What would you consider to be evidence for God?

[Ravenshire]

The Sun does that.

And it's quite clear that the sun doesn't show the characteristics of being a higher power.

You just need to believe!!!
















































That, and a frontal lobotomy will help.

[Whateverist]

Generally, if you find a lot of god scat in the basement and evidence of feeding in the kitchen, you probably have a god infestation. You'll need a devil cat.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Actually there IS evidence that "god" exists. But "god" is not an all powerful creature that created itself and sacrificed itself for itself. The bible is full of evidence that "god" exists, it's just that there is written the distorted vision of primitive people what "god" really is. The ancient civilizations knew what god really was: "Odin's home among the stars" and other examples of that. In times when people died from a simple wound on the skin an advanced medicine must have looked like god-like powers and resurrection. Today's guns would surely look like "thunder throwing hammers" to primitive people. An advanced technology for storing DNA sequences surely looked like an ark to the primitive people.

Which is another way of phrasing Kevin's point that proof of god(s) depends on one's definition.  Good points, don't get me wrong, but (if you'll pardon the pun) the devil's in the details. A human who knew ecliptic cycles could manipulate a primitive society (cf. Columbus), but that doesn't mean he managed the eclipse.

I think the issue is that you're talking about a god from the point-of-view of the percipient, while the OP is using the term "god" in the Judeo-Christian sense.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

The Sun does that.

And it's quite clear that the sun doesn't show the characteristics of being a higher power.

If the Sun stopped working do you think your favorite Middle Eastern ethnocentric deity will show up to keep us warm?

[snowtracks]

After billions of years, there was a first thought supposedly from a first brain, and for the first time awareness, information, consciousness, and that’s a big deal compared to a quantum vacuum source originating an universe bubble which is a simple physical to physical conversion. Thought and brain are dependent entities with a naturalistic model. But one had to exist before the other, so the best inference from the data is the creation model.
Science actually recognizes that intelligent design (IE) exist and is currently using IE criteria in research.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

After billions of years, there was a first thought supposedly from a first brain, and for the first time awareness, information, consciousness, and that’s a big deal compared to a quantum vacuum source originating an universe bubble which is a simple physical to physical conversion. Thought and brain are dependent entities with a naturalistic model. But one had to exist before the other, so the best inference from the data is the creation model.
Science actually recognizes that intelligent design (IE) exist and is currently using IE criteria in research.

How big is the God creature?

[rado84]

I think the issue is that you're talking about a god from the point-of-view of the percipient, while the OP is using the term "god" in the Judeo-Christian sense.

Erm... no. It's not about perception, it's about logic. The problem is that what I know now (note I'm not saying "what I believe"), people will know in 100 or 200 years from now. Simple logic suggests where's one, there's more. So, where's one planet capable of supporting life on it, there are many more. It's just a matter of time that to be confirmed and when that happens I wanna be there to see the faces of all those who claim otherwise. Then I'm gonna ask them if god created us all, who the f*ck created them, because god is only one, as they claim.

[Excited Penguin]

It depends how you look at it. God can be disproved both by science and philosophy, but also even by common sense. It's all about perspective. So you would have to know why one believes in god and then somehow come up with new, better arguments that would nullify those that have already explained God away in one way or another( or, at least have denied the high probability that some attribute to "God"), which is not really all that likely on your part, but then again, who knows. Anyway, this is either an argument we can keep having, knowing that there will always be arguments to be had as long as there will be beliers or atheists, or something to forget about alltogether. I would hope the latter will happen.

[snowtracks]

---

I know the question seems nonsensical, but hear me out. 

I've often encountered my fellow atheists say that there's no evidence for God's existence. This seems true, but I think that the answer may be fairly loaded.
Does it come across to anyone that people sometimes assume we can get evidence to begin with? or is it just me? 
I know a fair portion of atheists would disagree, and that everyone knows that you're really saying

"no, and there really is no way to get evidence for such nonsense".


If we can't get evidence, because evidence (at least by scientific standards) is by it's very nature falsifiable,
(something which the god claim can't provide [currently]) then what would anyone constitute as evidence? Are those who use the "we don't have evidence yet" claim literally, deceived?

---

Seeing it with our own eyes? How would we know it's not a hallucination?
If by some chance we are provided falsifiability, how would we know we aren't deceived by an alien hallucination inducing device?
(Pardon the bong logic format)

---

If evidence can't point us toward or away from answers to this kind of question, are they even reasonable to ask? 
How could anyone who is honestly seeking an answer be expected to come up with one in the face of such obstacles?

---

Given what is said, does anyone think that there is evidence that would convince them that God exists?

God has primary revealed himself to humanity in both the words of Scripture and the works of nature. Since God is the author of both, a worldview that harmonizes both of these two ‘books’ is possible. This is different than the interpretation of Scripture and the understanding of science which may not be in total agreement; in that case, future research is needed to resolve the differences. God also works through the consciousness. God’s standard of moral purity is indelibly embedded within the human spirit (lives forever) which is the reason the conscience reacts when a person breaks God’s law - even if a person’s experience and culture (or worldview) has managed to distort their conscience. A troubling question posed not just by atheists, but by many believers. What about those that haven’t access to the written word? Beyond nature and conscience, God uses special revelation - prayers, dreams, and possibly visions.
God is not reveal directly through the five senses. Here’s a hypothetical situation that I used before. - If a physical entity with the appearance of personhood were to materialize on the White House lawn and while saying “I’m God” (loud enough that it was recorded) levitated a foot above the ground, would that constitute proof that God is not hidden?
As the secret service approached, this entity asked one agent to place his hand onto the entity’s shoulder which the agent did, thus making the entity to disappear. Later, in the briefing, the agent said the shoulder garment felt ‘velvety’, anything else you noticed? ‘Yes, as we approached this thing, there was an aroma of fruit, the closer we got the more pungent it became, much like orange blossoms’.

[Foxaèr]

God has primary revealed himself to humanity in both the words of Scripture and the works of nature. 

Oh, you mean the scripture written by men with no evidence to support any divine intervention?  Do you also mean the nature that is around us that provides no evidence of having been divinely created?  
I do not have time for your retarded answers that are just that.  If you want to be taken seriously, try being fucking smart for once and not regurgitate the ignorance from thousands of years of mythology.