Post by unknownPost by Vincent Maycocksnip
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownTry to explain WHAT type of evidence
Any kind.
You have no idea.
Footprints in the sand or snow?
And you would of course be called on personally to verify that they were
made by God, since you're such an authority. Tell us all how you would know they
were the real thing?
I don't know; but remember, mur I'm not looking for "proof" here, just
evidence. If people were always saying, "Oh, hey, look there's some
footprints in the snow again; probably God just made those footprints,
since I was just talking to him in prayer, and he said he was nearby."
Post by unknownTell us also how you know he didn't already leave
footprints a thousand years ago, or do other less pathetic things to show of his
existence.
He might have, but let's stay with what we can see and experience
rather than made-up ideas that go "how do we know ...??" and so on.
Why shouldn't he feel that the footprints and other evidence he left a
thousand years ago were good enough that he doesn't have to keep providing it
over and over and over again?
Post by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockA video-tape of God on the evening news?
Being an authority on this tell us how you would also verify the
authenticity of a video "tape", and what you imagine should be on it. What sort
of sound track? What sort of narration?
I'm thinking David Muir from ABC World News would say something like
"And in other news today, God was seen flying through the sky and
walking on water."
I would consider that to be good evidence, and possibly even proof,
depending on the circumstances, that God exists.
From my pov he would feel justified to think he doesn't need to come perform
tricks like that in an attempt to persuade people he apparently doesn't care
about anyway.
That doesn't sound like the God of the Bible ("not caring about
people"), nor should the presence of "tricks" in God's appearances be
considered the active ingredient in the viability of this
evidence/proof for God's existence, nor should a sane God consider it
"beneath him" to perform tricks in his appearances on TV.
Post by unknownIf he does exist and cared whether or not you believe it I have no
doubt he could persuade you to.
Right.
Post by unknownAnd if he exists and wanted everyone in general
to know about it, I have no doubt he could do that too.
True.
Post by unknownSo if he does exist it
seems very obvious that he wants things to be as they are, and for that reason
doesn't provide the verifiable evidence you people keep naively whining for.
There's nothing that great about the way things are right now; an
omnipotent being should be able to change it for the better.
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownyou think there should be, WHERE you
think it should be,
Anywhere.
You have no idea.
In the snow or sand?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devil's_Footprints
These animal tracks are scarcely different in quality from the
evidence for Bigfoot, what with all the questions indicating that it's
a hoax combined with the kind of tracks left by hopping wood mice.
You would no doubt say something similar about footprints of God
If it was Bigfoot-grade, with allegations of "hoax" swirling about it,
I would probably say the same thing, yes.
Post by unknowneven though
you have no idea how it could be done much less why anyone would do it.
Why do you leave footprints in the snow when you go out? Or do you
carefully destroy all evidence that you were there, the way this
supposed God does?
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownHow you would verify?
Post by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownWHY you think it should be available to humans,
Because everything that's a part of the real world makes its evidence
available to us. It's just insane to think about the myriads of
things that *could exist* but leave no trace of themselves anywhere or
any time.
Yet you have no idea what type or where God should have left this evidence
you can't even imagine but you still have great faith that something SHOULD BE
somewhere for some reason.
That's not faith;
It certainly is. Why you're ashamed of it is what's in question, not the
faith itself.
Post by Vincent Maycockthat's just a generalization of the way the world
seems to work -- things which exist seem to provide evidence for
themselves. If no evidence turns up, we discard the existence of the
entity from serious consideration.
You're not mentally capable of giving it serious consideration. The most
easy and basic starting line of this aspect is the FACT that if there is a God
associated with Earth, he doesn't want to provide proof or "verifiable evidence"
of his existence for his own reasons.
And you can think of no motivation for why he would behave this way.
I can think of a couple of reasons why he would. One would be that people
are already bothering him with prayers for things every second of every day, and
it would be a whole lot worse if people knew for a fact that he exists.
That shouldn't be a problem for an omnipotent God; and one would think
if he were struggling with a problem like this, *pretending to not
exist* would not be the most obvious solution or remedy.
Post by unknownAnother
would be that people would have less freedom as individuals and would be more
like his slaves if they knew for a fact he exists.
Only trivially more slave-like. There shouldn't be a whole of
difference in terms of "slavishness" carried on by people who have
faith that God exists compared with those that know for a fact that
God exists.
Post by unknownAnother would be to "trim the
herd" and sort out those who qualify to be "with him" in an afterlife and those
who don't.
And how would "pretending to not exist" accomplish this goal?
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockI think it's more likely that SINCE there's no proof or "verifiable
evidence," for God's existence here on earth there is no such being
associated with our earth.
I consider that possibility as well but don't put faith in it being correct,
There's nothing similar to religious faith associated with rejecting
ideas for which there's no evidence.
Post by unknownand therefore consider other possibilities that involve more thinking and taking
more things into consideration.
Post by Vincent Maycocksnip
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockYou're drifting there; I asked for evidence, not proof.
Post by unknownyou atheists keep begging for is whatever reasons he has for not giving
everyone proof.
You mean evidence.
Why are you ashamed to call it proof?
Proof, evidence, whatever you want to call it -- it's *all lacking.*
If there truly was no evidence at all there would be nothing for anyone to
believe in
Well, they believe it because they want to believe it, not because
there's evidence for God's existence. They want someone who cares for
them and provides them a way out of their inevitable mortality, so
that's partly why so many people make up the idea of a God or gods.
Post by unknownand never would have been. That's one of the most basic starting
lines you people can't get as "far" as.
Post by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownOne reason for not doing so would be so we have more freedom of
thought,
It would seem to be a waste of such freedom of thought to spend it
trying to figure out whether the most important figure in your beliefs
does not does not exist.
It would make us more like slaves if we knew for certain that he does exist.
That doesn't appear to apply to anyone else.
It applies to everyone except those who already act like slaves to him and
are convinced that he does exist.
Post by Vincent MaycockAre you a slave to your parents because you know they exist?
That supposed comparison only applies in situations where children worship
and pray to their parents.
Maybe they wouldn't have such trouble if their parents weren't so
limited and human; God is not thought to be like that, so he would
encounter none of the ridiculousness ... about revealing himself to
people directly making them feel more like slaves.
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownIt would also make a big difference HOW he let us know of his existence, but the
first point would be significant regardless of how he went about it.
Post by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownand if that results in some people not qualifying for a nice afterlife
that's probably even better from his pov.
No, in Christian theology at least, God *wants* us to believe he's
there.
It's very obvious that if God does exist, he doesn't care if everyone
believes he does.
So why does he seem to be bending over backwards to make sure he's not
discovered?
LOL! That idea is hilarious by itself, and the fact that you can't imagine
what sort of evidence there should be, where it should be, why it should be
wherever, and when it should have been or should be made available makes it even
more amusing.
I gave two examples: footprints in the snow (which you attempted to
attack by bringing in Bigfoot-grade stories), and God on the evening
news; and then there's the old atheist standby-by that I didn't
mention, regrowing the limbs of amputees.
It's not that difficult to come up with the kinds of evidence that you
get so confused about regarding God's existence.
Maybe if people could hear God talking audibly, that would work; or
if God were to physically hit (or strike with lightning) people who
mock him the way some of us atheists do.
Maybe if he appeared in a ball of light to atheist non-believers
everywhere. Maybe if you could have a decent conversation with God,
without getting the feeling that you're talking to your own imaginary
friend.
Maybe if God could tell you your password when you forget it on the
Internet. Maybe if God would eat some of your food when he visits
your house. Maybe if God would cook dinner for you sometimes.
Maybe if God took up space physically when he was nearby. Maybe if he
solved some equations for the progress of science.
Any or all of those "maybes" add up to what I would consider
evidence/proof for God.
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockIt's not that difficult to leave evidence that you're
there -- it just happens naturally.
You only gave two not respectable naive suggestions both of which God would
obviously have to go out of his way to provide.
It constitutes going out of his way to get filmed for the evening
news? Why would this be so difficult for him to do?
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownSome people might just be mentally
unfit and that's how he filters them out.
And yet psychological studies show that atheists are smarter on the
average than theists.
LOL. They're certainly idiots in regards to the possibility of God's
existence, there's no doubt about that.
No,
Yes they certainly are, and you yourself are an excellent example of that
fact.
Post by Vincent Maycockthe atheists seem to be thinking clearly, more or less (with
caveats to their usual weak atheism, rather than the strong atheism
that seems more appropriate),
Yet you're ashamed of your own faith.
I don't have faith, but I'm not ashamed of my *conclusion* about
whether or not God exists (which is that he does not, of course).
Post by unknownPost by Vincent Maycockwhile the theists are even dumber when
talking about religion than when talking about other subjects.
You can't even get to the starting line regarding a number of aspects of the
situation, including what evidence you think there should be. The two things you
suggested don't count because they're so idiotic and naive.
What was idiotic and naive about them?
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownNO ONE can know that God doesn't
exist,
I think it's safe to say God does not exist, philosophically speaking.
Yet you're no doubt ashamed of your faith that your guess is correct.
No, it's not faith,
It sure is...LOL...but you can't even get to the starting line on that one.
Post by Vincent Maycockbut rather an evidenced-based claim about the world.
What verifiable evidence do you have that there's no God associated with
Earth?
The inadequacy of the evidences you presented below. "No evidence
for" = "does not exist."
Post by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownPost by Vincent MaycockPost by unknownbut if there is a God associated with this planet we ALL know he doesn't
provide proof of it.
You mean evidence. You keep drifting away into something I never
asked for.
Because you're ashamed of what you really are asking for. The only thing in
question about that is WHY you're so ashamed.
There's nothing shameful about asking for proof;
Then why did you keep trying to run away from yourself about it?
Post by Vincent Maycockin fact I'll point
out right now that I'll accept proof as well as evidence. It just
happens to be true that I'm generous enough to also allow in just
*evidence*
No you're not. Life itself is evidence.
No, evolution explains life quite well without invoking God.
Post by unknownAll accepted miracles are evidence.
There are no genuinely accepted miracles; the Catholic Church just
claims there are.
Post by unknownAll miracles recorded in the Bible are evidence.
In a book full of myths, legends, and fiction, sure -- probably
whatever "evidences" you found there are of the same caliber.
Post by unknownAll saints are evidence.
The existence of "very good people" is not an indication that God
exists.
Post by unknownAtheists lying about it are evidence.
What, specifically, are atheists lying about?
Post by unknownAll medical miracles are evidence.
There are no bona fide medical miracles.
Post by unknownAll
prayers that seem to have been answered are evidence.
Which goes to randomness when you consider the many prayers that do
*not* seem to have been answered.
Post by unknownDeath experiences people
have and recover from are evidence.
Near-death experiences can be explained by physiological trauma that
the brain undergoes in near-death circumstances.
Post by unknownThe evidence we have of evolution is
evidence.
Why would that be evidence for God's existence? The theory of
evolution works fine without any ideas about God in it.
Post by unknownThe success of AA and NA programs is evidence.
Studies show that AA is not particularly successful a program, when
compared with other similar programs.
Post by unknownPost by Vincent Maycockas something that would make me suspect that God existed.
The two things you mentioned wouldn't.
If God were to leave footprints in the snow or sand without
allegations of "hoax" circulating around the idea, then that would
make me suspect that God existed, and the idea of God being seen
flying around on the evening noon would also make me suspect this
(remember an omnipotent being should not find it difficult to get onto
the news, despite how difficult it is for mere humans to do so).
Post by unknownTwo things I know for sure. One is
that there might be a God associated with Earth.
The best conclusion is that there isn't any such God.
Post by unknownThe other is that he doesn't
care whether individual people believe there is or not in some if not most
cases.
That's reasonable. There's no reason to expect God to *try* to leave
evidence of his presence, but the point is -- in the real world --
things and people leave evidence without even trying, and God should
be no different.
(And remember you've been given a list of the kinds of evidence that
you always claim is never given to you by atheists -- so that your
what *kind* of evidence, *where this evidence should be,* WHY this
evidence should be there, etc. challenge has been thoroughly met.)