God Does NOT Exist - It is IMPOSSIBLE for a God to Exist
INTRODUCTION
The Religions of “theism” and “atheism” are in total agreement with each other....they assert that it is not possible to “prove” that God does or doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, these proponents don’t understand that the term “proof” resolves to none other than OPINION because it is predicated upon the limited human sensory system. But most importantly, none of these fanatics can unambiguously define the crucial term which makes or breaks their argument: the formidable term ‘exist’. No wonder these two fundamentalist camps have been arguing with each other for over 2000 years.
This article makes NO “claims”. It only provides a rational explanation for why it is impossible for God to exist. So the casual reader (i.e. theist/agnostic/atheist) had better go to school and learn the difference between a “claim” and an “explanation” before chasing strawmen in the comments section.
So.....it’s time to cut through all the BS thrown around by both theists and atheists alike. It’s time to rationally explain not only why God does not exist; but more importantly; that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a God to exist...any creator God!
WHAT IS GOD?
The proponents of God hypothesize that the term “God” resolves to The “Creator”. They claim that God is ‘something’ rather than ‘nothing’, who can move and perform activities, like “create”. This is their CLAIM, and they ask you to take it at face value and NOT ask any further questions!
Hey! Not so faaaaasssssssssst! I hope that nobody bellyaches if we critically analyze this claim before taking it at face value.
Realistically, the term “God” (like any other term in human language) resolves to either an OBJECT or a CONCEPT. There is NO other possible category. God either has ‘shape’ or He doesn’t....it’s a Yes or No issue....there is no other option! Those who claim that God is a concept like love, truth or intelligence, will summarily have excluded God from existence. These people need to learn the difference between an ‘object’ and a ‘concept’ before attempting to formulate arguments founded on ignorance.
For the rest, like the proponents of the God of the Bible (Christians, Jews, Muslims), for example, God is indeed a hypothesized entity/object who created space and matter. And “creation” is an action (verb) which necessarily invokes motion i.e. the motion of God!! Objectless motion is impossible! Nothingness cannot move! Whatever God is made from, whether He is visible or invisible, is totally irrelevant in the instant context. The point is that God absolutely does have ‘shape’ to His being,....God is obviously an OBJECT, whether He or His fanatic followers like it or not. This is an objective issue that is reasoned, and not blindly asserted. It is impossible to argue otherwise!
So…what is an object? How do we define ‘object’ and ‘exist’ unambiguously?
Object: that which has shape.
Exist: an object having location.
Location: the set of distances to all other objects.
Theologians HYPOTHESIZE that God does indeed EXIST! That is, they HYPOTHESIZE that God is an object with shape. Furthermore, by virtue of His existence, theologians HYPOTHESIZE that there is a set of distances between God and all other objects in the Universe.
Whether God is....
· Invisible
· Untouchable
· Unknowable
· Undetectable
· Untestable
· Hidden
· Mysterious
· Almighty
· Complex
· Not able to be scientifically analyzed and evidenced
· Etc.....
..... is completely IRRELEVANT to the theologian’s hypothesis - that God is an object with LOCATION! Since God is allegedly located somewhere “out there”, it follows that there is a distance between God and YOUR nose.
Q: DOES THE BIBLE SAY THAT GOD IS AN OBJECT?
A: OMG….YES INDEED, OF COURSE IT DOES!!!
Philippians 2:6 -- ”Who, being in the FORM of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
Numbers 12:8 -- “With him I speak face to face, clearly and not in riddles; he sees the FORM of the LORD.”
Job 4:15-17 -- “A spirit glided past my face, and the hair on my body stood on end. It stopped, but I could not tell what it was. A FORM stood before my eyes, and I heard a hushed voice: 'Can a mortal be more righteous than God? Can a man be more pure than his Maker?”
See how simple that was? Just read your Bible....and not just the cherry-picked verses which your Pastor forced you to memorize by rote in Sunday school.
Even God cannot elude His objecthood and structure to His being, which gives Him shape. Those who disagree that all entities/objects have shape/form, whether invisible or not (including God Himself), have a LOT of explaining to do! God is hypothesized by theologians to be an entity that is ‘something’ rather than ‘nothing’. In order to be ‘something’, God must absolutely have shape/form, and structure to His being. Only ‘nothing’ lacks shape/form!
WHY IS IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR GOD TO EXIST?
Because God cannot possibly be a “creator” of the Universe (space and matter).
1) Space is nothing; has no borders, boundaries or edges. Space is a concept invented by man. As such, space is impossible to create. Not even an all-powerful magical God can create space!
2) Matter has shape and is impossible to create from nothing. What sense does it make to say that “nothing”, which lacks shape, suddenly acquired shape in ZERO TIME; i.e. in one frame of the Universal Movie? Objects can only be ASSEMBLED from pre-existing matter. Matter is eternal….cannot be created or destroyed. Not even God can morph “nothing” into an object with shape.
Remember, points 1 and 2 are NOT claims….they are rational explanations which contradict the positive claim. It is the Theologian and the Big Bang Creationist who blindly asserts the positive claim that space and matter can be created. Their claim is irrational and contradictory. This is why they only “assert” it, and can never “explain” it.
Since God is a hypothesized object, space must necessarily enclose and contour God. This makes space at least as formidable as the Almighty. God could not have created space because space necessarily precedes Him. The God Hypothesis assumes God to be eternal, but space is what allows God to have form. There is no other way about it: God cannot be an entity without space. He would instead be nothing (i.e. space itself) and the God Hypothesis would be moot. Had it been possible for God to even attempt to escape this eternal prison we call space, He would have lost His most precious superpower:FORM; and be reduced to nothing. To assert that God created space is a blatant contradiction.
God can be as all-powerful as He wants, but since space doesn’t have a border, even He cannot cross that which has no boundaries. It is absurd to propose that God is outside of space (transcends it), looking in at space AND matter from a bird’s-eye perspective. Therefore, God cannot do without the background of space that grants Him form & being.
CONCLUSION
If there is a God, “He” is serving an eternal prison sentence here with all of us, as not even He can escape this unbounded prison which has NO walls to break out of and NO cracks to slip through. So He'd better work hard and earn his keep, just like all the other inmates. Formless & borderless space humbles the most arrogant of gods, even the God of the Bible. Nevertheless, God couldn’t have built this largest of prisons and simultaneously be unable to escape it – it’s impossible! We have “free will” because God does not, as even ‘He’ cannot escape this prison ‘He’ is credited for building. So if God exists, He is just another insignificant being that satisfies the human involuntary compulsion to worship....He may very well be Queen Elizabeth, Stephen Hawking, or some Hollywood Celebrity. Mindless beings are obsessed with worshipping conceptually-important (authoritative, celebrity, idol) characters.
It is IMPOSSIBLE for any God to exist…..sorry!
Comments
fatfist (author) on February 24, 2015:
"what separates object from space?"
Space is nothing. An object is something. There is no provision for "separating" an object from nothing because it ain't something.
space: that which lacks shape; syn: nothing, void, vacuum
object: that which has shape.
Space and object are the antithesis of each other. The term "separate" doesn't even apply in this context.
sekharpal on February 23, 2015:
Object is separated from space. But what separates object from space? Is it another object? Or, is it some more space? What I mean to say is this: if object is separated from space, then what is in between object and space? Because if nothing is in between object and space, then object and space are not in reality separated from each other.
Ryan on February 14, 2015:
Good stuff, man. Enjoyed the article.
fatfist (author) on February 06, 2015:
https://discover.hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/...
https://discover.hubpages.com/education/Physics-Wh...
Leo on February 06, 2015:
I see the hole.
I'm pumping a vacuum into this box.
Leo on February 06, 2015:
What is the definition of shape?
Also, what is the definition of definition? I'm not sure if these are trick questions. Let me know if they are and why?
Wait...how could something be a trick question...according to what authority?
Monk E Mind from My Tree House on February 01, 2015:
Now I'm really confused. Evangelist Kevin O'Brien says that God told him He uses evolution on a daily. And he's not alone, there are many Theistic Evolutionists.
Guess you can't trust Christians to tell you the truth.
LoverOfGod on February 01, 2015:
What makes evolution more real than Creation? Evolution is just a theory, not the truth. Also if you think about it, Creation makes more sense than evolution. I think a non-believer should still at least give God a chance and get to know Him. God still loves you and he wants you to know Him and accept Him in your heart so that you can go to Heaven. God thinks YOU are the best person in the world, and is hoping every second that you will get to know Him. So give God a chance and give evolution a break.
Believer on February 01, 2015:
Evolution makes as much sense as unicorns. The big false bang makes no sense either. You can't just have something and explode it and get living organisms out of it. Then those organisms 'evolve' and eventually comes to a man. Fact 1 that evolution is stupid: Darwin's Finches. Apparently there beaks get larger and that's a sign of evolution. The pictures of beaks getting larger is called adaptation. Those little birdies are just adapting to their environment. Fact 2 that evolution is stupid: Scientists think we're evolving and gaining more knowledge. That is called human progress. We humans are just progressively getting smarter and learning new things. Fact 3 that evolution is stupid (this one you can do at home!) : Go buy something that explodes and explode it. You see that when it explodes that all of the sudden you create an universe. Actually no, a universe isn't created, just some fire and mabye chaos if you did it in public. Fact 4 that evolution is stupid: Look at the Earth. The big freaking bang just so happened to make our Earth at a perfect distance away from the Sun so we don't freeze and die or overheat and die. So that means when the Earth was there and we were evolving, we were in the perfect temperature to live. That shows us there had to be a Creator and position the Earth for us. Then there were people that actually went to heaven and back. And they couldn't have been dreaming beacause they were dead. Go on ahead and post something that says Creation is dumb. Or what you could do is know God. But if you don't want to, then hey, let satan torture you in Hell, I did try to help you. There is so much evidence pointing to Christianity than evolution. But remember that you have a choice and God is waiting for you to make that choice. Right now you should make that choice, because you may die tomorrow or today, or mabye your reading this at your dying breath. Take a chance with God. If you die and nothing happens, then you were right. But if you die and go to Heaven or Hell, then you'll know that I was right. Believe in God.
Monk E Mind from My Tree House on January 25, 2015:
Krillco, you are talking to yourself again. Better take your meds!
William E Krill Jr from Hollidaysburg, PA on January 25, 2015:
Since you do not exist, I shall not respond.
Jethu262 from Cincinatti on January 24, 2015:
Lol, that Righteousdefender post made my night. So much emotion. Drama. Anger.
I love it when people mention the crucifixion of Heyzus. They sit with a straight face- and I don't think they even read into this deeply- and tell you about how god sent himself to earth, preached his own word, sacrificed himself- to himself, so that he would forgive you of your sins- which HE determined to be sins, to save you from the hell that HE created. Wow! I've never understood why people believe this bullshit!
fatfist, I hated you after reading one or two of your articles, but after five or six I began to love you. No one can convincingly refute anything you say, which makes for good internet times. Keep up the good work my friend, stir up more shit and get these numbskulls to think a bit more about the dumbassery they assert as "truth".
fatfist (author) on January 24, 2015:
Korrect, krillco. It's impossible to prove anything. Proof is an anthropocentric concept that always resolves to OPINION.
"Opinions/proof/truth vary!" - Patrick Swayze, Roadhouse (1989)
If you cannot refute a simple movie, then you have no business talking about reality.
Science is about EXPLAINING, not opining!
William E Krill Jr from Hollidaysburg, PA on January 24, 2015:
I declare that fatfist does not exist, and no one can prove h/she does.
fatfist (author) on January 24, 2015:
" ‘love’ or ‘nothing’ are just concepts"
Exactly!
concept: a relation between objects.
object: that which has shape.
Stay on topic, be a man, grab the bull by the horns and address the issues directly without going off in tangents. This place is not for preaching your beliefs and unjustifiable claims. You can try an Atheist forum for your Religious drivel, those clowns eat it up. This is your last warning.
Monk E Mind from My Tree House on January 24, 2015:
HahA! That's some selfritcheousdefender wall of shameonyou right thar!
Righteousdefender on January 24, 2015:
How bold a claim that you do make my friend. One that is substantiated by your very mind with its sensory boundaries and lack of sight. You claim that things like ‘love’, ‘something’ or ‘nothing’ are just concepts. That is what you believe and that is how you live your life. Then you say that because of this, because you cannot see nor touch them, that they are only figments of the imagination or mental constructs. This is your grounds base on your limited senses. Is the air no real because I cannot touch it. Does me believing that it is a concept make it any less of a thing? Has history not happened because I was not there? Was it just a concept and a mental concept that we all agreed to believe? Or is it real? Who are you to judge and to take away the choice from both others and yourself base on what you can see and touch and rationalize. How petty are the rationalities of a man without knowledge, or a man who is puffed up in what he does know, which is woefully little. You have the answers to the universe my friend, I am assuming. You have been to every point and time to give a testament to the fact that your words actually were created and are therefore things and not just a concept which will make all that you say valid. No, you were not. You were not there to see the creation of everything and even if you were, who would believe you? Why is belief even necessary? Because truly, all we have, is right now. You can neither look backwards into the past nor see forward into the future. All you have right this instant is the belief that you still are and have been from a certain date. Then you have others to tell you that this is the truth. What do you know? I claim to know only Christ and Him crucified and resurrected, but you claim that there can be no God. How does the clay know the potter exists or the computer realize that humans are what created unless it has faith. Where does your boldness come and why is it here. Was it always there or did you facilitate and create it? You try to answer battle against something that always was and always will be, and you do not realize that you are lost in the futility of your own perception because you judge only by what you can see, and touch, and taste. Not by what is told to you as truth and life based on faith which is the only thing you have in this world right now. Faith and that ever powerful choice to believe or to not. So do not strip those who are weak in mind and in strength of this beautiful choice. How can you? Do you make yourself the god of your own religion in which people take your word as doctrine? Then you are a hypocrite. You wish to free the people of an imagined bondage but do not realize that you put on your own chains as you write. Leave the people with a choice because you have no right to take it from them. It is useless quibbles and vanity that the lives of men consist of. All that we know is that there is good and evil, right and wrong. Because without that knowledge, there would be no room for you to talk because you will have already been killed by someone who didn’t like what you had to say and I would not be able to speak as I would because there would be no reason to. We are meant to love, I know this. Time and time again love prevails. Love is God. Not the petty emotion or passionate feelings but the unrelenting sacrifice that love truly is. It is okay for you to be adored or left alone in your want and in your misery but do not cast the darkness and futility of your mind where it is not wanted. Cast your lot with that hopeless group that has not faith enough to even believe that they have a brain in their head and air in their lungs because they cannot see it, touch it, feel it, or taste it. Go and be lost in the futility of your senses but do not weigh heavy your anchors of apathy and godlessness on us. Leave us with a choice. Leave me with a choice, and I shall leave you with yours. Speak when spoken to for your words lack wisdom and therefore you should only open your mouth out of necessity.
Sandibear764 on January 10, 2015:
Enjoyed this article. I would like, however, to suggest that "God" is possibly both a concept and an object. I come to this perspective after reading "A History of God." A well researched and well thought out book that explains the evolution of how we came to the current view of God over time through the construction of what is now called the Bible. The concept of a one and only God that many Christians believe in, was not the original God of the Old Testament. Rather, people began worshipping many gods. Though these many gods have essentially been relegated to mere myth, it was through the belief and worship of these many gods that a one and only God Creator began to be constructed.
fatfist (author) on January 06, 2015:
" If the hypothesis is explained"
Science doesn't explain hypotheses. A hypothesis is an assumption used to explain an event in a theory, like theory of creation. And there is no certainty as that requires proof, and proof always resolves to opinion. So certainty = OPINION. Educate yourself.
"God, defined by certain theologians"
God is an object. Objects are illustrated and named by humans before they are referenced in a sentence. Only concepts can possibly be defined. Objects are impossible to define.
idiot Razi: "You briefly address God as a concept in this article:"
fat: "Those who claim that God is a concept like love, truth or intelligence, will summarily have excluded God from existence."
Razi, it's quite obvious that you are dumber than a sack of rotting potatoes since you haven't a clue about Science, hypothesis, theory, etc. and keep chasing your tail in contradictions. But LYING will not be tolerated. Cease and desist the lying or your fanny will be booted, comprende? You can go lie somewhere else.
Razi Alaster on January 06, 2015:
I need to make one correction: "God, in this hypothesis, resolves to an object because it is hypothesized to have form, but the referent is rationally explained to be impossible.
Razi Alaster on January 06, 2015:
The referent is uncertain. At best, we can hypothesis an object and rationally explain the possibility or impossibility of the referent. If the hypothesis is explained to be impossible, the hypothesis is discarded, the referent is explained to be impossible. Science does not deal with the referents, but only hypotheses that can be rationally explained to be possible.
What we say in ordinary speech (shorthand) is irrelevant. This article is a rational argument and saying "rock is an object" is not the same as saying "rock is a hypothesized object." One infers certainty, the other possibility. Science deals only in possibilities, not certainties.
In this article, you are addressing a hypothesized object, God, defined by certain theologians (see "What is God" above). God, in this hypothesis, resolves to an object because it performs actions and the referent is rationally explained to be impossible.
Any critical thinker will critically think about the entire article. You briefly address God as a concept in this article:
"Those who claim that God is a concept like love, truth or intelligence, will summarily have excluded God from existence."
Concepts are not claimed, concepts are only defined. A concept cannot be defined as an object because concepts do not exist.
Where is my confusion?
fatfist (author) on January 06, 2015:
Razi, you are talking in riddles because you still don't understand the difference between objects and concepts.
All words in all languages are concepts. Even the words 'rock', 'car' and 'object' are concepts....linguistic concepts or more succinctly, lexical concepts.
If the referent of a term resolves to that which has shape, then we say that term refers to an OBJECT. In shorthand we say: rock is an object. And we are NOT referring to the lexical concept 'rock', but its referent.
Same with God. Please have a look at that pic of God again. He's an object. We can point to Him. We can make a statue of Him and bring it to the Physics Conference to attempt to explain the Theory of Creation.
The term God necessarily refers to an object. It has to because God performs ACTIONS. Concepts cannot perform actions.
Don't confuse the lexical term/concept with its referent, like Mathematicians & Atheists do.
Here's a quick and short tutorial explaining these issues in detail:
https://discover.hubpages.com/education/The-Ontolo...
Razi Alaster on January 06, 2015:
fatfist,
God is not an object. God is an English word (concept) defined to hypothesize an object by certain theologians (i.e. the Bible) as presented by you.
This article addresses this specific hypothesis. There is nothing to argue here.
I highlighted an unanswered question, I don't offer any answers, as God defined as a concept is necessary and entirely different than God hypothesized as an object. If you simply claim to assert that God is the only non-hypothesized (certain) object in the universe, you are just as hypocritical as the rest of us.
fatfist (author) on January 06, 2015:
Razi,
God is an object. He performs actions, like listening to your prayers. He created the Universe. He became a burning bush. He wrote the 10 Commandments. Concepts can't do that.
Here, look at God for yourself. He's an object. He has shape:
http://brandonvogt.com/wp-content/uploads/Angry-Go...
Where is the difficulty?
Razi Alaster on January 05, 2015:
I get it. Nothing to argue with here.
God is defined unambiguously as an object. The source for this definition are the theologians who hypothesized such an object (enough said).
This hypothesis, rationally explained through the definitions of Physics (this is important, as nouns according to physics and nouns in ordinary speech are different), is shown to be irrational and impossible. Therefore, God cannot be an object.
Those who assert that God is a concept are surrendering God's existence by the virtue of a concept. Therefore, God as a concept must necessarily be non-existent.
To be clear, the argument states that God cannot be an object, can be a concept, but one must surrender its existence if a concept.
So, as fatfist likes to say ... whether you like it or not, according to the Science of Existence, it is impossible for any God (object or concept) to exist.
That is the article. Nothing really to say there.
Some comments that pertain more to the comment section.
Though concepts don't exist, they can be necessary to rationally explain relationships, i.e. A dog (object) chases (concept) a cat (object). The nouns (concept) of Physics (concept) are objects (concept).
In the comments, fatfist clarifies this nicely illustrating the necessity of space (concept) to explain the relationship (motion) of objects, even though space does not exist.
"Space necessarily 'wraps' all existing objects and gives them spatial separation, which is the pre-condition to motion. Since objects are separated by space, one object can move and collide with another."
If one is encourage to question everything, then the only question left by the article concerning the topic of God, is whether God, as a concept, is necessary to explain any relationships? Physics cannot answer this question as the Science of Existence is not concerned with the non-existent, whether you like it or not.
fatfist (author) on December 23, 2014:
tt,
What do you mean by...
time:_____
energy:____
dimension:___
Please define and explain what these terms have to do with reality.
.
“I completely missed your logic leading to your conclusion.”
I would certainly hope so. Logic has nothing to do with reality or Physics. Please educate yourself on what logic is because you are begging to sound like an Atheist after a night of binge drinking at a Feminist rally.
https://discover.hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/...
https://discover.hubpages.com/religion-philosophy/...
tt on December 17, 2014:
sorry... your argument is pretty bad. I agree that the Bible claims God is an object, but you ignore time, energy, and multidimensionality. I completely missed your logic leading to your conclusion.
fatfist (author) on November 16, 2014:
Thank God for disagreements!
SAQIB from HYDERABAD PAKISTAN on November 16, 2014:
Well I disagree fatfist, God is Omnipresent and Omnipotent. God is in our minds and hearts. GOD really exists. Just thank God if grantes happiness and ask God,in any trouble.
God is the creator indeed.
fatfist (author) on October 04, 2014:
That's proof enough for me, thanks!
Dan Bruce on October 04, 2014:
New Book
Proof of God: Hard Evidence for 21st Century Skeptics
If you are skeptical about the reality of the God of the Bible, but open to the possibility that his existence can be proven to your satisfaction if there is real evidence that you can verify for yourself, this book is for you. Using an ancient prophecy and its modern fulfillment spanning more than two millennia in history—the only passage in the Bible that actually proves God is alive and well and active in the affairs of Mankind today—the evidence is laid out for you to verify for yourself. No faith is required to see the evidence of God’s existence. All you need is the ability to think and reason logically as an open-minded skeptical inquirer
Read preview on Amazon at http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00O2OON6M#reader_B00O2OO...
PrometheusKid from Heaven on August 28, 2014:
But what you think started everything”
Ummm….Intergalactic….did you even read the article? Creation or beginning to matter is IMPOSSIBLE.