Objective evidence of God

[Black Akuma]

However, it is objective evidence.

Perhaps, but not for God.

 

[Black Akuma]

It is impossible for anything not to be filtered by our own subjectivity.

Then nothing is truly objective.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Your interpretation of it is subjective. Even if I assume the tree is evidence that something made it, that doesn't support your god more than anyone else's.

So is yours.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Then nothing is truly objective.

Really? So a chair can not be objectively known as a chair?

Objects and truth are objective. They exists whether we know them or not. Our subjective interpretations decided what we think about those objective objects and truth.

 

[Black Akuma]

Objects and truth are objective. They exists whether we know them or not.

Is that not your subjective opinion? Can you show that in an objective fashion?

 

[EternalDragon]

Your interpretation of it is subjective. Even if I assume the tree is evidence that something made it, that doesn't support your god more than anyone else's.

Take a breath and go back to the OP and read it.

It does not ask for evidence of creation. It asks for evidence of God. (Of the bible I am assuming). I am giving you that objective, testable evidence. A tree, A cat. A human being.

Also, thanks Oncedeceived for helping to clarify things.

 

[Black Akuma]

You haven't shown that it's objective, and you really haven't shown that it's testable.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Is that not your subjective opinion? Can you show that in an objective fashion?

IF there is a chair in the room, the chair's existence can be objectively known by all is there for all. (Now we could argue that we don't know if reality is real but that is another topic). Truth is also absolute. It is true that the chair is there or it is not. IF we see it and touch it and experience with all of our senses then we can with objective certainty that the chair is there. That is true, it is or it is not. The law of non-contradiction. That works throughout our universe, we have laws of logic. Which in the Christian worldview is evidence of an intelligent creator. That statement is based on subjective opinion based on objective evidence.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Take a breath and go back to the OP and read it.

It does not ask for evidence of creation. It asks for evidence of God. (Of the bible I am assuming). I am giving you that objective, testable evidence. A tree, A cat. A human being.

Also, thanks Oncedeceived for helping to clarify things.

You bet.

 

[Black Akuma]

IF there is a chair in the room, the chair's existence can be objectively known by all is there for all. (Now we could argue that we don't know if reality is real but that is another topic). Truth is also absolute. It is true that the chair is there or it is not. IF we see it and touch it and experience with all of our senses then we can with objective certainty that the chair is there. That is true, it is or it is not. The law of non-contradiction. That works throughout our universe, we have laws of logic. Which in the Christian worldview is evidence of an intelligent creator. That statement is based on subjective opinion based on objective evidence.

Then the tree is objective evidence - but it's not objective for anything.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Then the tree is objective evidence - but it's not objective for anything.

Yes it is. IT doesn't have a meaning or reason it just is. IT supports that trees exist. It could support that a certain other life form uses it as a habitat. It could support theories that a certain tree is susceptible to one disease or another. A tree could be used to support a variety of propositions.

 

[FredHoyle]

Yes it is. IT doesn't have a meaning or reason it just is. IT supports that trees exist.

Why don't you use the same reasoning when it comes to US? you and me, we have no more meaning than a tree.

 

[Oncedeceived]

Perhaps, but not for God.

why is that?

 

[Oncedeceived]

Why don't you use the same reasoning when it comes to US? you and me, we have no more meaning than a tree.

We as a fact exist. That is true no matter whether we can see each other or not. We communicate. I think you have meaning, if you don't I am sorry.

 

[Sayre]

All evidence is interpreted by minds that are subject to biases, and through senses that are subjective (not available to others to investigate). Because of this, all interpretation of evidence is subjective. We can't escape that as humans. So let's all hold hands and become global skeptics together.

 

[Oncedeceived]

All evidence is interpreted by minds that are subject to biases, and through senses that are subjective (not available to others to investigate). Because of this, all interpretation of evidence is subjective. We can't escape that as humans. So let's all hold hands and become global skeptics together.

You would admit though I am sure that truth is truth regardless of how we might filter it.

 

[Sayre]

You would admit though I am sure that truth is truth regardless of how we might filter it.

What use is objective evidence of God if all we have access to is the subjective interpretation of that objective evidence?

 

[biggles53]

You are confusing your issues here. A tree is a physical object and is evidence that has a cause. It may be that you don't find a tree a reasonable piece of evidence for any God, but it is your subjective opinion vs. ED's subjective opinion concerning that evidence. However, it is objective evidence.

The tree is objective evidence that there are trees. It is NOT objective evidence for a god.....that's a subjective view....

Oh...and neither is it evidence for a 'cause'.....that's also a subjective view, no matter that it may be a view held by most people.....

 

[Oncedeceived]

What use is objective evidence of God if all we have access to is the subjective interpretation of that objective evidence?

Human beings have a strong desire to know and find truth.

 

[Sayre]

Human beings have a strong desire to know and find truth.

So what?