Evidence God Is

[nPeace]

That's how Jehovah's Witnesses are. They ask questions whose answers they already know. And why? To teach the other ones, because they think they know all the right answers. And their goal is to convince the other to join their religion.

Well, Jesus did say, a student would be like his teacher?
So, can you blame Jehovah's Witnesses for being like Jesus?

(Matthew 22:41-46)
41 Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them: 42 “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him: “David’s.” 43 He asked them: “How is it, then, that David under inspiration calls him Lord, saying, 44 ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet”’? 45 If, then, David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And nobody was able to say a word in reply to him, and from that day on, no one dared to question him any further.

What an excellent technique.
Do you know why they couldn't answered the question?

 

[Milton Platt]

I don't know how else you want me to answer this, other than the way I did. What exactly are you looking for?

Is your god simpler than the universe it designed?


A main board of a computer is complex.
A computer's housing (case) is simple.
Both are designed objects.

You are saying that if something is designed, there must have been an intelligent being to design it. How do you tell the difference between something that appears to have been designed and something that was actually designed?


In your opinion.
However, there are loads of evidence for intelligent design. It is not a case of "God of the gaps". That's an atheist's argument, based not on fact, but argument from personal incredulity.

I don't know how else you want me to answer this, other than the way I did. What exactly are you looking for?

No, the god of the gaps argument is different. It is when theists point to gaps in knowledge and say that god resides in the things we don't understand, or where there is currently an absence of knowledge.
Intelligent design is more accurately described as an argument from personal incredulity.


A main board of a computer is complex.
A computer's housing (case) is simple.
Both are designed objects.

Then why are you using complexity of design to argue for a god? If both simple and complex things are designed, how do we tell what is designed and what is not? Obviously, complexity isn't a reliable way.
Point to something that you do not believe is designed for comparison.


In your opinion.
However, there are loads of evidence for intelligent design. It is not a case of "God of the gaps". That's an atheist's argument, based not on fact, but argument from personal incredulity.

What you need is an hypothesis that takes into account all of the available evidence in multiple fields of science and does damage to none of it. The hypothesis must make predictions which are testable and repeatable.
All you have with intelligent design is a number of statements of belief, and no testable hypothesis.

Beyond that, if you were to provide sound evidence for intelligent design, it does not follow that your god, or any god, did the designing. You would still have to provide evidence for that.

 

[nPeace]

Oh. By the way @calm, it has nothing to do with wanting anyone to join our religion. Though we think that is a good thing,..

It's just a way to present an argument - a form of reasoning. That's all.

 

[Milton Platt]

But I am not talking about what others, or people say. That's testimony. I am talking about actual objective evidence.

So since I don't know of evidence that can be construed to be evidence for every god ever proposed, I really am eager to hear you present that evidence. You don't have to give me all... just one god, and one of the evidences.

Lightening was evidence for Thor at one time. Answered prayer is evidence for the believers of many different gods. So are miracles.

Yes, we should question things. I believe in careful analysis.
Did someone say they had god in a garage? I'm certain they can show you it.

Spoiler: Open's the door

I don't believe those gods, are what the Bible refers to as the true and living God. So he can't be found in a garage, or closet, that someone can open a door and show you.
Is that what Atheist are looking for.
That's not a reasonable expectation.

You haven't even examined the evidence that the Bible is objective evidence for God. It is. However, some persons willfully are as described here. (Psalm 10:4) . . .In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation; All his thoughts are: “There is no God.”

I'm hoping you are different.

"Did someone say they had god in a garage? I'm certain they can show you it."

No, it is invisible, just like yours.

The point is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Untestable claims from 2000 years or more ago cannot be considered extraordinary evidence,

 

[nPeace]

"Did someone say they had god in a garage? I'm certain they can show you it."

No, it is invisible, just like yours.

The point is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Untestable claims from 2000 years or more ago cannot be considered extraordinary evidence,

Okay.
So, first of all, you made this up...
"...in fact, there is evidence which can be construed to be evidence for every god ever proposed."
That's not true at all, is it?
So therefore you can't support that claim.

Secondly, invisible does not mean exists on, or resides on the earth.
So it's unreasonable for one to think they must see God literally with their eyes.

Thirdly, I made no extraordinary claim. I said, "If we can establish that the Bible is truly authentic, by careful analysis, then we have objective evidence God is."
How is that an extraordinary claim?

 

[nPeace]

@Milton Platt I want to say this though, in response you your assertion that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
The misuse of "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", to suppress innovation and maintain orthodoxy should be avoided as it must inevitably retard the scientific goal of establishing reliable knowledge.

 

[Valjean]

But I am not talking about what others, or people say. That's testimony. I am talking about actual objective evidence.

You obviously don't know what actual objective evidence is. You don't know how to evaluate evidence.

So since I don't know of evidence that can be construed to be evidence for every god ever proposed, I really am eager to hear you present that evidence. You don't have to give me all... just one god, and one of the evidences.+

I would ask the same of you.

You haven't even examined the evidence that the Bible is objective evidence for God. It is. However, some persons willfully are as described here. (Psalm 10:4) . . .In his haughtiness, the wicked man makes no investigation; All his thoughts are: “There is no God.”

The Bible is not objective evidence of god. It paints a picture of two, maybe three gods. It's self contradictory and offers no explanations or real evidence of anything.
What, in the Bible is objective evidence?

 

[Valjean]

Thirdly, I made no extraordinary claim. I said, "If we can establish that the Bible is truly authentic, by careful analysis, then we have objective evidence God is."
How is that an extraordinary claim?

The very claim that a god exists is extraordinary, inasmuch as we see no evidence of it.
Truly authentic? What does that mean -- that's it's an actual bible?
What evidence is there that it's authoritative, or true? The Quran or Guru Granth Sahib could make the same claim.

 

[metis]

I'm sorry, but please don't include me in your faith.

What? You say you're a "follower of Christ", and it is the Christian faith I was referring to.

If your faith is not based on evidence, then what is it based on? Is it not blind... meaning, you just believe?

The faith from the direction pointed out by the Holy Spirit that led me back to Christianity and the Church. I would assume you also believe in the power of the Holy Spirit, right?

Is there objective evidence for God? Yes there is. What, you ask?
Let's start with the Bible. If we can establish that the Bible is truly authentic, by careful analysis, then we have objective evidence God is.

If this all was submitted to a court of law, the evidence would be considered "hearsay", thus needing further proof. But for us who actually believe in the power of the Holy Spirit more proof is not needed.

Let's do something else. Meet me at the specified link, for another question.

Thanks for the proposition, but I neither have the time nor the interest. However, with that being said, maybe start the thread and I'll check in periodically to see what's going on and then see if I want to respond. I don't avoid discussions along this line as I've been involved with a ton of them over my years here and still am, but I know what I believe and why I believe, even if you don't think I'm a Christian. It's judgmental statements like you posted that simply just turn me off.

 

[metis]

I'm talking about a particular experiment with the peppered moth. You are talking about something else.

And that "experiment" (actually it was not an "experiment" but an "observation") was to show that natural selection is still very much at work. But obviously there are many other observations and real experiments that have shown much the same, and the link I provided you has other links to some of them.

 

[nPeace]

What? You say you're a "follower of Christ", and it is the Christian faith I was referring to.

The faith from the direction pointed out by the Holy Spirit that led me back to Christianity and the Church. I would assume you also believe in the power of the Holy Spirit, right?

If this all was submitted to a court of law, the evidence would be considered "hearsay", thus needing further proof. But for us who actually believe in the power of the Holy Spirit more proof is not needed.

Thanks for the proposition, but I neither have the time nor the interest. However, with that being said, maybe start the thread and I'll check in periodically to see what's going on and then see if I want to respond. I don't avoid discussions along this line as I've been involved with a ton of them over my years here and still am, but I know what I believe and why I believe, even if you don't think I'm a Christian. It's judgmental statements like you posted that simply just turn me off.

Mentioning the holy spirit doesn't tell me anything about anyone's faith. Many also have different views on holy spirit.
It's either our faith is based on evidence, or it is not. If yours is not based on evidence, then we cannot possibly share the same faith.
I don't think you want to explain how your faith is not blind, and I am not going to ask you.

I read here...
Kettlewell's experiment was a biological experiment in the mid-1950s to study the evolutionary mechanism of industrial melanism in the peppered moth (Biston betularia).
How is it not an experiment, when it is called an experiment? Are you suggesting this information is inaccurate?

 

[metis]

It's either our faith is based on evidence, or it is not. If yours is not based on evidence, then we cannot possibly share the same faith.

It is unethical under the most basic Christian teachings to assume that a person is not a Christian when they say they are. It is unethical under the most basic Christian teachings to "judge one another" when Jesus said we are not to do that. It is unethical to deny the power of the Holy Spirit to help us with discernment and being so arrogant about it that you somehow think that the only way you may have accepted Christianity is somehow the only way.

So, go ahead and have your debate, or whatever you want to call it, but it's clear that you are more into yourself than into what Jesus actually taught and what the scriptures actually teach. As for myself, I've suddenly lost any interest in joining you in that as I'm sick and tired of the bigoted condescension of some here that think that their way is the only way.

 

[nPeace]

It is unethical under the most basic Christian teachings to assume that a person is not a Christian when they say they are. It is unethical under the most basic Christian teachings to "judge one another" when Jesus said we are not to do that. It is unethical to deny the power of the Holy Spirit to help us with discernment and being so arrogant about it that you somehow think that the only way you may have accepted Christianity is somehow the only way.

So, go ahead and have your debate, or whatever you want to call it, but it's clear that you are more into yourself than into what Jesus actually taught and what the scriptures actually teach. As for myself, I've suddenly lost any interest in joining you in that as I'm sick and tired of the bigoted condescension of some here that think that their way is the only way.

I think this is a repeat to something you said to me before.
It is not based on anything I just said. There is nothing in my post that reflects anything you said here.

@metis Why should I agree with someone just because they want me to? Jesus didn't do that.

 

[metis]

I think this is a repeat to something you said to me before.
It is not based on anything I just said. There is nothing in my post that reflects anything you said here.

Now you are not telling the truth as it is very clear that you questioned my faith and essentially stated that if I didn't share your belief in "proof" for God that I was not of your [Christian] faith.

Therefore, there's simply no reason for me to continue on with you at this time as you are clearly not willing to apologize for your willingness to judge me as you have, instead deciding to double-down on your judgmentalism. Some day in the future I'll check back and see whether you have stopped elevating yourself and deciding to believe in what Jesus actually taught on this, and maybe then we can have a serious discussion.

 

[nPeace]

Now you are not telling the truth as it is very clear that you questioned my faith and essentially stated that if I didn't share your belief in "proof" for God that I was not of your [Christian] faith.

Therefore, there's simply no reason for me to continue on with you at this time as you are clearly not willing to apologize for your willingness to judge me as you have, instead deciding to double-down on your judgmentalism. Some day in the future I'll check back and see whether you have stopped elevating yourself and deciding to believe in what Jesus actually taught on this, and maybe then we can have a serious discussion.

I said my faith is based on evidence. you said yours isn't. It's either faith is based on evidence, or it is not. A cannot be A, and yet not A. either A is A, or it is not.
This is not the same thing as saying what you said above.
What you said above, compared to what i said is like an Easterly point compared to a Westerly point.

Your feeling threatened seems to stem from your own imagination. (Ecclesiastes 7:9)

 

[Valjean]

Mentioning the holy spirit doesn't tell me anything about anyone's faith. Many also have different views on holy spirit.
It's either our faith is based on evidence, or it is not. If yours is not based on evidence, then we cannot possibly share the same faith.
I don't think you want to explain how your faith is not blind, and I am not going to ask you.

I read here...
Kettlewell's experiment was a biological experiment in the mid-1950s to study the evolutionary mechanism of industrial melanism in the peppered moth (Biston betularia).
How is it not an experiment, when it is called an experiment? Are you suggesting this information is inaccurate?

But doesn't Kettlewell's study support the ToE? I don't get your point.

 

[nPeace]

But doesn't Kettlewell's study support the ToE? I don't get your point.

Maybe go back, if you don't get my point. Perhaps your focus was on the wrong thing.

 

[Valjean]

I said my faith is based on evidence. you said yours isn't. It's either faith is based on evidence, or it is not. A cannot be A, and yet not A. either A is A, or it is not.
This is not the same thing as saying what you said above.
What you said above, compared to what i said is like an Easterly point compared to a Westerly point.

Your feeling threatened seems to stem from your own imagination. (Ecclesiastes 7:9)

It sounds like your faith is based on hallucination or delusion. That's fine -- for you -- but don't promote your faith as evidenced or reasonable.

 

[nPeace]

It sounds like your faith is based on hallucination or delusion. That's fine -- for you -- but don't promote your faith as evidenced or reasonable.

You have not shown otherwise. So don't promote your opinion or belief as fact.

 

[Valjean]

You have not shown otherwise. So don't promote your opinion or belief as fact.

My opinion is evidenced. Why shouldn't I promote it as fact?