You Cannot Prove Zeus doesn't Exist

Originally posted by Creshosk
"You cannot prove that God doesn't exist." <-Nothing wrong with this statement.
"Prove that God doesn't exist." <-This is the fallacy.

However, the statements "you cannot prove that God doesn't exist" and "prove that God doesn't exist" are used interchangeable as a response to the demand "prove that God exists" on KMC.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Yup. However as in this example sometimes it's better to prove them wrong even if you don't have to. Since you CAN prove that the Earth is not cubical by proving that it is something else.

True, I can prove it in this case, but at a time where no one knew the Earth was round, even those people would not have to provide proof for why they disbeleive in a cubical earth, it happening to be very unlikely and all.

Originally posted by Creshosk
Umm... This is a tricky area, for while ou're right, you still wouldn't be able to since you can't prove a negative. And its been rather used as a trap statement because anyone challenging you is then indirectly asserting the opposite in that he does. any challenge to that statement usually is followed up by saying "you can't prove a negative." then challenging the challnger of your claim by proving that he does, which they cannot do either.

The point is, not being able to prove that God doesn't exist, is not evidense for his existance. I want people to realize that.

I cannot prove that Zeus doesn't exist. Yet, we all mutually accept his non existance, even though there are centuries of art, literature, and culture dedicated to his legend.

I find that with the same ease I can dismiss Zeus, I can also dismiss Yahweh. And for someone to insist that Yahweh does exist, the burden of proof would be on them, the same way the burden of proof would be on the person who claims Zeus' existance as true.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I'm not really sure what we're arguing about here. I'm agreeing with most of what you're saying with minor disagreements.

I am arguing about the fallacy of using the fact that we cannot disprove God's existance as evidence of his existance.

Originally posted by Creshosk
I am agnostic and feel that you can't prove God's existence either way. And without that evidence the only thing you can say is you believe or you have faith. Personally? I don't know what the answer is. I'm not entirely happy with the Atheist side when I ask them specific questions because they usually become about as reasonable as a theist. and eventually start saying "It just is." ...

I beleive that God is the universe. I am not convinced that God is a sentient conciousness, and I am definately not convinced that the creator of the universe is all loving.

Nature is not all loving, niether is the universe. There are cycles of creation and destruction, there are cycles of pain and suffering.

If God exists, then God is both "good" and "evil".

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
However, the statements "you cannot prove that God doesn't exist" and "prove that God doesn't exist" are used interchangeable as a response to the demand "prove that God exists" on KMC.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
True, I can prove it in this case, but at a time where no one knew the Earth was round, even those people would not have to provide proof for why they disbeleive in a cubical earth, it happening to be very unlikely and all.And at some point in time people decided that the Earth was round and didn't have evidence for it. At that point in time they were not wrong simply because they lacked evidence.

[QUOTE=9369713]Originally posted by Goddess Kali
[B]The point is, not being able to prove that God doesn't exist, is not evidense for his existance. I want people to realize that.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I cannot prove that Zeus doesn't exist. Yet, we all mutually accept his non existance,

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
even though there are centuries of art, literature, and culture dedicated to his legend.
I find that with the same ease I can dismiss Zeus, I can also dismiss Yahweh.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
And for someone to insist that Yahweh does exist, the burden of proof would be on them, the same way the burden of proof would be on the person who claims Zeus' existance as true.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I am arguing about the fallacy of using the fact that we cannot disprove God's existance as evidence of his existance.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I beleive that God is the universe. I am not convinced that God is a sentient conciousness, and I am definately not convinced that the creator of the universe is all loving.
Nature is not all loving, niether is the universe. There are cycles of creation and destruction, there are cycles of pain and suffering.
If God exists, then God is both "good" and "evil".

if you claim your beleif as fact, then you must prove it to us.

[/B]

We don't HAVE to do anything 😬

Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
We don't HAVE to do anything 😬

Originally posted by backdoorman
You do if you want to ban abortion, ban gay marriage, incorporate prayer and creationism to school curriculum, etc.

Indeed - if people say "But this is what God intended - he wouldn't want abortion, gay marriage, evolution taught" then that person is bringing God from "I just believe this" to "God is real and we should act accordingly."

Likewise for the "I am going to tell you the truth so you can be saved - God is real, the Bible is his word and we are his children" - once again goes past "this is just faith" to "this is real and you should believe me."

The onus of proof rests on the shoulders of the person claiming God and his actions are real and have a direct impact on us and our world and that we should act accordingly, not the other-way round.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I simply tire of the counter argument [b]"You can't PROVE that God DOESN'T EXIST" as a response to the statement that God's existance cannot be proven.

You can't prove Zeus doesn't exist either.

You can't prove Santa Clause doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist either.

You can't prove the floating teacup in outer space doesn't exist either.

All you have to go by is Logic, History, and Science. Please realize the fallacy of the argument "You cannot Prove God doesn't exist".

All of you Christians, Jews, Muslims, and other Theists deny the existance of other myths and possibilities, but will defend your own to the death, even though you know you cannot prove your beleif true.

Your arguments will earn respect when you clarify your beleif as beleif, but once you claim your beleif as truth that is when the Burden of Proof falls upon you.

Understand ? [/B]

Santa Clause was based on a real dead person.

Tooth fairy isn't real to anyone's knowledge since they haven't found her remains in a tomb somewhere.

Jesus' bones were believed to be found. Along with a coat or something.

And the rest some sad little man came up with. 😐

If it was proven that Zeus exists, I would worship him. Because number one: he exists so I might as well and number two: I've always admired him anyways.

Originally posted by backdoorman
You do if you want to ban abortion, ban gay marriage, incorporate prayer and creationism to school curriculum, etc.

But we don't 😬

MY Christian religion doesn't care about banning abortion, banning gay marriage, and incorporating prayer to school curriculum, etc. So stop trying to throw us in to the heap of Christians. The people who you guys are talking about are CATHOLICS. There are a LOT of Christians who are NOT Catholics. There IS a difference.

So please, refrain from the "oh you Christians this" and "oh you Christians that!". We don't all have the same ideals.

Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
But we don't 😬

MY Christian religion doesn't care about banning abortion, banning gay marriage, and incorporating prayer to school curriculum, etc. So stop trying to throw us in to the heap of Christians. The people who you guys are talking about are CATHOLICS. There are a LOT of Christians who are NOT Catholics. There IS a difference.

So please, refrain from the "oh you Christians this" and "oh you Christians that!". We don't all have the same ideals.

Agreed. Lumping 2 billion+ people under one label is beyond stupid.

Just replace the word "Christian" with an ethnicity in some of these anti-Christian threads, and see how it sounds.

Thank you, it's so annoying.

"OMG all Christians are t3h stoopidz 'cause they say Gods sends sinners to hell!"

Not all Christian sects believe in hell. 😬

Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
The people who you guys are talking about are CATHOLICS.

Nah, there talking about Evangelical Christians.

From where?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
If it was proven that Zeus exists, I would worship him. Because number one: he exists so I might as well and number two: I've always admired him anyways.

I can stand the Greek gods they have no sense of loyalty they are always stabbing each other in the back.

Originally posted by BlaxicanHydra
From where?

From the states, Catholicism is a completely different religion on it's own. Even though it created mordern Christianity.

Then again, I should be able to assume that a Muslim/Christian/Jew/Buddhist of Taiwan has the same beliefs as a Muslim/Christian/Jew/Buddhist of Greenland.

I still find it weird how people find so many different variations of what is supposed to be the same religion. You should be able to generalize (or stereotype if you want to be an ass) what they believe because it should be the same. Otherwise, there are many "fake" Muslim/Christian/Jew/Buddhist and only one of the variations of all of this is supposed to be correct. Maybe they are all wrong, giggle.

The problem is that the Abrahamic Religions are always creating various variations because of little changes in scripture. And, some of them fued about it for prolonged periods of time, it's annoying.

But the scripture should not be changing anyway.

Sigh, that's why I rarely get a straight answer from folks about theology. They already don't read the books that explain what they "believe" and then it's constantly in flux.

Exactly

Originally posted by chithappens
But the scripture should not be changing anyway.

Why not. Everything changes, why shouldnt scripture.

Cause scripture is supposed to be the word of God and the laws of God can only be ordained by God, unless you are suggesting a man can decide what God wants on a whim.

This is the era of media and I have not seen one tape showing God sitting down with Dan Patrick explaining how Barry Bonds REALLY never did 'roids:

"It was just a blessing through the Almighty, self, now accept it."

I haven't seen that tape yet.