What kind of evidence would prove god ?

seamus

HHobo wrote: »

Can God not simply choose not to and yet be extant all the while?

Sorry, yes of course. I was thinking more in the interventionist vein which requires the worship and toil and that.

There's always the possibility of the non-interventionist god, but that's as good as no god.

Lelantos

seamus wrote: »

Well yes. A god being a god, would know exactly what evidence would convince everyone and provide it to us all simultaneously.

The question asks for a definition of an actual falsifiable test for a concept which exists outside the boundaries of falsifiability and lacks definition. If the concept is undefinable, then the test is too undefinable.

Therefore the only being which knows the answer to the OP's question is "God". "God" has failed to provide this evidence, ergo, "God" does not exist.

But again, a non believer can call bs to this statement. Its the you will believe when he reveals himself argument. It offers nothing other than the parental pat on the head when explaining the workings of Santa to a 5yo

Andrewf20

A visit from one of God's Angels

antiskeptic wrote: »

Hopefully the above will indicate why this is a groundless position for you to hold. You have to ask youself: is the creator of the universe capable dispelling doubt without having to jump through his own hoops by using method along the way.

But you can't do anything as such to get yourself saved (in the sense of generating something out of self as opposed to God pressing something out of you). God will lead you along the path and questions will be asked of you...

The answer does involve you but in the sense of being subject to God configuring you so that you know it's him.

I see what you are getting at. However, until I have a genuine spiritual experience it is not a groundless position to hold. In other words, my doubt does have merit when the empirical evidence is not suffiicient to make me believe in God.

And this leads me onto the following, based on the argument as I see it so far...

Athiesm and Agnosticism can be acceptable positions to hold as conversion to belief in God may require a personal revelation at some point in the future, even if its last minute on a persons deathbed. God will decide whether he reveals himself to individuals based on how he views their actions and thoughts through their lives.

Whats your thoughts on this?

HHobo

seamus wrote: »

Sorry, yes of course. I was thinking more in the interventionist vein which requires the worship and toil and that.

There's always the possibility of the non-interventionist god, but that's as good as no god.

There is the possibility of a God who intervenes and, being God, is capable of doing so while leaving no trace of the fact for us to find. Deeply, deeply implausible, of course, but a possibility. Thats the trouble with all powerful entities; they can do anything!

There are other angles to come at the interventionist God though, so it definately has problems. Assuming a non-interventionist God though. If said God punishes and rewards postumously, then this God is extremely significant despite the non intervention.

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Zombrex wrote: »

Let me ask you a simple question, do you believe that if God exists then creation itself is a revelation from God?

Not at all a simple question but..

In so far as it expresses inalienable* truths (whatever about the possibility of those truths being suppressed by us), yes.

*where 'inalienable' means not arrived at by human contrivance.

PopePalpatine

Archaeological and historical evidence that the bible is literal ?

robindch wrote: »

They could come from a certain strand of Jesuitical religious philosophy, or perhaps a parallel protestant one, in which the aim of some block of dense prose is not to inform or debate, but simply to bamboozle by the continuous conflation of arbitrary levels; the confused and babbling use of misleading terms which are poorly defined, where they are defined at all; the bald belief that if a string of words sounds good, then whatever meaning the unfortunate and abused reader can cobble together must be good too.

Or as I prefer to call it. John Waters-ing. :pac:

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Lelantos wrote: »

This whole thread seems to be an attempt to prove a negative. No matter what evidence is presented, be it simultaneously appearing to each single person in the world, or raising the dead, or whatever absolute a believer puts forward, a non believer can say its the work of an advanced race or mass hysteria/illusion. Can anyone prove otherwise?

Earlier I posted on the meaning of the 'glory' of the God, where the Hebrew gives the impression of 'immense stature'

Given sufficient immensity there won't be any unbelievers. Or as the bible puts it;

"Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord"

Mark Hamill

HHobo wrote: »

There is the possibility of a God who intervenes and, being God, is capable of doing so while leaving no trace of the fact for us to find.

If we are completely unable to detect a trace of this fact, then this god is indistinguishable from not existing.

HHobo wrote: »

Assuming a non-interventionist God though. If said God punishes and rewards postumously, then this God is extremely significant despite the non intervention.

If said god is non-interventionist, then how would we know what it would punish us for?

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

robindch wrote: »

No, on the contrary. I am pointing out that you are saying nothing at all. The sentences I quoted above mean -- in real terms -- nothing. Absolutely nothing at all. They are pure, unadulterated, meaningless hot air.

Pointing and showing are worlds apart.

So let's have a closer look. Go through the "sophistry" starting at sentence 1 and stop at the first sentence you have a problem with (bearing in mind the context of the discussion: post 19 in this thread sets the scene)

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Andrewf20 wrote: »

I see what you are getting at.

You wouldn't PM Zombrex on that would you?

However, until I have a genuine spiritual experience it is not a groundless position to hold. In other words, my doubt does have merit when the empirical evidence is not suffiicient to make me believe in God.

No argument there: unless God shows up to your satisfaction (however that may be) the safest thing to do, it strikes me, is maintain a level of doubt.

The ball is ultimately in God's court - he must steer the ship (whatever about your contributing). Anything else leaves you open to the possibility of creating a god in own image. There's a lot of it about


Having said all that, my last post to Zombrex points out that the world both around us and in us, testifies (revelation) to the existence of 'God' . It might be shady, it might be unclear, it might be as through a glass darkly (which enables us to deny - if that is what you want). It nevertheless does enquire of us and probe us and test us. This, to find out where we stand regarding the 'things of God'.

And answer we do. Help that we cannot. God doesn't leave us silence as an option.

And this leads me onto the following, based on the argument as I see it so far...

Athiesm and Agnosticism can be acceptable positions to hold as conversion to belief in God may require a personal revelation at some point in the future, even if its last minute on a persons deathbed. God will decide whether he reveals himself to individuals based on how he views their actions and thoughts through their lives.

Whats your thoughts on this?

I see our fate in our hands. If we meet God's criterion for showing up then show up he will. He might be the enabler of the whole mechanism, ensuring there is no stone left unturned, no option for salvation lost (this is a double edged sword mind, since it leaves us no argument come damnation). But we are the button pushers - even be it on our deathbed.




On atheism/agnosticism:

Have you ever tried swatting a fly? Apparently, our hand movements are to the fly what slow motion is to television viewing. The fly weaves around our flailing hands as if they were still.

So it is with God's mechanism of salvation. It is a fly to crude, lumbering terms like atheism and agnosticism. It seeks out the heart of a person, weaving effortlessly around the coarse labels folk attach to themselves and others. And into the heart of the matter.

You might be an atheist yet your heart yearns for righteousness in the world. You might be an agnostic yet your heart cries out about the injustices we read of all day long. Does God give a fig about the label. Or does he care about the person and the fact that he's trying to bring them to see that they're a part of the problem of unrighteousness and injustice. In their own lives and in their own ways.


Be an atheist. Be an agnostic. It doesn't matter a fig to God's way of salvation/

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Have you ever tried swatting a fly? Apparently, our hand movements are to the fly what slow motion is to television viewing. The fly weaves around our flailing hands as if they were still.

I have a good track record in swatting flies with just my hands - you only have to create the illusion that your hands are doing something else. Perhaps I have similarly fooled other supreme beings? That's possible, yes?

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

You might be an atheist yet your heart yearns for righteousness in the world. You might be an agnostic yet your heart cries out about the injustices we read of all day long. Does God give a fig about the label. Or does he care about the person and the fact that he's trying to bring them to see that they're a part of the problem of unrighteousness and injustice. In their own lives and in their own ways.

Please insert "christian" instead of "atheist" into this paragraph and see does it make any whit of difference to the outcome. We can all yearn for righteousness - we atheists acknowledge that it comes down to us as humans though. God is not apparent.

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Obliq wrote: »

Please insert "christian" instead of "atheist" into this paragraph and see does it make any whit of difference to the outcome. We can all yearn for righteousness - we atheists acknowledge that it comes down to us as humans though. God is not apparent.

Since you rely on humans to bring about righteousness the opportunity exists for your yearning to crank up to unbearable levels (since there isn't rat's arse of a chance that humans will bring righteousness about).

If it doesn't so crank up, then perhaps you didn't really yearn as much as you figured you were yearning.

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Obliq wrote: »

I have a good track record in swatting flies with just my hands - you only have to create the illusion that your hands are doing something else. Perhaps I have similarly fooled other supreme beings? That's possible, yes?

That's analogies for you. There's always one who figures how to beat it.

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Since you rely on humans to bring about righteousness the opportunity exists for your yearning to crank up to unbearable levels (since there isn't rat's arse of a chance that humans will bring righteousness about).

If it doesn't so crank up, then perhaps you didn't really yearn as much as you figured you were yearning.

I don't see where I ever said my yearning for righteousness gets cranked up to unbearable levels. Sometimes, I'll admit, my yearning for equality in my own country causes me much sadness - and I do agree there isn't a rat's chance that humans will oblige in my lifetime. However, I will categorically state there is less chance of aliens or a god obliging, than there is of humans. Correct me if I'm wrong - the proof will be in the pudding.

As for your last sentence - do you truly believe that the more you yearn (as a christian human) the more likely it is that your prayers will be answered by some inhuman power? Tell that to the devout parent of a starving child in some "god-forsaken" place in the world.

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

I have a good track record in swatting flies with just my hands - you only have to create the illusion that your hands are doing something else. Perhaps I have similarly fooled other supreme beings? That's possible, yes?

Video or GTFO

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Obliq wrote: »

I don't see where I ever said my yearning for righteousness gets cranked up to unbearable levels. Sometimes, I'll admit, my yearning for equality in my own country causes me much sadness - and I do agree there isn't a rat's chance that humans will oblige in my lifetime.

My apologies: I was indicating that the way of salvation has something to do with a yearning for righteousness that becomes unbearable. I'd agree that any old dog in the street can yearn for a bit of righteousness - especially when they're at the receiving end of it's counterpart.

However, I will categorically state there is less chance of aliens or a god obliging, than there is of humans. Correct me if I'm wrong - the proof will be in the pudding.

Twill indeed.

As for your last sentence - do you truly believe that the more you yearn (as a christian human) the more likely it is that your prayers will be answered by some inhuman power? Tell that to the devout parent of a starving child in some "god-forsaken" place in the world.

That wasn't what I meant.

I meant that someone yearning for righteousness (most keenly when it came to resolving unrighteousness perceived to exist within themselves) was, in my estimation and experience, someone for whom the mechanism of salvation was reaping positive rewards. First comes the humbling, then comes the salvation.

Then comes the humbling again...

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Video or GTFO

Ha! I'm too quick for any video missus....just call me Elastigirl.

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

That wasn't what I meant.

I meant that someone yearning for righteousness (most keenly when it came to resolving unrighteousness perceived to exist within themselves) was, in my estimation and experience, someone for whom the mechanism of salvation was reaping positive rewards. First comes the humbling, then comes the salvation.

Then comes the humbling again...

Oh right. What I get from that is you believe someone who is seeking salvation from unrighteousness through belief is yearning for righteousness in a more beneficial way than someone who seeks righteousness without belief. Again, may I say, tell that to the devout parent of a starving child.

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

Ha! I'm too quick for any video missus....just call me Elastigirl.

Stop Motion Photographs or GTFO.

:pac:

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Stop Motion Photographs or GTFO.

:pac:

Ok. Will talk to my eldest. Has to be fly season though, or we'll be here for a while

Seriously - I have a good kill count. My eldest says "frag number", but I don't understand such speak...

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Obliq wrote: »

Oh right. What I get from that is you believe someone who is seeking salvation from unrighteousness through belief is yearning for righteousness in a more beneficial way than someone who seeks righteousness without belief. Again, may I say, tell that to the devout parent of a starving child.

I'm not sure how you picked that up. My comments involved only those who were unbelivers. Whilst all unbelievers (and believers) seek righteousness, some unbelievers reach a point where the (recognition of) unrighteousness in themselves causes unbearable pain.

Which causes them to seek release in the only way considered viable (other failing analgesics possibly being drugs, sex, work, hobbies, television, cinema, success seeking..)

Which brings them to God. Job's oxo.


-


The above progression is open to much misinterpretation (such as seeing "going to the cinema" as always an attempt to find release from the oppression of being unrighteousness. Despite my attemping to head such misinterpretation off at the pass)

Hercule Poirot

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

I would be very surprised if God did appear though, the whole foundation of the main religions is faith, i.e., you choose to believe that God exists. If he appeared then his existence would become fact (for most people - there will always be dissenters). It would be like a table - you don't believe in a table, you don't have faith in a table but you know that you can put something on a table and it will be held up. With certain knowledge there would be no belief.

That being said, if a 20 foot tall, old man appears and starts shooting thunderbolts out of his hands then I'd probably soil myself and start going to mass again

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Hercule Poirot wrote: »

I would be very surprised if God did appear though, the whole foundation of the main religions is faith, i.e., you choose to believe that God exists.

I'd advise looking other than in The God Delusion and it's ilk for your theological definitions.

Dawkins has be rightfully described as theologically illiterate.

Bannasidhe

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'm not sure how you picked that up. My comments involved only those who were unbelivers. Whilst all unbelievers (and believers) seek righteousness, some unbelievers reach a point where the (recognition of) unrighteousness in themselves causes unbearable pain.

Which causes them to seek release in the only way considered viable (other failing analgesics possibly being drugs, sex, work, hobbies, television, cinema, success seeking..)

Which brings them to God. Job's oxo.


-


The above progression is open to much misinterpretation (such as seeing "going to the cinema" as always an attempt to find release from the oppression of being unrighteousness. Despite my attemping to head such misinterpretation off at the pass)

It certainly isn't open to any interpretation that makes sense.

I seek no 'righteousness' nor do I yearn for salvation,or am I in unbearable pain (except when reading the turgid nonsense above) - do stop projecting your own sense of futility and meaningless on others. There's a good chap.

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Bannasidhe wrote: »

It certainly isn't open to any interpretation that makes sense.

I seek no 'righteousness' nor do I yearn for salvation,or am I in unbearable pain (except when reading the turgid nonsense above) - do stop projecting your own sense of futility and meaningless on others. There's a good chap.

Righto!

NEXT!!

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'm not sure how you picked that up. My comments involved only those who were unbelivers. Whilst all unbelievers (and believers) seek righteousness, some unbelievers reach a point where the (recognition of) unrighteousness in themselves causes unbearable pain.

Which causes them to seek release in the only way considered viable (other failing analgesics possibly being drugs, sex, work, hobbies, television, cinema, success seeking..)

Which brings them to God. Job's oxo.


-


The above progression is open to much misinterpretation (such as seeing "going to the cinema" as always an attempt to find release from the oppression of being unrighteousness. Despite my attemping to head such misinterpretation off at the pass)

Hmmm. I would say that the above is open to much interpretation alright - Using the word "misinterpretation" would indicate a belief that what you say about turning to a god is correct, and that I am not interpreting your assertions properly. I have no evidence for atheists becoming desperate enough to turn to a belief in a supernatural power that there has never been any evidence for - do you? I am basing that on my experience of several atheists that I knew dying without any conversion. Your experience please???

Obliq

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Righto!

NEXT!!

Righto is an argument? Not good enough for A&A buddy....better luck next time. :pac:

antiskeptic

None of the above, and even if its proved he exists, I'll still be rejecting him

Obliq wrote: »

Hmmm. I would say that the above is open to much interpretation alright - Using the word "misinterpretation" would indicate a belief that what you say about turning to a god is correct, and that I am not interpreting your assertions properly.

I was merely trying the point out that escapes people might use (cinema) to evade the pressure of their unrighteousness need not always be escapes from the pressure of unrighteousness.

This within the framework of explaining a mechanism that need not be believed in, in order to be understood.

I have no evidence for atheists becoming desperate enough to turn to a belief in a supernatural power that there has never been any evidence for - do you?

Are you asking whether atheists have converted having had a sense of desparation about their unrighteousness?

What would you do if I found one (and I'm pretty sure I can given access to the web)?


Don't confuse approaching death with conviction of unrighteousness. The former happens us all, the latter is something God brings about in response to our response to our unrighteousness. Evade God's attempt to convict you and you'll die an atheist - horror of approaching death or no.

Hercule Poirot

An extraordinary event/miracle, like raising someone from the dead, creating a new planet etc. etc.

antiskeptic wrote: »

I'd advise looking other than in The God Delusion and it's ilk for your theological definitions.

Dawkins has be rightfully described as theologically illiterate.

I don't understand your point. Since the existence of any God cannot be proved religions rely on the faith of it's parishoners, that they accept theological teachings and believe them to be true accounts of past events.