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

Online
User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11446
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 326 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #2

Post by 1213 »

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?

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 #3

Post by Willum »

[Replying to 1213 in post #2]

“Nothing is ever created nor destroyed - only transformed from one state to another.”

If nothing was ever created, your belief is specious. No creation, no creator.

Is there any reason to believe the barely coherent ramblings of 3rd century goat hoarders over repeated and I unviolated observation, that is applied in nearly every discipline of science, engineering and technology?

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 #4

Post by JoeyKnothead »

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.
God is the creator. [JK corrected from "good"]
So unevidenced assertions're direct evidence of God's existence?
Created things are the evidence for creator. We can see the created things, therefore we have evidence for the creator.
You've not shown the universe was created, so your assertions to that effect're empty.
If this is not direct evidence, can you show an example of direct evidence for anything?
I'm under no obligation to support claims I ain't made.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 6002
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6623 times
Been thanked: 3219 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #5

Post by brunumb »

1213 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:18 am We can see the created things, therefore we have evidence for the creator.
What criteria do you apply to establish that the things you see have been created or not?
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 8146
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 954 times
Been thanked: 3545 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #6

Post by TRANSPONDER »

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?
I think we can. In the old days, comets and lightning were considered supernatural events. We now know they are not. The appeal to Creation is now under pressure as creation accepting to Genesis is not in accordance with the evidence, and you have to choose to adapt Godfaith to what the science says about the development of Life (give or take the origins of DNA) or stick on science- denial.

But look at the title. 'God'. Not 'a god'. Even if the case for creation was validated, that only gets you to Allah or Shiva. What is the 'direct' evidence for Bible -god?

Online
User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11446
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 326 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #7

Post by 1213 »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:43 am ...The appeal to Creation is now under pressure as creation accepting to Genesis is not in accordance with the evidence, and you have to choose to adapt Godfaith to what the science says about the development of Life (give or take the origins of DNA) or stick on science- denial.
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.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:43 amBut look at the title. 'God'. Not 'a god'. Even if the case for creation was validated, that only gets you to Allah or Shiva. What is the 'direct' evidence for Bible -god?
Bible God shows knowledge and understanding that no other god shows. That is why I reject the others.

Online
User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11446
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 326 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #8

Post by 1213 »

brunumb wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 8:37 am
1213 wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:18 am We can see the created things, therefore we have evidence for the creator.
What criteria do you apply to establish that the things you see have been created or not?
For example, if life could begin from dead material without God, I think we should be able to observe it happening in nature. We don't see that, therefore creator is needed.

But, my point was only to show what is the evidence for God. Evidence doesn't necessary mean that the matter is true, it is only a sign for that it mat be so. God and probably everything else remain always a matter of belief.

Online
User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11446
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 326 times
Been thanked: 370 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #9

Post by 1213 »

Willum wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 5:56 am [Replying to 1213 in post #2]

“Nothing is ever created nor destroyed - only transformed from one state to another.”

If nothing was ever created, your belief is specious. No creation, no creator.

Is there any reason to believe the barely coherent ramblings of 3rd century goat hoarders over repeated and I unviolated observation, that is applied in nearly every discipline of science, engineering and technology?
If evidence means "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid", created things are evidence for creator. That things exist indicates that someone created them. However, I understand and agree that there can be other explanations. My point is not to claim that creation is a fact, only that we can see things that indicate that things could have been created. If we would not see anything that the Bible tells were created, we could tell that Bible is not probably true, but because we can see the things, we have evidence it might be true, as I believe it is. Evidence is not a proof and there can be also other explanations for the evidence.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 8146
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 954 times
Been thanked: 3545 times

Re: Direct evidence for the existence of God.

Post #10

Post by TRANSPONDER »

1213 wrote: Tue Jun 21, 2022 7:05 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:43 am ...The appeal to Creation is now under pressure as creation accepting to Genesis is not in accordance with the evidence, and you have to choose to adapt Godfaith to what the science says about the development of Life (give or take the origins of DNA) or stick on science- denial.
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.
TRANSPONDER wrote: Mon Jun 20, 2022 9:43 amBut look at the title. 'God'. Not 'a god'. Even if the case for creation was validated, that only gets you to Allah or Shiva. What is the 'direct' evidence for Bible -god?
Bible God shows knowledge and understanding that no other god shows. That is why I reject the others.
Science shows hard evidence and indeed verification for its' claims. If you dismiss and deny that, it is up to you, but it is no case or argument and certainly no hard evidence for a god.

Bible God shows no admirable morality, knowledge or understanding. Denial of science and dubious faithclaims do not make a case for God.

Post Reply