Throughout recorded history mankind has generally been convinced of the existence of God. Granted there are cultural variances, and no unanimous consensus agreeing on which religion is the ultimate truth, but the claim "there is no God" is a very recently made one. Until very recently in history it was...
Yep. That's part of why God chose for us to believe through faith and not proof.
Its true humans have always believed in God or Gods ,in recent times questions have
been asked because of the emergence of science.
But at the end of the day ,no one really knows the truth. We all hope there is a God,
but we just have a problem proving it.
Herod wanted proof also. Jesus wasn't out to "prove" anything to anyone. His mission was to present an offer.
Legally, in order to have a contract, there must be an offer, acceptance, and consideration. Jesus makes an offer of forgiveness of sin and eternal life. You may accept the offer or not. The consideration is His life for yours. He gives you His; you give Him yours. That's the deal and it's not negotiable.
No real atheist cares whether you believe or not. Believers are the ones with their panties in a bunch.
Incidentally, I'm a believer but I believe that God wants us to be respectful and loving toward others regardless of what they believe or what color they are. God's commandment is "Love One Another," not "Berate One Another On Social Media."
Throughout recorded history mankind has generally been convinced of the existence of God.
- And those same people believed that the earth was flat. So what?
but the claim "there is no God" is a very recently made one.
- Only to idiot fundies. Try reading something intelligent. It goes as far back as Pythagoras.
Until very recently in history it was taken for granted that some form of deity does exist.
- SO? Stupid people have always existed.
People wouldn't believe this unless they had legitimate reason to.
- Did people have a legitimate reason to believe that the earth was flat, or were they just told that it was flat and they would be burned at the stake if they did not believe in it.
so for Atheists to come along and make the claim that there is no God.
- No, we simply say you have not proven anything you say, as you do here. You "claim" a lot and say other people "claim" a lot and you PROVE nothing.
you also have to back up your claims with evidence if you want people to believe you.
- But we do not "claim" a god does not exist, idiot fundies say that. We simply claim you have yet to prove ANYTHING.
If religious people are wrong and it turns out there is no God, then there is no Heaven or Hell and thus no consequences
- Except that you have wasted the ONLY life that can exist.
however if you are wrong, and it turns out that God IS real and there is an afterlife, well you're f*cked for eternity when you die.
- WHICH GOD, you brain dead twit. there are more than 1000 out there and you have 1 in 1000 chance of getting it right. I have 1 in 1001 in getting it right and since I ignore ALL of them, the odds are immaterial.
it's incredibly remiss and immoral to deceive people into believing there is no God, unless you have 100 per cent concrete evidence.
- OK, now prove YOUR god is the right one or you are just as immoral as i am.
If I claimed to have superpowers and a few of my friends backed me up saying that yes I did. You will NOT believe me. You would ask me for evidence to prove it.
Similarly, if you say God exists. Show evidence and I'll believe you.
To disprove anything, it needs to be proved first.
Why should I try to disprove something for which there is no evidence? You have no evidence for your claim, and that's the end of the debate. Now that's settled, who wants pizza?
If I wanted you to believe in leprechauns, the burden of proof is on me to substantiate my claim that leprechauns are real and worthy of belief.
Atheists do not make the claim that there is no god. I only make the very simple claim that I don't believe in any god/s (or leprechauns). It is very reasonable not to believe in something that has absolutely no credible evidence to support its existence.
No, we are to give a reason for the hope that is within us. We are to KNOW and if we do not, then we are acting on blind faith and God never accepts that. If you don't know, then get busy and study. There are many books on apologetics which can help you with FACTS, not opinions which is what atheists lean upon.
There are so many Gods, and so many other places to go than heaven or hell (we don't need either for consequences, there are better options, the Gods know that).
But overall I agree with you. No one can disprove all the Gods, reincarnation, different planes of existence, astral travel, fairies, dragons, etc.. the things people have believed in for virtually all human history.
Like you and I, people have to just start accepting these all exist.
The burden of proof falls on the one making the claim of a god. I have never made the claim that god or a god does not exist. I simply don't believe one does for lack of evidence.
Um, last I checked there have been a whole lot of different religions with a whole lot of different beliefs.
This includes what exactly God/god/gods/or whatever there is out there actually is.
The burden of proof is still on Christians.
Why should I be forced to follow a God, specifically, that you can't even prove is real?
Why should your God that you can not even prove is real dictate how I live my life?
Why should your God that you have no proof of be in law, school, and elsewhere?
You're the ones trying to push this God. Not Atheists.
Pascal's Wager has NEVER worked.
If there is a god and an afterlife, there is no guarantee that atheists will not be given the opportunity to 'live on' - and no guarantee that theists will have the same opportunity.
You are assuming that YOUR particular beliefs are correct, what if the god that turns out to exist is not the one that you have believed in, and that it will allow everyone into the after life EXCEPT for those who believed in a different god?
The burden of proof is always on someone who claims existence, not on a person who rejects that existence because the other person has not met their burden of proof.
Do you mean you can say what ever BS you want and not prove it? What are you, Trump??????
You asked. "How can you disprove something without evidence?", but I could ask the exact same thing to any religious person as there is no evidence to suggest that there is a God or higher being. I personally don't believe in a God due to the evil in the world such as starvation etc. I also don't believe in a God because science seems more reasonable and has more believable facts and theories, rather than religion saying a 'God' made the world which could just be all stories. Obviously no one knows if there is a god or not but you can't be angry at someone for not believing in any religion, just like you can't be angry at someone for believing in a religion.
An atheist's evidence for a lack of God is that the universe does not require a god. During the great majority of history, people believed in gods because they had no explanation for life and the universe but a great and powerful being so complex that they cannot be understood. As soon as modern science was able to explain the movement of the universe and the evolution of life, atheism became an exponentially more popular concept, and rightfully so.
Basicly your premise about peoples' historical beliefs are not correct. Universal enforcement of belief have only arisen in the last 2000 under the theocratic tyrannies of Christianity and Islam. You can see atheism was a pretty common position among the Greeks, Romans, Indians and Chinese from their writings, especially the educated classes. Here is a quote from Seneca which sums up the ancient belief about belief. " Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful". It is no coincidence that religious belief has declined in Europe since the 18th century with the overthrow of theocratic monarchies. First among the educated and ruling classes, them spreading out into the wider population. When people are no longer punished or penalised for no believing then they tend no to believe in gods.
Stick it up your butt hole.
Consensus is proof of nothing, dumbass, and your god has never had even close to a majority of humanity as worshipers.
Since you people have never proven your God exists, your God's existence can't be disproven therefore the burden of proof is on you. That backs up my claim.
There are consequences. I'm surprised I'd have to tell you what they are.
Are you really that stupid?
No. You're the one making the claim. Not us. And if you really believe that the claim there is no God is recent just shows how ignorant you are. Not to mention I'm not deceiving anyone as I don't try to convince others that there isn't a God. Only that that is my belief. Your free to yours. Don't look at me to do your thinking for you.
you asked... "how can you disprove something without evidence?", but i could ask the exact same thing to any religious person as there's no evidence to suggest that there's a god or higher being... i personally don't believe in a god due to the evil in the world such as starvation etc... i also don't believe in a god 'cause science seems more reasonable and has more believable facts and theories, rather than religion saying a 'god' made the world which could just be all stories... obviously no one knows if there's a god or not but you for the life of me cannot be angry at someone for not believing in any religion, just like you for the life of me cannot be angry at someone for believing in a religion...
Not at all. You claim there is a god - you have to prove it if you want to be taken seriously on it.
I can't prove there is or isn't a god. I just don't see one. And seeing one by blind faith is like believing something just because you're tell me I should believe you. YOU prove he exists! After all, you are the one telling US he exists. I just don't believe in the mud man and the bone woman depicted in the bible. You?
False. Your logical fallacies include shifting the burden of proof, appeal to antiquity, and appeal to consequences. The burden of proof lies with the claimant, not one who rejects their claim. The age of a belief, and the potential consequences of holding it, have no bearing on whether the belief is actually true.
Furthermore, you have demonstrably false premises. Frex, the claim "there is no god" is one ancient Greeks debated, so it's clearly not a "very recently made one".
Finally, since you're restating Pascal's wager, I'll turn it back on you: You make a grave error when you say that if you're wrong, there are no consequences. What if you're worshipping the _wrong_ god, Andrew? You could be trying to avoid the wrong hell.
For instance, if you commit the heresy of worshipping Jesus, the Noble Qur’an says that your judgment shall be a painful doom forever in Islam's hell. And that you shall wear garments of fire, and your food shall be to eat from the tree of Zaqqum which will burn in your belly like molten brass. That you shall have no appeal; that Allah shall not relax your punishment, and that you shall be speechless with despair.
Which do you think is more likely: that Jesus would forgive you for being Muslim, or that Allah would forgive you for being Christian? If you think Jesus would be more forgiving than Allah, it follows that your odds of going to Heaven are greater if you worship Allah than Jesus.
But there's still many more hells to consider. Out of all the gods humanity has come up with, your safest afterlife bet would be to worship the most vindictive god with the cruelest hell of the lot, because every other god would be more likely to let you into paradise anyway.
Now that I've turned Pascal's wager against you, you should have an incentive to go read about all the ways it's a bad argument. Me, I'll just continue following the evidence where it leads.
Produce your fancy god then.
No. Atheism dates back to at least ancient Greece if not before.
No. The person making the ridiculous claim must provide evidence.
No. Pascal's Wager is irrelevant.
Nice try, ranty pants.
You are correct that the burden of proof are on those who claim "There is no God." That is a declarative statement of what the person says is true, and as a result it needs proof. But not all atheists make that claim. Some atheists properly say "I believe that God does not exist." Like the theist who says "I believe in God", this is a statement of belief. A belief is something which we accept as true even though it cannot be proven. It is illogical to ask someone to prove a belief because by definition there can be no proof. All the person who believes needs is a logical reason why he/she believes as they do.
Not true. I can prove the burden of proof is on you. Here goes:--- I come up to you in the park and I tell you that although I don't know who Mohammad is, a vision of him appeared to him in a dream last night and he said to come here to the park and he will reveal himself. And so I went to the park and there he was. Mohammad telling me that I was going to go to heaven and have 72 virgins. I said, to him, "but I'm not even a Muslim".... Would you believe me? No you probably would think I was nuts right? But I know what I saw. I know what I felt, and who are you to tell me anything right?
So for you to believe me, would you not "expect" to see proof? Of course you would. Who wouldn't. Which is exactly why the burden of proof lands on religious people because their Gods have never been revealed. "EVER!"
I see this. This 'claim' was VERY backed up for thousands of years and rarely
There was NO EVIDENCE that PEOPLE ....got it into their heads to believe something.
Thus it is not a CLAIM, but an ESTABLISHED PROCEDURE that only came into
dispute recently, as you said.
iS THERE GOD? That's a question. One that many ask and wonder about.
If it were a matter of 'I'd like there to BE a God, so I'll create one', that would
be different. I haven't seen that at all.
In fact, isn't it true that for about 2,500 years the JEWS did NOT want to
OBEY the God of the OT? So what would be...their CLAIM?
Let's see....we made up a God because it didn't rain, but that God started
bossing us around so we rebelled? Is that the reasoning?
We have FOUND due to EVIDENCE, and need not CLAIM.
Atheists have NOT found due to INABILITY or UNWILLINGNESS to
accept or see what we found, and they indeed must CLAIM NOTHING at all.
do you mean you can say what ever bs you want and not prove it? what are you, trump??????
As an old Atheist I have never attempted to either disprove or to convert anyone to my way of being. I leave that to those who do not respect others right to their religion or lack of it.
You can't prove a negative. If you want me to follow your God, you have to show Him to me. I want to know what I'm following.
I am an atheist cos I do not believe a "god" exists
You can believe whatever you want
Why do I have to prove anything?
If YOU want ME to believe a god exists then YOU prove it
I dont give a damn if you dont want to - that dont bother me at all cos I will just stay an atheist
But it appears to bother theists a LOT
(And your 1st paragraph is hilarious - You think I give a damn what people believed hundreds/thousands of years ago. belief never proved anything
People have only believed in 1 "god" for say 3000 years at most (the greeks believed in multiple gods, so did the romans (at 1st))
BEFORE the egyptians people didnt believe in any "gods" at all
Since "civilised" humanity has been around for say 6000 years (the start of the egyptian pharoahs)., THAT means different variants of atheism ( a non belief in "supreme entities") predate any theism by 3000 years
then you get really stupid "People wouldn't believe this unless they had legitimate reason to"
so your argument is "I should believe cos they did, and they must have had a good reason to believe"?
I just cannot believe somebody can be so stupid to think this is an argument
and then you get to pascals wager (he was a fool)
So you think I should believe to be "on the safe side" in case I am wrong
Aint this god of yours supposed to be onniscient? If it is dont YOU think it would realise that I would only be doing it to be on the safe side?
So either YOU believe your "god "aint omniscient or is stupid
So which is it . its GOTTA be one or the other (thats reason 1) why pascal was a fool)
Now suppose this "god" does exists
If you were this god which would you rather have in heaven
a "good" guy who just dont happen to believe you exist?
or a guy who aint that good but keeps "confessing" the things he does wrong and then goes out and does them again cos he KNOWS by confessing he is gonna get into heaven (ie he is an hypocrite)
(thats reason 2) why pascal was a fool)
There are thousands of different religions - all believing in a different "god" . Only one of them can believe in the "true god". And maybe none of them do cos that religion aint been invented yet
So how YOU know yours is the "true god" . ALL religions say theirs is the "true god" but they cant all be correct
So the odds are huge that YOU are following a "false god", and there is a good chance you certainly are
and whats the penalty for believing in a "false god" - aint it hell?
(thats reason 3) why pascal was a fool)
ME? - I have no problem - I dont believe in any god so cant believe in a false one
aint that a bummer - an atheist is more likely to get into heaven than any theist
be on the "safe side" - become an atheist - you know it makes sense
Its also damned easy
you are a christian?
all you gotta do is follow all the teachings you have been indoctrinated with, but NOT believe this "god" actually exists and "jesus" wasnt the son of this "god"
(no need to believe in the big bang or evolution, just that the universe and life wasnt created by this "god" as described in genesis (and that should be damned easy)
Just stick with "I dont know how the universe or life came about" and you will be fine as an atheist)
(no reason why you shouldnt believe "jesus" actually existed either if you want to, just that jesus was a normal human prophet and not divine)
Why so silly as to LIE?
The burden of proof lies on the person claiming something exists!
The first person to produce a single tiny little piece of verifiable evidence for any god will become world famous and mega rich!
Academia states that in the absence of any sort of evidence of the existence of something it must be deemed not to exist until verifiable evidence is found - thus god is held not to exist pending some sort of verifiable evidence.
But it is not just that there is no evidence for your claims but that there is so much evidence against it!
The bible is what is called "Faction” A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not!
There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record - that is right - not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are well recorded!
There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!
He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?
Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!
Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter!
At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!
Not one word of it is contemporary with the period and was not written until several hundred years after the period the story is set in!! How did the apostles write their books more than a hundred years after they would have been dead?
Christianity is an invention of the Italians and that is why it came from the Holy ROMAN Catholic church!
Please realize that those claims for the Old historians are worthless since they were not even born until long after everyone in the stories would have been so long dead!
Josephus AD 37 – AD 100
Tacitus AD 56 – AD 120
Suetonius - 69 – 130 AD
Pliny the Younger, 61 AD – 112 AD
Justin Martyr (Saint Justin) AD103–165 AD
Lucian - AD 120 -180 AD but he was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it.
Pamphilius AD 240-309 AD
Eusebius AD 263 – 339 AD
Photius AD 877 – 886 AD
Thallus - But there are no actual record of him except a fragment of writing which mentions the sack of Troy [109 BC] Showing that he was clearly not alive in biblical times.
Some even try to use Seneca. 4 BCE – 65 CE but as a Stoic Philosopher he opposed religion yet made not a single mention of a Jesus or Christianity!
Even funnier is trying to claim Celsus AD ? – 177 AD Who said that Jesus was a Jew who’se mother was a poor Jewish girl whose husband, who was a carpenter, drove her away because of her adultery with a Roman soldier named Panthera. She gave birth to an illegitimate child named Jesus. In Egypt, Jesus became learned in sorcery and upon his return presented himself as a god.
An ancient set of lead tablets found in Jordan in 2008 showing the earliest portrait of Jesus Christ have proved to be 2,000 years old and say that Jesus and the disciples tried to recreate a religion from the time of King David!
Research shows education reduces religious belief but each year of education more than the basic reduces it by 10%!
We all agree in the existence of belief. Where's the evidence of God?
Well, I'm not going to believe in every single God just in case. It just society evolving. it's served it's purpose to create rules and order and to explain the inexplicable in older societies. Now we have laws and a broader sense of morality and science. And Science is gradually working it's way towards the answer.
There have always been atheists. It's just that these days we don't get burnt at the stake for admitting it.
Yeah, well, there was a time when you could say that throughout history, mankind had believed in a flat Earth and a geocentric universe. But when humans started examining the evidence, they found none.
So nice try.
It is "gods", religions, faiths and beliefs and all are the creations of mankind. You may present that some have taken for granted but that is a personal opinion not a fact. Most of your "question" validates the fact that mankind has created all of the gods from the first worship of the elements as gods to those we have created recently. Your assumption that "history" has taken for granted is not grounded in anything but a desperate faith. You assume that without the "gods" there are no consequences and you are wrong as heaven and hell are not a new concept although the perception of such has changed many times through history. One assumes that a god is required to move on after the death of this life and I would bet that you believe your specific choice is the only one you believe is the real god. I do not deceive as you attempt to do here. I am not remiss in my personal perspectives which should have no effect upon nor present a threat to you or your belief if you are true in them. One attempts to validate a belief in rhetoric all the while not understanding what a belief actually is.
Your 5,000 years of failure to produce a god is all the proof I need.
What's taking toy so long?
Chronicles 16:33-36 God is serious business, take him seriously, he’s put the earth in place and it’s not moving. NOT TRUE THE EARTH MOVES.
And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them. Why would anything reach him if >>>Job 34:21 “For his eyes are on the ways of a man, and he sees all his steps.”
you have to believe in a flat earth to take the bible seriously.
Pascals Wager Alert > Everyone sell their possessions and place a bet on Pascal immediately .
That was about 42 years ago for me so I figure you should catch up in 42 years .
What you are not taking into account is what a real god would be testing for .
For the stupid people filtered out that buy religious Pascal Type mentality or those who really aren't afraid who make naturals at already
conforming to gods' standards .