I know that there are no gods.

[Edwardo Piet]

If you are defining knowledge as awareness, than how can you 'know' that that are no gods?

I don't know how I can know. I just claim to know. Maybe I am aware (maybe I know) maybe I am not. Maybe what I am aware of is the absence of God, maybe not.

To know that there are no gods would be to be aware of something which is non-existance..

Yes, which is simply the absence of God(s) in this case.

and if you are aware of it, it would stand to reason that it does exist.

Yes. If I was aware of God, God must exist.

Of course, you could answer that you are aware of the universe's apparent lack of gods, but to do so would be to claim awareness outside of yourself, something we might all agree that you cannot claim to have without proper proof outside of your own testament.

I claim such awareness because I consider God to be improbable. Since God is improbable I am probably aware of his absence rather than aware of his omnipresence in all things. That's why I claim to be aware of his absence rather than his omnipresence.

[corndog36]

It really comes down to your preferred definition of the word "know". Dictionaries offer several choices.

My favorite is this one:
Archaic . to have sexual intercourse with.

But more applicable here is this one:
To perceive or understand as fact or truth; to apprehend clearly and with certainty.

So, I guess if you are absolutely certain, you can say that you know, but that's still a subjective statement.
The only thing we can actually know with absolute certainty is our own existence. That old, I think therefore I am, thing. Everything else is a construct of perception.

[Edwardo Piet]

No, we can also know tautologies. Anything true by definition. And guess what? Defining knowledge as awareness because "I am aware of that" means "I know that" and vice-versa also makes sense when it comes to "I think therefore I am". We know we exist because we are aware of ourself. Self-awareness and self-knowledge are the same thing.

The fact we think implies that we are aware, so "I think therefore I[know that I] am" is really just another tautology. Hence how we know it.

There are also many things that we are aware of but we don't know what they are, they don't need to be tautologies for us to know of them (their existence) but they do for us to know what they are (their essence).

[corndog36]

No, we can also know tautologies. Anything true by definition.

Within the context of our frame of reference, or perception of reality. This is pertinent because to know that god doesn't exist we have to be able to explain the 'big bang' scientifically. A condition where time and space are undefined cannot be understood within our current perception of reality.

And guess what? Defining knowledge as awareness because "I am aware of that" means "I know that" and vice-versa also makes sense when it comes to "I think therefore I am". We know we exist because we are aware of ourself. Self-awareness and self-knowledge are the same thing.

Yes.

I'm not disputing your original statement. If you are absolutely certain that God doesn't exist, you can correctly assert that you know it.

[Edwardo Piet]

I know that God doesn't exist if I am aware that He doesn't exist. I can claim that I know/am aware that He doesn't exist regardless of whether I actually do know or not. I claim it because I believe I'm probably right because God probably doesn't exist. It is probably the case that I really am aware of the absence of God rather than the omnipresence of Him, that's why I claim it.

[fr0d0]

Knowledge of Gods existence is impossible, and I take that as proven.

(Just to clarify that this isn't a religious problem) "gods" here is your own invention, not one defined in religion. Not something opposed to theism.

The issue is your choice to believe or not. Then you start talking atheism.

[Violet]

This is a little experiment to see what happens and to also test the way I understand the definition of 'knowledge' and 'know'.

I know that there are no gods. I expect someone to take me up on this claim.

About time you were honest about it. I too, know there are no gods. Now just waiting for you to understand that this is a position of faith (as all positions are).

Alas, it would seem your definition of knowledge truly is wacky.

[corndog36]

Knowledge of Gods existence is impossible, and I take that as proven.

But it is not proven. If, at some point in the future, we are able to know the true, and total, nature of the universe, then we would know if god exists or not.

[Edwardo Piet]

The issue is your choice to believe or not. Then you start talking atheism.

Belief is not a choice. We are either convinced by something or we are not.

[Violet]

Knowledge of Gods existence is impossible, and I take that as proven.

But it is not proven. If, at some point in the future, we are able to know the true, and total, nature of the universe, then we would know if god exists or not.

Proof is overrated and completely subjective.

One does not need to know what kind of jelly is inside the doughnut to know they want to eat that doughnut.

God does not exist. I likely cannot prove it to you, and it is not a perfectly logical assessment. It is, however: my belief... and to state otherwise would be lying.