On the nature of evidence.

[trmof]

I would like to know what the atheists on this forum WOULD consider to be persuasive evidence of God's existence. If you are interested in scientific evidence of the existence of God, how would one go about acquiring this evidence?

Assuming God is a personality and not just a force of nature, it would seem that it would be impossible to scientifically test for the existence of his personality and it's characteristics; just as it is impossible at the moment to come up with a functioning theory of another human's personality other than "It does what it does when it does it, and sometimes it doesn't." It's theoretically possible that if you had all the information in the universe available to you, you would be able to predict another person's behavior accurately. But given that this is currently unfeasable, it would seem to me that experiential and testimonial evidence are the only two avenues through which we could currently examine the possible existence of God.

So what could a God do that would personally convince you of it's existence? I presume for most of you that if he started talking to you personally, you would simply assume that this was mental illness. So if a God with a personality WERE to exist, setting the standard of evidence this high would be putting him in a position where it's impossible for him communicate with you in any way whatsoever.

[Alex K]

Let's not act like it's the atheists job to come up with a phenomenology for *your* pet fantasy.

You tell me - what evidence do you think would be compelling?

But more to the point - if there is a superhuman presence making itself known, what good reasons are there to jump to the conclusion that one is dealing with the creator of the universe? Seriously.

[trmof]

Let's not act like it's the atheists job to come up with a phenomenology for *your* pet fantasy.

You tell me - what evidence do you think would be compelling?

If you're not willing to answer my questions, why should I answer yours?

[Mudhammam]

I would like to know what the atheists on this forum WOULD consider to be persuasive evidence of God's existence. If you are interested in scientific evidence of the existence of God, how would one go about acquiring this evidence?

Assuming God is a personality and not just a force of nature, it would seem that it would be impossible to scientifically test for the existence of his personality and it's characteristics; just as it is impossible at the moment to come up with a functioning theory of another human's personality other than "It does what it does when it does it, and sometimes it doesn't." It's theoretically possible that if you had all the information in the universe available to you, you would be able to predict another person's behavior accurately. But given that this is currently unfeasable, it would seem to me that experiential and testimonial evidence are the only two avenues through which we could currently examine the possible existence of God.

So what could a God do that would personally convince you of it's existence? I presume for most of you that if he started talking to you personally, you would simply assume that this was mental illness. So if a God with a personality WERE to exist, setting the standard of evidence this high would be putting him in a position where it's impossible for him communicate with you in any way whatsoever.

Open up the Bible to just about any chapter in the Old Testament. Any one of these miracles would be sufficient for me.

[trmof]

Open up the Bible to just about any chapter in the Old Testament. Any one of these miracles would be sufficient for me.

I think you might be setting your standards too high. As someone who I presume lives an ordinary life without major worldwide repercussions, it might be unreasonable to ask God for something so major that he has to make the laws of physics jump through hoops. He has to take into account the butterfly effect this would have on everything in your immediate vicinity and beyond.

In my experience God is much more likely to communicate with people through strange circumstances which speak to them personally, as these are much easier to engineer. I would suggest you ask humbly for a very simple sign of this kind, and don't immediately write it off as a coincidence when something unusual happens; but ask God to provide a larger, bolder sign to confirm the first. If he is an active personality as I believe, he will see fit to give you these signs and make them more and more obvious. However, if you DO receive these increasingly obvious signs and still refuse to acknowledge them as circumstantial evidence, then God will eventually stop trying.

[Anomalocaris]

Let's not act like it's the atheists job to come up with a phenomenology for *your* pet fantasy.

You tell me - what evidence do you think would be compelling?

If you're not willing to answer my questions, why should I answer yours?

Because you started with a special pleading. His question is but a polite way of giving you the courtesy opportunity to paste over your embarassing opening of a discussion with a logical fallacy. You don't seem to recognize let along appreciate the favor. If you can't answer the charge and restructure your opening without the fallacy, then you have no coherent and potentially sound position warranting any further discussion.

[trmof]

Let's assume for a second that you did experience just such an Old Testament miracle.

A) why would you assume it actually happened if a simpler explanation is that you imagined it and are developing mental illness.

and B) What would you expect to be the reaction of other atheists with whom you shared this experience? And assuming you believed what had happen to you, how would you convey this knowledge to another person besides simply telling them and hoping they believe you?

[Aoi Magi]

I think you might be setting your standards too high. As someone who I presume lives an ordinary life without major worldwide repercussions, it might be unreasonable to ask God for something so major that he has to make the laws of physics jump through hoops. He has to take into account the butterfly effect this would have on everything in your immediate vicinity and beyond.

In my experience God is much more likely to communicate with people through strange circumstances which speak to them personally, as these are much easier to engineer. I would suggest you ask humbly for a very simple sign of this kind, and don't immediately write it off as a coincidence when something unusual happens; but ask God to provide a larger, bolder sign to confirm the first. If he is an active personality as I believe, he will see fit to give you these signs and make them more and more obvious. However, if you DO receive these increasingly obvious signs and still refuse to acknowledge them as circumstantial evidence, then God will eventually stop trying.

He did it all the time in OT and NOW he has to worry about "butterfly effect"? he IS all powerful, capable of anything and everything, right? Besides, why bother convincing one person at a time when he can convince almost everybody at once by just twisting a few physics rules, which only he can? it should be no biggie for him, right?

[Mudhammam]

I think you might be setting your standards too high.

Conversely, I think you're setting yours too low.

As someone who I presume lives an ordinary life without major worldwide repercussions, it might be unreasonable to ask God for something so major that he has to make the laws of physics jump through hoops. He has to take into account the butterfly effect this would have on everything in your immediate vicinity and beyond.

I'm pretty sure a God that can plan for the intricacies involved in the evolution of intelligent life by means of physical laws and then intercede to violate them can also ensure that the butterfly effect remains exactly as it would given the absence of a miracle.

In my experience God is much more likely to communicate with people through strange circumstances which speak to them personally, as these are much easier to engineer.

That's what I would expect, as an atheist too. The difference is what you identify as God, without sufficient reason, I identify as fanciful projection of the ego, substantiated by a multitude of observations.

I would suggest you ask humbly for a very simple sign of this kind, and don't immediately write it off as a coincidence when something unusual happens; but ask God to provide a larger, bolder sign to confirm the first. If he is an active personality as I believe, he will see fit to give you these signs and make them more and more obvious. However, if you DO receive these increasingly obvious signs and still refuse to acknowledge them as circumstantial evidence, then God will eventually stop trying.

I would suggest that you apply a little more critical thought to your analysis of causes and effects.

[trmof]

If you're not willing to answer my questions, why should I answer yours?

Because you started with a special pleading.

I didn't plead, I asked a question out of curiosity because I enjoy having conversations with people and hearing their opinions. He answered it with another question, which is universally recognized as both a rude conversational style and an insufficient debating tactic.