Arguments for the Existence of God

[Dave Ellis]

It's not a contest. It is a screening process.

Sure, and when we try to pass your beliefs through this screen, you seem to think they don't apply.

There is only one ribbon of truth that has withstood the test of time. If it is in you to discover it - you will discover it.

And what is this ribbon of truth?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Although it is no secret, that is privileged information...and we're not there yet.

The claim you were taken out of this world is privileged information? What could possibly be your justification for refusing to answer how this happened?

I sorry, I don't believe your claim.

My "claims" are my witness as a link in the chain that you are hung up in. You are under no obligation to take it serious...but that won't make it go away. Have it your way.

Sure, and as I said you are just arguing from assertion. That is a fallacy. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion

You need to show your claims are correct, in order for me to believe them. That's the only way I can honestly accept your claims. If you refuse to do that, that's not really my problem.

 

[devolved]

Sure, and as I said you are just arguing from assertion. That is a fallacy. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Argument_by_assertion

You need to show your claims are correct, in order for me to believe them. That's the only way I can honestly accept your claims. If you refuse to do that, that's not really my problem.

(and I'm not really saying below for your sake, Dave, since you are likely aware of it)

I think we should be fair and note that on a personal level it MAY not be false that whatever he experienced is some true reality out there that MAY exist. In that sense, there should be a disclaimer put that a logical fallacy is not the same as "you are wrong". It's merely a framework of valid and MORE RELIABLE arguments that we collectively as people use to either reject or accept claims.

There are falsifiable one, like "Al Gore is our president". It's a falsifiable claim. We can actually check who the president is and his name is not Al Gore.

There are unjustifiable ones like the one in question "I've been taking to an outside reality and been revealed some secrets". On a personal level... I have no issue with this claim. But that's not how we get to believe the claim of others.

Hence, there's this constant problem and misunderstanding when it comes to providing evidence that's believable in the the framework of valid claims and argument (for communicating beliefs) in a way that we collectively recognize as a valid way to make an argument that has some chance of being taken as a rational one. If we can't tell a difference, between rational and irrational one... then there is no difference in the mind of person who receives it.

Of course, the unfortunate downside to that is that if the claim is indeed true, then we are missing out on some explanation of reality that we'd otherwise wouldn't work out on our own, BUT if by extension we believe ALL similar claims, then we'd be living in a world where everything and anything goes as believable.

But the larger question would be as to why would God choose such poor framework to reveal it's existence? There are a dozen of ways that I would find more believable. Inconclusive.... but more believable.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Ok, I though this is a thread about evidence for God's existence, and I actually thought that you have some form of a claim... but this conversation devolved into "There is evidence, and if you find it.... you'll find it"

Great, thank you for your participation.

The thing that keeps me coming back here is my utter astonishment that Christians are continually showing up and expressing their beliefs without good evidence, even after being told that this will never convince anyone.

 

[ScottA]

The point being is that as humans we have certain way that we progress through knowledge and understanding... and that way generally doesn't start with being pulled into some external reality where the secrets of the universe are explained.

We generally get a wide variety of information, and we weigh the evidence to form a mental model as to what this world is really like.

But, all you have is a claim of experience. My dad had an "out of body experience" when he went through surgery, and he flew through tunnels to a bring light with a voice that told him that I will play in the NBA . Of course I didn't, quite the opposite... I went and got an education and didn't really make the sports into a career. Was it a "conditional prophecy". Was it an imagined experience?

But let's say that I did make it into the NBA. Would that be an evidence of an all-knowing deity?

Can you see my point? Without some collective experience of reality, it's very difficult to convince people... and God if it exists should know it quite well and at least provide better evidence than that. I'm sure God would be perfectly capable to be more convincing to people like me who are very much open to the idea that God exists, but simply don't see evidence that it's true.

You are looking at it wrong. Material evidence works in the material world, but only works as an example of things in the spiritual world. Would you look for evidence of ice in the desert?

The only evidence of God in the material world (other than in His people), comes in parables (examples).

 

[devolved]

You are looking at it wrong. Material evidence works in the material world, but only works as an example of things in the spiritual world. Would you look for evidence of ice in the desert?

I don't demand "spiritual evidence" in a way you define it. I understand the distinction you are trying to make and merely trying to point out the problem of differentiating between the false claims about that spiritual world from the true ones.

You see the problem, do you? If there is no clear standard or framework to differentiate between various claims about the spiritual world, then one claim is not better than other... if we merely resort to parables.

The only evidence of God in the material world (other than in His people), comes in parables (examples).

Why would God resort to such unreliable framework as evidence? You really don't see why it's problematic, do you?

 

[ScottA]

What standards do you use to "screen" between various claims like yours and others? There are still people believing all sorts of demonstrably wrong things that seems to slip through the test of time you are talking about.

It either agrees with my own experience (which agrees with the bible), or not. But the qualifying factor, is that it is NOT material, but spiritual.

Ok, I though this is a thread about evidence for God's existence, and I actually thought that you have some form of a claim... but this conversation devolved into "There is evidence, and if you find it.... you'll find it"

Great, thank you for your participation.

I am just being straight with you (to set you straight), that you might get passed what God is NOT, and get on to what He is. So...if this is the end of the road for you, because I have offered you nothing of what it is not, then we are close...and still you don't see it.

 

[ScottA]

I don't demand "spiritual evidence" in a way you define it. I understand the distinction you are trying to make and merely trying to point out the problem of differentiating between the false claims about that spiritual world from the true ones.

You see the problem, do you? If there is no clear standard or framework to differentiate between various claims about the spiritual world, then one claim is not better than other... if we merely resort to parables.

Why would God resort to such unreliable framework as evidence? You really don't see why it's problematic, do you?

God did not create the world we live in to offer a reliable framework of evidence...but rather to [demon]strate His justice. The framework is spiritual, and you either pick up on it as evidence of you being a part of Him...or not, in which case the evidence is all on you...which is why I have said, you have it backwards.

 

[devolved]

God did not create the world we live in to offer a reliable framework of evidence...but rather to [demon]strate His justice. The framework is spiritual, and you either pick up on it as evidence of you being a part of Him...or not, in which case the evidence is all on you...which is why I have said, you have it backwards.

So, and other person comes to me and says that it's a female spirit entity who she calls "Geisha" who created this world, and that you are lying and it's true because Geysha revealed it to her that you are a worker of an evil spirit "Katon".

Which one of you do I believe, and which process do I use to differentiate between true claims and false ones?

 

[ScottA]

Who are you in this analogy... a dog or a flea? If you are a flea, then it seems like you got the evidence you need by being "pulled out", right? So, your claim and the question seems to not make sense and carry inherent inconsistencies.

On one hand, there is evidence that YOU get. On the other hand, there isn't evidence that everyone else can have . Do you see the problem?

I'm one of the fleas who realizes there is a dog.

But, it is not because I am better or because God is unfair. On the contrary...when we ALL were destined for death, God chose some, and then invited ALL, to live again. This is what is mean by being "born again."

 

[ScottA]

I didn't misspell any words.

Naaah, I was just messing with you.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

So...if this is the end of the road for you, because I have offered you nothing <snip>

I agree up to this point...

 

[ScottA]

What's that got to do with your inability to give evidence for your beliefs?

Nothing. I was referring to the dog (God, in this analogy).

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Naaah, I was just messing with you.

Suuuuuurrrreeeee. We believe you...

 

[ScottA]

Sure, and when we try to pass your beliefs through this screen, you seem to think they don't apply.

No, no...you do not have the screen. It is God who is screening us, whether we are His or not.

And what is this ribbon of truth?

It is the written record of testimonies of the people that have had personal contact with God, known as the bible.

 

[devolved]

But, it is not because I am better or because God is unfair. On the contrary...when we ALL were destined for death, God chose some, and then invited ALL, to live again. This is what is mean by being "born again."

Again, how an "initiated" person like myself who God invites to live again... how can I tell a difference between all of the different religious claims when they paint contradictory Gods and yet they all claim to have some form of special revelation?

You seem to dodge this question.

 

[ScottA]

So, and other person comes to me and says that it's a female spirit entity who she calls "Geisha" who created this world, and that you are lying and it's true because Geysha revealed it to her that you are a worker of an evil spirit "Katon".

Which one of you do I believe, and which process do I use to differentiate between true claims and false ones?

As I said, the evidence is in you - what you believe will be just.

 

[ScottA]

Again, how an "initiated" person like myself who God invites to live again... how can I tell a difference between all of the different religious claims when they paint contradictory Gods and yet they all claim to have some form of special revelation?

You seem to dodge this question.

I just answered: The evidence is in you (as to whether you are God's or not) - what you believe will be just.

 

[devolved]

As I said, the evidence is in you - what you believe will be just.
I just answered: The evidence is in you (as to whether you are God's or not) - what you believe will be just.

How do I know whether what I pick to believe as far as claim is just based on the lack of verifiable parameters that you set?

I understand how you can know... you are the lucky flee that got some special revelation from the dog. I understand that God gets to know and decide.

How do I know? Based on what you say... I don't know which is the just way. Yours, or a Muslim, or a Shinto follower? Let's say I need some guidance. What would differentiate false claims from the true ones?

It seems to me that we can't really tell a difference . If we can't tell a difference... then what is the difference?

 

[Ana the Ist]

For the same reason you might like Lamb: 20,000,000 coyotes can't be wrong.

All kidding aside, there can be no empirical evidence within the closed circuit of the universe. God is not inside - but is outside...and you can't go outside to prove it to yourself.

It is as if we were all born into a large room that no one had ever been or seen outside of, making no expert knowledge possible by those who could not possible confirm anything. Under those circumstances, the only way that it would even be possible to know the truth - is if the information came in...from the outside. But...if you were the guy who received the note that was passed under the door...everyone else would call you crazy. And if there was another person every so often down through history that received a similar message...and they began to write it down and put it in a book...and they called it their "bible" - that would just be crazy...20,000,000 coyote crazy!

There is no "outside" the universe.