Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 4:11 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Evidence for the existence of God
#21
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
Can I ask you a counter question:

Why should I care whether this "God" exists?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.

Index of useful threads and discussions
Index of my best videos
Quickstart guide to the forum
Reply
#22
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 11, 2017 at 11:38 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote:
(January 11, 2017 at 4:50 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: http://lmgtfy.com/?iie=1&q=define+evidence

LMAO!  That made my night, Hammy.  Thank you!   Big Grin

Yay!

Love
Reply
#23
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 11, 2017 at 10:52 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: You won't get CCTV footage or DNA samples as evidence of God. So, what would constitute enough "proof" or "evidence" for atheists to believe in God, or at least to consider God as the most credible explanation for the existence of the universe and life on earth?

Think about how you worded your statement-- you won't get any direct evidence of God's existence, so what would be enough circumstantial evidence to make you believe in God?

Part of the problem is that much of this kind of evidence doesn't point to God. If the geological and archeological records showed that fully-developed life forms suddenly appeared at the same time, followed by humans suddenly appearing with no precursors, that there was a cataclysmic event at one very brief point in time that killed everything and that the world was repopulated from a single point on the planet --at which we'd find the remains of a large ark-- then you'd have a massive fingerprint that would point to God. If there was any sort of evidence of this nature and on this scale, God's existence would have been so clear that not only would we all believe in God... we'd believe in the same God.

But no, the evidence comes in the form of unverifiable personal experiences, or statues that bleed, or images on toast. And here you are, wondering if that would be enough to convince us. Can you understand where we're coming from?
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."

-Stephen Jay Gould
Reply
#24
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 11, 2017 at 10:52 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Well, yes, this is what I am getting at.

You won't get CCTV footage or DNA samples as evidence of God. So, what would constitute enough "proof" or "evidence" for atheists to believe in God, or at least to consider God as the most credible explanation for the existence of the universe and life on earth?

So, you establish right off the bat that your god cannot clear an extremely low bar of evidence, the sort of evidence that a common flea could provide, yet the all powerful architect of the universe apparently can't. Having done that, you then proceed to question us, as though we're somehow obligated to accept some form of evidence below that low, low bar, what we'd need. What happens if the sort of evidence you'd excluded is the sort of evidence you'd need? Is that a problem for you?

As to your god? The biblical one? No, that god can't exist. It can't, because the evidence we already have contradicts the god described in the bible so thoroughly that there's really no way to salvage it. Not really our problem that your favorite explanation is an untenable idea, though.
"YOU take the hard look in the mirror. You are everything that is wrong with this world. The only thing important to you, is you." - ronedee

Want to see more of my writing? Check out my (safe for work!) site, Unprotected Sects!
Reply
#25
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
As to the question "What proof would it take to convince me?" - I don't know. But any god that wants me to know he exists should know exactly what proof it would take for me to believe in him. Just waiting for him to present that to me.

So far, I've found the arguments of all his various self-appointed spokespeople to be unconvincing.
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply
#26
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 12, 2017 at 4:09 am)robvalue Wrote: Can I ask you a counter question:

Why should I care whether this "God" exists?

The vibes that I got from talking to believers go something like this, regarding your question "I decided to walk the "noble path" of religion and so should you, otherwise the morally perfect book describes severe punishment for not following its prefect rules". In the age of consumerism that's a very exotic or rare statement.
Reply
#27
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 11, 2017 at 11:30 pm)21stCenturyIconoclast Wrote:
(January 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Atheists, please define "evidence".



Yadayadayada,

God damn it, when will you pagan god freaks ever learn?!  Which god of the primitive Bronze and Iron Age are you talking about???

Don't be like the ever so inept Neo-Scholasitc, Catholic Lady, Drich, Phillip2, et al, okay?  By you using the term "god," you act as though 
there is only one god which is laughable!  For the sake of your further embarrassment, I have included a list of many pagan 
gods throughout history,  so please pick from the list below in which primitive god you're referring too! 


Azura Mazda, Angus, Belenos, Brigid, Dana, Lugh, Dagda, Epona, Allah Aphrodite, Apollo, Ares, Artemis, Atehna, Demeter, 
Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Gaia, Hades, Hekate, Helios, Hephaestus, Hera, Hermes, Hestia, Pan, Poseidon, Selene, Uranus, Zeus, 
Mathilde, Elves, Eostre, Frigg, Ganesh, Hretha, Saxnot, Shef, Shiva Thuno, Tir, Vishnu, Weyland, Woden, Yahweh, Alfar, Balder, 
Beyla, Bil, Bragi, Byggvir, Dagr, Disir, Eir, Forseti, Freya, Freyr, Frigga, Heimdall, Hel, Hoenir, Idunn, Jord, Lofn, Loki, Mon, 
Njord, Norns, Nott, Odin, Ran, Saga, Sif, Siofn, Skadi, Snotra, Sol, Syn, Ull, Thor, Tyr, Var, Vali, Vidar, Vor, Herne, Holda, 
Nehalennia, Nerthus, Endovelicus, Ataegina, Runesocesius, Apollo, Bacchus, Ceres, Cupid, Diana, Janus, Jesus, Juno, Jupiter, 
Maia, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Neptune, Pluto, Plutus, Proserpina, Venus, Vesta, Vulcan, Attis, Cybele, El-Gabal, Isis, Mithras, 
Sol Invictus, Endovelicus, Anubis, Aten, Atum, Bast, Bes, Geb, Hapi, Hathor, Heget, Horus, Imhotep, Isis, Khepry, Khnum, 
Maahes, Ma’at, Menhit, Mont, Naunet, Neith, Nephthys, Nut, Osiris, Ptah, Ra, Sekhmnet, Sobek, Set, Tefnut, Thoth, An, 
Anshar, Anu, Apsu, Ashur, Damkina, Ea, Enki, Enlil, Ereshkigal, Nunurta, Hadad, Inanna, Ishtar, Kingu, Kishar, Marduk, 
Mummu, Nabu, Nammu, Nanna, Nergal, Ninhursag, Ninlil, Nintu, Shamash, Sin, Tiamat, Utu, Mitra, Amaterasu, Susanoo, 
Tsukiyomi, Inari, Tengu, Izanami, Izanagi, Daikoku, Ebisu, Benzaiten, Bishamonten, Fukurokuju, Jurojin, Hotei, Quetzalcoatl, 
Tlaloc, Inti, Kon, Mama Cocha, Mama Quilla, Manco Capac, Pachacamac and Zaramama



m

We're not at all discussing what or which god etc. That would detract from my question.

(January 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Atheists, please define "evidence".

(January 12, 2017 at 9:20 am)Esquilax Wrote:
(January 11, 2017 at 10:52 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Well, yes, this is what I am getting at.

You won't get CCTV footage or DNA samples as evidence of God. So, what would constitute enough "proof" or "evidence" for atheists to believe in God, or at least to consider God as the most credible explanation for the existence of the universe and life on earth?

So, you establish right off the bat that your god cannot clear an extremely low bar of evidence, the sort of evidence that a common flea could provide, yet the all powerful architect of the universe apparently can't. Having done that, you then proceed to question us, as though we're somehow obligated to accept some form of evidence below that low, low bar, what we'd need. What happens if the sort of evidence you'd excluded is the sort of evidence you'd need? Is that a problem for you?

As to your god? The biblical one? No, that god can't exist. It can't, because the evidence we already have contradicts the god described in the bible so thoroughly that there's really no way to salvage it. Not really our problem that your favorite explanation is an untenable idea, though.

I couldn't really find an answer in all of your drivel Esquilax. Again the question is:  What do you consider evidence for the existence of God?

Reply
#28
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
Yadayadayada Wrote:
FatAndFaithless Wrote:..We're not the ones claiming something exists. 
No, you are the ones claiming that there is no evidence that something exists.

Which is easily refuted by providing any evidence. If you want it spelled out: we are not aware of any evidence that God is real that stands up to scrutiny.

Evidence is a fact that points to a particular conclusion. For instance, the fact that Joe is dead doesn't point to him having been murdered, there are too many other possible reasons that he could be dead. The additional fact that Joe has fourteen axe wounds in his back would be evidence that murder is the most likely explanation, though not yet conclusive. An autopsy showing the axe wounds were the cause of death would be reasonably conclusive evidence that Joe was murdered. However, if the autopsy revealed that Joe was dead of liver failure, no toxins are present, and the axe wounds were post-mortem; the most reasonable final conclusion is that Joe died of natural causes and then someone hacked at him with an axe.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.
Reply
#29
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Atheists, please define "evidence".

(January 12, 2017 at 10:18 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:
Yadayadayada Wrote:
FatAndFaithless Wrote:..We're not the ones claiming something exists. 
No, you are the ones claiming that there is no evidence that something exists.
Quote:Which is easily refuted by providing any evidence. If you want it spelled out: we are not aware of any evidence that God is real that stands up to scrutiny.

Evidence is a fact that points to a particular conclusion. For instance, the fact that Joe is dead doesn't point to him having been murdered, there are too many other possible reasons that he could be dead. The additional fact that Joe has fourteen axe wounds in his back would be evidence that murder is the most likely explanation, though not yet conclusive. An autopsy showing the axe wounds were the cause of death would be reasonably conclusive evidence that Joe was murdered. However, if the autopsy revealed that Joe was dead of liver failure, no toxins are present, and the axe wounds were post-mortem; the most reasonable final conclusion is that Joe died of natural causes and then someone hacked at him with an axe.

So, what EXACTLY would you need to see to be able to say, "Wow yes, there is a God..."  What do you consider evidence?
Reply
#30
RE: Evidence for the existence of God
(January 12, 2017 at 10:24 am)Yadayadayada Wrote:
(January 11, 2017 at 4:01 pm)Yadayadayada Wrote: Atheists, please define "evidence".





So, what EXACTLY would you need to see to be able to say, "Wow yes, there is a God..."  What do you consider evidence?

Dude..you're the one asserting the existence of something.  You have actually present something, and then we can examine it and judge whether it constitutes evidence in our opinion(s).
In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty.
- Thomas Jefferson
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. Nishant Xavier 38 2380 August 7, 2023 at 10:24 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  When were the Gospels Written? The External and Internal Evidence. Nishant Xavier 62 3100 August 6, 2023 at 10:25 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Veridical NDEs: Evidence/Proof of the Soul and the After-Life? Nishant Xavier 32 1567 August 6, 2023 at 5:36 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Isaiah 53, 700 B.C: Historical Evidence of the Divine Omniscience. Nishant Xavier 91 4544 August 6, 2023 at 2:19 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal
  Conscience and the Moral Argument as Evidence for the Goodness of God. Nishant Xavier 162 7392 July 9, 2023 at 7:53 am
Last Post: Deesse23
  Signature in the Cell: DNA as Evidence for Design, beside Nature's Laws/Fine-Tuning. Nishant Xavier 54 2716 July 8, 2023 at 8:23 am
Last Post: Fake Messiah
  Do atheists believe in the existence of friendship? KerimF 191 9163 June 9, 2023 at 3:32 pm
Last Post: Mister Agenda
  What is the worst religion in existence? Hi600 89 5375 May 6, 2023 at 12:55 pm
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Atheism and the existence of peanut butter R00tKiT 721 45599 November 15, 2022 at 9:47 pm
Last Post: Jackalope
  Why the resurrection accounts are not evidence LinuxGal 5 1013 October 29, 2022 at 2:01 pm
Last Post: LinuxGal



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)