Evidence of God's existence

[Eljah702]

Do you not have the mental capacity to understand that there is a pretty huge difference between asserting that something is a positive fact and denying that? When you assert that something is a positive fact, you must offer some form of evidence or proof. It must be ADEQUATE.

i have done that. if you do not be able to recognize it, it is not my fault.

Your arguments have all been discharged.

So what ? you can also discharge, that 2 + 2 is 4......

It is not the nature of an argument to stand when challenged by a stronger counter-argument.

where is it ?

I'm seriously driven to tear my skin off. You are bereft of reason. You're trying to 'enlighten' us, when you don't even understand basic concepts behind logical reasoning. Fail.

what logic do i not understand ?

Well, you have neither evidence nor proof of God's existence.

i have plenty of evidence, and shown it. Your assertion is baseless.

Your antediluvian arguments failed and you cannot point to any scientifically proven instance of contact with God.

it was at no moment my goal to prove something.

 

[Haruspex]

i have done that. if you do not be able to recognize it, it is not my fault.

Adequate. Adequate. ADEQUATE! What is provided is not.

So what ? you can also discharge, that 2 + 2 is 4...

You can't explain God into existence through philosophy, bloody hell. People have been telling you this for four damn pages.

where is it ?

Where is what?

what logic do i not understand?

The one behind logical reasoning, as I have said. Take the burden of proof example above.

i have plenty of evidence, and shown it. Your assertion is baseless.

Arguments are NOT invulnerable. Another example of how you cannot reason logically.

it was at no moment my goal to prove something.

So you deny the fact that you came here to prove that God exists?

 

[Eljah702]

So you deny the fact that you came here to prove that God exists?

yes, certainly. I came to show evidence, not proves.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

One cannot prove that God does not exist, anymore than one can prove that flying saucers or Bigfoot don't exist. You can't prove the negative of a proposition.

In court (Western ones anyway) a criminal defendant does not have to prove he is innocent (i.e., that he did not commit the crime). The state has the burden of proving the defendant is guilty.

The existence of an omnipotent, supernatural deity is an extraordinary claim. If you were raised to worship God, it may not seem extraordinary, but that is how it looks scientifically. Science has never detected, measured, or contacted such a being.

You might say that life on earth could not exist without a supernatural creator. An untestable, speculative claim which, I admit, has considerable appeal. But this is not the only extraordinary, speculative basis for life to exist here. Maybe aliens zipped by and seeded the earth.

After all, science has never detected, measured, or contacted such beings either.

 

[RavenRockstar]

Baisically, Elija, you have come here to put some "Evidence" out, and you've done that. Therefore, there is no point in you still being here if you have nothing to prove.

 

[Eljah702]

One cannot prove that God does not exist, anymore than one can prove that flying saucers or Bigfoot don't exist. You can't prove the negative of a proposition.
In court (Western ones anyway) a criminal defendant does not have to prove he is innocent (i.e., that he did not commit the crime). The state has the burden of proving the defendant is guilty.
The existence of an omnipotent, supernatural deity is an extraordinary claim. If you were raised to worship God, it may not seem extraordinary, but that is how it looks scientifically. Science has never detected, measured, or contacted such a being.
You might say that life on earth could not exist without a supernatural creator. An untestable, speculative claim which, I admit, has considerable appeal. But this is not the only extraordinary, speculative basis for life to exist here. Maybe aliens zipped by and seeded the earth.
After all, science has never detected, measured, or contacted such beings either.

of course, if God is a meta-physical entity, he cannot be detected by science. Does this mean , he does not exist ? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the origin and existence of the universe, please give a better explanation. What alternative do you suggest ?

 

[Eljah702]

Baisically, Elija, you have come here to put some "Evidence" out, and you've done that. Therefore, there is no point in you still being here if you have nothing to prove.

Well, its up to me to decide, when to go. ok ?!!

 

[Mycernius]

The claim, no god exists, is a much more extraordinary, than that God exists.

No it isn't. It is a default position for anybody. You have made the claim, I haven't. You must now give the evidence for the existance of a divine magic being, which you have failed on, time and time again. What you are now doing is projecting your failure onto the rest of us. What you are doing is known as argument from ignorance and argument from personal incredulity. What you are doing is because you see lack of evidence on my part therefore makes your claim true. I do not need to present evidence, that is to you. That is then examined and discussed based on its merits. So far the merits on your part are sadly lacking. each one has been examined and shown to be false. So far you are wallowing in a sae of logical fallacies. it is about time you educated yourself on them before you make any more. See this thread
Please read and digest:
Burden of proof

If you deny God's existence, you need to show evidence that backs up your claim as well.

No, see above. Once more you rely on false fallacies.

Please show me, that our existence, and the existence of the universe, is better explained through anything else than God.

Again argument from ignorance. God of the gaps argument. Go and educate yourself on quantum physics, cosmology, biology, astrophysics, evolution instead of relying on a dusty book that has shown to be inconsistant with a being in it that is vainglourious, bi-polar, malevolent, murdering psychotic, sinful and egotistical. And that is just a few of its faults.

i have united overwhelmig evidence of God's existence at my forum :
http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/doe...f10/arguments-for-the-existence-of-god-t5.htm

Your so called evidence is apologetic BS and the same argument that you used on the OP. This is too funny. At no point has any theist provided any peer reviewed sceintific evidence for the creation of the universe by a god. Until such time all creationist BS will be regarded as BS until at some time they actually come up with realiable, testable evidence.

may you don't understand the subtile difference between evidence, and proof ?

That's rich. coming from somebody who doesn't understand logical fallacies.
I would like you to show why your are right, to provide some real evidence for your god, to show why Hezams' Islamic view is wrong, but yours is right. So the challenge is
1. Provide evidence for the universe to be created by a god or gods
2. Provide that said diety was your particular god (Christian god)
Have a watch
Creationists being pawnd



Evolution
http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/7/EEKqqrfWevc
Origins of life
http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/16/v8nYTJf62sE
The Universe
http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/13/uihNu9Icaeo
http://www.youtube.com/user/potholer54#p/u/12/bK6_p5a-Hbo

Thanks to AronRa, RedDevilFFM and Potholer54 for the youtube vids. Also look through
Thunderf00ts Why do people laugh at Creationists? set of videos (31 in total)
http://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t#p/u (Thunderf00ts channel)
AronRas Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism series
http://www.youtube.com/user/AronRa (AronRas channel)
CDK007s channel that also deals with creationist lies and BS.
http://www.youtube.com/user/cdk007

I have science and logic on my side, you have a dusty 2000 years old book written by desert nomads. Work it out yourself.

 

[Mycernius]

of course, if God is a meta-physical entity, he cannot be detected by science. Does this mean , he does not exist ? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the origin and existence of the universe, please give a better explanation. What alternative do you suggest ?

Typical theist evasion. I have provided much better links for the universe and it creation. God is one of the most pathetic and this is basically you saying "I don't need to put up evidence". The reason being is because you DO NOT HAVE ANY. Evasion is all you are doing because you know, deep down, you have no evidence and when confronted with member asking for it you have been driven into a corner so you come out with this tired old theistic canard.

If that is your stance saying god is eternal then I am saying the universe is eternal. It was never created it has always been here. it is obvious isn't it and I don't need to give any evidence for it because it is then best explanation.

Stop evading, either put up or shut up.

 

[Eljah702]

I have provided much better links for the universe and it creation. .

have you ? where is it ?

 

[Haruspex]

have you ? where is it ?

What is with all the selective responses?

 

[Eljah702]

What is with all the selective responses?

well, i would like to see concrete and clear proposals, and the evidence of it. So far, i have not seen any.

 

[Haruspex]

well, i would like to see concrete and clear proposals, and the evidence of it. So far, i have not seen any.

That is not an answer to my question rofl.

 

[Hezam]

If we read the Bible and Quran and Tawrat,we will find some similiarity about Prophets like ( Adam,Abraham,Nawah,Moses,Jesus,...etc and all of them worship Allah,they came with different teachs and this theory is very very old.
could we call this evidence or maybe proof ?
And please let's keep friendly ^___^

 

[Mycernius]

If we read the Bible and Quran and Tawrat,we will find some similiarity about Prophets like ( Adam,Abraham,Nawah,Moses,Jesus,...etc and all of them worship Allah,they came with different teachs and this theory is very very old.
could we call this evidence or maybe proof ?
And please let's keep friendly ^___^

No, not really. Islam and christianity are off shoots of the same religion, which is Judaism. That in its self has its roots in older mythology from the area (Sumerian/Babylonian/Canaanite etc). Each teaches esentially the same idea, but that idea is found within mythology and erligions in non-related parts of the world.
Christianities prophets are all Jewish in origin in the OT, hence the similarities. Jesus is a christian invention and puts a new spin on an old myth. Islam comes along and again borrows from the OT prophets and Jesus from the NT and creates its own prophet as Mohammad. All it is a new twist on old teachings. It happens again and again with it thus you then get the Bahais from islam and Mormons and JWs from christianity. All it is is a different outlook or translation on an old text. As the old texts are written by people who didn't understand the world and how it works then they are no good as an explanation for the world and how it works. Essentially it is chinese whispers on a grand scale.

There is also the existance of many more religious texts that are not related to the Judaic god. If you say that the bible/torah/quran are all evidence for the existance of god then all other texts have as much validity. The problem is they all say that they are right and every other is wrong. Since there is no testable (something that Eljah702 hasn't understood yet) way of seperating one from the other so we know which is true then they can all be discarded as evidence as they will contradict each other. Plus the fact that they manage to contradict themselves in their own texts is also evidence that they are inherently flawed. That is why it is called faith because there is no evidence.

have you ? where is it ?

I'm starting to think you are trolling this board and hve no interest in anything in the way of a proper disscusion. So far you have posted blind assertions, shown you have no grasp on logic and the ability to debate in a resoned manner. When put on the spot you evade or just ignore the questions or come out with a vacuous comment.

Watch the links I provided from CDK007, AronRa and Thunderf00t. I have had to watch cr@p from lying creotards such as Behe then you can at least take time to return the favour, or are you just going to sit there and continue your impression of the three wise monkeys.

I also give you this from another forum I post on. I have a great respect for Calilasseia and all I need do is just go through some of his other posts to find the relevant peer reviewed papers that blow your blind assertions out of the water.
FOR ONCE READ IT instead of giving your "no evidence BS again. I have said I am waiting for your wonderful evidence that shows that god exists. Seeing that learned men much better than you haven't managed it in the last several thousand years I am not expecting much> But you might have some knock out evidence that will put us poor heathens/infidels/atheists> i await your peer reviewed papers and your acceptance of the Noble prize

 

[Hezam]

No, not really. Islam and christianity are off shoots of the same religion, which is Judaism. That in its self has its roots in older mythology from the area (Sumerian/Babylonian/Canaanite etc). Each teaches esentially the same idea, but that idea is found within mythology and erligions in non-related parts of the world.
Christianities prophets are all Jewish in origin in the OT, hence the similarities. Jesus is a christian invention and puts a new spin on an old myth. Islam comes along and again borrows from the OT prophets and Jesus from the NT and creates its own prophet as Mohammad. All it is a new twist on old teachings. It happens again and again with it thus you then get the Bahais from islam and Mormons and JWs from christianity. All it is is a different outlook or translation on an old text. As the old texts are written by people who didn't understand the world and how it works then they are no good as an explanation for the world and how it works. Essentially it is chinese whispers on a grand scale.

There is also the existance of many more religious texts that are not related to the Judaic god. If you say that the bible/torah/quran are all evidence for the existance of god then all other texts have as much validity. The problem is they all say that they are right and every other is wrong. Since there is no testable (something that Eljah702 hasn't understood yet) way of seperating one from the other so we know which is true then they can all be discarded as evidence as they will contradict each other. Plus the fact that they manage to contradict themselves in their own texts is also evidence that they are inherently flawed. That is why it is called faith because there is no evidence.

Thanks for the long reply,it took your time though !!

 

[Eljah702]

But you might have some knock out evidence that will put us poor heathens/infidels/atheists> i await your peer reviewed papers and your acceptance of the Noble prize

So, no answer to my question ???? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the existence of our universe, you must have on hand a BETTER explanation. Please tell me which it is, and the evidence to back up YOUR claim. I am asking YOU to move forward now, and bring up your point. I am patiently waiting.

 

[Haruspex]

So, no answer to my question ???? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the existence of our universe, you must have on hand a BETTER explanation. Please tell me which it is, and the evidence to back up YOUR claim. I am asking YOU to move forward now, and bring up your point. I am patiently waiting.

You don't have to have a better explanation. An explanation is good or poor by virtue of the evidence or proof offered in light of how elaborate the claim is. If the evidence is poor, you have a weak or nonexistent claim, regardless of any other claims. Truth is not influenced by whether we know it or not, it exist separately from our beliefs.

 

[Half-n-Half]

So, no answer to my question ???? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the existence of our universe, you must have on hand a BETTER explanation. Please tell me which it is, and the evidence to back up YOUR claim. I am asking YOU to move forward now, and bring up your point. I am patiently waiting.

Trying to find an explanation for the universe without God is like trying to disprove the existence of God; it can't be done. However, it can be demonstrated that the evidence you provide that you claim necessitates a God can be disproven and therefore it is not necessary for a God to exist in order for the universe to exist. Keep in mind, this is not the same as saying a God does not exist, just that it is not necessary for one to exist.

If you wish, I can compile a comprehensive list of arguments against the evidence you have presented here. All I ask is that you actually read it. So, in light of your desire for us to move forward and bring up our point, do you want me to compile this list?

 

[Mycernius]

So, no answer to my question ???? If you think, God is not a good explanation for the existence of our universe, you must have on hand a BETTER explanation. Please tell me which it is, and the evidence to back up YOUR claim. I am asking YOU to move forward now, and bring up your point. I am patiently waiting.

Are you just purposely evading or do you really not understand how this works? The burden of proof is on you, you musts provide the evidence. You have made the claim that a god exists, all we are waiting is for you to provide the proper, critically robust evidence to support your claim.

I have refuted your claims on your OP, so has RavenRockstar, Derfel, Half-n-Half, Tsuyoiko and even Hezam, and he is a fellow theist. Do you suffer from some sort of reading defect in which your brain just ignores anything that answers your rubbish. Your OP was a bunch of blind assertions and deeply flawed arguments, and yet you continually fail to grasp this simple concept of you must provide the evidence. Instead you evade and try and turn it around onto us. Typical theistic fundamentalism I have seen on other boards. You post apologetic BS instead of evidence. I provide links to CDK007, AronRas, Thunder00ts channels that each deal with mindless drivel that is constantly erected by delusional theists, and yet you seem to have not bothered to even watch and comprehend what is being told to you.

Once again I do not need to provide any evidence whatsoever. The onus is on YOU.
YOU made the claim, YOU made the blind assertions, YOU need to put up robust, objective, critical evidence for a magic sky fairy. Until you do you will be treated by the obvious troll you are becoming. Get it through your skull!

 

[Eljah702]

Once again I do not need to provide any evidence whatsoever. The onus is on YOU.
!

I have already linked to my forum, and thread , with tons of clear and plausible evidence of the existence of God. Fact that you reject and declare it as non evidence, on whatever base, does not meen the evidence is not there, or that it is not valid. It meens just and only that you do not accept it. For me, and many people, it IS compelling and convincing evidence.
Fact that you however are not able to bring any alternative , speaks for itself.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

I have a psychic ability known as telekinesis; I can move objects just by thinking about it.

No, science can't test my ability because it has metaphysical properties. Trust me.

For believers, the Bible and Koran are self-authenticating texts. But to science or law, they are just hearsay, hundreds of times removed (copied, re-copied, translated, re-translated) from the original source. The only way science or law could authenticate these texts would be by testing the perceptions and credibility of the long-dead original sources.

You believers are trying to play in the wrong arena. Belief in God is simply a matter of faith. Sometimes I believe in God, sometimes I don't. But I never kid myself that God can ever be proved or disproved according to accepted scientific method.

 

[Haruspex]

I have already linked to my forum, and thread , with tons of clear and plausible evidence of the existence of God. Fact that you reject and declare it as non evidence, on whatever base, does not meen the evidence is not there, or that it is not valid. It meens just and only that you do not accept it. For me, and many people, it IS compelling and convincing evidence.
Fact that you however are not able to bring any alternative , speaks for itself.

It is not the best idea to link or quote stuff when it is unnecessary (considering that our disagreement here is mainly in respect of formalities and structure, it is unnecessary), but it seems there is no other way to resolve this issue. Here's a summary of a whole bunch of things I agree with, now lets see how you discharge them.

 

[Eljah702]

For believers, the Bible and Koran are self-authenticating texts. But to science or law, they are just hearsay, hundreds of times removed (copied, re-copied, translated, re-translated) from the original source.

Can science prove the bible has been removed from the original source ?

But I never kid myself that God can ever be proved or disproved according to accepted scientific method.

I don't assert that either.

It is not the best idea to link or quote stuff when it is unnecessary (considering that our disagreement here is mainly in respect of formalities and structure, it is unnecessary), but it seems there is no other way to resolve this issue. Here's a summary of a whole bunch of things I agree with, now lets see how you discharge them.

attempt failed again. It seems you do not understand what i am asking for ?
If you think, God is not a good explanation for the existence of our universe, you must have on hand a BETTER explanation. Please tell me which it is, and the evidence to back up YOUR claim. I am asking YOU to move forward now, and bring up your point. I am patiently waiting.

 

[RolandtheHeadless]

I already gave you a good alternative explanation, with as much real evidence to support it as yours: aliens.

Aliens with advanced technology could have created our universe as a pocket universe off a larger multiverse.

The fact that we can't explain everything in the universe does not mean we seize on the nearest available answer that suits our fancy. Sometimes we just have to say we don't know, and that is the answer.