Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Hey, hope you dont mind me making another thread,
Im quite interested in what you consider evidence for God. I hear it alot, people asking for evidence but it also seems they also discount anything that could be counted as evidence at the same time, so making it impossible for belief in God my their own definition.
So what do you call evidence? A good arguement for God (such as the philosophical arguements for God), others personal experience of God/miracles, literal data on God Himself, your own personal experience of God, miracles, etc?
To be honest I believe person evidence is the only way people ever believe and that the others just make people consider it.
Solarwave
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 397
Threads: 11
Joined: December 20, 2008
Reputation:
12
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 4:49 pm
I'll answer your question with a question if I may.
What do you believe to be evidence for your specific god?
Clearly you think there is evidence, otherwise you wouldn't believe in him/her/it. So what is that evidence?
Galileo was a man of science oppressed by the irrational and superstitious. Today, he is used by the irrational and superstitious who claim they are being oppressed by science - Mark Crislip
Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 5:11 pm
Thats like a whole other thread kind of question and it would totally derail the this thread before it started.
Ask me again somewhere else or later when I've had more responses.
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Solarwave,
For me a prayer study that showed a statistically significant, positively correlated difference between the "prayed for" group and the control would do it.
If you don't mind reading through past threads here is one that ran around this same maypole:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-1540.htm...conversion
Rhizo
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 5:22 pm
(September 29, 2009 at 5:11 pm)solarwave Wrote: Thats like a whole other thread kind of question and it would totally derail the this thread before it started.
No it isn't!
Derail? I ain't seeing it. You are basicly asking for what kind of evidence that could support your claim that is satisfactory. Well as long as god is non-temporal that is an impossibility. Can't help you there I'm affraid. Not our problem, it's your claim you prove it.
Also I'd like to make clear that atheists do not need a reason to lack belief in a god or gods. Everyone starts off with no belief in a god.
I'm Ace by the way. Jolly good to meet ya!
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 218
Threads: 7
Joined: September 28, 2009
Reputation:
1
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 6:04 pm
How can it be my claim to prove if you just said its impossible to have proof? Isn't that just giving up
But yh hi to you too, good meeting
Rhizo:
I might read the link if I have time.
As for the prayer group, do you think God would knowingly be tested by us?
Mark Taylor: "Religious conflict will be less a matter of struggles between belief and unbelief than of clashes between believers who make room for doubt and those who do not."
Einstein: “The most unintelligible thing about nature is that it is intelligible”
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 6:25 pm
(September 29, 2009 at 6:04 pm)solarwave Wrote: How can it be my claim to prove if you just said its impossible to have proof? Isn't that just giving up
But yh hi to you too, good meeting
It's your claim, it's down to you to prove it weather it's possible or not. The burden of proof is on the one who claims. Not my problem. Can't prove a non-temporal beings existence. That's the problem. Good tactic because it cannot be disproved but is a bad tac since it also cannot be proven. So it's a bit of a catch really.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 3989
Threads: 79
Joined: June 30, 2009
Reputation:
41
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Solarwave,
Ace is right, the onus is on you to prove your assertion that there is a God. If God has any effect on reality it should leave a measurable trace. According to the bible, God should act on our reality through prayer so we should be able to see his effects from prayer studies.
Any atheist that states something to the effect of, "There is no God." also has to provide proof! The only rational course that occurs to me is to simply say there probably is not a god because there is no evidence that one exists.
Why would God hide from us? Especially seeing how present he was in the bible. Is he afraid of labcoats?
Rhizo
Posts: 2375
Threads: 186
Joined: August 29, 2008
Reputation:
38
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 7:24 pm
Evidence that meets the rigorous standards of the scientific method.
And of course theists will insist it's not possible, but if a God can interact with this world, then should be tangible ways of studying it. I don't believe in this crap of "non-overlapping magisteria".
As Rhiz said, a prayer study that demonstrably showed Catholic prayers are answered over any other denomination of Christianity and any other religion, then hey, there's something there.
But as others said, you have the burden of proof. If God came down to me and showed me he was a God and performed miracles right in front of me, I might believe he exists, but if it's the God of Christianity, I most certainly would not worship that god. (Believing and worshiping are two different things.) Lastly, I would know that I could not come onto these forums and expect any one of the atheists here to believe me. Without tangible proof they cannot discern whether it happened, I was delusional, mistaken, or I am lying. Applying Occam's razor means the latter three options are most likely true be true, therefore logically they are correct in rejecting my claim. This is was it means to lack belief.
Posts: 95
Threads: 7
Joined: September 6, 2009
Reputation:
5
RE: Evidence?
September 29, 2009 at 7:47 pm
I'll accept a rapture as proof of the Christian god. But of course, there is no rapture.
I'd accept a second coming as proof. But of course there has been no second coming.
In fact, I'd accept any real miracle, but the Christian god never gets around to doing one.
However, there's a mountain of evidence that proves the Christian god is a fraud. And I accept that evidence.
|
odcast:: 
