In a World Where "Simple" Isn't So Much...

Over on God V. Darwin, Green has asked: I just want to know how you know that there is no God.

Here was my response, but being as we get (mostly) different groups of readers, I thought I'd let you all dissect it, for whatever it's worth to you. I like to share that way. :D

---

First, a disclaimer: I cannot speak for all atheists anymore than you can speak for all Christians. Just wanted to state that from the outset.

Secondly, this isn't a "simple question" by any stretch of the imagination...

So how do I *know* there is no god? Firstly, I would state I *know* no such thing--I simply regard it as so highly improbable as to be logically impossible. Religions across the board (of which Christianity is a young joiner, yet a popular one...) employ fantastical feats against natural law, basic math, simple geology, and on and on and on, which in turn causes a spiral effect of spin from the religious persons "faith" in that what they believe (whether based on "feelings," "books," or religious teachers) is more fundamentally correct than the very five senses (not to mention our cognitive functions) they claim a deity have given us! And soon, before you know it, religion is down to just plain ignoring the facts, logic, and reasoning behind "anti-religious" stances that it basically boils down to lying, more spin, and the backing of the faithful into the corner of only needing "faith" and a healthy dose of meditation or prayer.

And so while I cannot *prove* the non-existence of sky god, Stellar the Unicorn, or Russels' Teapot, from what I observe, read, study, and learn about, all of the faiths' gods come up severely lacking. And while a small, annoying argument could be made in the "blaming god for his followers" circle of reasoning, I will simply point out that the only way to know a god is through his followers, as a god only has as much power, influence, and existence as the number of followers that claim in his existence.

As a side note, I would also like to point out that what the other persons have posted here is true: That, if you are going to claim that something *exists,* you personally have the burden of proof to show that it does, indeed, exist. Asking persons to *disprove* sky god (which, while not the actual question is the root underlying logic of your question) is a non logical approach to the issue. The basic flaw of the question isn't "Why don't you believe in god?" It's that god isn't a factor, and hence, it isn't an *active disbelief* as much as it is a *non-belief.*

For instance, you wouldn't say "I believe that pigs don't fly." It's a matter of simple fact that pigs don't fly, therefore, you simply say, "I don't believe in flying pigs." You don't actively dis-believe in the pigs. It's just that you don't.

Make sense?

---