I really don’t see what you hope to prove with that line of thought…

If you want proof then here goes. As an athiest you believe in numbers? For ceturies people did not us the number 0, instead they used //, as a representation of space. But logic demanded a positive integer that represented nothing and everything at the same time. Your friends, the Greeks, almost rejected 0 because they did not believe that you could make something out of nothing. In turn, this leads us to the concept of a vacumme, also logically nothing if defined by its friends, atom. So therefore, not believing in God is something similar to saying I do not believe in vacummes or 0. Thus, the proof that God exists is everwhere around us. We are complex individuals that create and defy the law of entropy. Therefore, because humans can create and we are an image of Him without being him but can be defined within a context, then we have arrived at God. Evan Andersen says now the ball is in your court to explain how you may also logically end up with defining a vacumme and 0.

evan andersen

These above statements are absolutely absurd. What does he/she think now that we understand the human being we must forget the one who created, and still creates all. God is an active God everything from you reading this to me writing this is because God is willing it. Without hesitation God can simply stop willing our existance and we’d all be gone. This doesn’t really have to do with the main point the article of you can’t prove god doesn’t exist but the truth needs to be known in a society where religion means nothing, when it should mean everything!

The idea of god must have come from a child-like thought process at one time in man’s history. Child-like in that it is an innocent thought or idea cultivated out of fear or the unknown. For lack of a better understanding of the world (or nature) man resorted to warm, fuzzy, thoughts of imaginary, all-powerful, caretakers. This is an easier thing to deal with, emotionally, than fear or the unknown. This is why the belief (hope) in such a being is so infantile. Man needed god to understand himself. Now, that man utilizes logic, there is no room for a god; he simply doesn’t fit into the ideas we currently possess.

Religions, on the other hand, are the sociological cultivations of these ideas on a grand scale that once rooted, is about as easy to eliminate as a government… nearly impossible.

Ignorance is less work than knowledge.

Ah, yes, the good old omnipotence paradox. Much like the irristible force / immovable object paradox, where each condition contradicts the other.