The Empirical Evidence of Non-Existing God

[Roger Ramjets]

Originally Posted by epix

the need ... to turn toward God asking for divine assistance would be greatly diminished by the scientific and technological achievements of a new, atheistic society whose progress wouldn't be hindered by the Christian dogma.

Well at least they got one thing right.

Quote:

Could the folks living in the "worker's paradise" gather some resources to finance a scientific project that would supply the evidence that God really doesn't exist?

I remember those times well. There was a lot of hand wringing by religious types about how going into outer space would disturb God in His Heaven, and we would feel His wrath. Yet strangely nothing happened. Not only did God stay resolutely invisible, we saw no indication that He even noticed the intrusion. It's almost as if He didn't exist!

You think that didn't shake anybody's faith? That it wasn't one up for Science, and yet another gap closed off to God? You think that Christian dogma hasn't been greatly diminished by scientific and technological achievements?

[epix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by epix
The atheists living in the past two centuries were always extremely desirous to stumble upon empirical evidence showing that God is a myth

Originally Posted by Jack by the hedge

False.

What do the pope and the atheists have in common?

They never bother to justify their conclusions. And why would they? The pope is inspired by the infallible wisdom of God and the atheists by the infallible wisdom of their non-existing God.

[epix]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Yes, the OP does specifically mention such a conversation. Here's what I copied from your OP. See the hilited area:

On April 12, 1961, Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space orbiting once the earth. The event surely boosted the faith of those who hoped to see Soviet scientific atheism as the successor of Christianity. Upon landing, Yuri Gagarin became Hero of the Soviet Union (the highest Soviet award) and also an indispensable one-man platoon with which Soviet scientific atheism intended to outflank Christianity. He was paraded through the streets and squares of Soviet cities, and then he met the worker's deputies in theaters and the people's halls to share his experience. But there was always a KGB person present who always asked this question: Comrade Gagarin! While orbiting our planet, have you seen God?

The answer was also the same: NOPE.

While this isn't specifically a conversation between Gagarin and the flight control folks, it is the conversation alluded to in the posts. Whether it happened between Gagarin and the flight control people or later, it's still the same propagandistic exchange.

When you make up your mind, let me know.

[epix]

Originally Posted by Brian-M

Given that no rational, educated person (whether Christian or atheist) ever considered it even remotely plausible that a person in an orbiting spacecraft would see God, why would the news that God wasn't seen have the slightest emotional impact on any atheist?

Your assertion makes no sense.

My "assertion" never makes sense only when it is viewed through the binoculars of your conclusion, which is based on a false premise constructed around Forall x: there exists...

The truth is that not all persons falling into the Christians or atheists category are rational and educated people. If they were, the question whether Gagarin saw God would never be asked by those who subscribed to the philosophy of Soviet scientific atheism.

[epix]

Originally Posted by Loss Leader

Or they could have noticed that Gagarin was born on March 9. 3+9 = 12.

Or that he went to space on 12/4/1961. 1+2+4+1+9+6+1 = 24, which is 12x2

Or that he died in 1968. 1+9+6+8 = 24, which is 12x2.

Or that his capsule was named VOSTOK. Those are the 22, 15, 19, 20, 15 and 11th letters of the alphabet. That adds up to 102. Using the well-know numerolgical rule of dropping the zeros, 102 = 12.

Or they could have noticed that numerology is complete nonsense and any number you want to produce can be forced out of all of the millions of bits of data generated by a person's life.

Heck, your handle is EPIX. Normally, that would be spelled EPIC. IC is the roman numeral for 99. E is 5 and P is the 16th letter of the alphabet. 99+5+16 = 120. Drop the zero, as is allowed, and you get ... 12.

Are you through?

Why would anyone care to notice a bunch of meaningless arithmetic like that?

When the "descendants of Cain" are asked to solve an equation which doesn't have a unique solution, then their choice is guided by a circumstance, because making a random choice is a capitulation of reason. For example, consider this equation:

4 + 12 = x + y

If there is a high incidence of solutions that look like this

4 + 12 = 1 + 15

then there has to be a reason for such a choice. In this case, the reason is the main subject in OP, which revolves around the question whether Gagarin saw God. But that wasn't possible and the solution of the equation explains why. In general algebraic form, the equation is written as

M + D = C + V

where the parameters stand for

Month + Day = Chapter + Verse

So Gagarin orbited the earth on April 12, or 4+12. It follows that the solution to the uknown variables x and y is x=C=1 and y=V=15 with the following "proof":

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Colossians 1:15

Equations like that are very handy. You are not going to check the whole text of the Bible to find out if God is visible or invisible when the significant circumstance for it arises. Actually, most of us would - we evolved from animals, and Nature the LORD "blessed" us with severe limitations.

[epix]

Originally Posted by epix

It wouldn't be God, if he wouldn't purposely contradict his own words. Remember that the Bible comprises The Old Testament and The New Testament. Since the Book of Colossians is a part of The New Testament, you can set up a tentative comparison

NEW is to INVISIBLE as OLD is to VISIBLE

and try to attack the Christian position that God is invisible by perusing the Torah, for example.

Does the logical comparison hold?

It should, because God is very particular to the opposites. As a matter of fact, he even compares himself to opposites:

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation 22:13

The best way to answer the question whether the logical comparison hold is through evidence.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Colossians 1:15 (in The New Testament)

So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Genesis 32:30 (in The Old Testaments)

Some folks say that they read the Bible for comfort, but I don't see anything comforting in contradictory statements, unleeeess...

So is God visible or invisible? It is a principle question that the theists should answer.

Let's compare the answer given by the theists, those who subscribe to Judaism, with other possible explanation: They maintain that the infinite kindness of God caused his absence when Yuri Gagarin, the child of Soviet scientific atheism, had a full view of heavens. God simply hid not to squash the Soviet hopes for replacing Christianity with something better to believe in and go by.

But there is an option that speaks a different language:

Listen, you are like no show when a historic moment for mankind takes place? These are your children making a big step and you're not there to watch it while keeping your fingers crossed?

I ate something bad and had to keep going to the bathroom. Sorry.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by epix

Does the logical comparison hold?

It should, because God is very particular to the opposites. As a matter of fact, he even compares himself to opposites:

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation 22:13

The best way to answer the question whether the logical comparison hold is through evidence.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Colossians 1:15 (in The New Testament)

So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Genesis 32:30 (in The Old Testaments)

Some folks say that they read the Bible for comfort, but I don't see anything comforting in contradictory statements, unleeees...

So is God visible or invisible? It is a principle question that the theists should answer.

Let's compare the answer given by the theists, those who subscribe to Judaism, with the reality: They maintain that the infinite kindness of God caused his absence when Yuri Gagarin, the child of Soviet scientific atheism, had a full view of heavens. God simply hid not to squash the Soviet hopes for replacing Christianity with something better to believe in and go by.

But there is an option that speaks a different language:

Listen, you are like no show when a historic moment for mankind takes place? These are your children making a big step and you're not there to watch it while keeping your fingers crossed?

I ate something bad and had to keep going to the bathroom. Sorry.

LOL

Once again, you are arguing with yourself, and as usual you have descended into incoherency.

There is no God. Your silly arguments are meaningless, even if they ever made any sense.

Give it up. You've already attained most epix fails you'll be able to get. Are you still trying to "better" yourself?

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by epix

What do the pope and the atheists have in common?

They never bother to justify their conclusions. And why would they? The pope is inspired by the infallible wisdom of God and the atheists by the infallible wisdom of their non-existing God.

This statement makes no sense at all. (As well as being demonstrably untrue.)

How can something non-existing have wisdom? (Plus, there are numerous examples of atheists justifying their conclusions all over the place, including right here in the JREF forums.)

Originally Posted by epix

The truth is that not all persons falling into the Christians or atheists category are rational and educated people. If they were, the question whether Gagarin saw God would never be asked by those who subscribed to the philosophy of Soviet scientific atheism.

But did the anti-religious soviets actually ever ask such a question in earnest?

Looking it up, it appears that the subject of Gagarin not seeing God was first raised by Nikita Khrushchev, who said in a speech about the state's anti-religion campaign that "Gagarin flew into space, but didn't see any god there."

Sounds like empty rhetoric to me, not a genuine attempt to make a serious argument against God.

[epix]

Originally Posted by Brian-M

Looking it up, it appears that the subject of Gagarin not seeing God was first raised by Nikita Khrushchev, who said in a speech about the state's anti-religion campaign that "Gagarin flew into space, but didn't see any god there."

Sounds like empty rhetoric to me, not a genuine attempt to make a serious argument against God.

I was looking for the story myself and couldn't find any reference to it as well. I tried to find some radical Christian web sites hoping for a hit, but nothing showed up. Then I got a different idea: The failure of Soviet atheism was quite spectacular and something to learn from, so it is a subject of a scholarly analysis. But I couldn't stumble upon mentioning of the particular example shown in OP. I found only a generalized references, like this one:

Quote:

Smolkin-Rothrock begins with a careful study of the promises offered by the Soviet space program in the 1950s. She argues that atheism became a new faith in these years thanks in large part to space travel and the idea that man could now pierce the heavens and see that there was no god there. The rhetoric of the space program and the militant crusade to conquer the new frontier encouraged anti-religious activists to believe that superstition would soon be overcome. Just as the Enlightenment had ostensibly introduced the new faith of rationality to the world, so too did the space program offer a new set of beliefs upon which a populace could find hope and assurance. Yet, as Smolkin-Rothrock points out, such aspirations for the transcendent power of space travel were not so easy to fulfill. The vaulted promises of atheism did not reach much of the population, as atheists and Party members came to acknowledge in the late 1950s. Many Russians failed to make the connection between space travel and the seeming non-existence of a God, instead devising a whole series of hybridized beliefs.

http://dissertationreviews.org/archives/1857
Referring to the highlighted: That was the reason why Yuri Gagarin was always asked the same question during the gatherings with people.

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by epix

In this case, the reason is the main subject in OP, which revolves around the question whether Gagarin saw God. But that wasn't possible and the solution of the equation explains why. In general algebraic form, the equation is written as

M + D = C + V

where the parameters stand for

Month + Day = Chapter + Verse

Can you show a derivation of this equation? Is it based on pure logic or is there a natural phenomenological underpinning? Is it a universal truth or are there limitations on its usage?

[SezMe]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

We [atheists] don't eat babies, indulge in all sorts of heinous behaviors etc...

Hey! Speak for yourself.

[epix]

Originally Posted by AdMan

There is no God. Your silly arguments are meaningless, even if they ever made any sense.

There is no God? Did you also look under your bed...? Nothing?

Hmm. I kind of suspected that one nice day, the atheists would find and shove the necessary hard evidence into the throat of the religious myth and choke it dead.

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by epix

Hmm. I kind of suspected that one nice day, the atheists would find and shove the necessary hard evidence into the throat of the religious myth and choke it dead.

We'll do that the day after you provide hard evidence that magic pixies don't exist.

But if we're talking evidence, perhaps you can provide some for this....

Originally Posted by epix

He was paraded through the streets and squares of Soviet cities, and then he met the worker's deputies in theaters and the people's halls to share his experience. But there was always a KGB person present who always asked this question: Comrade Gagarin! While orbiting our planet, have you seen God?

Given that you seem to be relying heavily on this assertion to support your argument, can you provide a link that corroborates that this business with KGB agents actually happened?

Searching the internet, I can't find anything to corroborate it. The closest I can find is an anecdote that was printed in New Age Journal, Vol. 7 (1990), although earlier variants might exist.

Quote:

Trying to describe the experience of going to space has been difficult from the very beginning. When Yuri Gagarin, the first man who went into space, returned to Earth, there was a huge reception in his honor. As his close friend and cosmonaut colleague Alexei Leonov tells it, then-premier Nikita Khrushchev cornered Gagarin "So tell me, Yuri," he asked, "did you see God up there?" After a moment's pause. Gagarin answered, "Yes sir, I did." Khrushchev frowned. "Don't tell any one," he said. A few minutes later the head of the Russian Orthodox Church took Gagarin aside. "So tell me, my child," he asked Gagarin, "did you see God up there?'" Gagarin hesitated and replied "No sir, I did not." "Don't tell anyone."

But there's no way of knowing if this is true, or just an oft-repeated urban legend. Either way, it still doesn't support your allegation.

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by epix

The atheists living in the past two centuries were always extremely desirous to stumble upon empirical evidence showing that God is a myth - the kind of evidence that would mortally wound the kind of faith with which Christianity defends the opposite view.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim, ie the burden falls to those that say god exists.

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by epix

What do the pope and the atheists have in common?

They never bother to justify their conclusions. And why would they? The pope is inspired by the infallible wisdom of God and the atheists by the infallible wisdom of their non-existing God.

Most atheists just ask that you show evidence of god, which is lacking so far.

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by epix

Does the logical comparison hold?

It should, because God is very particular to the opposites. As a matter of fact, he even compares himself to opposites:

I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
Revelation 22:13

The best way to answer the question whether the logical comparison hold is through evidence.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Colossians 1:15 (in The New Testament)

So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Genesis 32:30 (in The Old Testaments)

So these were the words of god? About as much the the Prisoner of Azkaban and the Chronicles of Master Li and Number Ten Ox.

So how did god write those passages down?

[Resume]

Originally Posted by epix

There is no God? Did you also look under your bed...? Nothing?

It's not anywhere this god thing. Do you have some solid evidence hidden somewhere? Perhaps under your bed?

[Nay_Sayer]

So after careful thought, epix's brilliant atheist defeating argument is, You have not found evidence god doesn't exist, Therefore, he/she/horse does! CHECKMATE!

Well consider me a convert I'm heading to my nearest church to repent furiously.

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Of course, you can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making a positive assertion. For example, if the state charges you with a crime, the burden of proof is on them to prove you committed the crime. The only way you could prove you didn't commit a crime is to have an alibi, i.e. to prove a positive that makes it physically impossible for you to have committed said crime.

So, epix, I propose that you come up with a pass / fail test for the existence of God. Is there anything that you can think of that should be true if there is a God that wouldn't be true otherwise? If we could agree on such a test, we could prove things one way or another.

BTW, your posts often show considerable scorn for atheists. This is uncalled-for. We don't eat babies, indulge in all sorts of heinous behaviors etc.; we simply don't believe in God. You, as a believer, are, likewise, not necessarily a bad person. Unfortunately, you have engaged in some personal attacks on your threads. Try just arguing the point and asserting that your opponents are simply wrong on a given issue.

When you care to answer this post, let me know.

[epix]

Originally Posted by Dancing David

So how did god write those passages down?

I wasn't there when he did the writing. I'm not sure why you are assuming that I was. But you can use the Smolensk incident to figure that out.

But first, let's refresh the main: on 4/12/1961, the Soviet scientific atheism scores big time - Yuri Gagarin becomes the first man in space. Later, he visits Soviet cities where he meets with workers to share his experience. On each occassion, a special atheist propaganda person asks Yuri, if he saw God while in space. Gagarin always replies with a single word: NO. But upon visiting the city of Smolensk, Gagarin replied in a different way and that led to something called the Smolensk incident. This is how it went down:



Comrade Gagarin! When you were orbiting our planet, did you see God?

Instead of saying the usual NO, Gagarin goes...

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

His answer was followed by a moment of incredulous silence interrupted by one of the workers who dared to challenge the Hero of Soviet Union:

I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.

The security guys dragged the man away from the crowd. They asked him for his ID and it read Jacob Peniel. So they told him that they would send him to Siberia to a labor camp, which is far more dangerous to his life than seeing God face to face.

Of course, the atheist propaganda people later asked Gagarin why he answered the way he did. Gagarin said that it was a logical answer, because he was the first man sent to space and the date was April 12, or 4:12.

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
1 John 4:12

There was a colonel who said to Gagarin: "Yuri, the Communist Party sent you to space on 12. April, or 12:4, and not on April 12, the way date is written by our religious enemies in the USA.

Gagarin was silent for a sec and then he said: "But God writes dates the way Americans do - month/day/year." Then he added: "I didn't see God, but he was with me all the time I was out there in space."

The colonel fainted.

So that should answer your question about how God wrote those passages down: in the Month/Day/Year format.

[John Jones]

Yuri Gagarin didn't say that.

Do you have some other point?

[Craig B]

Originally Posted by John Jones

Yuri Gagarin didn't say that.

Do you have some other point?

I like the name of the heckler, Jacob Peniel. See wiki

Quote:

It is also called "Peniel" by Jacob, meaning 'face of God', "It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared."

See Genesis 32:24-32. I think epix is pulling our legs.

[TimCallahan]

Originally Posted by epix

I wasn't there when he did the writing. I'm not sure why you are assuming that I was. But you can use the Smolensk incident to figure that out.

But first, let's refresh the main: on 4/12/1961, the Soviet scientific atheism scores big time - Yuri Gagarin becomes the first man in space. Later, he visits Soviet cities where he meets with workers to share his experience. On each occassion, a special atheist propaganda person asks Yuri, if he saw God while in space. Gagarin always replies with a single word: NO. But upon visiting the city of Smolensk, Gagarin replied in a different way and that led to something called the Smolensk incident. This is how it went down:

http://www.topfoto.co.uk/gallery/Yur...nov0003274.jpg

Comrade Gagarin! When you were orbiting our planet, did you see God?

Instead of saying the usual NO, Gagarin goes...

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

His answer was followed by a moment of incredulous silence interrupted by one of the workers who dared to challenge the Hero of Soviet Union:

I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.

The security guys dragged the man away from the crowd. They asked him for his ID and it read Jacob Peniel. So they told him that they would send him to Siberia to a labor camp, which is far more dangerous to his life than seeing God face to face.

Of course, the atheist propaganda people later asked Gagarin why he answered the way he did. Gagarin said that it was a logical answer, because he was the first man sent to space and the date was April 12, or 4:12.

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
1 John 4:12

There was a colonel who said to Gagarin: "Yuri, the Communist Party sent you to space on 12. April, or 12:4, and not on April 12, the way date is written by our religious enemies in the USA.

Gagarin was silent for a sec and then he said: "But God writes dates the way Americans do - month/day/year." Then he added: "I didn't see God, but he was with me all the time I was out there in space."

The colonel fainted.

So that should answer your question about how God wrote those passages down: in the Month/Day/Year format.

Do you have a specific link you can give us regarding this material, or, if not a link, a source?

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by epix

On each occassion, a special atheist propaganda person asks Yuri, if he saw God while in space. Gagarin always replies with a single word: NO.

Can you provide a link or reference supporting your claim that a "special atheist propaganda person" or KGB agent (as you claimed earlier) was always present to ask this question. I haven't been able to find anything that suggests this is more than just a figment of your imagination.

Originally Posted by epix

But upon visiting the city of Smolensk, Gagarin replied in a different way and that led to something called the Smolensk incident. This is how it went down:

Can you provide a reference for this claim? When I Google Gagarin "smolensk incident" I only get links to this thread and one link to a page on the Smolensk war that doesn't load.

Originally Posted by epix

Of course, the atheist propaganda people later asked Gagarin why he answered the way he did. Gagarin said that it was a logical answer, because he was the first man sent to space and the date was April 12, or 4:12.p

Originally Posted by epix

There was a colonel who said to Gagarin: "Yuri, the Communist Party sent you to space on 12. April, or 12:4, and not on April 12, the way date is written by our religious enemies in the USA.

Gagarin was silent for a sec and then he said: "But God writes dates the way Americans do - month/day/year." Then he added: "I didn't see God, but he was with me all the time I was out there in space."

The colonel fainted.

The needle of my bovine-excrement detector just jumped up to "explosive diarrhea".

[Kid Eager]

Originally Posted by Brian-M

Can you provide a link or reference supporting your claim that a "special atheist propaganda person" or KGB agent (as you claimed earlier) was always present to ask this question. I haven't been able to find anything that suggests this is more than just a figment of your imagination.



Can you provide a reference for this claim? When I Google Gagarin "smolensk incident" I only get links to this thread and one link to a page on the Smolensk war that doesn't load.


The needle of my bovine-excrement detector just jumped up to "explosive diarrhea".

The entire claim in the post if false, so your explosion is understandable.

Mind you, it's got great entertainment value - consider it a companion piece to Chick Tracts...

[The Norseman]

Originally Posted by epix

There is no God? Did you also look under your bed...? Nothing?

Is your god often found under the bed?

[epix]

Originally Posted by TimCallahan

Of course, you can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the one making a positive assertion. For example, if the state charges you with a crime, the burden of proof is on them to prove you committed the crime. The only way you could prove you didn't commit a crime is to have an alibi, i.e. to prove a positive that makes it physically impossible for you to have committed said crime.

So, epix, I propose that you come up with a pass / fail test for the existence of God. Is there anything that you can think of that should be true if there is a God that wouldn't be true otherwise? If we could agree on such a test, we could prove things one way or another.

You just decided to steer away from the topic of the thread. The title does refer in a broad sense to the issue of existence or non-existence of God, but the following text sends the topic in a specific direction. You are forcing your agenda on the flow the same way Soviet scientific atheism "competed" with Christianity. You assume this approach to a debate very often, probably whipped by your desire to troll your way into the Hall of Righteous Conclusion.

You started with misapplying the conlusion "you can't prove negative," and that affected the rest of your view. There have been two approaches assumed by judicial systems: 1) guilty until proven innocent, 2) innocent until proven guilty. You are using the first option as a launchpad for the following proceedings, but I don't. This incompatibility gives me the right to decline your challenging proposition. I already explained my position in another thread - in a part wherein you hijacked the topic. Go and read it.

[epix]

Originally Posted by The Norseman

Is your god often found under the bed?

The definition of faith prevents your suggested method of confirmation. You, as an anti-religion activist, should know that to spare yourself an embarrassment.

[TheRedWorm]

Originally Posted by epix

You just decided to steer away from the topic of the thread. The title does refer in a broad sense to the issue of existence or non-existence of God, but the following text sends the topic in a specific direction. You are forcing your agenda on the flow the same way Soviet scientific atheism "competed" with Christianity. You assume this approach to a debate very often, probably whipped by your desire to troll your way into the Hall of Righteous Conclusion.

You started with misapplying the conlusion "you can't prove negative," and that affected the rest of your view. There have been two approaches assumed by judicial systems: 1) guilty until proven innocent, 2) innocent until proven guilty. You are using the first option as a launchpad for the following proceedings, but I don't. This incompatibility gives me the right to decline your challenging proposition. I already explained my position in another thread - in a part wherein you hijacked the topic. Go and read it.

What would evidence of a god not existing look like?

[epix]

Originally Posted by TheRedWorm

What would evidence of a god not existing look like?

That's the topic of the OP, which the local atheists managed to misdevelop.

[AdMan]

Originally Posted by epix

That's the topic of the OP, which the local atheists managed to misdevelop.

And again you miss the point.

[TheRedWorm]

Originally Posted by epix

That's the topic of the OP, which the local atheists managed to misdevelop.

Ok, then tell me, in your words, what you would consider evidence of god not existing.

[StankApe]

well... that would be like walking a mile to get a better view of the same rainbow wouldn't it?

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by epix

There have been two approaches assumed by judicial systems: 1) guilty until proven innocent, 2) innocent until proven guilty. You are using the first option as a launchpad for the following proceedings, but I don't.

Wait, so applying this metaphor to the supernatural (such as religious belief), the two approaches would be:

1) False until proven true
2) True until proven false

And you've chosen option two as your guide?

[Loss Leader]

Stalin is touring a farm collective in the countryside. He asks the farmer how the potato crop is doing. The farmer says, "Thank God, we have a large crop of potatoes. " Stalin tells him, "That's good, but remember this is the Soviet Union. We don't have a God." The farmer says, "That's ok, we don't have any potatoes. "

[bruto]

Originally Posted by epix

The guys living in the 14th century also denied on the same principles the existence of a 9-volt battery. That's why many theists don't argue about the existence or non-existence of God with the atheists who prefer sit in the present rather than consider the future. Also, the atheists usualy mistake God for Nature. That's why their gadget indicators are always in zero position.

"Seeing is believing." That goes the other way too, and since Yuri Gagarin didn't see God, there was no reason for the theists to believe and remain "delusional."

How interesting. Are you stating here that nine volt batteries actually existed in the 14th century, but were denied?

I've never known an atheist who mistook God for Nature. If I did, he probably would not be an atheist, but a deist.

[Cainkane1]

Evidence for the lack of a god is unanswered prayers, absence of personal appearances of supernatural creatures such as angels and nothing happening that science can't explain.

Adding to this is the vastness of the universe which means if a god does exist he's nowhere near us. I mean you can't see him or smell him or touch him. If gods exist they got other things to do.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by Nay_Sayer

So after careful thought, epix's brilliant atheist defeating argument is, You have not found evidence god doesn't exist, Therefore, he/she/horse does! CHECKMATE!

Well consider me a convert I'm heading to my nearest church to repent furiously.

Not me I'm gonna start sinning furiously so that when I do my altar call and witness testimony I'll have stories that will cause the old women to writhe in ecstasy.

[tsig]

Originally Posted by Craig B

I like the name of the heckler, Jacob Peniel. See wiki See Genesis 32:24-32. I think epix is pulling our legs.

He's yanking something all right.

[Nay_Sayer]

Originally Posted by tsig

Not me I'm gonna start sinning furiously so that when I do my altar call and witness testimony I'll have stories that will cause the old women to writhe in ecstasy.

I'm not sure if I want the words old women and writhe in my head.