Gods can't prove their existence

Even if a being would make itself known by, let’s say -speaking from heaven to all the inhabitants of the earth and performing all kinds of miracles that are beyond our understanding and contrary to the laws of physics, how would we be able to judge if this is THE God and not just a scientifically advanced entity or a demigod? Even worse if it should be only a personal experience.

For me, no god would be able to prove itself as GOD because I do not have the information, intelligence or understanding to judge this proof rendering said proof meaningless.

I am considering the following: God/gods cannot prove to us they exist because we cannot judge or make sense of what is beyond our understanding, thus the only way they/it can be relevant is if it gives us no choice in the matter and just makes every person ‘know’ him/it without doubt. Everyone in union, without doubt; and then judge us by what we do with this information. Because this is not the case, for me he/it doesn’t exist, or is at most irrelevant, not worthy of worship. If it exists, there needs to be universally - humanly falsifiable proof, or no choice in the matter. To be judged righteously these are the only options for me. Righteous judgement cannot be reliant on something as weak and vague and abstract as faith, no?

In regards god we have no meaningfull proof, and the freedom to worship thousands of gods of our own design…

I’m probably not making sense; it’s after 2AM and can’t sleep.


Welcome. You are making sense.

The fact is any sufficiently advanced technology would appear as ‘magic’ to a more primitive society.

Godlike? More than possible , it has been explored in many SF & F novels, short stories and films since the thirties.

The “real God”? well unless it appeared exactly as forecast in whichever primitive “holy book” its origins and practises would be unknown except for those we witness. Even then it could be gigantic con trick by a sufficiently advanced race/civilisation to get us poor terrans to accept their rule.

Short answer? who the fuck knows? Who, apart from the adherents to such fairy tales really care? The “god” question is entirely irrelevant to living a satisfying and ‘good’ life.


Oddly I have always inferred the opposite. That if a deity with limitless knowledge and power existed, it could easily make me aware of it’s existence. Perhaps the label god simply has too much baggage here, and is a hindrance.

However, all the god claims I’ve encountered are either offered as bare claims, or subjective opinion, from adherents of various religions. I have no more reason to believe them, than people who insist they’ve seen mermaids, or were beamed aboard alien spaceships.


Before the existence of anything can be proven, we need a definition of that thing. An elephant is a large quadruped mammal with a elongated nose, big floppy ears, grey skin, and a thin tail. Show me something like that and I’ll accept that it exists and is indeed an elephant.

So what are specifications for a god? Ask a thousand people and you’ll get a thousand different answers. No entity could prove itself to be a god, because there are no specifications to measure it against.

The only exception is Aretha Franklin. Her voice proved her to be a goddess.


Yes, that’s what I meant above, when I said the word god had too much baggage, and is a hindrance. So a very specific type of deity would enable us to infer if it could or could not make its existence known to us, based on certain attributes like omniscience and omnipotence.

1 Like

Which for all intents and purposes could be attained by human-created AI entities in the not-too-distant future.


I wonder will that make Friedrich Nietzsche’s claim seem prescient, or erroneous if it happens?

1 Like

Yes, a point of reference from where proof would be meaningfull would have to fall within our understanding, or we would not possibly be able to judge its truth or substance…anything supernatural or technologically beyond us would be meaningless as proof, exept to contrast our own position, progress and probably potential.

It would only prove that there are things beyond our current understanding, which we already know, but we would not be able to judge if it’s the “true” God or a slave to something greater…we would not be in a position to determine anything meaningfull.

You seem to be suggesting there is a limit, to limitless power?

I’ve never understood that rationale, though it’s an idea theists and religious apologists have often espoused.

FYI I’m an atheist, and don’t believe in any deity or deities, I just don’t see the rationale in claiming a deity with limitless power and knowledge couldn’t make us all aware of existed if it desired to.

I think I understand your point, but like I said in op, in my opinion he/it would have to ‘make’ all of us just know, because if the proof is above our ability to understand or supernatural it opens the door to a spirit realm where anything could be possible - including that it could be any being or entity that is showing you the proof.

For God to sit in judgement of our eternal fate he cannot judge us with proof we cannot understand or is beyond us, only for what we ‘know’ and reject.

A primitive island tribe cannot be judged for worshipping (or attacking) soldiers and their iron bird that unexpectedly and miraculously land on their island, but god (if he existed) could judge us for both choices because we know who and what they are.

My rational is to be rational if possible. For some just hearsay is enough to believe in a god - I want to stay as far as possible away from that side of the spectrum I guess. I wasted too many years there. I may be over correcting.

I somewhat see what you are saying, but you are “pre-supposing a god” idea. And using that to reason away “god”.

Now this idea as presented via the bible, Koran, or other holy books are the claims about “him” yet there is no demonstrable evidence for this being.

My simple approach is back your claim. A claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

HOWEVER I also don’t claim otherwise (black swan fallacy). I have no reason to believe. I remain unconvinced.

But your point about what would seem “miraculous” to us may be a higher technology or time travellers or aliens or life forms we are yet unfamiliar with (like germs were)… I would not be easily convinced by what seems “magical”. I like time and methodology.

Well I don’t find it helps to speculate on hypothetical realms or anything supernatural. I can only deal with the rational objections to claims theists make, and the claim an omniscient omnipotent deity wants me to believe it exists is demonstrably irrational.

Well I don’t believe any of that, but I also fail to see any logic in the claim a deity with limitless power and knowledge remotely cares what one species of evolved ape thinks or does.

That is one of the lamest excuses theists use when cornered.

We humans are very capable of learning and going well beyond those limits theists assume exist. We have wrestled with the big bang, black holes, quantum physics, stuff that does require imaginative thinking.

We can think of a god, even though it may not exist or be purely an exercise in imagination.

When theists attempt to put a limit on our abilities, that is a red flag, they have run out of excuses and try to erect a barrier.

1 Like

I agree, they always struck me as desperate rationalisations. However I think they’re irrelevant when theists are arguing for any deity with limitless power and knowledge, and for a pretty obvious reason.

Any suggestion a deity who has limitless power, can’t do something is an obvious and irrational contradiction. Though religious philosophers do mental cartwheels here, it’s far more rational to apply Occam’s razor, and cite a much simpler and rational explanation that fits all the facts, as to why a deity with limitless power, knowledge, and benevolence, has not made every living human aware of its existence.

Of course the purpose of theology and religious apologetics is not to get at the truth, but to try and square the facts around their a priori theistic belief.


One reason god idea may not have let everyone “know” is because we are all god and we are separated and ignorant of this for the experience of learning. I mean, after awhile a being would get bored and think of a new game… especially if it has a mind (which is asserted by theists).

Don’t get me started! There are lots of god ideas :bulb: TONS

You have created a straw man argument for a straw man god, The post is basically worthless.

1 Like

I think I’ve lost where I was originally going with this lol. By trying to avoid the SPIRIT trap I got drawn in too deep speculating about it. Sigh.

Yeah, I see that. I dont even know what I was trying to get at anymore.

There is this one scripture from the bible where an angel apears to someone and the person immediately falls down to worship it and the angel has to explain that they are not god but a fellow servant.
I guess from an evolutionary point of view it is better to fear the unexplained until we understand it. What is religion other than a means to deal with the unknown.