what is the logical reason to believe in no God?

52 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sheldon's picture
I dont find the claim any

I dont find the claim any less compelling than all the other religious apologetics I've encountered. That also includes Islam of course...

arakish's picture
Regardless of how you define

Regardless of how you define "god" if it messes around with the physical realm, then there shall be evidence.

Where is that evidence?


ibrahimlhotse's picture
what kind of evidence?

what kind of evidence?
physical, metaphysical or what.

Sheldon's picture
It's your claim it is for you

It's your claim it is for you to evidence it.

xenoview's picture

You need objective evidence, evidence outside of the mind that can be tested. Metaphysical evidence is from the mind, making it subjective.

arakish's picture



Sky Pilot's picture


"what kind of evidence?"

Why should I believe in your imaginary deity? It is not a credible delusion.

Sheldon's picture
Go away and learn what

"what is the logical reason to believe in no God?"

If there is no rational reason to believe something, then ipso facto that is a rational reason to disbelieve it.

Now go away and learn what atheism means before trying to start a thread about atheism. Start with a dictionary definition as you can't even get that right. These threads are ten a penny and just reinforce how ignorant and confused the average theist is about atheism and atheists, and how desperate they are to try and reverse the burden of proof onto those who don't share their beliefs, because they know they can demonstrate no objective evidence for those beliefs.

Hitch's picture

What is logical reason not to believe in god?
Ans: Because there is no evidence for it. You may say, well, god is outside "physics", I will reply what makes you certain? and what makes you so confident that there is a god? And what makes you believe that he is "Allah" and not "Jesus/Yahweh/Thor/Ra etc."? What convinces you that he interferes in our universe? How do you know he created this Universe of ours? If he created this Universe, what/who created him?
You have to answer all these questions before we move ahead.
Why do atheists not believe in god?
Ans: Because we are not stupid, we do not simply believe in something because some man claimed that he is a prophet. We question things. Have you ever questioned god? Have you ever thought if there is any god? Do you even know science?
We reject god because of the lack of evidence. Can we disprove god? No. Because he is unfalsifiable, just like unicorns, farting monkey god, etc etc. Just because we can't disprove something does not mean that thing exists.
If I tell you there are even number of stars in the Universe, will you believe me? I guess no. So, does that mean you believe the number of stars in universe are odd? No. The one that makes claim that god exists, has to present evidence for his existence.

Cognostic's picture
servantofAllah: "Logical

servantofAllah: "Logical reason to believe in no god." "Believe in no god" is a shifting of the burden of proof. Atheists do not believe in "No God" They do not believe in "God." There is a significant difference.

If I tell you that the number of stars in the sky are even, Do you believe me. Of course not. I have not counted them. Do you believe they are NOT EVEN. (No even or No god.) Of course not. THEY HAVE NOT BEEN COUNTED. There is no evidence. Anything at all you say about their number is suspect without evidence.

With that said, an absence of evidence is evidence of absence, Imagine there is a cave in the mountains and everyone is sure there is a vicious bear living in the cave. We want to find out if he is really there. We set up cameras. We search for footprints. We blow smoke in the cave. We put food in front of the cave. NOTHING HAPPENS. In fact, nothing happens for 2000 years. We can be fairly certain that there is no bear in the cave. The same is true for your absent God. You have no evidence for its existence. That which is asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence but we have loads of evidence against the existence of God.

RE: "we can explain how the universe came into existence, " You are confused.
No one knows the cosmology of the universe. Not you, not us. We know how our current universe came into existence. Time, space and mass. It began with a singularity or hot dense mass and expanded. We do not know why it expanded or why it is still expanding. We do not know what was before the singularity. This is where Christians insert their God. "Well God did it." NO You must first prove that your god is real. You do not get to insert a magical flying being at the beginning of everything. Or, if you can do it so can every other religion on the planet. That still leaves us unknowing and nowhere.

RE: Can science detect anything outside the laws of physics? No! Agreed. Does it then automatically follow that there is something outside the laws of physics? NO. If you are going to make the assertion you need to provide evidence. This is just an Argument From Ignorance, it can not be explained so it must be true. NO.

Good Question RE: "So why use science of a means of 'detecting' God?"
So what else have you got. We are dying to hear. Please demonstrate your god with the same reliability that Science can demonstrate gravity. I for one would love to see it done.

RE: " this couldn't have created itself " Assuming you mean the universe here.
No one has ever asserted that the universe created itself from nothing. That is a theist perspective and they do it so they can insert their god. We have no example of nothing anywhere. Asserting nothing prior to the singularity of the big bang is as ignorant as asserting a god. We don't know. If you are going to put your god there, prove your god thing is real.

IF THE SHOE FITS, WEAR IT : "are quick to jump into the 'God of the gaps'
All you have done is present a God of the gaps argument. Please prove your god thing is real.

jay-h's picture
The problem with the

The problem with the 'universe is complex' argument is that it really demonstrates nothing. Even if we suppose, for the sake of argument, that there must have been some intelligence behind it....that does NOT prove that it was YOUR god with your god's specific arbitrary behavior rules. There are thousands of gods worshiped .... the 'divine evidence' argument does NOTHING to establish your belief.

Indeed if there is an intelligence behind the universe I doubt it gives a damn about us.

Sheldon's picture
Insisting complexity requires

Insisting complexity requires a designer / creator deity, and therefore the universe can't exist without a deity has three common logical fallacies I can see.

1) It's an argument from ignorance fallacy, not knowing how the universe formed cannot rationally be used to make assertions.
2) It's a special pleading fallacy, that creates a rule for complexity then immediately waives it for a supposedly more complex deity.
3) It's a begging the question fallacy, since it makes claims and assertions about the deity it is arguing for.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Complexity is known to

Complexity is known to increase spontaneously.

toto974's picture
They talk of complexity but

They talk of complexity but really, you need four fondamental forces to have the current Universe.

arakish's picture
Another thought.

Another thought.

What is the logical reason to believe in no God?

How do I believe in a NOT?


Sheldon's picture
Exactly arakish, the thread

Exactly arakish, the thread OP is the same tired old appeal to ignorance fallacy we see theists and apologists trot out all the time.

It's like asking what is your logical reason for not believing in invisible unicorns.

Non belief doesn't require a reason, it's a default position until there is a rational reason to believe something.

What is servantofallah's logical reason for his disbelief in all other deities? It isn't objective evidence for the Islamic one, as there isnt any.

arakish's picture
@ servantofAllah

@ servantofAllah

Do you or did you have a mother and father? yes

Are you sure? I could have been molded from the clay in my backyard, given a blow job, and poof!, here I am.

Have you existed for a finite period of time? yes

Are you sure? How do you know for how long I have existed?

Will you live forever? No

You cannot answer this one since "forever" has not existed yet.

Did you cause the universe to exist? no

Yes. I thought about how much fun it would be to have others like me to interact with and poof!, there is everyone.

Are you aware of everything that exists?

Are you? Or are all just a brain in a jar being fed impulses to fool us into thinking that we exist?

Do you know literally everything that happens in this universe and in any other possible universe? NO

How can you know what I do and do not know?

How the hell can you be God !!!!!!

Easy. You have simply lost your faith. Come back to the fold my son. I am a lenient God. I do not punish any who choose not to believe in me.


David Killens's picture
Science is not anti-religion.

Science is not anti-religion.

Science is a process used to discover and describe what we observe in this universe. If science is considered anti-religion it is because the logic and methodology it practices has disproven many tales from holy books. Because of science and not religion we have modern medicine, the internet, the computer you are using at this moment.

Sky Pilot's picture
David Killens,

David Killens,

"If science is considered anti-religion it is because the logic and methodology it practices has disproven many tales from holy books."

OK, so maybe the sun doesn't submerge itself into a muddy pool at night but maybe that is because it is sleeping in its tent in heaven at night.

Pslam 9:4 (CEV) = "Yet their message reaches all the earth, and it travels around the world. In the heavens a tent is set up for the sun."

Sheldon's picture
David Killens "Science is not

David Killens "Science is not anti-religion."

Anymore than it hates unicorns or mermaids, there just isn't any evidence they exist, the same as deities, and humans have simply imagined them, again the same as deities.

arakish's picture
@ serventofAllah

@ serventofAllah

You say science is anti-reliion. Let's see.


  1. a person who is opposed to a particular practice, party, policy, action, etc.


  1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
  2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects.
  3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices.
  4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.
  5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
  6. something one believes in and follows devotedly.
  7. a point or matter of ethics or conscience.

Now that we know what anti-religion is, let's see about science.


  1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws.
  2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
  3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.
  4. systematized knowledge in general.
  5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.
  6. a particular branch of knowledge.

Nope. I do not see where science is anti-religion. A person can be anti-religion and not be a scientist.

Try again.



Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.