Atheists and proof

[Kdtym10]

On several threads, some atheists have said they would believe in God/the Divine if they had proof. If you’re an atheist what would that proof look like to you?

[PrimitivePerson]

There is no proof.

Also, if God revealed himself and he turned out to be exactly the same as evangelicals say he is, I wouldn't bow down and serve him, I'd tell him where to shove it. That God is a monster and doesn't deserve to be worshipped.

[CaterhamReconstituted]

The burden of proof is on those making the assertion.

[Kdtym10]

@CaterhamReconstituted

The burden of proof is on those making the assertion.

What, the assertion that there is no divine force?

[Kdtym10]

@PrimitivePerson

There is no proof.

Also, if God revealed himself and he turned out to be exactly the same as evangelicals say he is, I wouldn't bow down and serve him, I'd tell him where to shove it. That God is a monster and doesn't deserve to be worshipped.

So what about all the other descriptions. Is your issue with something that fits the description of the Christian Evangelicals rather with the concept of the divine?

[PrimitivePerson]

I just don't believe in anything supernatural any more. I spent 25 years trying to be a good Christian and it pretty much destroyed me.

I'm therefore going to live like there's no God. It's much healthier.

[CaterhamReconstituted]

@Kdtym10

What, the assertion that there is no divine force?

Atheism has no content. It isn’t actually asserting anything. It is simply the absence of a belief in the divine. It is for those who assert the belief in the divine to substantiate it.

[Garlicking]

Unsure I want to plug away at this topic any longer. But interested enough to want it in my Threads I'm On.

[KnittedCardi]

I think they say that, because they know you can't prove it. Fait accompli.

I don't believe in any divine, as it is a man made concept to explain the once unexplainable, which is now explained by science, and latterly to control the masses, and subjugate women.

[PrimitivePerson]

@KnittedCardi

I think they say that, because they know you can't prove it. Fait accompli.

I don't believe in any divine, as it is a man made concept to explain the once unexplainable, which is now explained by science, and latterly to control the masses, and subjugate women.

Absolutely. Back in the days the Bible was written - certainly things like the book of Genesis - people didn't even understand where the sun went at night, and they needed to try and explain all these things. They therefore developed a whole bunch of stories around there being a supernatural being in charge of everything.

We can now explain just about everything about how the world actually works, and we know that miracles are impossible. Sure, believe in God if you want to, but for me it's a step of faith far too far these days.

[fedupandstuck]

First, those who assert that there is a god or the divine or whatever you want to name it, need to describe and define what they mean by that. Then it would be possible to decide on what definitive proof of that might look like. The usual scientific method would then apply.

[SirenSays]

It would look like a god poking their head out of the clouds and explaining themselves.

[SmiteTheeWithThunderbolts]

Channelling Terry Pratchett: even if gods exist, that doesn't mean you have to believe in them.

Knowledge of existence of an entity and religious belief of that entity are separate things.

So you even if proof were available that atheists accepted as the existence of a god, it doesn't necessarily follow that they would believe in and worship that god.

[whatsitcalledwhen]

@fedupandstuck

First, those who assert that there is a god or the divine or whatever you want to name it, need to describe and define what they mean by that. Then it would be possible to decide on what definitive proof of that might look like. The usual scientific method would then apply.

I think this is a really good point.

Proof of one concept of a God / divine power would differ from others.

Could you share what your concept of god / divine power is OP and then people could respond accordingly?

[Thegoodbadandugly]

There is no god. If there was a god he would not let people suffer the way they do.

[Kdtym10]

@whatsitcalledwhen

I think this is a really good point.

Proof of one concept of a God / divine power would differ from others.

Could you share what your concept of god / divine power is OP and then people could respond accordingly?

Yes, this is an excellent point, and often one that is not picked up in these discussions.

My concept of the Divine is nothing, thinking itself into being emanating out to create the whole universe simultaneously the same as but (potentially giving the illusion of being) separate. Neo Platonism or Kabbalah are good reference points. I think this is a perennial concept expressed in different religions through the filter of imagination (Blakean imagination rather than fantastical)

[Kdtym10]

@whatsitcalledwhen

I think this is a really good point.

Proof of one concept of a God / divine power would differ from others.

Could you share what your concept of god / divine power is OP and then people could respond accordingly?

Addressed many times

[Kdtym10]

@KnittedCardi

I think they say that, because they know you can't prove it. Fait accompli.

I don't believe in any divine, as it is a man made concept to explain the once unexplainable, which is now explained by science, and latterly to control the masses, and subjugate women.

But, I guess that’s the purpose of the thread. What is proof in these circumstances?

[CurlewKate]

I would need actual scientifically verified proof of anything that appeared paranormal, whether it's poltergeists, psychic reading, ghosts or god. So far any attempt to find such proof has failed. It's not up to me to define the proof. It's up to the people who believe in things that don't fit the laws of science to offer proof.

[whatsitcalledwhen]

Addressed many times

Huh? When I wrote my post you had posted three times and hadn't described what your concept of god / the divine is?

[Sleepmoreplease]

I think the world would look quite fundamentally different if there was a benign God. For example, why all the reproduction and death? Surely a benevolent God would create a fixed number of intelligent beings to live in a paradise, that he/she/it would love dearly and have a personal relationship with, who wouldn't have to suffer, learn hard truths and then finally die. I just don't buy that free will or a meaningful life demands the savagery we see in the natural world (by which I mean, the world as it is apparent to us).

I have young children, in a way I'm their God - to them I'm omnipotent, omniscient and the most important relationship (alongside their dad) in their lives. They have free will though I'm still the boss. Just because they sometimes do things wrong doesn't mean I would ever willingly expose them to the kind of cruelty and death that exists in the natural world. If I could make the world a better place for them, make it so they didn't have to lose loved ones and eventually die themselves, I absolutely would. I also have 3 of them. If it was possible, I wouldn't choose to have 7 billion children because why that many? How could I even know them all? So if God is meant to exist, what's the deal?!

So I'm guessing, to think that a benign God makes sense, I would have to be made aware of a paradigm shift in what the world is. For example, if it was established that there are only a limited number of consciousnesses, that are immortal, we spend nearly all of our time with God being loved in paradise, and we just get recycled through this mortal coil so we have something more to talk about in paradise - like playing a video game. But even this is hard to rationalise - there are billions of us, why would God create so many? Our population is expanding, where is all the extra consciousness/ souls coming from and why would God have a desire to make them? Where do other sentient but not as sentient beings such as ourselves come into this? For example dolphins, dogs, elephants? Why aren't humans just better - less cruel, less petty, less tribalistic etc? These feel like survival traits in a natural selection model, not the best kind of sentience that could be created by an infinitely wise and kind God. And what about lives that just don't make sense in this model - ones that are not only terrible, but also boring and lacking in meaning. For example, surely there is no point to reincarnating as one of those poor children in the Romanian orphanages, who died without even developing language because of appalling neglect?

I think those who have a belief in a benign God have more questions to answer than those who don't, respectfully. I can understand the concept is comforting but it doesn't make a lot of sense.

[CaterhamReconstituted]

Religious people don’t think they need proof as they have faith. Belief in the absence of proof. This is entirely irrational, but in religion faith is a virtue. Some even think that having faith is itself a form of evidence. There are mental gymnastics required to sustain this position.

Funnily enough, in other circumstances they would dismiss faith. Imagine if the pilot of a plane said he had no training or experience, but he had absolute faith he could fly it. They would not be happy to get on board!

[whatsappdoc]

I'm honestly not sure what the god I don't believe in would look like.

[lotsofpeoplenametheirswords]

I like the thought that proof would be him sticking his head out of the clouds and calling to us all.

As it happens I don't believe in God. I also think that if there is one he's an absolute arsehole.

I am my own god. I choose what is right and wrong in my life, I choose the path I want to follow. I choose what I want not what is decided for me.

I don't label myself an atheist or anything else. I am simply me.

[senua]

@Kdtym10

On several threads, some atheists have said they would believe in God/the Divine if they had proof. If you’re an atheist what would that proof look like to you?

Religion is designed purposely so you can't pin it down; the whole idea is 'belief' rather than 'fact'.
It's quite clever.

[skilpadde]

You're placing the existence of a god, and proof of the existence of a god, on a special plane, and that is unwarranted.

As has been noted upthread, atheists don't hold an active non-belief in a god. It's an absence of belief in something for which there is no evidence.

I don't spend my days affirming that I don't believe in unicorns. They just don't exist, and I don't engage mental energy in knowing that. Same with other people's gods.

For me to believe in something, I need to know it exists. That means it must be evidenced and most likely explainable. I don't necessarily need to see it. I understand the structure of atoms and molecules, even though I can't see them.

For other people, faith is enough. Good for them, but that's not sufficient for atheists.