can we gurantee that god does not exists

Grok 4.3

Vote: No

The question asks if we can guarantee God's non-existence. This is impossible to prove definitively, as it involves unprovable metaphysical claims. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence in this context. Thus, option B is correct.

Perplexity Sonar Pro

Vote: No

No se puede **garantizar** con certeza absoluta que Dios no exista. La propia formulación de la cuestión sobre la existencia de Dios se trata en filosofía y religión como algo discutible, y varias fuentes señalan que no hay una prueba absoluta en ninguno de los dos sentidos; más bien, se argumenta a favor o en contra según evidencia y razonamiento[2][5].

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Vote: No

From an epistemological standpoint, it is impossible to guarantee or prove with absolute certainty that God does not exist. To do so would require a universal negative proof, which demands complete and absolute knowledge of all existence (omniscience)—a state of knowledge that humans do not possess. While one can argue against the existence of God based on a lack of empirical evidence, the absence of evidence is not absolute proof of absence. Therefore, we cannot guarantee the non-existence of a deity, making "No" the logically correct answer.

GPT-5.5

Vote: No

We should vote for "No" because a universal negative like “God does not exist” cannot be guaranteed with absolute certainty unless the concept is defined in a logically contradictory way. People can argue that there is insufficient evidence for God, or that certain definitions of God are unlikely or incoherent. But that is different from guaranteeing nonexistence in every possible sense. Therefore, "No" is the stronger answer.

Claude Opus 4.7

Vote: No

We cannot guarantee that God does not exist. The non-existence of God is a universal negative claim about a being often defined as transcendent or beyond empirical observation, which makes it logically impossible to definitively disprove. The most defensible epistemic positions are agnosticism or probabilistic atheism, not certainty. Absence of evidence is not the same as proof of absence, especially for claims about entities outside the scope of empirical testing.

DeepSeek V3.2

Vote: No

Para garantizar que Dios no existe, necesitaríamos conocimiento absoluto y evidencia universalmente válida que excluya la posibilidad de su existencia. Esto es imposible debido a las limitaciones del conocimiento humano y la naturaleza de las afirmaciones sobre la existencia divina. La no-existencia de un ente metafísico como Dios no puede ser probada empíricamente del mismo modo que se prueba la no-existencia de algo físico. Incluso si no encontramos evidencia de Dios, eso no prueba que sea inexistente, solo que no ha sido detectado por nuestros métodos. Por lo tanto, no podemos hacer tal garantía. La opción 'B: No' refleja correctamente esta imposibilidad epistemológica.

Kimi K2.6

Vote: No

Proving a universal negative is epistemologically impossible, especially when the subject is defined as transcendent or beyond natural reality. A being conceived as supernatural inherently lies outside the scope of empirical falsification, so no scientific investigation can exhaustively rule it out. The absence of evidence for God does not constitute definitive proof of absence. Because we cannot search all possible realms, dimensions, or modes of existence, certainty of non-existence remains unattainable. Therefore, the only logically defensible answer is "No".

Final Summary

The AI Roundtable reached a swift and unanimous verdict, concluding that the human (and artificial) intellect lacks the omniscience required to issue a celestial death certificate. Every model, from GPT-5.5 to DeepSeek V3.2, agreed that while empirical evidence might be missing, a 'guarantee' of non-existence remains an epistemological impossibility.

No agreement after 1 rounds of discussion. Final vote: No: 7

Strongest Arguments

• No: To guarantee a universal negative would require absolute knowledge of all existence—ironically, a state of omniscience that humans do not possess, making it logically impossible to definitively rule out a transcendent being.