Can You Prove That God Doesn't Exist?

[webhead]

How would scinece explain healing for example?

I'll take God for 1000, Alex.

Or walking on water? Or raising a dead mummified man Lazarus from the grave? Or growing new legs on a lame man who was born without legs? Or telling a thunderstorm to stop, and it stops instantly? And the list goes on...

Science is only an observational testing method created by mankind, God didn't create it, man did, and God is not subject to it.

[markedward]

After all GREEN signifies creation and the Bible says the "invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead". How could that NOT draw you closer to God?

Cool, now I have found me one of them thar prooftexts.

Don't forget Revelation 22. We see there a symbolic description of the new creation. There is a tree of life, and a river of life. Of course, in Christ, a man is a new creation. Hence, a man in Christ is comparable to the symolism of the tree of life of Revelation 22. And hence, green. You ate green jello, and you were a new man.

[Firefighter]

That wraps it up in one nice little package... THANKS!

[murrare]

For the OP, there is no way you can prove God doesn't exist. First of all, because He does exist, so that would be kind of hard.

But seriously, there's no way you can prove He doesn't exist, because you don't have 100% knowledge. YOu don't know everything there is to know, so in the vast expanse of things you don't know, God could possibly be there.

In the same way, you can't prove Bigfoot doesn't exist, because we haven't combed through every possible forest in the world looking for him. We can't prove Loch Ness monster doesn't exist, because we haven't combed through every inch of the Loch Ness. We can't prove aliens don't exist, because we haven't combed through every inch of space. We can't prove God doesn't exist because we haven't combed through every possible area He might be in.

[mcgyver]

To comment on what Murrare posted,

To state that God (or Nessie, or Bigfoot) does not exist is a universal negative, and a universal negative can not be proven...what you end up with is something known as a "logical contradiction".

To affirm a logical contradiction is then irrational.

From what the OP posted, the atheist website is arguing from an irrational position whereby it is assumed that there is no God, which (coming full circle) is a logical contradiction, which is irrational...and so it goes.

Their whole argument can be defeated with a simple series of "what caused" questions....

Let's take a flower for example: I say "God caused it to grow", they answer with "no, it was a seed that germinated that caused it to grow"..."I ask what caused the seed to germinate?"...they answer "X,Y, and Z"...I ask "what caused X,Y, and Z"...and on we go until there is a point that you can't go any farther...the point of creation....

Even with Oparin's "Big-Bang" theory of the origin of the universe there comes the question: "Where did these two bodies of incredible mass come from?"

Sooner or later you'll be asked: "OK, where did God come from?"

That's the point that you smile sweetly and answer "God has no beginning, He has always been...Prove otherwise"...and guess what? They can't.

[Romber]

In a sense proving that God does not exist is almost like a contradiction. If the subject in question (God's existence) needed to be PROVEN not to exist then it had to be true at some point before. In other words, you don't prove things don't exist without having some reason to believe they possibly could exist.

Anyways, that was a long string of words that I hope made partial sense. As to a way to prove God did not exist, I would first need Omnipotence.

Ok, that obviously won't work. So, if I were to prove God existed beyond a reasonable doubt (inductive reasoning) I would need premises that would reconcile what we observe without a God.

(Not that I support any of these beliefs)
Nature-Mindless evolution
Morality-Human consensus on what is 'wrong'
Spirituality-Comfort factor-developed by human consensus on what makes people easy to move on and what happens after death
Knowledge-We need better inventions to support longer, better life.

Of the 4 points, Knowledge is the easiest defendable. However the other 3 options are gigantic 'ifs' with huge holes in them-but they are a 'non-God' answer.

Feel free to refine the list. Those were just general ideas I thought up of