[QUOTE=chalsall;368612]Because I cannot prove that a god does not exist. Nor can you. Nor can anyone.
.....
If one cannot disprove something, then that means that that
something may be possible.[/QUOTE]

Or that you haven't tried hard enough, or that it was
too hard for you but that someone else did.
Only a child would think that his own failure to do
something implied that no one else could too.

It seems to me that the only being/thing capable of proving god does not exist would be god him/herself (which has kind of a catch-22 paradoxical thingamy going on there). Else how could any other entity/being/creature/thing be simultaneously at all places at all times to observe that god is not anywhere and itself not be a god?

[QUOTE=davar55;368584]I understood that. But to even try to explain awe, a very
wonderful response to something experienced, something
really truly experienced, as supernatural in any way, even
as "God" itself, is to reduce away the awe and elevate "God".

I personally exclude all supernatural definitions of "God" as
being necessarily unreal. I have heard some non-supernatural
definitions of "God", such as God is Everything, God is Nature,
God is My Cat, God is A Flying S. Monster, God is Science.
Except for a personally held emotional definition of "God"
that many people have but which probably should remain
personal, the non-verifiability of all such definitions
properly excludes them from consideration as alternative
definitions. You have to contend with the origins of
the word "God" before trying to redefine it away - unless
you're completely an atheist.

Awe is awe and is real and important. "God" is unreal.[/QUOTE]Very well.

Re was a God to the Egyptians.
Re was the Egyptian name for the Sun.
To the Egyptians, Re [b]was[/b] the Sun --- the "God" was identical in every respect to the Sun.
The Sun was not then and is not now supernatural, neither to the Egyptians nor to us.
The Egyptians certainly found the Sun awe-inspiring.

[QUOTE=xilman;368653]Very well.

Re was a God to the Egyptians.
Re was the Egyptian name for the Sun.
To the Egyptians, Re [B]was[/B] the Sun --- the "God" was identical in every respect to the Sun.
The Sun was not then and is not now supernatural, neither to the Egyptians nor to us.
The Egyptians certainly found the Sun awe-inspiring.[/QUOTE]

You seem to enjoy toying with my logic. :smile:

Perhaps you would prefer an equally difficult task -
prove that some god actually existed or exists or will exist.
A REAL god, really existing. Not some mythical invention,
some flight of fancy, or some 2 or 3 thousand year old falsity.

I know that if you could, you would already have given up
your agnosticism/atheism and and considered yourself a
believer (or perhaps not, maybe a theolorebel), so perhaps
I should have put this post in Puzzles and let everyone have
a go at attempted proofs of existence of a god.

OTOH proving no god (as qualified above) ever existed is,
in my book, a piece of cake.

[QUOTE=davar55;368656]OTOH proving no god (as qualified above) ever existed is,
in my book, a piece of cake.[/QUOTE]Please go ahead and prove it then. Since it is such a piece of cake there should be no reason to not do it and settle the matter once and for all.

[QUOTE=davar55;368656]You seem to enjoy toying with my logic. :smile:
Perhaps you would prefer an equally difficult task -
prove that some god actually existed or exists or will exist.
A REAL god, really existing. Not some mythical invention,
some flight of fancy, or some 2 or 3 thousand year old falsity.[/QUOTE]I have already given you a 5 thousand year old example. I have also provided examples of natural phenomena which meet commonly and sincerely held definitions of the word "God". To do better (in your eyes, not mine) I will require that [B]you[/B] define what you mean by a "REAL god".

Paul

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;368644]Ask Michael Valentine Smith[/QUOTE]

I asked you.

[QUOTE=xilman;368669]I have already given you a 5 thousand year old example. I have also provided examples of natural phenomena which meet commonly and sincerely held definitions of the word "God". To do better (in your eyes, not mine) I will require that [B]you[/B] define what you mean by a "REAL god".
l[/QUOTE]

My definition of a "REAL" "God" includes, by necessity, the
phrase "imaginary being" somewhere within it. Only a
believer would object to my definition, and in respect of
the believer (but not the belief) I wouldn't attempt my
proof with them, only with an agnostic who isn't sure or
another atheist who disbelieves but has no proof to
support his/her belief.

[QUOTE=davar55;368675]My definition of a "REAL" "God" includes, by necessity, the
phrase "imaginary being" somewhere within it. Only a
believer would object to my definition, and in respect of
the believer (but not the belief) I wouldn't attempt my
proof with them, only with an agnostic who isn't sure or
another atheist who disbelieves but has no proof to
support his/her belief.[/QUOTE]

What a load of bovine excrement.

[QUOTE=davar55;368675]My definition of a "REAL" "God" includes, by necessity, the
phrase "imaginary being" somewhere within it. Only a
believer would object to my definition, and in respect of
the believer (but not the belief) I wouldn't attempt my
proof with them, only with an agnostic who isn't sure or
another atheist who disbelieves but has no proof to
support his/her belief.[/QUOTE]
"Bovine excrement" is perhaps a rather loose description of this definition, but I too certainly object to it and yet I am not a believer. (I am an agnostic but lean strongly towards atheism.)

Your definition does, of course, make your proof rather trivial if by "imaginary being" you mean a being which exists [I]only[/I] in imagination.

My definition of a god is, approximately, "purpose". In other words, "God" is the "master plan" of the universe, if such exists.

"Behind that there was something else at work, beyond any design of the Ring-maker.
I can put it no plainer than by saying that Bilbo was [I]meant[/I] to find the Ring, and [I]not[/I] by its maker.
In which case you were also [I]meant[/I] to have it.
And that may be an encouraging thought."