• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Lack of evidence

Does lack of evidence mean a god doesn't exist

  • yes

    Votes: 3 9.1%
  • no

    Votes: 27 81.8%
  • don't know

    Votes: 1 3.0%
  • don't care

    Votes: 2 6.1%

  • Total voters
    33

We Never Know

No Slack
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.

PS: save your unicorn and spaghetti monster comments for the funny papers :). But if you want a unicorn, google narwhal.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Save for a few outlying issues, I tend to think of such questions in terms of probabilities rather than a definite yes or no. The lack of evidence I perceive in this case leads me to believe the probability that a deity exists is very low, but for me to conclude it was impossible, I would need evidence that there was no deity.

If you told me all swans in the world were white and I found out that nobody had ever seen a non-white swan, I would conclude that the existence of non-white swans was very unlikely but not impossible. But if you showed me some sort of incontrovertible genetic evidence that swans could not possibly be non-white, I would conclude that non-white swans definitely didn't exist.
 

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
I think a major problem in proving the existence of God is that it isn't well defined what God is. A supernatural omnipotent force that pervades the universe? A supernatural force that exists beyond the universe? A supernatural force, limited, that has supreme power and ruling over the universe or a single phenomenon within? The universe itself? A big man in the clouds with a big old beard? The sun?
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
There's actually a lot of evidence for God if you don't think God is some super-person in the God judging everybody's actions like a grown-up version of Santa. I don't know how to answer your poll because I fundamentally disagree with your assertion.
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
There's actually a lot of evidence for God if you don't think God is some super-person in the God judging everybody's actions like a grown-up version of Santa. I don't know how to answer your poll because I fundamentally disagree with your assertion.
Or your idea of god might involve something that you could never provide evidence for.

Take the statement, **god is the universe**. Given a universe where this was true, is there any way, even in principle, we could gather evidence supporting this statement?

Btw, the point is that there are possibly things that are true that we can't have evidence for. Not that god is the universe, god is real or that believing things without evidence is sensible.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
Or your idea of god might involve something that you could never provide evidence for.

Not if you believe that nature itself is divine.

Take the statement, **god is the universe**. Given a universe where this was true, is there any way, even in principle, we could gather evidence supporting this statement?

The Universe has many divine qualities, like being completely ubiquitous to the average human. The fact that it also expands infinitely for such a long time is another sign of ubiquity. There is plenty of evidence that ultimate nature, and ultimate human, possesses themselves all the characteristics of God.

Btw, the point is that there are possibly things that are true that we can't have evidence for. Not that god is the universe, god is real or that believing things without evidence is sensible.

See the thing is the more you understand nature the more you start to realize that what nature is becoming is Godlike by itself. The God of Christianity cannot be proven not because of free will but because it doesn't exist. The God of Earthseed however is being unfolded each and every single day. I will only stop believing in Earthseed when the Universe stops changing, which will never happen.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.

PS: save your unicorn and spaghetti monster comments for the funny papers :). But if you want a unicorn, google narwhal.
There is no possibility for a god to exist whatsoever. It's completely made up by people.

If there was any shred of the supernatural by way of evidence , we would have that by now.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.

PS: save your unicorn and spaghetti monster comments for the funny papers :). But if you want a unicorn, google narwhal.

Whilst a lack of evidence might not mean God doesn't exist, there are certain God-concepts that could more fairly be expected to have left evidence. So perhaps it's informative for SOME God-concepts?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Whilst a lack of evidence might not mean God doesn't exist, there are certain God-concepts that could more fairly be expected to have left evidence. So perhaps it's informative for SOME God-concepts?

Here's an odd thought....
"George Washington died in 1799, the first Dinosaur fossil wasn't identified until 1824. George Washington never knew dinosaurs existed"

Reference... Megalosaurus is believed to be the first dinosaur ever described scientifically. British fossil hunter William Buckland found some fossils in 1819, and he eventually described them and named them in 1824.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
This can apply to any imaginary character.

It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.
The question is: given the lack of evidence for any idea why would a smart, rational person think it does exist? Evidence is the the best means we have to make good judgments. The lack of evidence means quite a bit.

The default for rational minds is: I'm not convinced.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.
Which demonstrates how superior evidence-based conclusions are.

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.
Some gods are defined in such a way they can be ruled out. By definition they are impossible.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Whilst a lack of evidence might not mean God doesn't exist, there are certain God-concepts that could more fairly be expected to have left evidence. So perhaps it's informative for SOME God-concepts?

Change the topic for a second....
You live in Austraila, have you ever saw this spider or is the picture deceiving?

IMG_20221113_215304.jpg
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

It's also irrelevant for most practical purposes. If a knowledge claim isn't backed by evidence, it's made-up nonsense. The fact that made-up nonsense could potentially, rarely, be a coincidental lucky guess doesn't mean that it's ever reasonable to take made-up nonsense seriously.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.
Well that's not true. Are there any other claims you want to pull out of your butt?

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.
I don't believe that for a second.

PS: save your unicorn and spaghetti monster comments for the funny papers :). But if you want a unicorn, google narwhal.
Why? Because they prove you wrong?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence.

It's also irrelevant for most practical purposes. If a knowledge claim isn't backed by evidence, it's made-up nonsense. The fact that made-up nonsense could potentially, rarely, be a coincidental lucky guess doesn't mean that it's ever reasonable to take made-up nonsense seriously.

Absence of evidence doesn't mean its not possible

Well that's not true. Are there any other claims you want to pull out of your butt?

What's not true about it?

I don't believe that for a second.

Who cares!

Why? Because they prove you wrong?

Nope. Because its comical denial
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.

100's of years ago we had lack of evidence for DNA, evolution, and even dinosaurs... Yet even though unknown to us at the time, they all existed.

While I don't accept or believe in something without evidence, I also will not rule it out or think its impossible.

PS: save your unicorn and spaghetti monster comments for the funny papers :). But if you want a unicorn, google narwhal.

The deep philosophical answer is that it has nothing to do with a god as such. It is about what objective reality is as independent of the mind other than independent of the mind? The current answer with rationality seems to be that is unknowable because knowledge requires a mind and thus that which is independent of the mind is unknowable.
 

stvdv

Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
To me lack of evidence for a god doesn't mean a god doesn't exist.
It means we don't yet know if a god does or not.
It only means that the person claiming it:
1) Did not find evidence for God
2) Lacks the ability to recognize God
3) Uses the wrong method to get evidence
4) ...

Also, if those who know don't share their evidence then such a claim would be false too of course:D
@stvdvRF
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
It only means that the person claiming it:
1) Did not find evidence for God
2) Lacks the ability to recognize God
3) Uses the wrong method to get evidence
4) ...

Also, if those who know don't share their evidence then such a claim would be false too of course:D
@stvdvRF

Well, my evidence of God is different than yours as far as I can tell and that is not limited to God, but also as for some aspects of the everyday world. Including that we do wrong different in some cases as we do evidence differently.
 
Top