Talk:Arguments for the existence of god
Physical existence of objects called god
I have yet to spot a section that refers to god(s) that can be demonstrated to exist now, let alone to have existed in the past, vis:
- Sol (the sun)
- Prince Phillip
- The Emperor of Nihon
...etc, and so-on.
In my mind, to omit these gods, who clearly exist, is a failing in the atheist argument that needs to be addressed.
- That is not a legitimate failing of the argument - it is an equivocation. The 'atheist argument' is not claiming that the physical objects of worship do not exist, but that the divine qualities attributed to them have not been demonstrated.
- For brevity, we should agree that people call something a god only because it is attributed with some uniquely divine or supernatural qualities. It is those qualities that must be demonstrated. Less that, we must simply find a word other than "god" to make our argument, but the point is not defeated. --Jaban 16:39, 10 May 2010 (CDT)
If there are such arguments demonstrating te existence of those specific gods, then let us know, so we can dissect them. However, a very little amount of people do believe in these gods and a demonstration of their non-existence would be unnecessary; anyway, we do have arguments against the existence of all possible gods. You can spot these arguments in the atheology center, "arguments against the existence of God".--wissam hemadeh 04:25, 10 May 2010 (CDT)