You are a lost cause Min. Thanks.

EvidenceVsFaith: So for you do reasoned arguements count as evidence (ie: cosmological arguement(just an example)), a better documented heal. Is there a certain amount of evidence you would get at which point you would seriously consider it and personally look for evidence rather than wait for it to come to you?

Minimalist: Isnt that circular reasoning?

I have absolutely no idea what would be evidence for God. I wouldn't know where to look ...

I guess kind of life before bacteria was discovered, people wouldn't have known where to look to find it. They didn't even know it existed - and the discovery was a surprise.

If I were to find evidence for God it would have to be something like that. At this moment I have no idea what would quality, or if anything would.

And even if there can be no evidence for God whatsoever, I still accept that he may exist even if us mere mortal, us mere humans can't evidence him. Because you can't prove a negative.

EvF

I think it would be very hard to say what is needed for me to count as evidence for god. It has to not only point at this one particular character but evidence it's existence as well. There are countless possible characters just like god and to distinguish god from the rest would be one hell of a challenge if god is non-temporal. Every imaginable character is non-temporal, now try to pull god away from the rest. It's impossible.
To consider god a possibility you must also consider every other imaginable character a possibility as well. This is why evidence is so vital. God is a possibility just like santa, easter bunny, ect ect.
The reason I don't believe in santa or the easter bunny is the same reason why I don't believe in god. They are all alike. They all hold a possibility. So evidence is needed not just to prove god but to seperate him from every ther imaginable character as well.
Impossible if he is non-temporal. God to me is just an adult version of santa. People who just can't let go of their imaginary friend. Also nothing personal, but I think those who still hold onto made up beings for comfort and guidence should really grow up. If people hold onto such beliefs for comfort when it comes to death and such then just don't dwell on it. Death is inevitable and so unpreventable, I can understand why some people hold onto beliefs because of death and tend to use their beliefs as a way out of death. Would be nice if it was true but it's plain and simple wishful thinking.

So yes god is a possibility but he is also a high improbability as well. (Read sig)
With god being so outside all known detection(non-temporal) it is therefor impossible to say what evidence if there can be none.

The only thing that in my mind would count as evidence for God is him personally paying me a visit. If he can't do that then he can fuck off. Imo there is nothing logical about faith and belief in god is nothing short of schizophrenia.

The way I see it, if God or any other god would supply evidence, I guess that god itself would know what evidence would convince me. And it would more than likely have to be the kind of evidence that no one can deny and loads of people recognize as true at the same time, like everyone in the entire world. I don't buy that personal revelation stuff, it is way to inefficient for a deity to use.

God is a figment of the imagination. He cant reveal himself to me because by doing so he would defeat the purpose of faith. Faith: Voluntary ignorance.

You couldn't think of one way in which God could reveal himself to you Chatty, because that would be impossible. To call that ignorance is self defacing.

If god showed up in person it would cancel the whole faith thing frodo. He cant reveal himself because he does not exist.

(November 3, 2009 at 8:18 pm)chatpilot Wrote: If god showed up in person it would cancel the whole faith thing frodo. He cant reveal himself because he does not exist.

Not really. How would you know that this person was God rather than some other extremely powerful (but not godly) being?