Evidence for Believing

[EgoDeath]

In that sense, pantheism could be considered a type of deism, no?

Couldn't the "everything is god and god is everything" (which is wonderfully ridiculous) of the pantheists be considered a naturalist "god" that deists could subscribe to?

[Simon Moon]

No, it's a simple question, where was he/she/it?

God existed as an immaterial being at that point and then "became" the universe.  I'm relating this as I understand the pantheists' point of view to be.

You seem to be describing panentheism, not pantheism.

[downbeatplumb]

I've been asked a zillion times in this forum to give evidence for why I believe in God and each time the questioner comes back and tells me that's not real evidence.   Here's the situation.  We have a being who is supernatural.  He/She/It can exist without the need to obey any natural laws and therefore, cannot be understood or explained by natural or scientific means.  

I always reply that I believe because God has directly impressed me with the awareness of his existence.  I list supporting factors as the witness of other believers, evidence of ghosts and other supernatural phenomena, etc.  A very conservative estimate of the number of people in the world today who believe in God, in this scientific age, is five billion.  These people are from every profession and walk of life.

If God directly illuminates me through supernatural means which cannot be tested by any natural means, how can I give you any other solid evidence other than to relate my experience?  You might say I'm suffering from a delusion, but I have no other history of delusions and billions of others who have no history of delusions also believe in God.  Billions of these people are moderately or well-educated and realize that the earth revolves around the sun, as you do.

Why don't you accept this as evidence for God?

Because it is not evidence for god.

[LastPoet]

God existed as an immaterial being at that point and then "became" the universe.  I'm relating this as I understand the pantheists' point of view to be.

Very well, you be you! Why are you bothering the rest of us with nonsense?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I've been asked a zillion times in this forum to give evidence for why I believe in God and each time the questioner comes back and tells me that's not real evidence.   Here's the situation.  We have a being who is supernatural. He/She/It can exist without the need to obey any natural laws and therefore, cannot be understood or explained by natural or scientific means.

If God directly illuminates me through supernatural means which cannot be tested by any natural means, how can I give you any other solid evidence other than to relate my experience?  

If god is, by definition, untestable and inaccessible to scientific inquiry, then by what method have you determined that the cause of your experience was a god, and not your own mind? You need to justify this to yourself first before you can offer it to others as evidence. And, appealing to the number of people who believe the same thing as you is a fallacy. The number of people who believe a claim is true has no rational bearing on whether or not it’s actually true. At one time, a great number of people believe that the earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around it. Did that collective belief count as good evidence for those claims?

Bingo lolly.  Truth is not a democratic process.

No one is denying that you had an experience (or multiple experiences) that you took to be evidence of God.  I can't accept that evidence because I can't replicate your experience.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

In that sense, pantheism could be considered a type of deism, no?

Couldn't the "everything is god  and god is everything" (which is wonderfully ridiculous) of the pantheists be considered a naturalist "god" that deists could subscribe to?

I'll start by saying that I'm biased...but...yes.

[Simon Moon]

I've been asked a zillion times in this forum to give evidence for why I believe in God and each time the questioner comes back and tells me that's not real evidence.   Here's the situation.  We have a being who is supernatural. He/She/It can exist without the need to obey any natural laws and therefore, cannot be understood or explained by natural or scientific means.

If God directly illuminates me through supernatural means which cannot be tested by any natural means, how can I give you any other solid evidence other than to relate my experience?  

If god is, by definition, untestable and inaccessible to scientific inquiry, then by what method have you determined that the cause of your experience was a god, and not your own mind? You need to justify this to yourself first before you can offer it to others as evidence. And, appealing to the number of people who believe the same thing as you is a fallacy. The number of people who believe a claim is true has no rational bearing on whether or not it’s actually true. At one time, a great number of people believe that the earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around it. Did that collective belief count as good evidence for those claims?

HIs only answer, so far, has been he really, REALLY feels it. And other people (even some smart people) claim to have had similar experiences.

I want to know how he eliminated a super advanced alien civilization, who take delight in fucking with less advanced civilizations, as a possibility.

Wouldn't this actually be a more rational explanation? After all, we have demonstrable evidence, that there are 200 billion stars in our galaxy alone, each with planetary systems, and billions of those planets are in habitable zones. The only evidence LEK provides, is personal experiences.

[GUBU]

I've been asked a zillion times in this forum to give evidence for why I believe in God and each time the questioner comes back and tells me that's not real evidence.   Here's the situation.  We have a being who is supernatural.  He/She/It can exist without the need to obey any natural laws and therefore, cannot be understood or explained by natural or scientific means.  

I always reply that I believe because God has directly impressed me with the awareness of his existence.  I list supporting factors as the witness of other believers, evidence of ghosts and other supernatural phenomena, etc.  A very conservative estimate of the number of people in the world today who believe in God, in this scientific age, is five billion.  These people are from every profession and walk of life.

If God directly illuminates me through supernatural means which cannot be tested by any natural means, how can I give you any other solid evidence other than to relate my experience?  You might say I'm suffering from a delusion, but I have no other history of delusions and billions of others who have no history of delusions also believe in God.  Billions of these people are moderately or well-educated and realize that the earth revolves around the sun, as you do.

Why don't you accept this as evidence for God?

Because the voices in your head are nothing more than evidence that you are, at best, delusional or, far more likely, psychotic.

Your evidence in detail 1) "god directly impressed me" is nothing more than you talking to yourself, 2) "witness of other believers" is not evidence it is claims, 3) ghosts and supernatural beings don't exist, 4) supernatural phenomena don't exist. So in your egerness to make us believe you've just shovelled, against our wills, a steaming rancid pile of bullshit into our collective mouth and tried to tell us it was caviar.

Go fuck yourself.

[Objectivist]

I've been asked a zillion times in this forum to give evidence for why I believe in God and each time the questioner comes back and tells me that's not real evidence.   Here's the situation.  We have a being who is supernatural.  He/She/It can exist without the need to obey any natural laws and therefore, cannot be understood or explained by natural or scientific means.  

I always reply that I believe because God has directly impressed me with the awareness of his existence.  I list supporting factors as the witness of other believers, evidence of ghosts and other supernatural phenomena, etc.  A very conservative estimate of the number of people in the world today who believe in God, in this scientific age, is five billion.  These people are from every profession and walk of life.

If God directly illuminates me through supernatural means which cannot be tested by any natural means, how can I give you any other solid evidence other than to relate my experience?  You might say I'm suffering from a delusion, but I have no other history of delusions and billions of others who have no history of delusions also believe in God.  Billions of these people are moderately or well-educated and realize that the earth revolves around the sun, as you do.

Why don't you accept this as evidence for God?

Because it's a stolen concept.  The concept evidence rests logically on the primacy of existence principle.  The notion of gods assumes the primacy of consciousness.  You are using a higher-level concept while denying a concept it logically depends on.  A simple example of this fallacy would be using calculus while denying basic mathematics.  That's why I no longer ask for evidence of a god because I would be guilty of stealing concepts in doing so.  So you can relax a little around me.  I won't ask you to prove it.   Proof also presupposes the primacy of existence.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why is it a stolen concept?