What empirical evidence could there be for God?

[Haven]

In my years of debating God's existence (both as an evangelical Christian and an atheist), I have heard countless philosophical arguments for the existence of God. The Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA), Anselm's Ontological Argument, the Teleological Argument, and the Moral Argument, among others, all seek to establish God's existence through the use of pure logic and reasoning. However, I have yet to see a Christian put forth an empirical case for God's existence (empirical, in this case, means physical, testable, analyzable by science). In fact, I don't feel that it is even possible, in principle, to put forth an empirical argument for God's existence, because of the common properties assigned to God (i.e., omnipresence, omniscience, timelessness, etc.).

So, for the debate question: What empirical evidence could there be for God? How would we discover this evidence? How could we determine it pointed to a God rather than a naturalistic entity?

For the sake of this discussion, a definition of God:

(1) A single, supernatural being that created our universe
(2) A personal mind with thoughts, feelings, emotions, and plans
(3) A maximally benevolent, morally righteous entity
(4) An omnipresent, omniscient entity
(5) An eternal being, the "first cause" of reality."
(

[spayne]

We are talking about evidence for God here. What exactly do you want that will "substantiate and validate" his existence? Do you expect him to come and knock on your door and introduce himself to you?

Why not? We can play a game of checkers... Hey, if I can go outside and meet the Pantheist GOD and have fun enjoying their GOD, why can't I yours? .. Surely you claim he exists somewhere in the Pantheists GOD...Right? Is he the father that doesn't spend any quality time with his supposed children?... Well it's odd that our Grand Father (existence) spends more time with us.

Well, the great news here Jackelantern is that he HAS come and knocked on your door. Revelation 3:20 says, Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

It appears that you are to busy skiing to notice him.

[spayne]

I get it. I just don't think anything is going to be sufficient for you. Actually, the words of Paul in Romans come to mind:

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)

For the record, I disagree with Paul on this point. Please demonstrate to us how it is that Paul's assertion here is valid. How do the eternal power of God and which aspects of God's divine nature are clearly seen and understood from the creation? Please be very specific, I am sometimes rather thick when it comes to spiritual matters.

And for the record, I already have presented evidence. Christians believe that the Bible is the revealed word of God, and that in it are a number of proofs that confirm this.

And, for the record, your evidence has been shown to be lacking.

I would cite some important ones as being the life and ministry of Jesus Christ,

The New Testament is true because of the alleged life and ministry of the central character? This is a kind of circular reasoning.

the strong prophetic element of the Bible particulary with regard to Jesus Christ,

The prophetic element regarding Jesus is not convincing to anyone but the already convinced or those who are not particularly skeptical. The promoters of a new religion, writing in the second half of the first century, want to convince their readers that their messiah from the first half of the century was the fulfillment of ancient Jewish messianic prophesy. Bit of a no brainer that. As they compose their Gospels, they scan the scriptures for anything that looks like a messianic prophesy and include or invent some detail in Jesus' life to fulfill it. They would have written that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, even if he was actually born in Allentown!

the absolute continuity of theme throughout the book despite the fact that the book has so many authors and was written over a 2,000 year period,

This is an oft repeated claim that is to my mind both wrong and subjective. What the Christians call the Old Testament speaks only of Jesus anachronistically. The Jews of the early Christian centuries up until today see through that deception. That is part of the reason for the strong antisemitism in the history of the Christian Church.

the moral order that it establishes,

Any moral order in the Bible that is worth having, can be arrived at independently of it. You and I really don't need the Bible to tell us that murder is wrong (which it does) or that slavery is wrong (which it does not).

the description of sin as the destructive force of mankind, the emphasis on destroying evil,

That is somewhat tautological. Doing bad stuff is not good in the long run. D'oh!

the revealed character of God as loving, righteous and holy,

Actually the character of God as revealed in the Christian scriptures is only selectively loving and certainly not righteous.

and outside of all this, the various archaeological discoveries that confirm the truth of various Bible stories,

Archaeology only confirms that the writers of the tales were familiar with their own surroundings. It does not confirm the truth of the myths presented.

the survival of the Jewish people in the face of enormous persecution,

A double edged sword. The continued survival of the Jewish religion in the face of its apparent successor is a thorn in the side of the Christian message. Why is it that more Jews do not convert?

and the creation of an international movement of Christians in which literall millions of people have come to believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Lots of people can be wrong.

These responses here amount to subjective opinions that stem from your own deep seated biases. This is why I said in my first response that this is a worldview issue. Your worldview excludes God. Therefore, no amount of evidence for God, whether it's in the form of fulfilled prophecy, personal testimony, scriptural truth and continuity, or anything else is going to be enough to convince you.

[spayne]

Well, then maybe you don't understand what the word 'empirical' is. That is stuff you can SHOW ME is true. I don't see that. If you have your subjective evidence, that's fine for you. .However, this the debate section.. where you have to present evidence.

I get it. I just don't think anything is going to be sufficient for you. Actually, the words of Paul in Romans come to mind:

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)

And for the record, I already have presented evidence. Christians believe that the Bible is the revealed word of God, and that in it are a number of proofs that confirm this. I would cite some important ones as being the life and ministry of Jesus Christ, the strong prophetic element of the Bible particulary with regard to Jesus Christ, the absolute continuity of theme throughout the book despite the fact that the book has so many authors and was written over a 2,000 year period, the moral order that it establishes, the description of sin as the destructive force of mankind, the emphasis on destroying evil, the revealed character of God as loving, righteous and holy, and outside of all this, the various archaeological discoveries that confirm the truth of various Bible stories, the survival of the Jewish people in the face of enormous persecution, and the creation of an international movement of Christians in which literall millions of people have come to believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

I don't care about what you believe. I care about 'Can you show your claims are true'. Those are two different items.

You believe 'the bible is empirical evidence'. Can you SHOW the bible is empirical evidence. If you can't, then the claim 'The bible is empirical evidence' is an unsupported claim. The claims 'so many authors and ' then a bunch of unsupported religious claims' don't matter to me.

And, I challenge you to show the archeological evidence that the supernatural claims of the bible are true. I also know that many of those so called 'archeological evidence' is exaggerated, or biased. Yes, much is true, .. but that does not mean the supernatural claims are true.

For example. let's see the archeological evidence of.. oh.. lets say the exodus.. and the resurrection.

Or.. how about Sodom and Gomorrah.. that is an often claimed one.

Unsupported claims do not support unsupported claims.

My whole point was to cite a few things in the Bible that compell Christians - not atheists like yourself - to come to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. You have never addressed one of my primary points in this thread, which is that the Bible contains language that specifically addresses all five of the proofs for God that were introduced by the author of this debate subject. As I said before, if you are curious about that, then go and pick up a Bible, ask God to reveal himself to you, and start reading and see where it takes you.

As I stated before, this is a worldview issue not an evidence issue. Your worldview leaves God out of the picture. Therefore, there is no amount of evidence that would be good enough to convince you. Jesus Christ himself could knock on your door and say "Hi I am Jesus Christ, and I want to be part of your life." And you would say, "Can you give me empirical evidence that you are really Jesus Christ?"

[Haven]

Spayne, why should I adopt the Christian worldview on blind faith? Why should I choose Christianity over, say, Islam, Hinduism, or Judaism, all of which have scriptures that claim to be the word of God/Allah/Brahma. Remember, I can choose to adopt any religious worldview on blind faith, so I would need some reason to select Christianity over all others. Without evidence, this all becomes subjective and boils down to personal preference and cultural background.

[Goat]

My whole point was to cite a few things in the Bible that compell Christians - not atheists like yourself - to come to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. You have never addressed one of my primary points in this thread, which is that the Bible contains language that specifically addresses all five of the proofs for God that were introduced by the author of this debate subject. As I said before, if you are curious about that, then go and pick up a Bible, ask God to reveal himself to you, and start reading and see where it takes you.

As I stated before, this is a worldview issue not an evidence issue. Your worldview leaves God out of the picture. Therefore, there is no amount of evidence that would be good enough to convince you. Jesus Christ himself could knock on your door and say "Hi I am Jesus Christ, and I want to be part of your life." And you would say, "Can you give me empirical evidence that you are really Jesus Christ?"

Then, your claim for the 'what is the empirical evidence for God' is that there is none?

I mean, why should I believe what you say about Jesus Christ, or any of your claims about 'sin, salvation and the afterlife'... you point to hearsay accounts in a book of religious promotional material , and expect me to accept it without question??

Do you have an actual argument, or are you just preaching?

[Heresis]

Christians and theists in general have two huge problems when arguing their case, 1) they have to prove that a god does in fact exist, which is pretty hard when not building a case on a priori evidence and hearsay, and 2) they have to prove that they also know the mind of the god, and have divine instructions to live out their every day lives. There are no hard facts for the existence of a god, and its existence is purely in the minds of believers. If one were to look at the world around us and the way that it is composed, it becomes obvious that nature wasn't designed by an all-knowing being. The human appendix and vestigial tail are good examples.

I think Judeo-Christians have a bigger case to prove than other religions because they are the new kids on the block. Greek, Egyptian, Roman, and many other polytheistic religions came before Yaweh, Jesus, Mohammed and monotheism in general. The religious texts of the three big religions are seriously flawed and contradictory, so this certainly can't be taken as a positive proof of a creator. In fact, it's proof that the scriptures aren't divinely inspired, but written by humans. They offer no insight on anything that wasn't known of the time it was drafted, which is another telling clue.

As I posted in another thread, since there is no empirical evidence for a god and contradictory accounts across the world (much like alien abduction), then Occam's Razor can be used to eviscerate any sort of logical argument for the existence of a god.

[TheJackelantern]

These responses here amount to subjective opinions that stem from your own deep seated biases. This is why I said in my first response that this is a worldview issue. Your worldview excludes God. Therefore, no amount of evidence for God, whether it's in the form of fulfilled prophecy, personal testimony, scriptural truth and continuity, or anything else is going to be enough to convince you.

So you don't have evidence of your GOD's existence. Yes, we know you need to call everyone bias to whom doesn't believe in your deity...But hey, you seem very biased against the Pantheist GOD.. Why is it that an Atheist like me can tell the Pantheists that I agree that their GOD exists? So you sit there calling me or others biased? Isn't that a convenient argument to make from a position of lacking any sort of credibility, or evidence.. Your bias is that you think people should believe you out of blind belief through appeals to ignorance and emotional pleading. So of course you are going to tell us that there isn't going to be enough evidence to convince us when you have none to begin with. That's how religions operate and cults work..

Talk about dishonesty, and clear intention of perusing dishonest discourse. It's pretty bad that other theists can prove the existence of their GOD without any effort, and you can't... There is a problem there isn't there?

Well, the great news here Jackelantern is that he HAS come and knocked on your door. Revelation 3:20 says, Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

The last thing to knock on my door was the pizza delivery man.. But he just asked me to pay and tip him... And did you serious think posting this mind wipe nonsense would work on a former Christians to whom used to use the same arguments? .. Heh, I'm not that stupid or gullible. The only news is that all you have is a book of mind wipe to quote from..

[micatala]

We are talking about evidence for God here. What exactly do you want that will "substantiate and validate" his existence? Do you expect him to come and knock on your door and introduce himself to you?

Why not? We can play a game of checkers... Hey, if I can go outside and meet the Pantheist GOD and have fun enjoying their GOD, why can't I yours? .. Surely you claim he exists somewhere in the Pantheists GOD...Right? Is he the father that doesn't spend any quality time with his supposed children?... Well it's odd that our Grand Father (existence) spends more time with us.

Well, the great news here Jackelantern is that he HAS come and knocked on your door. Revelation 3:20 says, Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

It appears that you are to busy skiing to notice him.

Moderator Comment


Please remember that this is a forum for debate, not preaching or proselytizing.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.

[spayne]

My whole point was to cite a few things in the Bible that compell Christians - not atheists like yourself - to come to believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. You have never addressed one of my primary points in this thread, which is that the Bible contains language that specifically addresses all five of the proofs for God that were introduced by the author of this debate subject. As I said before, if you are curious about that, then go and pick up a Bible, ask God to reveal himself to you, and start reading and see where it takes you.

As I stated before, this is a worldview issue not an evidence issue. Your worldview leaves God out of the picture. Therefore, there is no amount of evidence that would be good enough to convince you. Jesus Christ himself could knock on your door and say "Hi I am Jesus Christ, and I want to be part of your life." And you would say, "Can you give me empirical evidence that you are really Jesus Christ?"

Then, your claim for the 'what is the empirical evidence for God' is that there is none?

I mean, why should I believe what you say about Jesus Christ, or any of your claims about 'sin, salvation and the afterlife'... you point to hearsay accounts in a book of religious promotional material , and expect me to accept it without question??

Do you have an actual argument, or are you just preaching?

You don't have to believe any of this Goat and nor would I expect you too. This is why I said that FOR THE CHRISTIAN, the Bible is evidence for the existence of God. God cannot be proven or disproven, so I am simply saying Christians see evidence of his existence in the Tanakh and the New Testament. And once again, I will give you my primary argument: the five definitions for God that were put forth in this debate question are all addressed in the Bible. If this is interesting to you, then go ahead and investigate further.

And finally, once again, my previous experience speaking with you on these boards has led me to conclude that you are not going to believe the evidence even if Jesus himself introduced himself to you. I'm not clear as to why you won't address these points in your response to me. We can go around and around with a dialogue, but honestly, it's a waste of time for someone who has already made up his mind.

[spayne]

Spayne, why should I adopt the Christian worldview on blind faith? Why should I choose Christianity over, say, Islam, Hinduism, or Judaism, all of which have scriptures that claim to be the word of God/Allah/Brahma. Remember, I can choose to adopt any religious worldview on blind faith, so I would need some reason to select Christianity over all others. Without evidence, this all becomes subjective and boils down to personal preference and cultural background.

I can almost guarantee that people will rarely come to faith for purely intellectual reasons and because of empirical evidence.

I will reiterate what I have already stated: the five definitions for God that you put forth in your debate question are all addressed in the Bible. And for the Christian, this is evidence for the existence of God. If you were truly sincere about your debate question, and wanted truth instead of just intellectual sparring, I would think this would be of interest to you.