Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I'm curious to know what type of 'evidence' of God that the resident atheists around here might accept, and find compelling?
Is the roaring of a lion "natural"? If yes, then why is a human testimony (voice) not "natural"?
Why not it be both natural and supernatural?
Personal experience is only personal evidence at best, and I quite often doubt that. Some of our posters here claim to have had personal experiences, but the only "evidence" of it is that they seem to be totally sure of themselves even though they cannot support their claims at all. And of course they tend to be different from others that had a "personal experience".It seems perfectly reasonable to me. There are many Christians who owe their faith to some kind of personal experience of Christ.
But it is not evidence of the kind creationists need to impose their theology on the rest of us.
If god were to appear before me, and demonstrate his godhood, that would be sufficient evidence for me...
For whatever reason though, it seems like whenever I give this kind of answer to christians, they act as if this is some kind of unreasonable request...though I'm not really sure why. For a god, this would be something that requires minimal effort.
The kind that is repeatable and testable in a lab.
I suppose it depends on what type of 'god' we're talking about.
But if it's the type of supernatural deity promoted by your mainstream world religions,
then I'd need evidence on par with any other phenomenon.
Basically, there needs to be some sort of detectable measure that specifically applies to said deity that is readily repeatable, not contingent on pre-existing belief, and not otherwise explainable by more mundane phenomenon.
It basically comes down to extraordinary claims needing extraordinary evidence. Show me the extraordinary evidence.
No evidence. At least nothing that suggests the existence of a supernatural deity as per your mainstream, Western religions.
In general, I've found people's personal testimony to be a combination of cultural influence coupled with mundane phenomenon which they then ascribe to supernatural origins.
And that sometimes includes things I've experienced myself, but I have no reason to believe there is anything supernatural involved (particularly things related to sleep and dream related phenomena).
That's pretty much the same for me. If there is a god, who has supernatural abilities, then he/she/it would know exactly what would make me a believer. And if it's part of this god's plan that I should believe, then he/she/it will arrange events so that it happens.
In short, for me to believe in god, would take an act of god.
Since your background is biology, I can understand your preference for a purely empirical cause/effect definition of evidence.
Do you apply that same empirical cause/effect standard of evidence to all branches of science, including particle physics and astronomy?
Personal experience is only personal evidence at best, and I quite often doubt that. Some of our posters here claim to have had personal experiences, but the only "evidence" of it is that they seem to be totally sure of themselves even though they cannot support their claims at all. And of course they tend to be different from others that had a "personal experience".
I can't really think of anything. Aliens would be a much more likely explanation for any occurrences that are beyond our understanding or that seem to mimic our religions, and I mean that seriously.I'm curious to know what type of 'evidence' of God that the resident atheists around here might accept, and find compelling?
check also my argument here:In a general sense we're simply discussing evidence of God, not religion. Christianity teaches that Christ was God residing in human form, teaching us the moral values of God in human form, and living those morals in human form. Other religions may (and theoretically should) contain those same moral values somewhere in the religion if those religious values actually come from God/Christ. That shouldn't be surprising in other words.
I can't really think of anything. Aliens would be a much more likely explanation for any occurrences that are beyond our understanding or that seem to mimic our religions, and I mean that seriously.
"God": The good ol´ invisible personal bearded sky daddy who plays hide and seek, who impregnates virgins, who can alter the natural laws at will etc..
Evidence: A thundering voice announcing that the earth rotation will stop for a few minutes, and this actually happening - that would be a good start.
...
"God" is another word for "everything that exists". That everything that exists exists is axiomatic to the point of being tautological, so I am a theist in regards to that God definition.
Don't let me define the term for you. I'd rather you do that, and explain what type of evidence you might accept. I'm not insisting on any particular qualities per se, although it would have to involve some type of intelligence beyond the human level.
I'm curious to know what type of 'evidence' of God that the resident atheists around here might accept, and find compelling? At the present moment, do you believe that there is "no" evidence of God, little evidence of God or just not convincing enough evidence of God for your personal tastes? Do you believe that the topic of God can be studied scientifically? Must all cause/effect relationship be demonstrated empirically in controlled experimentation to your personal satisfaction, or would you accept simple uncontrolled observations as a form of "evidence", even if it's less than convincing evidence?
That could be an inspired guess - but if it clearly described DNA, one would have pause for thoughtSomething in the Bible that clearly describes something that was not known until centuries later. If the Bible described micro-organisms causing disease, for example.
That could be an inspired guess - but if it clearly described DNA, one would have pause for thought
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?