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: 18214

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

And that's how I like to keep it, personally - vague...and it's nothing our minds could even comprehend anyway if it did exist.  I have no interest in making an organisation or institution of what could be out there and make it into some club.  I'd be just as happy if no higher power was out there.  (I do believe in ghosts though, if that says anything.)


Anyway, what I AM sure about is that there isn't some motherly/fatherly power out there who rewards the good, punishes the bad and protects people.  In other words, s*** happens and I find that more easy to accept than believing in a God who allows children to be born without a chance and takes them away within an hour of life "because he has a role for them in heaven".  What utter...

The federal government is a higher power, higher than the state powers. Just saying. Its just too vague to actually describe something, so its not possible to say whether you believe in it or not when you get that vague.


You're right, a supreme being above our universe and would be beyond our comprehension, but that would mean we couldn't believe in it anyway, as we couldn't know if its existence. Therefore, anything we know of, just can't be it.

I am 99% sure there is no God.

God 100% exists or God 100% doesn't exist. Pick one. 

I choose God 100% doesn't exist. And I'm 100% sure of it.


As for scientific proof of gods existence or non-existence:.

I say keep atheism and religion out of science.

I also say keep religion and atheism out of politics.


But using a scientific approach to determine good policy in regards to infrastructure, education etc, it's the only way.

Good for you if you think God 100% exists or 100% doesn't exist.  I don't want to pick one and I don't have to.  I came to this forum to discuss my own philosophy of life because I hate how organised religion urges you to follow a set of rules agreed upon by some self-proclaimed authority who doesn't know anymore than I do.  I'd appreciate if no one laid out a set of conditions for me to agree or not agree with.  If you expect me to, then I guess this is not the type of message board or community for me.

I am interested in your philosophy of life and am looking forward to reading about it.

I'm not imposing the 100% statement on anybody, it's what my final conclusion about gods existence comes down to. Either he exists or he doesn't exist. But I am more than willing to listen to a 3rd alternative.

I say 99% because absolute certainty doesn't exist.

No, but I'm 99.999 % certain that absolutely certainty doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure gravity will be in effect tomorrow, to about 99.999%. Can we be absolutely certain that gravity will be in effect tomorrow morning? I'm 99.999% sure it will. But what if there is some unknown law of physics that will coincidently make gravity cease to affect us between now and then? We don't know of such, but it could exist.


I'd say near absolute certainty, because ultimately we're trusting our senses to be giving us correct information not just about the universe, but what the tools we use to decode it are saying about it.  I don't want to derail too much. But its more a philosophical position, because in practice, I act as if I'm absolutely certain.

I say 99.9999% because its the closest you can get to 100% certainty, as I pretty much feel 100% certain, but I know that knowledgewise its impossible, and wouldn't hold such a position when discussing a matter. So I think we're in agreement here.

Yes, we can be absolutely certain that absolute certainty doesn't exist because there is always the possibility that there is something we don't know--perhaps even some plane of existence that is more "real" than our own.  Certainty is something we have to define for ourselves as best we can.
Not 100% no. I dobot feel comfortable being 100% certain of anything. I dobot think tho that 100% is required to consider oneself an atheist. Almost every theists is artistic regarding every god but theirs. I agree w them on not believing in 99% of every god that they also dobot believe in. We atheists go only one god further and also dobot believe in their god as well.

Imo, for us to be 100% certain of something like this, makes us guilty of what we accuse theists of so often, namely coming to conclusions unwarented by evidence. True enuf our world acts as if it would if there were no god, in a mechanical deterministic(or at least probabilities) manner. Imo, this is indistinguishable from a world made by a trickster god to appear deterministic.

Most rational observers would point out that no one currently worships a trickster god and that Jehova is definetly not a trickster god. I beg to differ tho. I have a theists relative who very much believes in a literal interpretation of his bible such that he is a new Earther. Despite mountains of irrefutable physical evidence showing our Earth to be billions of years old my relative prefers to base his conclusions on a collected group of writings authored by a particular grouped of bronze age goat hearders. And when asked what response he could possibly have to this mountain of evidence that refuted his position he discount it mearly as items put there by Satan to confuse us.

I could and should have then asked him if he was also centrist, still believed in witches, or was a holocaust Denver, but I was, at that point, absolutely dumbfounded into silence.

Anyway a god that ran things like that or allowed things like that would be indistinguishable from no god at all. So no, even w all evidence contrary, I don't thinking reasonable to say one is 100% sure (s)he/it doesn't exist.
I think the problem may lie in the definition of atheism and the mixing of science with religion.

Definition of Atheism
In most dictionaries Atheism is defined as 'disbelief' in God. The dictionary doesn't mention we need evidence for not believing in God. So if, for what ever reason, I don't have a belief in God, I am by definition an Atheist.
But in todays world, due to education and the social trend that encourages us to think for ourselves, to only believe or not believe is no longer enough. We now need a reason for our belief or lack of, and anything else we think. And I think this may be causing a problem.

Mixing Science with Religion
Part of Wikipedias definition of Science: "knowledge must be based on observable phenomena and capable of being tested for its validity by other researchers working under the same conditions"

Therefore if we are to take a scientific approach in regards to god we will have to wait until God is observed. If God is not observed how can we apply science to prove or disprove him.

Therefore, if anybody out there has decided to apply science to proving or disproving the existence of God could you please tell me where you observed God so I can also join in and prove or disprove God. If you have not observed god please refrain from using science and it's definition to prove or disprove god.


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service