What would you mean by "testable evidence"? examples?

For something to be tested as scientifically true, it must also be able to be falsified.

For instance, Newtons theory of the law of gravity is falsified when, in the absence of gravity, a brick can fly upward, therefore, Newtons theory would be true.

Of course, due to the study of black holes Newtons law has been proven wrong... but it took more than 200 years and huge technological advancements to do so.

However, If you take falsifiablity away from science, it ceases to be science altogether and enters into the realm of religion, which is basically where science is today, as they have reached their limit, for now, of what they can actually prove.

Does Science Need Falsifiability?

The issue with God, as a whole, is that He cannot be proven through falsification, which has always been, up until now, a defining factor in science.

But even as science moves from the realm of science into the realm of religion, they're "faith" as it were, exists in saying God cannot be proven (ever), but through knowledge will some day be able to be disproven, instead of leaving that door to possibility open, they have already shut it firmly.

So we can look around and see God in the flowers of the field, in the universe and laws upon which it exists, but I find it doubtful a "true believer" will ever be Christian, unless God places His Hand upon them directly.

I was once a "true believer" in Islam, and ultimately it was God's work that took me out of that belief, whether through others or through His power working on me... I think the "true believer" in the absence of a God, would need the same...

That's just my thinking on the matter though.

I have been told so often that the gods will not submit to testing that I have stopped inquiring about the topic.

But since you ask....

Stepping away from 'science', there are still obvious miracles that would demand some sort of explanation that would lead inevitably to some sort of intelligent and superpowerful being.

The stars in the sky could move about to spell "I AM" in Japanese and remain that way for 24 hours, and then go back where they belong.

It's just something that can't be waved away as optical illusions or a mass delusion, assuming it shows up in photographs, etc.

On a smaller scale, I can imagine a god appearing to me personally and demonstrating something miraculous that would inspire belief.

On the more science-y experiment-y side, things tend to be indirect, since (alas) we cannot grab a sample of god and take it to the lab.

If the gods answer prayers, then we might be able to detect this. Studies of intercessary prayer in medical outcomes have generally shown no effect. A group of expert(?) prayers pray for the experimental group of cardiac patients, but not the control group of similar patients. [One experimental defect is you can't know if any amateur prayers, like a family member, are also praying for your control group.]

That is at least an idea of how to test a specific claim about gods, if not the gods directly. A null result doesn't mean that there are no gods, just that they don't appear to answer prayers.

Obviously the world is full of people who worship all sorts of different ideas of gods. All in all, people are people everywhere, so it doesn't seem as though anyone has achieved any special benefit for picking the right ones to worship. Again that doesn't mean they aren't there, just that they don't seem to show any favoritism.

com7fy8 said:

What might be an example of what you mean by testable evidence?

Click to expand...

The Bible makes a testable claim. It says that a person with even a small amount of faith can pray for a mountain to move, and the mountain will move. This claim can easily be put to the test, and it fails every single time.

I personally trust that there is evidence, but ones do not acknowledge it to be evidence that we have God. For example, if God made the sun, then the sun is evidence that God exists. But can I a human prove He made the sun? I would say no, but I can see that He did.

Click to expand...

The existence of the sun would only be evidence for God if there was no other explanation that was simpler. Remember Occam's razor!

com7fy8 said:

Except . . . if Jesus meant this as hyperbole . . .

Also, we have people who understand how Jesus means a mountain to be something we could not possibly overcome, but it can be moved . . . like my paranoid stuff, or someone else's lust problem or addiction. And God can simply change an impossible situation, which I could not possibly handle; it might be simply that some impossible person goes elsewhere; or I just don't let something or someone get to me. So, we have ones who understand Jesus means impossible things in our lives.

And, by the way . . . how God changes our character can do more than moving any mountain.

Anyway . . . how about other examples?

Click to expand...

The Bible also says believers will be able to drink poison and handle deadly snakes without being injured. Are you going to pass these off as metaphor as well? Do you plan on passing off any testable claim that the Bible makes as metaphorical to keep Christianity firmly in the unfalsifiable category?

Well, I looked up one writing representing what Mr. Ockham says.

He says to use the simplest explanation, in order to get what is the correct explanation . . . if I understand correctly.

Well, then, you have people prehistoric of away from modern society who have giant rocks in their territory. Their simple explanation is those rocks are the bones left behind by their reptile gods who were killed in battles with other reptile gods. That's simple.

Or, we could say God made the rocks.

Or, we could say there was a big bang and the molten original earth cooled until there was more and more rock, and giant pieces of rock ground around with each other as the earth cooled and therefore was contracting so the pieces of rock would crunch and grind together; and then during an ice age glaciers pushed and crunched remaining the rocks to form certain giant boulders that more or less slightly could pass for giant bones left behind by reptile gods killing one another in battle.

And you say we need to pick the simplest explanation?

Click to expand...

I'd hardly say that God is simple. And claiming "Goddidit" is hardly an explanation, since it can be applied to anything at all, and so explains nothing.

Also, are you claiming God is simple?

Not everything can be proved by being repeatable and demonstratable.
But things can be proved through the examination of witness statements and through the examination of facts found there.

An example of this is the Christian claim that Jesus was crucified, burried and that he rose from the dead.
The documentary evidence is that he lived, he was crucified, burried and that his tomb was found to be empty.
Did Jesus rise from the dead?
The disciples cetainly believed so and it dramaticly changed how they behaved.

How do you explain it?


Then there is for you the embarasing problem that the universe and life exists. How do you account for it, when science says that there was a begining of the universe?

Everything that has a begining, has a cause.
The universe has a begining.
What caused it to begin?

com7fy8 said:

nope

But it could be metaphor > meaning how God keeps us from being poisoned by unforgiveness and hate and dominating and controlling drives for foolish and selfish pleasures, and the kind of arguing which degrades people and their relating. And He makes us able to refuse to give in to the spiritual poisonous snakes . . . devils . . . who would get us into that stuff.

How God proves Himself in us, like this, is convincing. May be it would be more convincing than if He only kept us from being harmed by poison and snakes. However, if He keeps people from suffering from snakes and poison . . . fine with me > I personally understand God does what He means by His word, in any case; and I think His word can multi-task > Isaiah 55:11. So, there could be spiritual but also physical applications of a same scripture.

Click to expand...

Of course, you could make this about any claim in the Bible which appears testable but consistently fails the test.

For me, one testable claim is "the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus." (in Philippians 4:6-7)

I test this, all the time, by trusting God to correct my character so I am obeying Him in His peace which is almighty to easily and breezily and beautifully keep my mind clear of self-righteous criticizing and immoral imagination stuff, so I am loving, instead.

Click to expand...

The trouble with this is that this is not actually testable. You could get the same result praying to any other deity. You could ask the Force (of Star Wars fame) to bring you peace of mind, but if you then get that peace of mind, that doesn't mean that the Force is real. So this claim is not actually testable.

no (c:

But you offered that idea that we should pick the simplest explanation. So, I just offered how that might not be what a lot of people go by.

Click to expand...

I've seen that a lot of creationists claim that the universe can't be explained by naturalistic processes, because simple processes can't produce complexity. Do you share that view?

Tolworth John said:

...The documentary evidence is that he lived, he was crucified, burried and that his tomb was found to be empty.
Did Jesus rise from the dead?
The disciples cetainly believed so and it dramaticly changed how they behaved.

How do you explain it?...

Click to expand...

Written decades after the fact (well established) with the aim of promoting the subjects impact and reputation (reasonable speculation consistent with other contemporary biographical efforts).

com7fy8 said:

You could get counterfeit peace.

Click to expand...

If it brings me peace, then it brings me peace. If the person experiencing it can't tell the difference, then how can it justifiably be claimed to be a different thing? And if the person can tell the difference, how would they do so?

Evidence in the form of predictions of future findings is testable. Testing the predictions can either support a theory or invalidate it in whole or in part. The testing of such predictions must be repeatable.
For example, among other things, the General Theory of Relativity predicts that the path of light will be influenced by gravity. The hypothesis was tested numerous times and the null hypothesis was shown to be correct.

ruthiesea said:

For example, among other things, the General Theory of Relativity predicts that the path of light will be influenced by gravity. The hypothesis was tested numerous times and the null hypothesis was shown to be correct.

Click to expand...

Exsqueeze me? There are plenty of measurements that show the null hypothesis (that light doesn't bend) is not correct.

com7fy8 said:

Well, I know I can fool myself and not even know it; so I trust God to make sure I really am in His peace.

Click to expand...

So you just assume that it's God's peace and you do nothing to make sure?

com7fy8 said:

I don't assume. First, I openly prayed for whoever really is God, to do what He really wants with me. And here I am, after what has happened since then. And I still offer myself for whatsoever God really wants.

My basic now is that God is our Judge who knows if we are really with Him or not, at any moment; so I pray and trust Him to do what He pleases with me, and to make sure I really am with Him. And Hebrews 12:4-14 to me means it is wise to actively seek God for real correction so we are with Him.

So, in praying for real correction, I keep it open about what God knows I need. And there still can be enough going on inside of me, so I offer I do not assume I am always obeying God in His own peace. But it is clear His word says He wants us to, and what is guaranteed will happen if we do > among other scriptures we have >

Colossians 3:15

Philippians 4:4-7

Matthew 11:28-30

So, I keep trusting God to do this with us.

Click to expand...

And how did you verify that what you got was actually from God?

com7fy8 said:

not by human means

However God has us know. He is able to have us know what He wants us to know . . . as well as we can

As I have said, there is so much more to Him, than we can understand. So, He knows better than we can. Jesus is our way. Through Jesus we have gotten to God.

Click to expand...

So you just feel it really strongly, and thus conclude that what you feel must be correct?