Absolute undeniable evidence for existence of God?

[Anomalocaris]

If "Hello, my creations" in block letters a billion light years tall is detected etched into the temperture patterns of cosmic background radiation, I might treat that as evidence in favor of the POSSIBILITY that a being both aware of us and at some level care for us heavily menipulated, but not necessarily created, the universe.

However, the very fact that I am moved to this conclusion by EVIDENCE tells me the being in question is natural, not supernatural.

[LostLocke]

Why is necessary to have evidence for the existence of God? I have started to suspect that knowledge of God comes largely from perception and personal experience. It's like watching a movie with a friend. You might take it as a just a fun popcorn film. Your friend might find significance in certain elements of the film. From there you could have a debate about whether the director intended a deeper reading of the film or whether they were accidental plot features. If the director doesn't return phone calls, such a debate can never be fully resolved.

That is completely true.
However, you, your friend, and all the other people who saw the movie at the same time as you may all have different opinions, ideas, feelings etc about/from the movie, the fact is that everyone can independently verify the existence of said movie.

[Tonus]

Let me rephrase that again, for the sake of argument, what evidence would make you believe in the existing of a supernatural being that created the universe?

I am going to copy/paste my reply from the last time a topic like this was posted here (which is a copy/paste of my reply from the same question in another forum):

What specifically would the evidence have to be?

I would think that a being who could demonstrate the supernatural would at least convince me of the existence of the supernatural. Someone who could read thoughts, or levitate, or miraculously heal the sick and change the weather and feed the world and make the world's nuclear stockpile turn into soap bubbles. Proof of being an honest-to-goodness deity might follow from that, as well.

The problem I see with the question is that often it implies that there might be something that would convince me that the god of the Bible, or of any of our major religious movements, is real. But those gods, as envisioned, make little or no sense and the way they are described makes me terrified at the thought that they would ever be real. I don't WANT for Yahweh to present himself to us and tell us that he's real. He's a miserable and angry and bitter person with a penchant for capricious decisions to massacre people wholesale. He can't possibly exist, and I don't want him to.

I could imagine a god who created the universe and then went on to some other reality in order to create a universe there. And maybe he stops by to see how we're getting along, and he manifests as something truly godlike in stature and capabilities, and he gives us a guidebook that is so amazing that it doesn't take long for us to cure AIDS and cancer and stop fighting wars. And then he apologizes for waiting so long to check up on us, and he tips his cap and moves on to the next reality. That's a god that I can stomach.

[Anomalocaris]

However, you, your friend, and all the other people who saw the movie at the same time as you may all have different opinions, ideas, feelings etc about/from the movie, the fact is that everyone can independently verify the existence of said movie.

You mean the cinema in which the movie was alledgedly watched should be shown to exist before "I watched this movie there" can be considered plausible?

With restictions like this how could even all, and I mean all, mighty Jesus do his work?

[bennyboy]

No, there absolutely could be no sufficient evidence to prove God. Burning talking bushes: "Where's the tape recorder, and who would burn a perfectly good bush?" Walking on water? "Seen it on TV."

And EVEN IF something totally inexplicable happened, you could go with advanced technology (or even an alien interaction) before going to the idea of God.

[Foxaèr]

So, could there be an absolute evidence for God?

At this stage of human evolution, without an iota of evidence to support the existence of god, the chance of such proof materializing in the future is basically nil.

Let me rephrase that again, for the sake of argument, what evidence would make you believe in the existing of a supernatural being that created the universe?

The type of evidence that everyone else in the world was privy to, as well. The type of evidence that would lead to the conclusion that it was a deity rather than an illusion or merely a con concocted by a highly evolved alien.

If it was the creator of the universe, the last question would still remain: is it worthy of worship? If it is as uncaring a god as the one depicted in the bible, then the answer would be rather simple. No, it is not worthy of worship. Existence of a god does not automatically deem it worthy of worship.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

I think someone brought up Q in Star Trek, that's a god concept pretty well executed. His abilities are so far above that of humans that it would qualify him as god-like. But you see, even the manifestation of such a being, if this being claimed to be god, he'd be rather convincing, but it isn't proof. Because he can just be an advance alien race. If we made a time machine and went back to 2500 years ago, show them iPads, how to perform surgery, antibiotics, they'd think we're gods too.

There's no such thing as supernatural, only things yet to be explained, and once explained, it'll be natural. God will have to be natural if it is to exist.

There isn't sufficient proof. If you think that makes me as unreasonable as a theist ... why? I don't believe in something that cannot be proven, why should I? Would you believe that you were created just 10 seconds ago along with everything else on this earth with your memory intact? You can't prove that you were and you can't prove that you weren't. But you will not believe one of those claims, does that make you as unreasonable as a theist? No, if you believe in it, then yea.

It'd be rather unreasonable for me to posit a proof that cannot sufficiently proof god and then claim that it does.

[Bad Writer]

Yeah, and it won't be the last time I bring up Q or any Star Trek reference for that matter.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Don't know if anyone watched Stargate SG-1? They have a god concept thing with the Goa'uld, who goes to primitive places and exploit the natives by pretending to be gods. In one episode there were advance aliens who pretend to be gods to take care of "their people".

[Bad Writer]

I've seen the entire Stargate series, but I couldn't quite get over how the Asgard race justified letting the humans keep thinking they were gods, especially if we're supposed to believe that the Asgards were morally better than the Goa'uld. I actually started spreading the idea among other fans that the Asgards were the worst of the "Four Races". They couldn't beat the replicators, and their technology actually helped spread the little buggers; they beguiled people into worshipping them just like the Goa'uld; they committed mass suicide as a race instead of continuing to advance the causes of the other races. Although Thor was cool.