the current limit of our ability to perceive. Be patient. We'll fully integrate the quantum level logically, both hierarchically, by describing it as a group of smaller things or currently hidden variables and as a part of what we know to be larger things, as well as contextually without logical contradiction into an objective knowledge base.  Or we will not breach this current limit. But we will never prove true randomness or god. We, popular academic theoretical physicists and the media, should be more careful about calling what is at the very limits of our ability to perceive it knowledge, especially when it contradicts, not just other related knowledge, but what makes knowledge possible. There is one reality. Granted, it looks like this is just one local expansion, of many, with these particular physical constants, but no where in existence does anything deserving of the name god exist.


•God is an untestable concept.

•Therefore he doesn't exist. At least that's what I have faith in. Do not question me on my faith you stupid atheist! I will defend it to the death! Logic and reason be damned! 

Nice cartoon. You are silly. I am a gnostic atheist. I have zero faith. And zero religion. For beliefs, convictions and knowledge, I use only reason, the art of noncontradictory integration of objective concepts formed from sense perception and the realization that reality exists and things within it do only what is in their nature to do based on their structure and momentum. This is the only sufficient path to knowledge. That's not religious, faithful or mystical. God can be known to not exist, not because it is untestable, but because contradictions and metaphors and things that lack identity cannot manifest. That it is untestable is simply why the absence of direct physical proof of its non-existence is no reason to think it possible. As if knowing about reason and epistemology wasn't proof enough. Faith is the absence of reason as god is the absence of noncontradictory concrete identity (which a thing needs to exist).

Why couldn't a god have an identity? Why does a god have to interfere with the nature of things? What if a highly evolved race became "gods" or "god" much before our time? Makes sense. Aliens could exist. Why not gods?

Your logic totally makes sense bro. Please contact the scientific community right away and collect your Nobel Prize and your photoshoot for Time magazine.

I'm waiting... 

"noncontradictory concrete identity"

noncontradictory: "The law of logic that it is not the case that (p & not-p). Contradiction is the final logical stopping point: if we can derive a contradiction from a set of premises, then at least one of them is false (see reductio ad absurdum). 

Concrete: "naming a real thing or class of things <the word poem is concretepoetry is abstract>em>concrete evidence>

identity:  "the distinguishing character or personality of an individual"

"Faith is the absence of reason as god is the absence of noncontradictory concrete identity (which a thing needs to exist)."
OK, now what does that mean? 

Using all the sciences and human history I can be 100% sure that all religions and superstitions are made up! I can be 100% sure that there is no known evidence to support the existence of a god or gods. I therefore do not believe in them.
If there is some sort of higher power that created everything, its nothing more than a vague lucky guess on mans part and he or she is most definately NOT worthy of worship.
The problem might be that man simply overthinks things because he is constrained by what he can comprehend, particularly his own mortality. Perhaps matter, existence, time etc have no beginning or end they just simply, are!
PS: If you are an a***ly retentive, politically correct person, please insert he/she where appropriate!
My favorite theory is that time is an anomaly that exists only in our universe.

Technically that could mean that matter in our universe has always existed in a sense. One day time/gravity will collapse and our universe will disappear from existence.


Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today



Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon


Nexus on Social Media:

Latest Activity

Warren Jappe posted a video

Eddie Izzard "Stripped": God and Atheism

Eddie Izzard discusses God, atheism, and Hitler in this hilarious clip from his "Stripped" Tour, recorded in London's Lyric Theatre on Dec. 22nd and 23rd, 20...
50 minutes ago
Profile IconDana Porter and Derek joined Atheist Nexus
57 minutes ago
Warren Jappe posted a photo
58 minutes ago
Pat replied to Emma Lennon's discussion Creation(ist) Museum commercial on Hallmark Channel
1 hour ago
Pat commented on Daniel W's group Food!
1 hour ago
Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish commented on Rich Renouf's blog post You won't guess who owns the "JebBushforPresident.com" domain?
1 hour ago
Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish liked Dr. Allan H. Clark's discussion Women being allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia
1 hour ago
Visvakarman Svetasvatara-Upanish replied to jay H's discussion UK Police seek man over derogatory Islam slurs on bus
1 hour ago

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service