There is no evidence of God

[InChrist]

The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork. Psalm 19:1

 

[yoda89]

I think there is a lot of evidence for God. The cumulative evidence comes from the paranormal and the cumulative experiences and teachings of saints/mystics/gurus.

If you’re looking for God in science that can only study things within the range of the five senses and physical instruments, then any mystic can tell you that you’re bound for failure. Science only studies creation, not the creator which is the basis for creation.

There is a lot of evidence of people worshipping a God/Gods just look around the forum.
However, there is no proven cumulative evidence. The origins of these evidences have also been watered down by being passed down from generation to generation. I'm not sure if you played a game when you were younger called telephone. Everyone sat in a circle or straight line and the first person gave a statement and passed it along to the next until it reached the final person. Every single time what was the ending statement said was different from the beginning statement. Now, imagine someone preaching to one outside of their faith. There is also going to be a little bit something better than what you were taught. It is also going to be said differently than you were preached. Information being told hundreds of times embellishing and taking out what people felt was inappropriate. While this does not disprove the possibility it shows how these evidences can be easily manipulated and used to ones advantage.

Science does not only study creation but everything. Many myths that were attributed to a higher powers have been explained by science.

 

[yoda89]

The thing is that there is evidence in God- there's just not any scientific evidence of God. I am not saying the evidence that I have will be accepted by everyone, by any means. I don't usually share my own personal evidence with anyone outside of my faith, however, because it opens up to ridicule (yes, I have been ridiculed about it by a couple of people but not here on the RF).
And I agree with others who have stated that God is not some magic "sky-daddy". As far as I know, he doesn't appear to have a physical body.

I respect that. If you do not wish to share that's perfectly understandable. Growing up where I did and having the beliefs I was also ridiculed. For myself at least it was harder to take on a new perspective than just saying everything is going to be alright and something/s is/are always out there watching out for me. Especially at the point of my life when I discovered it.

 

[outhouse]

Expand your tv programming.

I knew you had zero evidence to back your statement

 

[Quagmire]

"There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle."
---Albert Einstein
See more at: Everything Is A Miracle, by Albert Einstein | Awakin.org

I think it's reasonable to paraphrase that as "Either everything is evidence of God, or nothing is".

 

[rusra02]

Welcome to the thread:faint:

There is no evidence that someone built the pyramids. Both statements are preposterous, but the statement that 'there is no evidence for God' far more so, IMO. God's existence is proved by the things He has made, as the Bible explains; "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable." (Romans 1:20) Psalm 148:5 tells why Creation praises Jehovah:"For he himself commanded, and they were created."
It is the height of arrogance to dismiss faith in God as unscientific. Scientist Vincent Wigglesworth said that the scientific method itself is “a religious approach.” “It rests upon an unquestioning faith that natural phenomena conform to ‘laws of nature.’” And it doesn't explain how those laws of nature were made without a Lawgiver.

 

[George-ananda]

There is a lot of evidence of people worshipping a God/Gods just look around the forum.

I wasn’t talking about evidence for people worshipping God. I was talking about evidence for God.

However, there is no proven cumulative evidence.

Who used the ‘proven’ word. And what does that word mean in the context of God?

The origins of these evidences have also been watered down by being passed down from generation to generation. I'm not sure if you played a game when you were younger called telephone. Everyone sat in a circle or straight line and the first person gave a statement and passed it along to the next until it reached the final person. Every single time what was the ending statement said was different from the beginning statement. Now, imagine someone preaching to one outside of their faith. There is also going to be a little bit something better than what you were taught. It is also going to be said differently than you were preached. Information being told hundreds of times embellishing and taking out what people felt was inappropriate. While this does not disprove the possibility it shows how these evidences can be easily manipulated and used to ones advantage.

Here it sounds like here you’re talking about scriptures that came to us through oral tradition. Your telephone game analogy makes some sense here but passed-down scriptures was not what I was talking about when I said the paranormal and the cumulative experiences and teachings of saints/mystics/gurus. These are people and researchers that live in the modern era and today.

Science does not only study creation but everything.

How does it study for the existence of a non-physical creator?

Many myths that were attributed to a higher powers have been explained by science.

True.

 

[ruffen]

More like Man woke up.
And over the centuries has refined his thinking about God.
Science now helps to support belief.
As soon as someone gets the equation right.....we will hear of it.

God particles?

You do know the reason they called it "the God particle"?

About the book that was supposed to be called "the ******* particle" but the editor felt it just sounded sexier?

The Higgs Boson has aboslutely nothing to do with "proving God" or anything of the sort. The discovery of the Higgs Boson helped confirm the mathematical/theoretical model of mass in particle physics.

 

[ruffen]

Haha, the profanity filter got me, but it was supposed to be called "The God-darned particle" then.

 

[ruffen]

The thing is that there is evidence in God- there's just not any scientific evidence of God. I am not saying the evidence that I have will be accepted by everyone, by any means. I don't usually share my own personal evidence with anyone outside of my faith, however, because it opens up to ridicule (yes, I have been ridiculed about it by a couple of people but not here on the RF).
And I agree with others who have stated that God is not some magic "sky-daddy". As far as I know, he doesn't appear to have a physical body.

But if you have evidence that will not be accepted by others and it's a "personal evidence", can it then be called evidence in the sense of the word most people mean when they say evidence?

 

[yoda89]

I wasn’t talking about evidence for people worshipping God. I was talking about evidence for God.



Who used the ‘proven’ word. And what does that word mean in the context of God?



Here it sounds like here you’re talking about scriptures that came to us through oral tradition. Your telephone game analogy makes some sense here but passed-down scriptures was not what I was talking about when I said the paranormal and the cumulative experiences and teachings of saints/mystics/gurus. These are people and researchers that live in the modern era and today.



How does it study for the existence of a non-physical creator?



True.

1-It's difficult because these evidences are subjective. Tales and accounts being from person to person. Take into account human beings are emotional creatures. They can be revealed as natural occurrences that have taken during an emotional periods. People also tend to use cause and effect. Only acknowledging cause when there is a desired effect.

Someone may say God is nothing and is everything, God is many yet he is one. Emotionally inside you can tell yourself he is everything and he is nothing. However, you cannot display it.

2- The word proven is also subjective to the individual and these evidences are only made relevant if it suites the believers desires.

3-Current religious text are not tampered with for the most part because people can tell the difference. However as in the bible sense many chapters have been removed to best suite the churches stance. Yes there are many mystics and gurus in moderate time. However many of those began with oral tradition which shows the telephone game. Many ones more recent been written down are less flawed in their original concepts unless they are manipulated or translated into other languages.

4-I do not know what you mean. Even psychology is physical. Even voids are know as physical parts of the world.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now try saying that on Purim.

:biglaugh: :clap :biglaugh:

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

That looks a bit circular.

It may be inaccurate but it is in no way circular.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

I do believe that there are several good philosophical arguments for the existence of God but believe me, I don't know them well enough to explain them. Saint Thomas Aquinas had several good philosophical arguments for God's existence

The deductive arguments for the existence of God, such as Thomas' Five Ways, or the arguments advanced by Plantinga, Hartshorne, WLC, etc., are all, without exception, either invalid or question-begging.

Clearly, they establish nothing.

***

No photos, no fingerprints, no equations, no repeatable experiments....
no evidence.

Faith by definition requires no proving.

Not to say there is no sound reasoning.

Yes, accepting claims despite having "no evidence" is NOT sound reasoning, more or less as a matter of definition.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

There is no evidence there is no god (or gods)

Sure there is. The absence of necessary evidence is necessarily evidence of absence.

The fact that the types of evidence which would be entailed by the existence of a theistic god fail to obtain is decisive evidence there is no such thing.

Furthermore, any theistic god-model that is purported to be omnipotent and eternal, omnipotent and necessary, transcendent and existing, and/or intervening and atemporal, cannot exist because each of these pairs of attributes are contradictory.
***

I think it's reasonable to paraphrase that as "Either everything is evidence of God, or nothing is".

And a claim which is consistent with any and all possible evidence is no claim at all.

***

God's existence is proved by the things He has made

Begging the question, obviously...

It is the height of arrogance to dismiss faith in God as unscientific.

No, it is simply accurate.

Scientist Vincent Wigglesworth said that the scientific method itself is “a religious approach.” “It rests upon an unquestioning faith that natural phenomena conform to ‘laws of nature.’”

Poor Mr. Wigglesworth was very confused then. The scientific method has proved its usefulness time and time again.

 

[yoda89]

There is no evidence that someone built the pyramids. Both statements are preposterous, but the statement that 'there is no evidence for God' far more so, IMO. God's existence is proved by the things He has made, as the Bible explains; "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable." (Romans 1:20) Psalm 148:5 tells why Creation praises Jehovah:"For he himself commanded, and they were created."
It is the height of arrogance to dismiss faith in God as unscientific. Scientist Vincent Wigglesworth said that the scientific method itself is “a religious approach.” “It rests upon an unquestioning faith that natural phenomena conform to ‘laws of nature.’” And it doesn't explain how those laws of nature were made without a Lawgiver.

There is clear evidence that someone built the pyramids. Because they have been built...
The questions as to it to who built them. That doesn't take away from the fact that they are there.

 

[rusra02]

There is clear evidence that someone built the pyramids. Because they have been built...
The questions as to it to who built them. That doesn't take away from the fact that they are there.

Exactly. There is clear evidence someone created the earth and life upon it. (Hebrews 3:4) Find the Creator and you have found the true God. I believe only the Bible gives accurate information on how the earth and we ourselves came into existence. (Revelation 4:11)

 

[The Sum of Awe]

It's all about faith, and trust in God. Most people think that God's existence is the main issue religion revolves around, but that's what we have to have faith in in order to come towards our true goal - spiritual enlightenment, etc. For me, religion is a teacher of faith, and without religion, faith would be reduced.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

Exactly. There is clear evidence someone created the earth and life upon it.

The opposite of what you just said is the case.

 

[Astravalon]

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]

There is clear evidence that someone built the pyramids. Because they have been built...
The questions as to it to who built them. That doesn't take away from the fact that they are there.

Good point. There was some sort of designer behind those pyramids. We might not know (yet) the identity thereof, but those pyramids likely didn't come about by randomly falling blocks of cement (though even if they [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]had[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif], that would be rather cool too! )[/FONT][/FONT].

[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]

Exactly. There is clear evidence someone created the earth and life upon it. (Hebrews 3:4) Find the Creator and you have found the true God. I believe only the Bible gives accurate information on how the earth and we ourselves came into existence. (Revelation 4:11)

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]While I don't (any longer) lean as heavily on just one religious text as the sole authority on how we came about, I do agree that Someone made us (along with the rest of the universe).
[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]PS: According to the more nondualistic view, we are said to be (human manifestations of) God Himself, so finding evidence of God is real easy in that case -- just look in the nearest mirror and one will see God looking right back at 'em! [/FONT][/FONT]



[FONT=Verdana, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, sans-serif]





[/FONT][/FONT]