God does not exist

How can a god exist he cannot it is impossible. This God you say is all powerfull, how can that be. If he is so all powerfull is he able to create something so heavy that even he is not able to lift it? THis question cancels that idea of God out completely. But lets say they got it wrong about god that he wasnt all powerfull just a little bit, how can it be proved that he exists, do you expect us to believe in a book of chinese whispers. And you continue to drone on about it all being faith, and what is the purpose of this faith you have created. You seem to have put a purpose to just about everything else. The only reason anyone would believe in a religion is to find a purpose in life but there is no purpose in life we live and we die it is such a simple concept and yet our massively developed brains can still not grasp the idea. Society creates religion because it feels a need for it every religion that has ever existed has fitted around the times and circumstances take the Romans for an example their gods were in plenty each representing something the Romans thought important but that have now become much less important such as a God of wine. It is our human instinct to survive that creates these ideas of eternity. I could pull a million more ideas from the back of my mind but I shall not it would tire me and eventually erode away my keyboard. So I shall stop here and leave you with a little thought, what if all this religion was just a waste of time and realy it was just made by a mad bloke called jesus who went about going crazy thinking he could walk on water paying people to pretend, uh?

with all due respect, i find that hardly an issue here, but i will reply back just for the heck of it…
say you were to build , in God’s case ‘create’, a small house, adding a log or a brick or whatever each hour or so, whould you be able to lift it at the end??? I’m not saying God can’t life this whole universe if he wanted but im playing along with you here…
so what do you say? should we just ‘cancel out ur exsistance’ completely because you wont be able to life that house?

true, we all die at the end but that didnt stop people from trying to improve did it? if everyone thought the same way you did and just waited around to die you wouldnt have a computer infront of you now.


yes but it is not part of callum_dodsworth’s essence that he is all powerful. Either God can create something he can’t lift, which is contrary to his essence, or he can’t, which is also contrary to his essence.

sorry bout the typo’s :

life = lift *

thanks for the clearification Tim…

but i cannot understand how cullom_dodsworth came to the conclusion that God cant lift his creations. i think his greatness and power show in so many things if you are willing to open your eyes and see…

Maybe it’s me being naive, and I’ve not exactly formulated arguments to support my claim, however:

The way I see it is that God is a remote and abstract entity which does exist in the mind of those who believe in Him. It may not be based on fact, but I don’t think you can say that religion is pointless simply because it’s created by culture/society and so forth. It’s a coping mechanism like many others, and even though it undermines the possibility of the existence of God, it doesn’t, in my opinion, undermine the need to have a belief in something we can’t grasp in the hope that it’ll provide (false, but no one has the answers anyway) explanations.

I don’t believe in God simply because I don’t feel the need to use that as my coping mechanism. I’m sure I’ve created a few myself, but I can’t think of any off the top of my head

I just remembered the ‘does love exist’ topic in the philosophy forum and I was wondering, with this whole talk of existence… what are we referring to? Is it whether those things exist in the real external world? I can’t conceive of how such abstract and intangible concepts exist anywhere other than our minds. Does this make them less real, and if so, why?

It seems to me the answer to that is wrapped up in the definitions of the words themselves. Like, with 'does love exist", I think everyone is pretty much thinking of it as something only in our minds in the first place, so if it’s there, then it exists as much as anyone thought it did. Nobody, as far as I know, is out to prove that there’s a pile of love in a crater on the moon or something.
With God, though, He’s generally defined as a Being which has existence outside of people’s minds. So, if the only place God exists is our imaginations, then it would be proper to say God doesn’t exist under the defintion of 'God" considering him an external being.

I think the answer to this question depends on the nature of the Universe. If the universe is finite, then God could create a rock that occupied the entire universe, and thus he would be unable to move it because there would literally be nowhere to move it to. On the otherhand, if space is infinite (or at least, potentially infinite), then the question has no answer because “a rock so heavy God can’t lift it” is an impossibility, and thus the question is meaningless.

In the name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

For all the unbelievers in Allah (The Creator of all) out there, this is for you:

    I am tired and sick of you trying to figure out the mystery(ies) of the universe just by sitting and PHILOSOPHIZING.

For the above reason, philosophy-specially of this kind- is prohibited in Islam.

Because it leads no where, you could find thousands of ideas against the existing of The God, simply because all these ideas generates of one idea of NOT believing the existing of the all mighty Allah, just like riddles in a water surface generated from a touch (in this analogy) the ideas will expand and become so distant from the origin that you will start to believing in the validity of these that these ideas in themselves, like the idea of having a creation so heavy that the God can’t lift it …, but -as we know- they will fade away sooner or later in the end and the end (the day of judgment) is near.

This example is being “constructed” to disprove the existing of the God, unfortunately for the unbelievers, and fortunately for the believers:

   This example will not hold ground scientifically

You wonder: WHAT!?

I will not discus the above example, and other silly examples like: I can’t see The God then he doesn’t exist, we know that we can’t see radio waves or atoms yet they exists!,but here is the ULTIMATE RULE:


That means: Think objectively through science and you will arrive that there is a creator of all things (Allah).

Why?: Because if a creator of all things exists then the universe is built following some principles of his chosen, That’s from the creator’s side
From our side science is simply the facts that describes the underlying principles of the universe (or ourselves…etc)

Then if there is a true religion (sent by the creator) then in it’s whole and sums should agree with the scientific facts, because this is the creators creation, in fact the religion should describe facts that yet to be discovered by science.

So, you see it’s your choice to belive or not (go to heaven or hell), but don’t try to convince yourself and worse others that A CREATOR doesn’t exist to lift the burden of worship and belive of your shoulders.

In in way, the wise will deal with this mathematically & logically (to win in the end with good odds):
If a creator doesn’t exists, then no problem, but what if a creator does exists ( you at least don’t have a solid fact disproving this, even if there is a 1/100000000000 chance of his existence, still a chance!) what will be your position then, what will you say to him!

THE WISE SHOULD COVER ALL HIS GROUNDS AND NOT LOOSE, we practice this simple principle in daily life in everything, yet it’s hard when it comes to the existence of the creator!!!

The simple fact is that Allah exists and he sent lots of messengers to show his existence, and simply asked you to thank him (worship) for that he created you (in the first place). This is our OBLIGATION, and we are totally responsible for our choices.

Every time scientists discover something, they find it already mentioned in the Holy Quran from the atom, uniqueness of the finger print, …, to the big bang … and much more, just look around in the Internet to find these

We will never comprehend the idea of a creator until we die, because we are wrapped within our own dimensions, only after death Allah will give us (the believers in heaven, you don’t want to miss that unbelievers) the ability to see him like we see the full moon in a crisp clear night.

                  All praise belongs to Allah alone,

and blessings and peace be upon the final Prophet Mohammed.
Islam is peace - Islam is simple

My email is: thereviewer@hotmail.com


I understand that God would find no need in the task of creating and lifting this object it is just this theory disproves his all power. This theory is not to eradicate the idea of a God existing just to show that if he did he would not be all powerfull which is what is said in the bible.
Also I do not wait around to die, I as many others set my own purpose in life, to survive, to have a family, to be happy those are my own purposes that i have found for myself we all must have a purpose it is our nature. I have no problem with people believing a religion it is often a better way of life for communitys and I never said it was a bad thing I am just argueing that a god does not exist because he dosnt!
Some of the smartest people ever to have existed that have invented the very computer I am useing may of believed the same as I and look what they have avhieved.
This God may have power but im saying if he exists he dosnt have all power.
I completely agree with Karolina except for she accuses me of saying that religion is pointless which is not what I said at all I merely used that arguement to back up the idea of their not being a God.
But excuse my language but DeepBlue I believe is speaking out of his arse where the hell did he get that rubbish from, no offence to your believse but its just what i believe.
If a creator does exist and I am faced with him I will say “what now?” he will either take me to heaven or to hell or he will answer me, now if he is an all forgiving god which a god must be then he will forgive me if he is not then I will be damned to hell but what kind of a god would send and innocent man to a place of evil where murderes are sent where hitler is sent , I mean can you not blame a person for not beleiving in a God there are so many to choose from how are you to know which is the true how are you to know he even exists at all. As long as you have done well in your life, helped others lived a peacefull happy life he shall let you in. But because god dosnt exist that is not a worry I shall live my life happily without the added stress of a wastefull religion when i can live happily without one.
If your god is so willing to show that he exists why send men down if he is so powerfull why cant he present himself to us humans?
Any way i cannot believe in a god simply because its better to believe in him than not just in case he is real because that is not a true belief and if he is real he will not except that.
Please reply


“Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen.” – Michel de Montaigne

You are assigning attributes to God (or reciting attributes given to him by others) and then using this to disprove his existence. This is your mistake. God is infinite and that is all you can say. To say more about God will only lessen your understanding, not increase it. All religon is myth and myth is the only tool we have to “explain” that which is beyond explanation. To say God is all powerful or God is all loving or God is all good is to define God and that which can be defined is finite. Say God is all…. and just leave it at that.

I use to be an atheist also so I am aware of most of the arguments against God. Can God create a rock so big even he can’t lift it?. If God created the Universe then who created God? If God is mercyful then how can he condeme anyone to Hell? My study of science, religion and philosophy have answered all my questions and I have come to except the existence of God not because I need to, but because the preponderance of evidence supports it.

Atheism can not simply be the “default” belief system because God can not be proven. It must stand on its own merits. There are very many Atheist arguments but really it comes down to one thing. CAUSE AND EFFECT. This is the atheist God and all there arguments seek to demonstrate that this God can explain all physical phenomenon including life and consciousness. The atheist “Old Testament” was written (inadvertently) by Isaac Newton. Newton believed that all events that take place in the Universe are knowable and predictable through the physical laws of Cause and Effect (action and reaction) and he provided extremely accurate equations that supports this view. The Atheist “New Testament” was written (inadvertently) by Charles Darwin. Darwin’s Theory of Evolution has been interpreted by many to mean that the Cause and Effect explanation of inanimate objects extends into biology. If CAUSE AND EFFECT can really explain everything then the honest and objective person would have to admit there is no need for a God to exist and unlikely that he does. So this is where we can either find God or “prove” his non existence.

This is obviously a big subject so I will just outline a few ideas starting with Isaac Newton’s cause and effect model of the Universe. This model started to crumble with Einstein’s Theory of Relativity and his description of light. Light (electromagnetic radiation ) is the most fundamental and abundant thing in the Universe and according to Einstein it can not be explained or understood without first identifying an “observer” or point of “observation”. Cause and effect was beginning to “bend” to the relativity of the observer. With the discovery of Quantum Mechanic, it broke! Even Atheist believe that atoms are the building blocks of all matter and Quantum Mechanics spells out there behavior. The problem is that Cause and Effect has no place in Quantum Mechanics. It is a world of possibility and probability, of potentiality and actuality. Atoms are not “things” they are “events”. Events which are only complete at the moment of observation. The “act” of observation causes “probability wave collapse” and a “potential” something becomes and “actual” something. The Big Bang itself is understood to have been a Quantum Event and there had to be a conscious “something” there to observe it or it never could have happened. There is much more to be said on this subject but I will leave it at that.

This alone should be enough to de-deify Cause and Effect but lets look at Evolution Theory for a minute because it is a stumbling block for so many. First, the Theory of Evolution is exactly that. A Theory of Evolution, not a Theory of Creation. Darwin doesn’t have word one to say about how life was created. All he says is that once it has been created it will evolve via this process. So a “Creation Event” is still required and Atheist’s take it on “faith” that science will one day explain that. Secondly, and more importantly, is how Darwin explains this evolution process. He says that life evolves via a process of “Random mutation and natural selection”. The key to this is the word “random”. Where exactly does randomness come from in a Cause and Effect world? If all physical phenomenon is a result of Cause and Effect then there can be no randomness. Science is the Cause and Effect explanation of the world and mathematics is the language of Science. But there is no equation for randomness. There never will be. There will never be an equation where you can put a definitive number in and get a random number out. But randomness is a part of the world. It is required by Quantum Mechanics, Cosmology, Biology, Evolution and many other things. And randomness is the fundamental property of consciousness. Every conscious being can choose its path and to the outside observer the choice is unpredictable. It is random. Consciousness must have been here in the beginning, it is here now and it will be there in the end.

Atheism is a faith like any other. They believe something that can not be proven. It is just as difficult for an Atheist to explain randomness as it is for a Christian to explain where Cain’s wife came from.

A good argument but not convincing. You speak as if one theory rules the universe when realy the whole universe rules a million theorys. You speak as if we have discovered everything when we still are to discover millions. It is possible for to theories to exist apart from eachother they do not have to work together, havnt you ever thought it possible that some of our world is ruled by the Cause and Effect theory and some of it by evolution and some of it by Quantum.
As for your random with consciousness that is also wrong, how can you just slunk the idea of randomness onto consciousness can you not see that everything is random, you only believe this nonse of consciousness because you believe in God and because you believe in God you believe that all humans have a purpose in life you believe that everything was created for a purpose. God is your purpose, but eliminate the idea of a purpose in life and you will see that everything in nature has no purpose. The big bang happend, this produced living orginisms somehow these creatures evolved over the years to addapt to their surroundings to survive. Actually that is our true purpose which everyliving thing has, to survive. Then one highly developed creature starts thinking and he thinks: “This is boring im fed up of sitting around trying to keep alive im gonna have some fun!” and thats when the humans start to create ideas in their heads about Gods, the survival instinct in them kicks in and they dont want to believe that when you die that is it so they start to invent heavens and hells. But all we are are a group of living organisms. It is possible to randomly evolve just as it is possible for a ball to bounce one direction and then the next, yes you could say that that is because of where it bounced but the same can be said for humans, you drop a human on a mountain, it is cold and hard to breave, leave him their for a couple of thousand years, hell make a family, itll grow and eventually they will evolve, they will evolve to keep warm and their bodys will ‘randomly’ choose something that will keep them warm wether it be hair, fur, feathers or something completely different their lungs will develop in the same way. Now you could say that this is not ‘random’ because the human is evolving like that because of his surroundings, but if you roll a dice the action of rolling it is not ‘random’ but the result of the throw is. I hope you can understand this theory.
Religion is the not only tool we have to explain what we dont believe we can use science and years of work, if we do say that our only tool is religion then that is wrong because just because that might be our only tool dosnt mean its the right one. Its like a man trying to get a nail out useing a spanner. Just because it seems to be the only and easiest tool to use dosnt mean it is the right one.
Please reply

Nice reply Sideshowbob, and nice handle as well. :slight_smile: However, the jury is still out on whether or not quantum physics is deterministic or not. The late John Bell, when asked about Alain Aspect’s “proof” of faster than light communication, elegantly pointed out that while the photons seemed to be “communicating” faster than light in Aspect’s experiment, it still may not be the result of the observer playing a role. Bell noted that perhaps it was the result of a deterministic universe, that the photons reacted to each other faster than light because they already knew how the observer atoms were going react, i.e., the staunchest determinism one could imagine.

Either way, (as you previously stated) no one can claim that God does or does not exist under the stipulation that they prove it.

From:Phenomenal Graffiti

I have always made the argument too that one cannot “prove” the existence or nonexistence of God.

Indeed, it comes down to how God is conceptualized. In the Bible we have the supernatural “ectoplasmic” being with face shining like lightning and hair curly as lamb’s wool with robe and sandals. This seems to assert a mystical being that can only be seen after one dies. This is a magical requirement for the experience of a God. It is a sort of concept that I call a: “sensory contestant”-or an imaginary or conceivable being that as conceived and entailed should be available to sensory perception of human observation but continually fails to appear to humans. Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy are also all sensory contestants. ( The term: “contestants” I use to imply that believers in the existence of these entities seem to have their imaginary entity “compete” for proof of their existence, if they don’t conveniently shuttle them away in some mystical universe or place. The first sensory contestant to show up on our doorstep, big as life and available to our senses, wins.)

On the other hand, God can be conceived of as a universe-controlling disembodied mind. Consciousness other than our own personal conscious experience is naturally imperceptible to the senses, so anyone asserting that disembodied minds do not or cannot exist will certainly not be making their assertions based on experience, and cannot argue from lack of availability to experience, as other humans’ conscious experience are themselves unavailable to one’s own personal experience.

At the end of the day, all we ultimately have when it comes to imperceptible concepts (such as God) are BELIEFS in the nonexistence or existence of such entities. Objective reality involves imperceptible concepts(such as other people’s internal thoughts that are not verbalized or demonstrated by behavior), and one can argue that just because consciousness accompanies physical brain process in some physical systems in our universe, that this is not a sufficient condition to assert that that’s all the consciousness in the universe and that the brain is the only conduit to the existence of consciousness. We simply can’t make it a sufficient condition (although it “suffices” based on what we observe about the world) because consciousness is a nomologically (naturally) imperceptible entity. That is why some philosophers even propose panpsychism(the idea that consciousness is everywhere in physical matter, not just within brains). We cannot make something true or false because we strongly believe in the truth or falsity of that something. It either is or it isn’t. And this is ultimately the case for God.

Jay M. Brewer


Okay, check this out. A “whippledorken” exists. Do you know why? Because it is infinite, that’s why. And don’t try to say that they don’t exist because any attempt to add or remove attributes to a whippledorken is a mistake. A whippledorken is infinite and that’s all you need to know.

[Bob scratches his head]

Now, here’s the deal. I don’t need to try to prove that a God doesn’t exist because according to you, you can’t even begin to describe to me what it is that I am trying to prove doesn’t exist. Follow me? Your argument is redundantly circular and ambiguous. It’s not that I exhaust myself trying to disbelieve in such a thing, it is the fact that you can’t yet provide any evidence that such an entity can possibly exist, because everytime you try to ascribe a characteristic to this God, you turn around and say that any one specific characteristic, is, in fact, a mistake. You then reconcile this by giving God EVERY possible attribute, and call God “infinite.”

This is utterly ridiculous.

A dialogue:

Bob- “Do you believe in God?”

de’trop- “Tell me what that is, and I’ll tell you whether or not I believe in it.”

Bob- “I can’t do that, my friend, because I can’t assign any attributes to it.”

de’trop- “Ah…you must be talking about whippledorkens, then. Sure, I believe in the existence of a whippledorken. I mean, isn’t it obvious that whippledorkens exist? What a dumb question, Bob.”

Bob- “Great, then we agree!”

de’trop- “Of course. Whippledorkens exist because they are infinite. Hell, even I knew that.”

(Bob and de’trop ride off into the sunset together with their thumbs up their asses)

Normally, Bob, I’d go off on my tangent about how you are terribly sick. How you are angry at life, dissatisfied, afraid of death and meaninglessness. How, instead of trying to fix concrete problems concerning mankind, you create a childlike fantasy to help you endure your existence, while endangering any real progress that can be made.

One day, and it might take a thousand years, “religion” will only be read about in history books. The closest thing to a “holy” man will be a wax statue of the Pope, standing in a museum window under the exhibit sign reading: “Sub-human fruit-loop.”

Something tells me that you are going to reply to this post. That’s fine. I’ve got eternity and a raging case of intellectual genius. I do feel obligated, however, to warn you in advance that you will lose( recently edited, thanks to Matthew and the English language), so don’t get upset. This is for your own good.

Go ahead,(de’trop sticks his jaw out), take yer best shot.

Then what in the hell are we talking about, Jay?

Here’s one for you to ponder.

Theists and atheists do not exist.

Theists do not exist because whippledorkens do not exist.

Atheists do not exist because whippledorkens do not exist to questioned whether or not they exist, therefore a whippledorken doesn’t exist to be doubted and therefore there is no atheistic position.

Again, I’m asked, “do you believe in God?” I answer, “what is that?” Someone says “then you aren’t even an atheist, if you don’t know what it is that you don’t believe in.”


Thankyou for your support de’trop i totally agree. These religious people rap them selves up with their own wrapping. You cannot fully prove that God exists or dosnt exist but you can still change other peoples minds in what you say.

The problem De’trop, is that Whippledorkens might exist.

De’trop wrote:


Also, I thought this was rather comedic as well:

I generally avoid touting any intelligence I may or may not have, as it usually results in me with my foot in my my mouth (or thumb up my ass). You may want to take an “o” out of loose, unless you’re preparing yourself for some sort of masochistic adventure. :stuck_out_tongue:

I wholeheartedly agree with your position De’trop, to the extent that believing in God is no less ridiculous than believing in Whippledorks. But you must concede, epistemologically at least, that one who believes in one or both has that right. I tend to take a Utilitarian approach toward religion; if it makes people capable of being happy and living a clean life, then for these people, perhaps it is better to be a pig than Socrates.

[awaits scathing response]