Absolute undeniable evidence for existence of God?

[Kim]

Any evidence that can be peer-reviewed and reproduced is good enough.

Can you give an example of such an evidence?

What I'm trying to figure out is, in principle, is it even possible to have a very strong evidence to support the existence of a supernatural being that created the universe?

[Anomalocaris]

In essence, the concept of "supernatural" is a hack concocted, almost always crudely, to assert while evading in principle the burden of evidence.

So in principle, you go from the joker to the butt of the joke when you attempt to apply evidentiary evaluation to anything deemed "supernatural".

[Bad Writer]

Q had the appearance of being Supernatural on the show "Star Trek: The Next Generation", though he was never labeled a god. Still, in the realm of this show, evidence for his existence was demonstrable, as well as reproducible. The entire galaxy felt the effects of his influence as he used the Enterprise to lure the Borg into the Alpha Quadrant. Occurrences were without question attributed to his actions. I think these would be good models to show how one could go about proving a God exists, or, rather, how God would prove his existence to others.

[Anomalocaris]

In what way was q fundamentally supernatural?

[Minimalist]

Well, OK, let's say God = supernatural being that created the universe, but doesn't care about anything else. What kind of sufficient evidence is required to prove the existence of this supernatural being?

Do it again. While we are watching.

(Then we can get into a discussion of why he did such a shitty job the first time.)

[Bad Writer]

In what way was q fundamentally supernatural?

"Q had the appearance of being Supernatural". I never said he was

[downbeatplumb]

What you want is evidence for something that is indistinguishable from God, yet is not that which is indistinguishable from god but is not god.

Good luck.

---

Define god.

Anything that inspires awe in, and is said to demand obedience from, the yokel.

That definition could include kings or priests.

[Lucanus]

"Why would you need evidence when you have THE BIBLE?". Any religion does fundamentally ask you, and rewards, blind faith.

Still, anything in the world can be interpreted through all of the crazy horse shit written in that book (or, for that matters, in ANY book); there is no need for evidence when one "believes".

If you are agnostic but you want to believe in a god, well, change your mind because if you are going for the evidence, it won't work.

[Neo-Scholastic]

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.

I see a world richly endowed with meaning and essential truths. Others see an absurd one with only proximate meaning. This in part explains my inclination toward Swedenborg. His writings pro-port to be revelations of the inner symbolic meanings found in Scripture. Most consider it hokum, as did I many years ago, but after a second look I found them very compelling. YMMV

[CleanShavenJesus]

I often wondered what kind of evidence is actually required to prove without any doubt the existence of God?

What's a god? God, by the common definition of the term, is capable of very extraordinary things. And those who believe in God think that prayer, the Bible, and just the existence of the world around us is enough to prove their God. But little do they realize that it's not enough to prove God as a creator, let alone prove God as the being who actually interacted and still interacts with our world in whatever ways. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and the more credit God is given for certain things, the more evidence skeptics need before they can believe anything a religious nut is spewing out of his or her mouth.

We won't see any evidence of God ever. I am agnostic, so I strongly believe that there isn't a God, however I'm willing to be wrong about it in the end because nobody knows for sure. And nobody ever will know for sure until the end (and even that would require the assumption that something happens after death, God or not).

There is no absolute evidence for God, and there never will be.

So, could there be an absolute evidence for God?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgpytjlW5wU