The evidence in the Bible.
This question is asked at least 100 times a week.
You have it backwards.
Anyone who asserts that a thing or entity exists is the one who must give evidence for it.
It is impossible to prove that a thing or entity does not exist.
“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.”
— Bertrand Russell
Apart from the evidence that God’s an imaginary character, like Santa?
Nothing but the absurdity of religious claims, which should be sufficient.
If you insist on anyone having to disprove God’s existence, then anyone else has the right to insist that you disprove the existence of anything that YOU regard as imaginary. If you insist that God exists as anything other than a conceptual being in spite of the evidence that that’s all He is, you have no rationale for stating that anything else is imaginary.
Academia states that in the absence of proof of the existence of something it must be deemed not to exist until verifiable proof is found – thus god is held not to exist pending some sort of verifiable evidence.
The bible is what is called “Faction” A fictional story set in a factual time and place. Thus the time, place and real historical characters are all correct but the fictional characters and stories are not!
There is not one single mention of Jesus in the entire Roman record – that is right – not one! At the same time as he was supposed to have been around there were a number of Jews claiming to be the messiah – all of whom are well recorded!
There is not a single contemporary record from any source and even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!
He was supposed to have been a huge problem to the Romans and produced wonderful miracles but still not one contemporary record?
Even the bible mentions of him like all other references were not written until many years after his supposed death!
Pilate is recorded in the Roman record as a somewhat lack luster man but no mention of a Jesus, a trial or crucifixion that would surely have been used to make him look brighter!
At best he was an amalgam of those others but almost certainly never existed!
The Roman Emperor Constantine produced the bible and he was a pagan not god! He took the Jewish religion and basing it on the Mithras religion, organized it into Christianity and then into the Holly Roman Catholic Church!! Not in Israel or any of the countries of supposed origin but entirely ITALIAN!
Not one word of it is contemporary with the period and was not written until several hundred years after the period the story is set in!! How did the apostles write their books more than a hundred years after they would have been dead?
What a wonder full disinformation and deception campaign he waged against his Jewish enemies by turning them into his invented Christianity – so good in fact that Christians are still following the deception to this day!
The first person to provide a shred of verifiable evidence for God will become world famous and mega rich!! Ain’t happened yet and it never will!
So how does this primitive belief survive? The answer is simple and very down to Earth
Acceptance of a supernatural claim tends to promote cooperative social relationships. This communication demonstrates a willingness to accept, without skepticism, the influence of the speaker in a way similar to a child’s acceptance of the influence of a parent. By encouraging this kind of behavior where the most intense social relationships occur it facilitates the lack of skepticism and deters more open minded thinking.
They are christian, Muslim or the other religions depending where they were born simply because they were indoctrinated by their parents as very young children. They will go on to indoctrinate their own children and those will go on to indoctrinate their grandchildren!
Atheists have the intellect to see through the conditioning and escape into the real world!
Agnostics have the intellect to see through the conditioning but lack the courage to throw of the conditioning entirely.
Sadly Christians, muslims and others are still held firmly prisoner by the self perpetuating brainwashing!
The same evidence that we have to disprove the christian god can be used to disprove any of the thousands of gods that men have created over the whole of human history.
For example please prove to us that Horus did not or still does not exist. I think that if you do some research on the stories of Horus you will be more that a bit shocked and amazed.
Let’s face it, that question will never be answered to either side’s satisfaction. Atheists can’t DISPROVE the existence of God and theists can’t PROVE the existence. It’s really that simple.
So I guess we’ll all just have to figure out a way to get along.
1: Logical contradictions in the claimed properties.
2: claimed interaction with this universe demonstrably false (answering prayers, creation of species/the world/the universe)
3: the obviously stolen concepts from other religions
I hope this is a joke.
There’s no reason for Atheists to disprove the existence of God. The burden of proof relies on theists to provide evidence that God exists, which they’ve never done.
The burden of proof is on the theists to actually prove the existence of god. Not on an atheist to disprove.
what evidence do you have to disprove the existence of unicorns?
The utter and complete lack of evidence supporting his existence