Will There Come A Confrontation Between Those Who Don’T Believe In God’S Existence And God Himself ?

[goodlife]

The fact is that you can not see God does not disprove the existence.

[Kromovaracun]

"The fact is that you can not see God does not disprove the existence."

True. Whether this is relevant really depends on the kind of God you are trying to defend, though. If you believe God to be a morally good, genuinely powerful, and interventionist agent in the world, then the concept becomes so utterly incoherent when reconciled with the real world to be literally impossible.

Of course, no atheist can really do much to defeat the "God as prime mover/creator" argument, but that's because we don't think it's particularly important - the conclusions for how to live your life or make morally right decisions are pretty much exactly the same as there being no god at all.

[ll_billym]

That question does not make sense.

If God proved he exists by appearing in some sort of 'confrontation' then everybody would believe in him.

The problem you have is that today it isn't actually God that is proving he exists, it is people, like you, and lots of people don't believe you.

[Hypognosis]

@Il_billym

//If God proved he exists by appearing in some sort of 'confrontation' then everybody would believe in him. //

If he appeared and -proved- he existed, then you would -know- and 'belief' would be the thing you could then dispense with.

As per the passage in Hitchiker's, "..for proof denies faith and, without faith, I am nothing..."

Apparently, it is the 'faith' bit which is responsible for the (supposed) health benefits of organised religion. If you successfully prove the existence of the(a) deity then you'll be neutralising the olnly good thing about it.

[Baldric]

Those Who Don’T Believe In God’S Existence would not fight 'cause he doesn't exist in the opinion!

[vetuste_ennemi]

"Have you made your peace with God, Henry?". "I didn't know we had quarrelled, Aunt." Thoreau.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Thoreau was a 19th century American atheist, Goodlife.

[Teddio]

Was it Richard Dawkins who said that you can't disprove the existence of a chocolate teapot in orbit around the Sun ?

[Zeuhl]

What form will this hypothetical confrontation take?

Will jackets be removed?
Or will there just be an exchange of harsh language?

Surely, if God turned up for the 'confrontation' that would take care of all the 'not believing'?
God would be able to go off again to wherever he is now?

God wouldn't continue with the 'confrontation' anyway would he? Like in a vengeful, punitive, nasty sort of way?
Would he/she/it?

[LazyGun]

Well that is just a restatement of that old phrase "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". And it is true, as far as it goes.

However - and its a big however - those people of faith from main religions who have us believe that god is omniscient, omnipotent; Can hear all prayers and will answer as they see fit, and that miracles are evidence of gods magnanimity. If that were so, then some evidence would actually exist; god would leave footprints and fingerprints all over the fabric of the universe - but there is nothing like that. No significant evidence beyond anecdote.

So in this instance, absence of evidence is indicative that no evidence actually exists- ergo, no god.

And this doomsday scenario you mention of Atheists vs God, the battle royale, the armageddon showdown that gets your juices flowing - doesn't really do anything for me, since I have seen nothing to suggest that your god exists! Its like threatening me with a rumble with a flying spaghetti monster, or a unicorn...

[Quizmonster]

It was Bertrand Russell who postulated the orbiting teapot.

[pixie373]

You can't see air, but its existence has been proven. Why can't you do that with God, goodlife?

[vascop]

Kromo:"Of course, no atheist can really do much to defeat the "God as prime mover/creator" argument"
Of course they can:
-Who created god? It doesn't solve anything to postulate a god.

[vetuste_ennemi]

If it ever comes to that it'll be a case of "I could see it was about to kick off, so I got out of there fast".

[jomifl]

The fact that you think a god exists is no proof that it does.

[Old_Geezer]

We will find out when the time comes. Or not as the case may be. But it'll be a weird sort of Deity that treats those who were less gullible but incorrect than it does those more gullible but fortunate enough to turn out to be right.

[mikey4444]

No !

And yes, because I can't see him does prove he doesn't exist, just like tooth fairies, dragons, goblins, the Loch Ness Monster, etc, etc.

[jomifl]

O_G, you have put your finger on it...a weird sort of deity. The really funny bit will be at the 'clap of doom' when the theists discover that they have been believing in the wrong god and the atheists are let off for having the sense to see that the theists were wrong...but I jest of course it won't happen ...will it?

[modeller]

goodlife I can't prove the Invisible Pink Unicorm doesn't exist. What is more
I can't prove he didn't make the universe and I can't prove he doesn't answer all our prayers. In fact I can't prove he has ever done anything .
Therefore with all that lack of evidence I assume that is overwhelming proof of his existance.
I'm looking forward to the invisible confrontation. It will be quite a spectacle.

[naomi24]

//Will There Come A Confrontation Between Those Who Don’T Believe In God’S Existence And God Himself ?//

You tell us.

Proof? Just a little evidence would be useful. And don't quote the Bible in response to that, Goodlife, because there's no evidence there that Jehovah is an almighty, omnipotent creator god. Quite the contrary.

[goodlife]

The evidence is overwhelming. No further proof is required by anyone who is free from old illusions and prejudices.