Actually, it's the male ego that determined the teachings.
Patriarchy. It's still THE WAY in most of the middle east, Asia, and some parts of Europe. It is religion-derived. In their eyes, men rule and dominate women.
Take a look at islam; women have to outnumber men 5 to 1 in a court hearing to even get recognition! (not to mention numerous other demeaning practices which are acceptable there)
Yeah, why isn't God like Aphrodite or Persephone so I can masturbate to her??? LOL
Well but this is part of the point that folks like Dawkins, Sam Harris, and myself make. Yes, it is true that you can't disprove some generic undefined "god", but you can disprove any specific claims about gods, especially the traditional claims about traditional gods.
Its part of the claims of religionists that "science" can't prove or disprove religion, but indeed we can. The traditional Christian world view is composed of a series of very specific claims about how the world works. Now what has happened is that over the past 300 years as each one of those claims can fallen and crumbled under the weight of scientific evidence Christians have continued to change their views about those claims, but the problem for a religion like Christianity is that Christian theology is firmly based on the validity of the prior claims, all of which have since been disproven.
So now what most Christians do is they believe in some vague notions about "god" that are completely unconnected to the theology that brought about the concept of said god in the first place.
The entirety of the Christian belief system is based on the concept of "original sin", which based on the idea of a defined creation story as described in the book of Genesis AND interpreted by early Christian fathers. If you don't believe in in that creation story, then the concept of "original sin" makes no sense. If you don't accept original sin, then the concept of needed redemption makes no sense. If you don't believe in the need for redemption of the whole of mankind, then the concept of Jesus the savior makes no sense.
The whole thing is a house of cards.
Christian theology is fundamentally founded on the premise that materialism is false. The early Christian fathers all explicitly stated that if materialism were true, then Christianity were false. As such, they explicitly declared the atomic theory (developed around 400 BCE) heresy, they declared the concept of evolution (actually about 2,300 years old) heresy, they declared the idea of people living on the other side of the earth heresy, they declared the idea of life on other planets (Greeks philosophers proposed this over 2,500 years ago) heresy, etc., etc.
So they made a number of specific claims, which can and have been tested, and thus far they have been wrong about every single claim they ever made about how the world worked.
They've gotten by by disconnecting the religion from its claims about the world, and expect people to believe that a theology that was wrong about every single testable claim, is right about all of its untestable ones.
The JW's still think that evolution is untrue because it would invalidate the saviour myth. I see that "truth" printed every three or four issues of Watchtower. I guess if they say it enough times it will turn out to be true. Sad.
You can not positively disprove the existence of A God or Gods.
That would require full knowledge of the universe.
He might be hiding in some far off Galaxy. On vacation, or took a leave of absence,
or just fed up with it all.
How can anyone be certain?
As far as I know, God is on a spiritual or supernatural plane.
Science deals with phenomenon on the physical/natural plane.
Never the twain shall meet.
Can't disprove God's existence.
We can only poke holes in the foundation of religious dogma, so that eventually it crumbles and the world is religion free.
The Idea of a god can survive without religion; religion cannot survive without the idea of a god.
in order to abolish religion, you must destroy the imaginations of a god.
And there's your killer deal: God is on a spiritual or supernatural plane <= it's a personal moment that Kids, Schizophrenics, cavemen, and pope benedict XVI thrives on — It's all in their head. In another sense, WE created god.
There really is no way to prove or disprove a concept as intangible as "God." And as others have said before, when someone makes a claim for the existence of anything, the burden of proof is on the person making the claim. Scientists don't put forth a hypothesis and then wait patiently while the entire scientific community goes about trying to disprove it. No, they conduct research and experiments to prove their ideas, not the other way around. Facts are proven, not assumed until unproven.
The correct question to ask is, "What kind of study can I possibly concoct to prove his existence?" And the answer, according to science and also most major religions, is that no such experiment is possible.
Because we can't disprove it 100 % makes it believable because God is suppose to be bigger than science.That's one important reason religious people don't take all scientific discoveries seriously,if something doesn't fit their religious description of the world they're gonna reject it.You see it all the time people like John Lennox for example really smart guy but doesn't take it seriously because if he affirm that we did evolve through natural selection the foundation argument about morals changes and you have to change the hypothesis therefor you have to give science more authority which they don't like because science works and it's testable.Religion is basically philosophy it's old philosophy but it's been a important part of the history and we shouldn't want a different past in the world or else we wouldn't be were we are but that aside religious people not being sincere seems to me to be fundamental problem or just plane ignorance.Lot of atheist might be that as well of course..