Yes, we can prove that god does not exist.

As opposed to the cop-out of "Yes, we can prove that god does not exist."? To say "I don't know, and you don't know" in a thread titled "Yes, we can prove that god does not exist" is contradicting.

 

Many of the answers that atheists are so desperately craving are addressed within the link below. Quite interesting reading!

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencebible.html

 

The god described in the Bible says evolution is not the right way, and that the earth is 6000 years old, and science has proven those both wrong, so the god as described in the Bible is provably false. This isn't rocket surgery.

- - - Updated - - -

Jesus was a home-wrecker, and taught hatred for non-believers, obviously.

 

Really? I would love to see the science that proves that the God in the Bible is false. The Bible has over 700k words that your OP does not summarily refute.

 

Too bad god's not real, or, if he loved us, he'd clear up all this confusion (is Islam correct, or the Bible, or Hinduism, etc.) Too bad.

 

No, sorry, I meant that evolution is true, and that the earth is not 6000 years old. If he got those scientifically-proven facts wrong then the "divinity" of the Bible is a lie. Other things, such as "Love your neighbor", can be good and helpful, and I believe some are, but that can't overcome the obvious lies in the Bible.

 

The Bible was written by man thus you have proven than historically man is gullible and ignorant. If you are arguing that the Bible is the explicit word of God then I will need you to back that claim with evidence. I argue that the God of the Bible is the construct of man thus supporting my claim that "man is gullible and ignorant."

 

God did not get any facts wrong as there is no proof that said theological intangible has ever written a single thing. Fallible man wrote the Bible.

 

But "most theists" in America also give their impressionable young children a book that in multiple places says to KILL them if they happen to have the same sexual preference as their opposite-gendered parent has (i.e. turn out gay - which harms no one), so the judgment of said theists might be questionable.

- - - Updated - - -

If men wrote it then of course it's a lie, because it claims that god talked to a ton of Biblical characters. Obviously made up. Obviously as real as the Peter Pan/Neverland story is.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, all religions are a construct of man, so they are lies (when it comes to divinity, that is.)

 

Gravity. Is your mind open enough to accept that?

 

So is the language you are using. It is also a construct of man therefore it also must be a lie. Science is also a construct of man so it also must be a lie.... See your use of logic fails.

 

Actually, your link shows that with the over 3,000 versions of the bible you can make it say anything you want, no matter how contradictory.

Of course even within the same version there are contradictions:

Ps 93:1 The LORD reigneth, he is clothed with majesty; the LORD is clothed with strength, wherewith he hath girded himself: the world also is established, that it cannot be moved.


Ps 96:10 Say among the heathen that the LORD reigneth: the world also shall be established that it shall not be moved


Ps 104:5 the LORD hath founded the earth upon its own bases; it shall not be removed forever and ever


1 Ch 16: 30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.


Contradicted by


Isa 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed

 

I see you are having a hard or difficult time in recognizing metaphors when reading the 'Bible'. I would question you.... has the 'world' ever been moved from its orbit? Will the 'world' ever be moved from its orbit? Your first answer, hopefully, will be 'no'. and your second answer (hopefully) will be 'I don't know because that is in the future.' I ask those questions to point out that the first set of quotes you make are relative to factual conditions (the world has never been removed); and the future condition that it will never be removed. The second set of quotes you cited are akin to someone saying. 'my whole world has been destroyed'. In Isa 24:19 It should have been obvious that a metaphor was being made due to the clause immediately preceding the one that you highlighted..."the earth is clean dissolved..." Has the earth ever been "clean dissolved"? Hmmmm. Hint...

 

As you point out the first quotes establish that the Earth will never be moved in the future for ever and ever, but you seem to miss the fact that the last quote predicts that in the future the Earth will be moved exceedingly.
How can you possibly miss that the quotes both predict a future that contradict each other?

Ps 104:5 the LORD hath founded the earth upon its own bases; it shall not be removed forever and ever


1 Ch 16: 30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.


Contradicted by


Isa 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed

 

Well just for a little nit picking: You misquoted Ps 104:5 by adding the "and ever" at the end.

As to Isa 24:20.....: Has it been removed? No? Do you know the mind of God and are able to tell us when that event will occur? No? Am I to assume then that you are receiving the message in that passage as being 'true'???? as in you believe in the 'Bible'? Is it a contradiction, a misinterpretation on your part, a mistranslated passage, or simply some metaphor meaning something entirely different? Your conclusion that it is a contradiction is based on your reading of a text that has been translated many times and is subject to many errors on the part of the translators. I would suggest that you pray about it and receive an answer from the Lord.

 

The Lord told me this:
"That is a distinction without a difference."

How do you like these versions of Ps 104:5:
Douay-Rheims Bible
Who hast founded the earth upon its own bases: it shall not be moved for ever and ever.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
He has prepared Earth upon its foundations that it will not move for an eternity of eternities.

JPS Tanakh 1917
Who didst establish the earth upon its foundations, That it should not be moved for ever and ever;

Young's Literal Translation
He hath founded earth on its bases, It is not moved to the age and for ever.

New American Standard Bible
He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever.

And Isaiah is talking about 70 years after the future fall of Tyre, which happened in 332 BC, though some interpret it as an end time prediction. Either way, if it was supposed to happen and as you have said it didn't or will happen in the end times, it clearly contradicts Psalm 104.

Isa 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed

 

Sorry, no. That may be true of the illiterate peasantry and slaves but very few educated people believed it, ever. Most with keen eyes and a high place could see how a ship came into view from "over" the horizon, they could also see the spherical moon and note that whatever shadow fell on it was round. The idea of a round earth was not just broached in 6th century Greece it was widely accepted and Eratosthenes even calculated it's diameter, correctly.

 

Eratosthenes was hardly 'ancient' history in the 2nd century BCE. Possibly Pythagoras - but certainly Plato and Aristotle accepted the probability of a round earth earlier. It is many centuries before some civilisations accepted the idea.
But my idea of ancient history obviously varies from yours. Sorry, I ought to have made things more clear.
Most early civilisations such as Sumerians, Egyptians, Babylonians, Akkadians and Assyrians etc

 

Again, your opinion with no proof. You are welcome to your religion of science.

 

Science is a huge gigantic part of Modern Secular Humanism, yes. But science deals with reality, while religions make a break from reality. Breaking from reality is very very dangerous (just read the world headlines!) We have faith....more faith than the religious person....we just put our faith in something that's more real, more consistent, and ultimately that is better for the world (we put our faith in reality.)

 

Ehm ... these Darwin deniers tell again how old Dinosaurs were in reality, backed on timetable of bible?

 

X

Can science explain why a person would be very compelled to wake up at 3:00 in the morning and go to his shop, never before and never since, and finds his business filled with smoke in the early stage of a fire?

Can science explain premonitions? Can science explain good and evil? I'm convinced there is a supernatural realm that engages our lives. You can stay strictly with science. I'll consider the things we can't prove and understand, with it.

 

Yes, those 5000 year old dinosaurs!!
It's really sad to see those people live such delusional lives, mostly driven by one thing, their fear of this false nonsense called "hell". The OT's after-life wasn't scary enough ("Sheol"), so Jesus and pals invented the "lake of fire" and other horrors in Revelation - which were not in the less scary OT. The NT is less moral then the OT in that vital area. Instead of becoming more compassionate, Christianity went in the other direction. Sad, really.

 

And this disproves Yahweh how?

 

Directly it does not, no. But indirectly it shows that the god in the Bible (again, not talking about god described anywhere outside the Bible) probably does not exist because he's claimed to be loving, yet he teaches to KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE! Inconsistency is often a sign that something is wrong. In the case of god, it's so incredibly wrong that he likely doesn't exist. But again, this does not prove that the doesn't exist, unlike the scientific stuff in the body of the OP.