Christian claims are unfalsifiable.

[Paul of Tarsus]

If you're familiar with Christianity at all, then you're unlikely to be told anything that you can falsify about it. Consider the following format for a claim that can be falsified:

Do A.
B should result if you do A.
If B is not the result of doing A, then you know that "B should result if you do A" has been falsified.

The Christian version on its claims takes this format:

Do A.
Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A.
If B is not the result of doing A, then believe "Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A" anyway. It's your own fault that B didn't happen because you are a faithless sinner and/or God has a plan that does not involve B for you.

The claim is then deemed to be true regardless of the outcome of A.

Another Christian version I've seen recently takes yet another format:

Do A which as far as you can tell has never been done or cannot be done.
Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A.

Of course this claim cannot be falsified because doing A is impossible!

So why are all Christian claims unfalsifiable?

[benchwarmer]

One way to falsify the foundation of Christianity is to show Christ did not rise from the dead.

1 Cor 15:16-17
For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.

I think that's basically impossible. Even if someone produced the remains of Jesus buried in a field somewhere and somehow proved via some amazing DNA tracing it's really him, it still leaves the possibility Jesus was spiritually raised and that was the meaning of the passage.

In fact, we can go to any graveyard and show the dead are not raised physically, therefore Christ wasn't raised either (if we are going for physical raising). That's what the quoted scripture above is saying if you take it literally. i.e. these dead people here in this graveyard are still here and not raised, so neither is Christ.

Looping back to your personal belief that extraterrestrial life would falsify your Christian beliefs, that is an interesting take I have not heard often. Out of curiosity, is this based on some scripture?

You must be at least a little nervous about the upcoming US release of UAP information I honestly doubt they will release anything much beyond what has already been released, but who knows.

[bjs1]

If a person is willing to pull a couple of verses out of their immediate context and out the context of the Bible on the whole, then that person could get the Bible to say virtually anything.

That works from both sides and is what makes any of the alleged truths contained in the Bible questionable.

"I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."

Even in the context of the extra passage you quoted, the meaning is perfectly clear, and experience demonstrates that it is totally false.

I fully agree that it is possible for both sides. That is why I quoted the entire passage, instead of highlighting only a couple of verses in a larger passages to give the appearance of a “perfectly clear” meaning that ignores the larger context.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to Paul of Tarsus in post #16]

Are you saying that Christian claims are unfalsifiable to lend an aura of mystery to them?

I'm not sure they've put that much effort into the stories.
It could be what you're asking, though.
Or it could be the stories are so 'out there' as to make them automatically unfalsifiable, without any effort to the effect.

[otseng]

One way to falsify the foundation of Christianity is to show Christ did not rise from the dead.

1 Cor 15:16-17
For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.

I think that's basically impossible. Even if someone produced the remains of Jesus buried in a field somewhere and somehow proved via some amazing DNA tracing it's really him, it still leaves the possibility Jesus was spiritually raised and that was the meaning of the passage.

The context of being resurrected from the dead is both physical and spiritual. If either one is shown to be false, then (orthodox) Christianity is proved to be false. Sure, some Christians don't believe in a physical resurrection, so disproving a physical resurrection would not change their beliefs. But, it would disprove the traditional form of Christianity.

In fact, we can go to any graveyard and show the dead are not raised physically, therefore Christ wasn't raised either (if we are going for physical raising).

Only at the endtimes would everyone else be resurrected. The falsification would specifically involve the resurrection of Jesus.

Looping back to your personal belief that extraterrestrial life would falsify your Christian beliefs, that is an interesting take I have not heard often. Out of curiosity, is this based on some scripture?

It's based a natural reading of Genesis where God supernaturally created all life.

You must be at least a little nervous about the upcoming US release of UAP information I honestly doubt they will release anything much beyond what has already been released, but who knows.

Honestly, I've dismissed the recent spat in UFO statements by the government so haven't been following that. No, I haven't been nervous about it. My reaction is more like

[Paul of Tarsus]

He explicitly stated that the cohesiveness if his belief would collapse if any life were found that originated outside Earth (ie. such a discovery would falsify his version of Christianity). So we can "tell" that this would be the case because he directly stated it.

To tell if a claim is falsifiable, we need good answers to these two questions:

A. What exactly is being claimed?
B. How exactly can we know if the claim is falsified?

If we are told "the cohesiveness of my belief collapses" if life originating beyond the earth is discovered, we encounter two problems. One, we don't really know what the claim to be scrutinized is. What belief is being referred to? Second, how can we tell if the cohesiveness of a belief collapses? I don't know what that means, and therefore I cannot falsify the claim.

A much better claim would be: If life originating beyond the earth is discovered, then I will avow that the fundamental beliefs of Christianity including the deity and resurrection of Christ are bogus. It is easy to understand just what is being claimed, and if extraterrestrial life was discovered, then we can readily check to see if the person making the claim avows that Christianity has been discredited.

A claim that no biological life exists outside of Earth is easily falsifiable by finding biological life outside of Earth. This is not an unfalsifiable claim.

But that's not the claim, for starters. And although it may be possible to find life on other planets, contrary to what you say it appears that the task of finding that life is anything but easy. For practical purposes it may be undoable. So any claim that is to be falsified depending on the discovery of life on other planets might as well be falsifiable.

[Paul of Tarsus]

What you're saying here is more a claim about your own beliefs than of Christianity.

Yes, it is my personal belief, but at least there is an objective way to falsify it.

How could we tell if your belief collapses?

"Do A. Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A.
If B is not the result of doing A, then believe "Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A" anyway. It's your own fault that B didn't happen because you are a faithless sinner and/or God has a plan that does not involve B for you."

What's unclear about my description of typical Christian claims?

I would agree though there are unfalsifiable claims made by Christianity. But, it does not follow that all Christian claims are unfalsifiable.

I will make this falsifiable claim: If you or anybody else can post an example of a coherent claim from the Bible or Christian theology that can be readily falsified, then I will post that yes, we have at least one example of a falsifiable Christian claim.

One way to falsify the foundation of Christianity is to show Christ did not rise from the dead.

The claim is that Christ rose from the dead. Since it's impossible to prove he didn't rise from his grave, then that claim is unfalsifiable.

Anyway, my whole point in starting this discussion is that Christianity is based on unfalsifiable claims to safeguard it from disproof. If Christianity was based on facts, then it could make falsifiable claims and be confident that those claims will withstand testing.

[1213]

...
God creating the earth is an unfalsifiable claim. Whether we can observe the earth or not, we cannot know that God didn't create it. Even if we could not observe the earth, it might still exist somewhere we didn't look, and therefore not observing the earth does not and cannot falsify the claim that God created it.

That is why I think the whole idea of falsification is pointless and can’t be used really in this kind of debate. There is always possibility to say that there is some other option.

[1213]

Probably because you form them poorly. For example, in that the claim was inaccurately defined, which led to wrong conclusion.

I can form one that is better:
[?????] created the earth -> if we can observe the earth does not exist, we can falsify the claim.

<edited to make a point>

Could you not simply place anything in the place of those question marks and have an equally falsifiable position?

Probably, for other things there is just not much reason to make that claim.

[Purple Knight]

Do A.
Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A.
If B is not the result of doing A, then believe "Supernatural event B (miracle, revelation, etc.) will result if you do A" anyway. It's your own fault that B didn't happen because you are a faithless sinner and/or God has a plan that does not involve B for you.

This isn't unique to Christianity. I often complain about people peddling Positive Thinking as being guilty of the same exact fallacy.

Think positively! If you do, positive things will happen. If positive things don't happen, or negative things continue to happen, it's your fault - you must not have been thinking positively enough.

The why - the answer to the debate topic - is because very clever people have figured out that when you can convince others that your way is best, you can control them. And when you can always say your way is perfect and blame the person trying to carry it out when your way doesn't work, you don't even need to think up ways that work. Shaming people for not doing your way good enough works better than giving people actual answers anyway. They'll be so busy trying to live up to your unachievable standard they won't notice flaws in your way, while people unencumbered with this unachievability will notice flaws in your way even if there aren't any flaws.

...
God creating the earth is an unfalsifiable claim. Whether we can observe the earth or not, we cannot know that God didn't create it. Even if we could not observe the earth, it might still exist somewhere we didn't look, and therefore not observing the earth does not and cannot falsify the claim that God created it.

That is why I think the whole idea of falsification is pointless and can’t be used really in this kind of debate. There is always possibility to say that there is some other option.

All the things that happened in the past are unfalsifiable. As are all true things.

Demonstrating the reliability of an unfalsifiable belief given the apparent impossibility of ever having a way to determine if the belief is mistaken would falsify the claim that falsifiability is necessary for the formation of a demonstrably reliable belief.

To be fair, 1213 just did this. The belief that swans exist is not falsifiable. It is a reliable belief.



Clearly, a demonstrably reliable belief can be formed by observation without falsification, as long as one still relies upon evidence.

The belief that some swans can shoot fireballs is likewise not technically falsifiable, but a good rule of thumb is still to rely on evidence.

The belief that some swans can shoot fireballs can be confirmed, but not falsified. So I will look for a reasonable amount of time (yes, this is a judgment call) and if I can't confirm it, I will say that swans probably can't shoot fireballs. If I happen to want to go above and beyond, I'll dissect some animals that can shoot fireballs and some swans, and if I can't find any sort of structure analogous to the draconis fundamentum (third lung) or any method of producing fire, I'll likewise say it's probably not true.

[bluegreenearth]

...
God creating the earth is an unfalsifiable claim. Whether we can observe the earth or not, we cannot know that God didn't create it. Even if we could not observe the earth, it might still exist somewhere we didn't look, and therefore not observing the earth does not and cannot falsify the claim that God created it.

That is why I think the whole idea of falsification is pointless and can’t be used really in this kind of debate. There is always possibility to say that there is some other option.

What would be another method for reliably and objectively determining if a claim is false or not?