Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #1

Post by JoeyKnothead »

For debate:

Please offer direct evidence for the existence of God, and some means to confirm it is direct evidence.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #11

Post by JoeyKnothead »

1213 wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:05 am When "science" offers nothing meaningful as real evidence for its claims, I have no intelligent reason to even consider it as an option against Genesis.
I find the use of "no intelligent reason" an important few words to consider here.
Bible God shows knowledge and understanding that no other god shows. That is why I reject the others.
I hate to break this to ya, but the bible's a compilation of human tales regarding a god that can't be shown to exist.

And ain't considered authoritative in this section of the site.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #12

Post by TRANSPONDER »

That's it , really. Though clearly the evidence for the existence of God (Biblegod) has to be reliance on the Bible (some or all of it) and that either requires dismissing some as 'Symbolic' (pack of lies) or maintain it as true, which requires denial of science. Though curiously not denying the astronomical science. There, my argument that Genesis describes the Babylonian snowdome -cosmos (and Venom asked me to show this, but I have to defer it to a later time as it is a trickier debate even that the one on the Tower of babel I had recently) is rejected and there, the science isn't denied but it is denied that the Bible says anything different, though some extraordinary theories have to be invented to explain how there was day and night before the sun was created..(1). It's the old story of Religious fundamentalism fighting a rearguard action against modern thought except where at least Some Church thought has to play catchup or get left behind.

Unless it can establish a Theocracy.

(1) But that andthe 'evidently, Mioses dreamed it all, because he wasn't t there.' theory has to wait for another time.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 9342
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 883 times
Been thanked: 1240 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #13

Post by Clownboat »

1213 wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:05 am When "science" offers nothing meaningful as real evidence for its claims, I have no intelligent reason to even consider it as an option against Genesis.
You (like all of us) will eventually die and the world will move on and Genesis beliefs will no longer be an accepted explanation. Progress takes time. Just look how long it took for enough believers to die off in order for those very same religions to now agree with evolution as an explantation or that the earth is not the center of our solar system to just name a couple.

While you are on this earth, you are free to believe the claims of any religion you choose, even if you have no intelligent reason to do so, but don't be expected to be taken seriously here on a debate forum when the claims nor the god can be evidenced.
Bible God shows knowledge and understanding that no other god shows. That is why I reject the others.
You were in fact raised in the religion you are now saddled with and that is why you reject the others. Please stop pretending that you understand other religions and made some sort of educated reasoning to pick the religion you were born in to.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #14

Post by Goat »

1213 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:18 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:39 am For debate:

Please offer direct evidence for the existence of God, and some means to confirm it is direct evidence.
Good is the creator. Created things are the evidence for creator. We can see the created things, therefore we have evidence for the creator.

If this is not direct evidence, can you show an example of direct evidence for anything?
How is that evidence at all? There are a series of unsupported claims to try to back that up.

1) Good is the creator. How do you know that? Can you objectively show what 'good' is? Can you measure good.
2) All the created things I know are created are created by man, or perhaps other types of animals (burrows and such). Man and animals are not God.

Can you give an example of a 'created' thing that wasn't made by man , or perhaps another anima
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #15

Post by Goat »

Goat wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 2:23 pm
1213 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:18 am
JoeyKnothead wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 4:39 am For debate:

Please offer direct evidence for the existence of God, and some means to confirm it is direct evidence.
Good is the creator. Created things are the evidence for creator. We can see the created things, therefore we have evidence for the creator.

If this is not direct evidence, can you show an example of direct evidence for anything?
How is that evidence at all? There are a series of unsupported claims to try to back that up.
1) Good is the creator. How do you know that? Can you objectively show what 'good' is? Can you measure good.
2) All the created things I know are created are created by man, or perhaps other types of animals (burrows and such). Man and animals are not God.

Can you give an example of a 'created' thing that wasn't made by man , or perhaps another living thing?
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #16

Post by Willum »

[Replying to 1213 in post #9]

Sadly, my non-reading friend, every body of science, every application of engineering, has observed proof that there is no thing that exists now that was ever created, only formed from a precursor.

Since nothing is or was ever created, there is no creator.

God dismissed as the fantasy of ignorant goat herders, that modern people still manage to believe.
I will never understand how someone who claims to know the ultimate truth, of God, believes they deserve respect, when they cannot distinguish it from a fairy-tale.

You know, science and logic are hard: Religion and fairy tales might be more your speed.

To continue to argue for the Hebrew invention of God is actually an insult to the very concept of a God. - Divine Insight

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11342
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 312 times
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #17

Post by 1213 »

Goat wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 2:23 pm ....
1) Good is the creator. How do you know that? Can you objectively show what 'good' is? Can you measure good.
2) All the created things I know are created are created by man, or perhaps other types of animals (burrows and such). Man and animals are not God.

Can you give an example of a 'created' thing that wasn't made by man , or perhaps another anima
Sorry, I meant God, not Good, all though I think God is good.

And, I don't think people have created anything. People can only build, form and construct from what exists, they don't really create anything.

Created things were for example this planet, animals and humans.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #18

Post by TRANSPONDER »

So, essentially we get back to 'Who made everything, then?' With denial of abiogenesis (life from non -life). The idea being that 'it is impossible to explain this other than by an Intelligent Creator'. Which is the two best apologetics for a god, though it says nothing about which one.

But the arguments have been done to death, including plants from seeds in life from non -life and protests that it is potentially life. The objection is that this supposed creator has to come from somewhere but that is dismissed. This creator was eternal and uncreated and they don't have to explain how.

But the supposed 'reasonable' agnosticism says 'nobody knows' and that is not evidence for the existence of a god. But this recurring apologetic 'What other explanation is there?' keeps being presented. The answer is not 'an intelligent creator', 'but 'we don't know'. That is not evidence, let alone direct evidence.

I need hardly reiterate the false mindset of faith here - God is the default explanation unless unbelievers can prove 100% demonstrable in real time proof of the materialist explanations down to the last nano -particle'. That is not how evidence works. But it is how gap for God apologetics work.

User avatar
Goat
Site Supporter
Posts: 24999
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 207 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #19

Post by Goat »

1213 wrote: Wed Jun 22, 2022 4:04 am
Goat wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 2:23 pm ....
1) Good is the creator. How do you know that? Can you objectively show what 'good' is? Can you measure good.
2) All the created things I know are created are created by man, or perhaps other types of animals (burrows and such). Man and animals are not God.

Can you give an example of a 'created' thing that wasn't made by man , or perhaps another anima
Sorry, I meant God, not Good, all though I think God is good.

And, I don't think people have created anything. People can only build, form and construct from what exists, they don't really create anything.

Created things were for example this planet, animals and humans.
Ok. You made the claims that 'God is the creator'. How do you know that? That looks like an axiom that there is no evidence for.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�

Steven Novella

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #20

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Saying 'God' is the axiomatic Christian fallacy, when arguing from Intelligent Creation. Because they don't know which one. This is the 'leap of faith' from the claim of some creative supernatural being to Biblegod. They assume there is only one god that could have created everything and (unless they are non -religious theists/Deists) that is what they have to argue. It comes down to the Bible and Cosmic origins and denial of Abiogenesis and evolution are really not the argument for (Bible) God.

Post Reply