Proof that God does not exist.
Posted: Monday, October 05, 2009
by Kenny St.pierre
The 5 senses : smell, taste, seeing, hearing, and touch.
Physical (adj): * Material rather than imaginary. *Of or relating to the body rather than the emotions. (There are many other definitions also, but these should suffice.)
In my rationale I have come to the firm conclusion that God(s) can not exist if it or he (they) is not acknowledged through at least one of the 5 senses. God has yet to reveal himself via our senses, so for the sake of my argument he can not possibly be real. If humans do insist God is real without any physical evidence to prove his whereabouts, then we can also conclude God is as certain as Martians.
It goes without saying; God's reality only lives in the arguments of the very humans who "believe" in him. Many Atheist will ask a believer, "How can you believe that which is unseen?" The usual response will almost always be, "You must have faith." However, If an absolutely reasonable person were to say to anyone, "I have faith that Martians exist," he or she surely would not be taken seriously. So I ask again, wherein lies the difference between one's faith in God and another persons faith in Martians, and why would one belief be accepted over the other?
Also, anyone who declares they "believe" in God is basically saying they are not sure if God exist. To believe in something means one is not sure. A good example of this would be:
If I were aiming a bow and arrow at a target 50 yards away, and said I "believe" I could hit the target from that distance, then what I am in fact saying is, I am not sure I can hit it, but I believe I can. Believing in something does not guarantee it exist undoubtedly. In actuality - believing is doubt! If I said, I could hit the target undoubtedly time and again, then I would have to prove it by hitting the target time and again in order to fulfill my prophecy.
To say with absoluteness God does exist puts the burden of proof upon the claimant. However, I have come into contact with many people in my life time who believe in God, yet not one of them has been able to prove him/it.
As for the Martian assertion, if I were to say I believe in Martians, I'd be saying I'm not sure if they are real or if they do exist. However, if I said Martians do indeed exist, then I would need to provide evidence of my claim.
It's the same with anyone who insist of God's existence. They have no basis for their argument, yet they will still worship as though he were real. Again, if God were a fact, why would anyone need to Believe in him if they already KNEW he was an actual entity? It's because God is not a fact, only a belief, and the two things (Fact and Belief) are not even close in relevance to each other.
Regardless of that logic, one thing I do know is I have an answer as to why and how we humans determine whether things exist or not, including the question of God's existence or lack thereof.
All things are born from atoms, and as far as I remember atoms (Energy) are of physical form. If there were a God then surely he would have this physical form; thus humans could exercise one or all of the 5 senses to prove he exist. We would have the ability to smell him, see him, touch, and/or even hear him. My question is, if God does exist then why is he not experienced through any of our senses?
I have never touched, seen, heard, tasted, or smelled God. Has anyone else? Even if there was a God who existed beyond our senses that doesn't mean he is real to us. Humans have no right to say God exist beyond our senses when it would take our senses to make such a declaration. It takes our senses to KNOW if God is or is not within our realm of reasoning, therefore that would be the only possible way one could claim he is outside our world of the senses.
I have an example in which I'd like to show the impossibility that God or Martians could exist. It goes like this: Let's say, I were to take a rock in my hand where I could see it, touch it, smell it, and even lick and taste it. It would therefore be real to me and to anyone else I may toss that same rock to. The fact of the rock's physical features and my possession of the five senses from which I am able to unleash their power on the rock, make my rock experience absolute. Therefore there would be no reason to believe the rock is real since it is proven by my/our senses.
Again, God and Martians can no t be real if we can't experience them via the five senses as we do a rock.. The rock is more real than God and Martians. This emphasis lies on the physical in conjunction with the human and animal senses, and only then can an experience be derived which offers us our reality.
Before there was man, animals existed. These animals had proof Dinosaurs were real anytime they were stepped on by one of them, heard their loud roars, or got too close to their wagging tails. The senses of these animals allowed them the luxury to see, hear, smell, taste, and/or touch Dinosaurs, therefore Dinosaurs were very real to those creatures long before humans discovered Dinosaur remains (Physical). That is how Dinosaurs became real to us. Our sensory of SEEING & TOUCHING in unison with the Dinosaurs physical skeleton form creates and proves their reality to us humans.
Reality can not possibly be realized from beliefs or faith simply because neither manifestation is physical, nor of the senses. The notion that God exist beyond the human realm of experience is an absurd proposition when we consider that the idea of God derives from the observable intake of the outside real world. God was produced from man's hopes and beliefs, but never from any actual experience between man and God that declared him real. We can't smell, taste, hear, or feel God or Martians, just as neither can the five senses detect a belief.
Some will say that God can be seen through the mind's eye, but this is not so. One's mind (Physical brain ) may have the ability to concoct a belief that he exist, but thereafter it cannot prove the belief is anything more than just a belief, nor can the belief produce anything outside of itself. Beliefs are built on hope.
In the distant past, people derived their beliefs about God through contemplations of why, how, who, or what, made everything we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell. The very things humans witnessed (plants, moon, animals, mountains, etc.) through their natural senses are all physical, but over time humans had a need to explain the physical world, thus the belief in God(s). Their desperate musings ranged from the innocent, to the ridiculous, and at times, to the very strange.
An innocent belief could be something as simple as a baseball fan "believing" their team will win the World Series. They have come to that conclusion having watched their team play all season, and towards season's end they are convinced their team is the best team in all of baseball. This belief is established over the length of the season by the fans observations of their team's performance, but their belief is never definitive as to what the end result will be. Their belief, like all beliefs, carries no guarantees attached to them. The fan can not prove their team will win - they can only believe or hope they will. Regardless, their belief that their team will win the Series is harmless and acceptable because it does not inflict punishment or rules on our society. It is a vehicle that adds wonderful excitement to an already exciting spectacle.
At the other end of the spectrum we have witnessed the strange beliefs of the many who have and still are, inflicting pain and even death on others. We have learned of Hitler's genocide on Jews because of his "belief" that the blonde-haired, blue-eyed, German was among the fittest of the human race. He believed their "superiority" should have inherently allowed them rule over the "inferior" races. We also remember the Jonestown suicides of not just adults, but even their innocent children, all because of the misguided beliefs they embedded within their vulnerable minds.
These are just two examples of the thousands in human history in the name of God(s), a term used to acknowledge a higher being, where everyone who "believes" in him/them unwittingly admit they are not sure if he/they are real and exist. All the terrible happenings in human history have taken place while each side admits they were unsure (belief) and unable to prove anything of God, is indeed peculiar and insane. If I were unsure in something of that magnitude I would absolutely not worship it. Show me proof first that it is real, and I am there.
Someone asked of me once, "If thoughts, ideas, and dreams are real, then why not God since the thought of him also comes from the same physical brain?" I replied, " Because God is ONLY a belief, not a thought, idea, or dream, and beliefs are incapable of interaction with any of the 5 senses. Once again, God was "made up" just to satisfy man's need for explanation of the Universe."
Tolkien's book, "Lord of the Rings" derived from an idea. The "idea" for the book was real, but the actual story is nothing more than a fantasy. People do not worship Gandalf or Frodo simply because we know they are "made up" characters in a book. God too does not and has not existed beyond the "belief" domain or beyond human story-telling.
To our knowledge and experience God is not manufactured into even the simplest physical form of matter, so therefore he is stuck in the human realm of beliefs. If people want to declare that the very belief of God is as real as an idea, then I say good luck in carrying out that notion. See how far they get in creating a real God from the "belief in God." However, an idea, thought, or dream can go a long way in it's quest for reality.
Ideas come from within the physical brain, and are eventually witnessed by our senses. Similar to ideas, I have had dreams and nightmares that have "snapped" me out of deep slumbers because they were attached with strong emotion. I have never had such an experience with any belief. Some nightmares and dreams have touched me in such a way they were able to produce physical interaction with my senses.
Beliefs are only a hope established by an observer looking for answers to which the world's amazing physical reality is experienced through his senses. Simply put, there is no experience or reality in a belief!
Dreams can make us jump up with great excitement in the middle of the night pumping our minds and hearts with excitement, and it is our bodies that experience them through our senses. However, the real difference from that of beliefs, is that dreams can create reality outside of themselves. There have been many recorded events of people having dreams which later were realized to come true. I have heard of more than one case where a songwriter woke with a dream for a new song in his or hers head, immediately wrote it down, and followed with the music, eventually making the "dream song" real. The dream was produced by the physical brain, experienced through the senses, and later an actual form (song) arose. God can not be produced internally from the five senses because he can't be drawn or written, recorded, or manifested.....whereas a song can!
Songs are recorded, notes are drawn, and the sheet music is held in hand. Conclusion: The dream was real because it created something from itself that later became a product for our senses to experience. Whereas, a belief in God can't produce anything material to satisfy our curiosities and senses. Beliefs and hopes produce nothing, they are not physical, nor are they a friend of our senses. A belief can not create something from itself.
Ideas, dreams, and thoughts can be seen through the minds eye, but never has anyone seen God through that same eye. If someone has, I'd like to know why they haven't yet painted a picture of his form for the world to see. According to the Bible, Man was made in God's image. If that is so then the Bible suggest God has a face, yet no one has seen it. Why?
Getting back to the concept of how ideas work, their connection to our senses, and how they become real, let me continue. If a person had an "idea" to build their own house let's say, it would only be in their minds eye at first, but from there they could draw (physical) it, and make planned written notes (physical) to see how it would look on paper (physical), and once they were satisfied with their draft (physical) they would use tools (physical) and wood (physical) to build the house (physical). All the "physicals" I just placed in here are all in some way connected to our senses. That can't be done with God.
Even if a dream conjured up the thought of a faceless God, he could not be real, simply because that's where God begins and ends, in the human mind!! He can not be produce beyond that. No one knows what he looks like, sounds like, smells like, feels like, or taste like. Even to dream of God, if possible, would leave us absent of experiencing him.
The example of the house far exceeded just the home builder's idea. The idea was only the beginning stage of a process - as it went from a thought to an eventual actual physical entity. On the contrary, humans can contemplate God all day long if he or she likes, but God will never be seen in their mind's eye, nor will it manifest into a physical reality. Their musings will never produce a physical God, and they will never experience God via the 5 senses. Man can not construct God from a belief...In fact there is NOTHING that can be constructed from a belief. The only leg a belief stands on is hope.
I was asked once, "Why don't you believe in a God, but you believe in the things you hear and see on television?" My reply, "First, I don't believe everything on TV because it is only content. The content is only real or unreal depending on the character of those who send it. The producers produce it, but it's up to them to decide whether to send us the honest content or not...That is not my responsibility...If I accepted something I saw on television as a truth, and learned later it was a lie, then that's on them not me. God is neither a truth or lie, only a belief. Television is not a belief, but sated of truths, lies, information, entertainment, etc.. The important thing is what I acknowledged and accepted after I had learned the actual truth. That is where my responsibility lies. Lies and truths are produced by the brains contemplative physical ability to do so, and are a communicative and yes physical response. Accepting it's content is purely one's decision to do so. A viewer can only "Hope" and "Believe" they are being told the truth. There will always be those who believe a lie as a truth, and others a truth to be a lie, but that's the very nature of beliefs in which I speak of."
I continued, " Also, the news and such that I witness on my television screen are produced by atoms (Energy) and real (physical) people. These people then employ devices (physical) that can transmit sights and sounds (both physical) to many more real physical people which can follow the programs path (Electricity> physical) because they have 5 senses (physical) to experience the program with. It's like the saying, "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?" The answer is no! If there are no ears to hear or listen, then it makes no sound. It only makes vibrations! The sense of hearing the vibrations is key to recognizing their sounds."
With that previous question I was challenged with another. I was asked, "If there were not one human currently living on Earth, would the Planets, Stars, and Sun exist since there would not be anyone with the 5 senses to prove them?" My reply was a swift "yes!', but they are not REAL TO WE HUMANS until WE experience them." They are physical entities that by themselves can not be proven unless there are animals or humans to prove them. The 5 senses humans and animals possess are the tools which are used to make them REAL FOR US." Most inanimate physical forms preceded our existence, but for us humans they did not exist until they were in conjunction with our senses. Only then could we enjoy a human perspective on reality.
IF God had been here before the arrival of humans, he could ONLY have existed as a physical entity with the other material parts of our universe. Then when humans arrived on the scene God's existence for mankind would have had a connection with our senses for his absoluteness to be recognized just as the stars are. It is quite obvious this connection has never manifested, and a belief in God is the best effort humans can make in falsely acknowledging him. The stars and planets undoubtedly exist. I know this because I can see them.
A woman questioned me once, "What about space? Surely it is free of the 5 senses! My response, "Sorry but that is inaccurate since space consist of billions of atoms of both gas and dust (physical), and space also can be seen and measured . When we look up, we see space nightly. A microcosmic example of this would be, like when we clasp our hands together and we leave no empty area between them - then when we take those same hands and separate them, we can then see the clear emptiness between them (Two physical separated hands) indicating space.
As I have said, God has not ever been seen, heard, touched, or smelled, so therefore he is non existent and actionless. It's obvious not enough people take any time to question their beliefs, and it is mandatory if they wish to be true to themselves and gain rationale as their prize. Why the insistence people place on beliefs rather than facts is beyond me. How would a person feel if they were being charged with a crime they did not commit, yet were sentenced on the jury's "belief" they were guilty rather than their guilt or innocence having been based on actual facts. That's the way it was and still is in some parts of the world. Religious and power mad zealots who seize(d) and murder(d) people (Spanish Inquisition and Salem witch hunts to name a couple), because they believed and considered those people undesirable" based on hearsay alone sometimes. Beliefs do more harm than good.
An intelligent man once asked me, "What is the difference if a person believes in a God or not? What would be the consequence of being wrong? Surely one has nothing to lose by believing."
I told him, "The consequences are enormous because to be on this earth and tell our children superstitions which they will practice whole-heartedly and impossibly is criminal to their minds, and it is mentally abominable to the following generations to come. We should never let our children be the subject of foolish lies or nonsense, for to do so is a recipe for mental illness and other more serious lies and distortions! Freedom from religion and God is the foundation for common sense and reason, which is something that has always lacked in all societies! Beliefs in Gods and religions have caused more insanity on this earth than any other practice or institution."
I would also like to point out, that if one wishes to worship, they should worship their next door neighbors, their children, horses, light, cars, stars, bridges, stores, animals, friends, houses, bicycles, the Sun, electricity, etc. etc. etc., because they are all made from that beautiful physical energy we may never know or understand, and they can all be detected by man's 5 senses making them most real.
I will always love man before God or any belief simply because man's existence is real and God's is not - period!!!. We were all born without beliefs whether one wants to hear or agree to that. The belief of God(s) was planted in our minds by the contemplative and believing forceful minds of the previous male dominated human generations.
Even a dumb dog can experience reality. Like rain for instance. It'll run for cover because of it's being "touched" by the rain, it will "see" it fall , "hear" it crash all around, and the dog can even "taste" and drink it if it wishes to . It's the dog's senses that gives the rain it's very existence for the dog.
God can only be possible if or when "man" discovers his/it's physicality. If I and my readers were void of all our senses this very essay would be impossible. Man could not possibly exist or know reality without his very own senses.
Picture a human without their senses, and place hot food in front of them. Then tell the person to eat the hot meal which you placed on the table before them. However, the person can not hear you so they just sit. They might accidentally put their hand in the plate, but because they are incapable of touch they would not feel it. They are also sightless, so seeing the whereabouts of the plate of food is impossible. The person too would have no sense of smell, therefore they would be without any ability to smell from which direction the food has been placed. Lastly, even if a person were to help the hapless person, by placing the food in their mouth, they still could not eat it - being unable to feel it.
The result: The food would go unnoticed and uneaten by the subject ad infinitum. The food may be real for the person who gave it to them and for any other eyewitnesses, but because the subject did not have possession of the 5 senses, the food has no physical reality for them. I conclude from this example that the subjects experience with reality would be absolutely impossible.
There simply is no proof of any connection between man and God for similar reason. Man has the 5 senses, yet God has not revealed himself to be at all physical making it impossible for man to recognize and know of his existence. Maybe some day scientist or someone other then, will discover through their human senses God somehow or somewhere, but until that time comes, he has not or does not exist.
Kenny St. Pierre
This Article has been viewed 814 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
More commentsWell, for me God doesn't exist, therefore I'm not worried about HIS frustration. That would make about as much sense to me as fearing being bitten by a dog in my house that I don't own or never have. No dog! No chance of being bitten! - No God! No frustration!Be careful when you say, "God is less than logical and much more an intuitive reality." You set yourself up for having to provide proof in order to back up your statement. You put yourself in the same social circle as the believers who declare, "I believe in God."
Kenny, I was an atheist for 9 years and I have walked where you seem to be now. (see my piece if you like Nine Years an Atheist written on SW Spetember 1, 2009) Check it out and let me know if it strikes a chord with you. Welcome to Searchwarp! Marijo (pronounced Marijo)Thank you for your warm welcome and I will check out your article Marijo.....Kenny
In rebuttal, I would quote from Wm. Blake's There is No Natural Religion:"From a perception of only 3 senses or 3 elements none could deduce a fourth or fifth."
What Blake meant by this is an answer to your argument that "man has only five senses." Since man has five senses, he is unable to conceive that there might be a sixth, seventh, or even more. That does not mean experience cannot exist beyond our perception, only that our perception is limited.
The absence of proof for God is inarguable. You can show evidence that a cow walked through here, by pointing to a regular pattern of hoof prints. But if no one has ever seen an actual cow, you can't know what it is you're talking about, but you can have faith that it is something that left those tracks. That is sort of the argument of intelligent design, that a regular, ordered universe is evidence of an intelligence that made it. Yet, it is not proof of anything, only an explanation for regular orderliness in the universe.
However, I'm wondering if there was a time in humankind's primitive past when we were able to perceive God, or at least something god-like. It is known there are states of consciousness that do perceive events outside of what is normal for the five senses. In the end, there is no proof that god doesn't exist, and especially no proof that god could not exist.- GIn rebuttal, I would quote from Wm. Blake's There is No Natural Religion:*** Good! Religion is for losers!"From a perception of only 3 senses or 3 elements none could deduce a fourth or fifth." What Blake meant by this is an answer to your argument that "man has only five senses." Since man has five senses, he is unable to conceive that there might be a sixth, seventh, or even more. That does not mean experience cannot exist beyond our perception, only that our perception is limited.*** Who's experience? I'm only talking about humans! Who are you talking about? As far as I know humans have ONLY 5 senses, and some less. Anything is possible if you want to shoot outside of our reality (5 senses) and what is for what MIGHT BE. That's for children."The absence of proof for God is inarguable."*** How's that?You can show evidence that a cow"***Physical!"walked"*** Physical action." through here,"*** Do I detect that maybe "here" refers to a "place" (Physical, and proved by our senses.)?by pointing to a regular pattern of hoof prints.*** All physical.But if no one has ever seen an actual cow,"*** Someone had to know about a cow, or why would you be suggesting it?"... you can't know what it is you're talking about, but you can have faith that it is something that left those tracks."*** NO! YOU can have "faith." I don't need faith. I would know undoubtedly that something made those tracks, but they don't prove God did. Everything you just described is all within the framework of our senses and their physical. You only made my argument stronger.I do know about cows. However, even if I never had any experience with a cow - through any of my senses - why would I claim it to be a COW since I wouldn't even know what a cow was? Just like, why would anyone, who never had any experience with God, claim that there is a GOD?"That is sort of the argument of intelligent design, that a regular, ordered universe is evidence of an intelligence that made it."***That's right, but what gives people the right to say it was GOD that created it? Couldn't it have been a COW? Or David Copperfield maybe? My essay is clearly titled, "Proof that GOD does not exist." I never mentioned or denied anything else as being creator, but if others do they better have the facts to prove their claim. I say prove to me this creation was from God, yet no one ever does! You certainly haven't.*** I am not foolish enough to suggest that my existence, and all that I sense, have not come from some source. What I'm saying is God is the "unproven" source that people give the credit to when it comes to what we sense and know exist."Yet, it is not proof of anything, only an explanation for regular orderliness in the universe."*** Agreed! But where does God fit in? Have you seen or touched him?"However, I'm wondering if there was a time in humankind's primitive past when we were able to perceive God, or at least something god-like. It is known there are states of consciousness that do perceive events outside of what is normal for the five senses."*** But that has nothing to do with my essay! I stayed within the parameters of the senses and the physical. You are the one stepping out of bounds, and creating unknown scenarios."In the end, there is no proof that god doesn't exist,"*** But I DID prove it. Where is this God you give the credit too. If I had said, "Proof that there is no Jomitzoo (A fictitious higher power of course), wouldn't I be stating a fact - unless or until someone proved that there is a Jomitzoo?"and especially no proof that god could not exist."*** Something we do know exist - it's called energy! Where it came from or why it exist I won't know in my lifetime. Energy is physical and detected through our senses. God is not. No one has a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!"- GThanks for the comment Greg.Kenny"Who's experience? I'm only talking about humans! Who are you talking about?"
I'm talking about humans. Who are you talking about?
If you had understood Blake's statement correctly, you would infer from it that the nature of reality is greater than our five senses allow us to experience, in their normal condition. That is precisely why natural science can never disprove God. The Hubble telescope shows us everything, you think? Not really. The Hubble shows us only what it was made to show us. The instruments of science are imperfect, so, the instruments of science are not useful for disproving the existence of God.
There is such a thing as mystical experience, though, where humans have grasped a reality greater than the sum of their five senses.
Your argument is flawed, since you are trying to prove the non-existence of that which you apparently don't have access to. I have a thought right now. I had a dream last night. If I were to interpret the world according to your logic, my thought and my dream don't exist because they are beyond your perception. Yet, guess what? My thought and my dream will affect what I do today, and so, therefore, thoughts and dreams transcend reality.Therefore, I give me the right to believe in a thing that the next guy doesn't believe in. That means I give myself the right to believe in God, even over your protest that I don't have that right.Religion may be for losers, as you say. But religion is also for winners. It's all in what you do with it, and what it does for you. Many winners have religion. In fact, most winners, from what I've seen. I don't have religion in the classical sense of belonging to a church, but I have religion in the sense of a belief in God. Has it hurt me, or has it helped me?Blind faith is a double-edged sword. It has stunted human imagination and scientific progress. Bad religion can make people miserable. Good religion can make people happy, and even creative. There are some good articles on SearchWarp about the influence of religion in classical art.As for your statement, "No one has a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!" I disagree. your statement is predicated on your own belief, but I don't see that it's based on any law of nature, only on the "logic of Kenny".You could just as easily say, "We have a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!""
This argument reminds me of the time I rode up the ski lift with my boss, years ago. He looked at the trees and said, "I see death, rot decay. The trees are purple and gray with fungus, disease."
I looked at the woods and saw something different. "I see life, new buds, new branches. I see signs of rejuvenation everywhere."
My ski partner grumbled, "Well, maybe..."
Reality is what you see in it. You can be ruled by the restrictive influence of Saturn, or you can be ruled by the expansive influence of Jupiter, it's a choice we make.Thanks for the comment, Kenny- G*** "Who's experience? I'm only talking about humans! Who are you talking about?""I'm talking about humans. Who are you talking about?"*** Here was your original quote, "That does not mean experience cannot exist beyond our perception, only that our perception is limited."*** When you said "OUR" perception and then say you're talking about "humans," I ask, 'How can humans experience that which is beyond our perception when our perception is restricted, and it's impossible to experience anything beyond those restrictions.' It's like saying we can experience walking on the surface of the Sun...Impossible!!! Experience means "doing it" - not talking about it as you are now. Talk and wishful thinking does not equal experience."If you had understood Blake's statement correctly, you would infer from it that the nature of reality is greater than our five senses allow us to experience, in their normal condition."*** Yes, "the nature of reality" may be "greater than our five senses," but we will never know will we, if all we have is our 5 senses? Try not to put the stands, restrooms, and concession areas inclusive with the playing field. All games have lines, boundaries, and restrictions just like we humans do.Also, I understand Blake's statement perfectly well and it lacks reason."That is precisely why natural science can never disprove God."*** When and where did I include science in my article. I used the 5 senses and physicality as the basis for my reasoning's. The 5 senses and the physical universe are "Natural" but not scientific. All a human needs is his "natural" senses from which he derives his "experiences," thus they have their reality."The Hubble telescope shows us everything, you think?*** What kind of question was that?"The Hubble shows us only what it was made to show us."*** Exactly! Because our 5 senses created the Hubble, and they and it can only take us so far, and that's why I can prove there is no God within our realm...You keep going beyond the 5 senses, and trying to reel me along with you. Your sounding more and more like Bill O'reilly, the master of twisting things."The instruments of science are imperfect, so, the instruments of science are not useful for disproving the existence of God."*** What instruments have I used? Once again try reading the article correctly. It's about the 5 senses and the physical world...You talk about everything, but this!"There is such a thing as mystical experience, though, where humans have grasped a reality greater than the sum of their five senses."*** Name them, and then prove them!"Your argument is flawed, since you are trying to prove the non-existence of that which you apparently don't have access to."***No, I disprove God because I DO have access to my 5 senses and the physical universe. That IS exactly why I can disprove prove God. If it's not within the realm of human experience and 5 senses then it does not exist for us humans. Got it?! How many more times must I say this?"I have a thought right now. I had a dream last night. If I were to interpret the world according to your logic, my thought and my dream don't exist because they are beyond your perception."*** I made great examples about thoughts and dreams in my essay which prove their "reality." I never said they didn't exist! Just another one of your "spins." Go back and read and then comment. Also, dreams and thoughts come from the "physical" brain. Without our brains there would be no thoughts and dreams." Yet, guess what? My thought and my dream will affect what I do today, and so, therefore, thoughts and dreams transcend reality."*** HELLO!!! Read the essay again!!!! You apparently have me mixed up with someone else."Therefore, I give me the right to believe in a thing that the next guy doesn't believe in. That means I give myself the right to believe in God, even over your protest that I don't have that right."*** Of course you have the right to "believe" in God, but that doesn't mean or prove he exist. Once again read the essay."Religion may be for losers, as you say. But religion is also for winners. It's all in what you do with it, and what it does for you. Many winners have religion. In fact, most winners, from what I've seen. I don't have religion in the classical sense of belonging to a church, but I have religion in the sense of a belief in God. Has it hurt me, or has it helped me?*** Belief in something is not religion.... Also, Christ was a great philosopher, but religion destroyed it. The people who best practice the principles of Christ are usually the ones who stay far away from churches, televangelism, and those who impose. Good for them!"Blind faith is a double-edged sword. It has stunted human imagination and scientific progress."*** On this argument we agree 100 %."Bad religion can make people miserable. Good religion can make people happy, and even creative."*** Give examples of good religion, and I bet most humans can do those same good acts without religion."There are some good articles on SearchWarp about the influence of religion in classical art."*** What does the influence of religion got to do with the my essay?"As for your statement, "No one has a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!" I disagree. your statement is predicated on your own belief, but I don't see that it's based on any law of nature, only on the "logic of Kenny"."*** That's because you have selective vision. My statement, "No one has a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!" is not a belief - it's a fact. Please tell me what experiences YOU have that prove you've gone beyond your 5 senses and the physical universe, and I'll show you a man in need of mental help.You could just as easily say, "We have a right to go beyond our limited knowledge of energy and say "it's God!"*** NO! I wouldn't say that - only a fool would!"This argument reminds me of the time I rode up the ski lift with my boss, years ago. He looked at the trees and said, "I see death, rot decay. The trees are purple and gray with fungus, disease."I looked at the woods and saw something different. "I see life, new buds, new branches. I see signs of rejuvenation everywhere."*** Yes, and both observations came via your senses of a physical universe. I'm not interested in his or your interpretation of how it appeared to each of you. All I care about is that your senses and the physical (Trees) allowed you those observations. It's like the question, "Is the glass half empty or half full? I could care less in such a question. All I care about is to first establish the fact that we do have a glass. Just like I could care less about your interpretations of God. What my essay's says is, we can NOT establish the fact of God's existence, and if his existence can not be established by our means (Our 5 senses and his physicality) then human interpretations about God are worthless."Reality is what you see in it."*** Duh! Not to be mean, but isn't that what I have said all along? Isn't seeing one of the 5 senses?" You can be ruled by the restrictive influence of Saturn, or you can be ruled by the expansive influence of Jupiter, it's a choice we make."*** The only person talking about "influence" is YOU! You should try writing an essay on "perceptions and influence" because they have nothing to do with what I am talking about. Once again try not to make the stands, restrooms, and concession areas a part of the playing field."Thanks for the comment, Kenny"*** You are VERY welcome...I enjoy our exchanges enormously!- GRespond to this comment"Also, I understand Blake's statement perfectly well and it lacks reason."How so? Blake's reasoning seems very straight forward. Tell me what about that statement lacks reason. Don't just say it does, explain why you think so.
We cannot disclaim that which is still possible. The two-dimensional planarian might claim tall things do not exist. The being that can only hear, smell, taste and feel might say light doesn't exist. The human of five senses might say God doesn't exist. That isn't proof, only opinion.Finally, I said, "Reality is what you see in it," you didn't understand the metaphorical use of "see" in that sentence. You took it literally. This tells me a lot about the intellectual level you are at, believe it or not. One thing it tells me is that it doesn't make sense for me to continue this discussion with you for the present.I think you will enjoy the next ten years, as you look back and see where you came from. I hope you and I are around then, when we can pick up this debate again.- G"Also, I understand Blake's statement perfectly well and it lacks reason."How so? Blake's reasoning seems very straight forward. Tell me what about that statement lacks reason. Don't just say it does, explain why you think so.*** I asked you some questions in my last post, which you avoided, and now suddenly I am supposed to answer yours?"We cannot disclaim that which is still possible."*** Who's disclaiming "possibilities?" I'm disclaiming that which can not be sensed."The two-dimensional planarian might claim tall things do not exist."*** Two dimensional? I always though we lived in a 3-dimensional world."The being that can only hear, smell, taste and feel"*** Only see, hear, touch...? Why, do you know of some other method or sensory? Are you suggesting humans have radar, but scientist and the rest of us have missed it?"The human of five senses might say God doesn't exist. That isn't proof, only opinion."*** Well then, what do YOU use to gauge reality and the existence of something if not your senses?"Finally, I said, "Reality is what you see in it," you didn't understand the metaphorical use of "see" in that sentence. You took it literally."*** Okay, so shoot me! I'm sorry for being human! Then again. No I'm NOT!!"This tells me a lot about the intellectual level you are at, believe it or not."*** Good! Then it must make you feel good to know you are far superior than me. I'm human and make mistakes, but you don't. Maybe YOU are the real God!"One thing it tells me is that it doesn't make sense for me to continue this discussion with you for the present."*** My overlooking a metaphor tells you that it doesn't make sense for YOU to continue a conversation with ME? And you say I am at a lower intelligence than you? Lmao!! Yep, with that last statement you have certainly proved you're intellectual skills are above mine all right."I think you will enjoy the next ten years, as you look back and see where you came from."*** And what human doesn't? Everyone looks back." I hope you and I are around then, when we can pick up this debate again."*** Hope? Isn't that the way of Christians. Why would you walk away from a debate that you can carry on now, and instead "hope" to carry it on 10 years from now? Do you fear my questions? If you are so positive about God then I should be a cinch for you, and then I'd be the one running!10 years from now! lolKenny :)
I don't adhere to any religious beliefs.. neither do I bash anyone's beliefs- to me they're all in the same boat- and I think that boat is sinking. But try this on K- You're looking for the producer instead of watching the movie he produced. What he produced proves he exists. And you CAN see God with your eyes, and feelings, and ears. Do you see what makes the plant grow? Do you know why you feel love? Do you know why you hear music? God is LIFE itself- which we only see the results of. There are all kinds of ways of finding something- make sure you've exhausted them all before you give up. LOL you're pretty smart- you know what to write about to get a rise out of everybody! Produces lots of comments huh?
"I don't adhere to any religious beliefs.. neither do I bash anyone's beliefs- to me they're all in the same boat- and I think that boat is sinking."*** I agree. Beliefs are baseless."But try this on K- You're looking for the producer instead of watching the movie he produced. What he produced proves he exists."*** You are making the same mistake everyone else makes. You are insisting that their is a producer of energy, and you can't prove it. The HUGH difference between a producer of a movie let's say, to that of a producer of both inanimate objects and life - is that a movie can not produce itself. Movies need producers, but life (energy) doesn't. Life can produce itself. Energy has unique properties, and man may never know how energy produces life, where it gets its ability to create life, or why energy exist at all, but certainly NO ONE has the right to say their was/is a producer called GOD who is responsible. Whenever someone applies the "tag" God to their argument then all I ask is prove him/it is responsible for all we see, hear, touch, taste, and smell."And you CAN see God with your eyes, and feelings, and ears."*** YOU call it GOD. I learned it to be energy. If you say there is a God responsible for this energy then you have to prove it. Energy doesn't need a producer. It creates from and of itself, and as far as man knows energy always has been and will always be. It can not be destroyed nor reproduced, but it does exist and takes on various forms. No one has a right to say that a God made this energy."Do you see what makes the plant grow?"*** No! But how does that prove God created (produced) the plant? God is for the majority of people a justification for the unexplainable. It's a way of satisfying their belief in a higher power. Man can only prove energy exist, but we can't prove why energy exist or where it came from. My proof that "God Does Not Exist" comes from the fact that those who claim God does exist can't prove it.Example: If we were sitting at a table where a drinking glass was placed before you and I, we would both know that there was producer (maker) of the glass because the glass can not make itself, but if the properties of the glass had the ability to create and change it's form would their be a need to attach a "label" that there was a creator?"Do you know why you feel love? Do you know why you hear music?"*** No, but I do know I can feel love and hear music. Also, hearing music and feeling love are not the things in question in my essay. God is! How does my inability to explain "why I feel love" or "why I hear music" prove YOUR God exist?"God is LIFE itself- which we only see the results of."*** YOU say God is life! I say PROVE IT! Where did you come up with this notion of a God responsible for this energy other than you believe it to be so?"There are all kinds of ways of finding something- make sure you've exhausted them all before you give up."*** Give up what? People claim there is a God and I say they can't and never have proved it, so what is it that I have given up on? If God was proven then why would anyone give up on God? I want there to be a God, but no one has provided evidence of "him.""LOL you're pretty smart- you know what to write about to get a rise out of everybody! Produces lots of comments huh?"*** I wrote an essay. It deals with the five senses and the physical. As of this moment I have had 176 people view this essay, and you make only the fifth person to comment. If you consider that "lots of comments" then apparently you can only count on one hand. If anything, and as I expected, this essay is unpopular in this environment where the majority of people "believe" in a God, so where you get the notion I'm looking for multiple comments is beyond me.
Writers who seek approval or attention normally will write popular articles which will attract audiences, and not the other way around. I have spent a considerable amount of years contemplating, researching, and coming to grips with reality long before I wrote this article. I had this essay on my desktop for the longest time and only shared it with family and friends before I sought out a larger community of "thinkers." I went online and stumbled upon SearchWarp.
So for you to insinuate I wrote it for comments is laughable. If you are incapable of distinguishing the difference between a writer who has worked diligently in preparing an essay of this magnitude to those who write for popular opinion, then I indeed feel for you. It must s*ck to be so shallow.
It's comments like this one that helps me to believe in myself more and more because people like you can't acknowledge nor distinguish the differences in simple things - yet you try to take on the issue of God? How pretentious!
I don't take on the issue of God because it's too big for me, so instead I challenge those who claim God undoubtedly to come forth and share with me how they can prove him. I'm still waiting.Besides, why would you bring that up unless you have an axe to grind with me? Have I upset you in a previous post or article that you come here seeking revenge?*** It would do you a great service if you identified yourself, so we'd know who you are and who I am writing too. Is their something to hide? Like they say, "If you're afraid of tomatoes being thrown at you - then you shouldn't be onstage."*** All-in-all I enjoyed your examples and questions. If humans can't challenge each other then what is the point of writing, debating, and commenting? I seek the truth and always hope that someone shows me something I didn't know or overlooked before, and if it turns out I was wrong then GREAT! From there I can grow. There are few people more willing to admit their humanness than me. I have no problem with someone proving me wrong. In fact, I welcome it. Once again, I'm hoping there is a God, but to date no one has proven to me otherwise.Sorry that was put in under annonymous- It's just me - Ella- You know in a way you just proved God yourself- when you said energy creates in and of itself- isn't that what this thing we call God is? Your intelligence is almost frightening! I must be attracted to danger- I like to read your stuff. The last sentance was said tongue- in cheek- I should have indicated that I suppose..... You certainly write with passion!"you just proved God yourself- when you said energy creates in and of itself- isn't that what this thing we call God is?"*** I don't understand how you say I prove God by speaking of energy!Also, exactly what is this thing YOU and OTHERS call God before you compare it to energy? Describe energy and then describe God and tell me the similarities that replicate they are the exact same thing.Then explain to me what energy has to do with morality, religion, authority, heaven, hell, war, violence, a virgin, a God/child, Satan, Bible, Koran, churches, etc. etc. etc. - all things attributed to the believing human mind.Energy doesn't have attachments to it for it to be "believed." It stands proven without the embellishments. Only God needs human attachments for his existence to be considered and "believed."Thanks for the questions Ella.
When I wrote my own articles on religion and my profound doubts, and agnosticism, I got lots of negative response. The thing is, many religious folk just can't consider the other position, and cling to their faith. When you look at the bible with out BLIND FAITH you see stories that , taken literally, are just too crazy for a logic to accept. I don't believe in Zeus, but I think there are insights to be gained from mythology. I my mind, Christianity is mythology, and it has great gifts to us when it is taken as myth rather than literal truth. Peace: texI don't disagree with what you say Tex. All I'm saying is no one has a right to declare that the energy which makes it all possible is GOD. We don't know, and we may never know the why's and how's of energy, but when people insist that a God is responsible and that he should be worshiped via moral laws and codes is when it gets out of control. Some people talk as though God were a fact, and then try to impose their beliefs on the rest of us like there is something wrong with us for not believing as they do. That's outright arrogance!Thank you for the comment Tex.Wow, you are really arguing your point here. It seems you are trying to convince people you are GOD and you are right and everyone else is wrong. Humans need to believe in something whether it be themselves or an entity we may feel but not see. It's what keeps some people going with this unseen faith. Faith is not physical or scientifically proven but it is a feeling whether it can be defined our not just like the belief in GOD. Relax, your point has been heard over and over doesn't mean we all have to agree. That is why it is called: Freedom of speech, or in this case, free to express opinions in writing.Wow, you are really arguing your point here. It seems you are trying to convince people you are GOD and you are right and everyone else is wrong.
*** I said that God does not exist, so how could I be trying to convince people I'm God? Did you even read the article?
Humans need to believe in something whether it be themselves or an entity we may feel but not see.
*** Are you speaking for all of us because I don't feel a need to believe?
It's what keeps some people going with this unseen faith. Faith is not physical or scientifically proven but it is a feeling whether it can be defined our not just like the belief in GOD.
*** FAITH is believing in something unproven. It's a cop-out for those without facts.
Relax, your point has been heard over and over doesn't mean we all have to agree.
*** I don't recall asking you or anyone else to agree.
That is why it is called: Freedom of speech, or in this case, free to express opinions in writing.
*** Yes, and I exercised my freedom just as you did, so what's your point?Agree to disagree is a point you should consider when people respond to your article. Who are you really mad at GOD or yourself? Since Shiann stated humans need to believe in something whether it be themselves or an entity we may feel but not see; your comment is you don't feel the need to believe. Do you believe in yourself? If you put out a controversary article as this one, knowing we can comment, then we can agree to disagree with you and you can do the same. My point is you are gracious to those who agree and in fight mode to those who have their own belief. Please write an article on what you do believe in. If you do believe in Love, I would like to read your description of love because this is a feeling.*** Hi Darlene!!! :) You're still angry I see. How are you enjoying your time away from work this week? It's nice of you to use your free time to comment and join us here on SearchWarp. Ttyl
"Agree to disagree is a point you should consider when people respond to your article. Who are you really mad at GOD or yourself?"
*** Humans, for sticking their beliefs down the throats of others.!!!
Since Shiann stated humans need to believe in something whether it be themselves or an entity we may feel but not see; your comment is you don't feel the need to believe. Do you believe in yourself?
*** Yes, I do! I am of flesh and bone. You should know - You slept with me.
If you put out a controversary article as this one, knowing we can comment, then we can agree to disagree with you and you can do the same. My point is you are gracious to those who agree and in fight mode to those who have their own belief.
*** Only when it comes to beliefs.
Please write an article on what you do believe in. If you do believe in Love, I would like to read your description of love because this is a feeling.
*** You already read my description of love in another article I gave to you remember? The one where you childishly got upset because it described a tale with my ex wife.
*** Thanks for the comment. I hope you are enjoying your vacation. :)*** Wow!! Darlene sure has a lot of time on her hands this week to express her anger, but that's good. As long as it helps you towards finding happiness in the long run.
"Wow, you are really arguing your point here. It seems you are trying to convince people you are GOD and you are right and everyone else is wrong."
*** How could I be trying to convince people I am God when I say, God Does Not Exist?" Your emotions are causing you to talk senseless.
"Faith is not physical or scientifically proven..."
*** Faith is for those who can't prove their beliefs. It's a cop-out!
" if you don't believe in God"
*** Again you just don't get it Fran. How many times do I have to say, God does not exist?!! Where is the belief in that? If you can't comprehend the difference between a lack of belief and saying a thing DOES NOT exist (UNPROVEN), then I don't know what to tell you.
Kenny St.Pierre, I can not imagine anyone of 1.2 billion people of India can imagine an educated person like you can give such a presentation of God, ....... God (s) can exist only if he or she is recognized by at least one of the 5 senses.
I may add, you know your existence only if you recognise at least one of your 5 senses . If I give you anesthia or made to sleep, you fail to know your existence, should it be assumed that you do not exist like your logic on God....... If you do not know the existence of God, this does not mean that God does not exist, may be you need assigned bed in the nearest mental institution.
God is not subject to sense and wisdom of thought with which to see, smell, taste, touch, subtle as it is beyond the control of everything .... This can be felt upon entering the consciousness of pure wisdom that every system of your body's physical and mental work, it is auto. This controls all kinds of life and endless in the physical universe and subtle. It is an inexhaustible, infinite wisdom in directing and controlling oneself. Science tells us the man has learned to use the equipment 5% of his mind. And the Spirit of God (call by name) is a hardware and software without end.
Over 88% of people in the world belive god, the techniques are different. Only 10% of people in the world like you do believe in no God existence. Thus, many other types of life that have not not developed consciousness, do not know either existence or nonexistence of God.
Anyway, Kenny, I appreciate your thoughts. Thank you.
Kenny St.Pierre, I can not imagine anyone of 1.2 billion people of India can imagine an educated person like you can give such a presentation of God, ....... God (s) can exist only if he or she is recognized by at least one of the 5 senses.
*** That's correct! I appreciate that you read the article.
I may add, you know your existence only if you recognise at least one of your 5 senses . If I give you anesthia or made to sleep, you fail to know your existence, should it be assumed that you do not exist like your logic on God.
*** Yes and no! I knew I existed before the anesthia, and no, I would have no clue of myself while gassed. Also, it's relevent that whomever gave me the anesthia must be proof of my existence, no?
...... If you do not know the existence of God, this does not mean that God does not exist, may be you need assigned bed in the nearest mental institution.
*** Maybe, but there are many who don't belong in an institution and many who do. They said Einstein was disturbed at a young age, and that John Lennon wouldn't amount to anything. So much for those who believe they are normal and justified in evaluating the charaters of others.
God is not subject to sense and wisdom of thought with which to see, smell, taste, touch, subtle as it is beyond the control of everything.
*** Where did you come up with that?
... This can be felt upon entering the consciousness of pure wisdom that every system of your body's physical and mental work, it is auto. This controls all kinds of life and endless in the physical universe and subtle. It is an inexhaustible, infinite wisdom in directing and controlling oneself. Science tells us the man has learned to use the equipment 5% of his mind. And the Spirit of God (call by name) is a hardware and software without end.
*** Yep, it's called energy, with no need to worship, kill, or die for.
Over 88% of people in the world belive god, the techniques are different.
*** My condolences!
Only 10% of people in the world like you do believe in no God existence.
*** But I never said, I don't believe. I said, God does not exist!
Thus, many other types of life that have not not developed consciousness, do not know either existence or nonexistence of God.
*** Exactly, so does God exist for those species?
Anyway, Kenny, I appreciate your thoughts. Thank you.
*** Same here!
Kenny St.Pierre takes slings and arrows, but nobody has successfully refuted his logic.*** Thank you so much Greg! We've had our differences, but you've always had the courage to look at what is rather than how you want things to be. You are a great man! I am grateful to you, and feel fortunate we met.
More comments
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.