Independently repeatable evidence that God interacts with our world

[eleos1954]

What standard do you think we should set for something this purports to be eyewitness evidence?

We have videotaped descriptions from eyewitnesses to Lincoln's assassination (they lived well into the 1900s).

We have samples of George Washington's handwriting.

We have actual video of Mark Twain.

There is no physical or first-hand descriptive evidence to support the majority of the Bible.



Beyond a few irrelevant anecdotes, your link does not support your claim in the slightest.


Can you prove that Elvis didn't deliver a pizza to me last night?

Sure Elvis is dead. Dead people don't deliver pizzas?

Your examples don't date back to ancient history, back then history was conveyed verbally until written language came about and then later the various technologies as you put forth.

All is well .... we are off topic .... so best to end it here ;o)

 

[Tinker Grey]

Sure Elvis is dead. Dead people don't deliver pizzas?

Your examples don't date back to ancient history, back then history was conveyed verbally until written language came about and then later the various technologies as you put forth.

All is well .... we are off topic .... so best to end it here ;o)

See, here's my default: demonstrate to me here and now the supernatural. Until you can do that, any ancient stories involving the supernatural I will/ must assume are wrong or a lie or legend/myth.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

So when I was suddenly interrupted in the middle of a meal, dropped everything, called a cab, rushed across the city in urgency, arrived at exactly the time my friend was dying of a heart attack, prayed for her and she was fully healed in two minutes. This was a co-incidence? Cognitive bias? Really...

I really don't know, but without corroborating evidence, I'm skeptical. What you think really happened and what really happened may not coincide.

 

[Carl Emerson]

See, here's my default: demonstrate to me here and now the supernatural. Until you can do that, any ancient stories involving the supernatural I will/ must assume are wrong or a lie or legend/myth.

Yes but it becomes an infinite regress argument...

Whatever is presented is not good enough not good enough not good enough
medical records not good enough not good enough not good enough...

enjoy your day.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I really don't know, but without corroborating evidence, I'm skeptical. What you think really happened and what really happened may not coincide.

I am still in touch with the lady after 35 years, she has a prominent ministry in Israel.

 

[NxNW]

Sure Elvis is dead. Dead people don't deliver pizzas?

There are eyewitness sightings of him all over the world since his alleged death. Did you see his body?

Your examples don't date back to ancient history, back then history was conveyed verbally until written language came about and then later the various technologies as you put forth.

Sounds like you're saying such conveyance is unreliable, especially over long periods of time. I'd be inclined to agree.

 

[NxNW]

So when I was suddenly interrupted in the middle of a meal, dropped everything, called a cab, rushed across the city in urgency, arrived at exactly the time my friend was dying of a heart attack, prayed for her and she was fully healed in two minutes. This was a co-incidence? Cognitive bias? Really...

Misdiagnosis seems more likely than God changing his mind because you decided not to finish your meal.

 

[NxNW]

Yes but it becomes an infinite regress argument...

Whatever is presented is not good enough not good enough not good enough
medical records not good enough not good enough not good enough...

That's why you establish a standard ahead of time.

 

[Carl Emerson]

That's why you establish a standard ahead of time.

...and if you don't want to face the consequences of it being met, make it unattainable...

 

[SkyWriting]

I think you'll find that the answer is no, there is no independently repeatable evidence that God interacts with our world, or exists at all.

There is but it's only visible to those who pray. Others are not made aware of God's works and answers to prayer.
Answered Prayer - God heard your prayer, planned, and laid out your answer for you

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I am still in touch with the lady after 35 years, she has a prominent ministry in Israel.

Good for you.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

There is but it's only visible to those who pray. Others are not made aware of God's works and answers to prayer.
Answered Prayer - God heard your prayer, planned, and laid out your answer for you

Very convenient.

 

[Aussie Pete]

What has religion found to be true that corrected the findings of science? The fact is that religion has had to change its beliefs as science finds out how the universe works, it has never happened the other way around.

Christianity gives meaning to life. I don't care what other religions say. I also don't care what science has to say. Science can only observe what is there and make guesses as to why. The most brilliant can get it wrong. Einstein rejected quantum theory.

I have the utmost respect for Jordan Peterson. He has a great ability to skewer irrational false narratives such as white privilege and male domination. However, even he falls for the trap of science's inability to do more than observe. He stated, correctly, that people are happier when they are helping to improve the lives of others. This is, of course, very much a part of Christianity. He also went on to say that it was something that people evolved with to make for better societies. Rubbish. If this evolved then it is hard wired and would be normal and natural for everyone. It's pretty obvious that tribalism, self preservation, self interest and selfishness in general are just as much part of the human condition.

Jordan Peterson knows the Bible well. Yet he comes to a "scientific" conclusion. This is not surprising considering his profession. But his conclusion is incorrect. And his answer to the problem is correct, but only if his conclusion is correct. If his original premise was correct then there would be no problem to address. The Bible addresses the human condition and explains why and gives the solution. And people generally don't want to know.

Science can tell us what. It cannot tell us why. Science cannot prove or disprove the reality of God. And when God came to earth in the form of man, He was rejected by most. God states that the creation is sufficient evidence for His existence. It was enough for me.

 

[Aussie Pete]

See, here's my default: demonstrate to me here and now the supernatural. Until you can do that, any ancient stories involving the supernatural I will/ must assume are wrong or a lie or legend/myth.

I've been a Christian 50 years. I've had many experiences that you call supernatural. That is the wrong word, spiritual is more exact. I will not be able to convince you and I will not try. You are your own judge and jury and you decide what to believe. You've already decided. You believe that you know all there is to know about all there is to know. So you claim to be God. Neat trick, you deny your own existence.

Not many atheists are internally consistent with their beliefs. Your existence is pointless. It has no meaning. It's like dropping a pebble into the ocean. Just ripples that disappear without a trace. Your words also mean nothing. Neither do your actions. And no doubt you will argue to the contrary. I've not heard a convincing argument from an atheist yet.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Science can only observe what is there and make guesses as to why. The most brilliant can get it wrong. Einstein rejected quantum theory.

No, he didn't reject it, he thought it was incomplete - he got the Nobel prize for his pioneering work on quantum theory (the photoelectric effect).

 

[Tinker Grey]

You believe that you know all there is to know about all there is to know. So you claim to be God. Neat trick, you deny your own existence.

Don't lie.

 

[tas8831]

As a matter of fact all secular writtings not only avoid the possibility of a Creator but they aim to prove He does not exist.

That is quite a charge.
I'm betting that you cannot support that at all. Most people don't actually care if your preferred deity exists or not.

 

[Bob Crowley]

Hello,

I hope I posted on the right place. English is my second language please excuse my grammar mistakes.

I am genuinely curious if there is any independently repeatable evidence that God interacts with our world, I would prefer an article published in a well estabilished journal. I mostly looking for sciences like: physics, biology, chemistry etc and not sciences like philosophy.
I am curious and wanted to ask you guys, it looked like a good place to ask. This is just a friendly request and no offense meant.

Thank you in advance,
Kind Regards,
Curious about this

There's an article here you might find interesting.

Why Science Does Not Disprove God

I lifted this paragraph from the article -

Why did everything we need in order to exist come into being? How was all of this possible without some latent outside power to orchestrate the precise dance of elementary particles required for the creation of all the essentials of life? The great British mathematician Roger Penrose has calculated—based on only one of the hundreds of parameters of the physical universe—that the probability of the emergence of a life-giving cosmos was 1 divided by 10, raised to the power 10, and again raised to the power of 123. This is a number as close to zero as anyone has ever imagined. (The probability is much, much smaller than that of winning the Mega Millions jackpot for more days than the universe has been in existence.)

Incidentally your English is pretty good. Although if I came to Hungary and spoke in my Australian accent, you probably wouldn't understand a word! And I wouldn't understand your Hungarian either - I don't speak it. That's one of the allegorical mysteries of the Tower of Babel story - when we finally managed to circumnavigate the world, we found men were already all over the place, from Eskimos in the arctic and Maoris in isolated New Zealand, and they all had different languages.

How did the ancient writer of Genesis 11:1-9 know that?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Really ???

Folks believe all sorts of stuff without evidence.

No, people believe untrue things to be true by believing bad evidence. Is there anything that you believe to be true that you can just choose to believe the opposite without being convinced in some way?

 

[Aussie Pete]

I think you'll find that the answer is no, there is no independently repeatable evidence that God interacts with our world, or exists at all.

Do you shave? Every time you look in the mirror, there is repeatable evidence that God exists. You refuse to accept it. That is no one's responsibility but your own.