Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Their ubiquity, scope and power speak for themselves. If they are not evidence . . . nothing could possibly be. Essentially you have set the bar for evidence beyond any conceivable level attainable by us puny creatures. Evidence merely has to support the existence of God to be more than ZERO evidence. You are denying the possibility of evidence by requiring it PROVE God completely before it will be accepted as evidence supporting the existence of God . . . in essence a reverse tautology or circular argument denying the consequent by denying the premise. It refuses to look at the evidence we have and ask if it is of sufficient ubiquity, scope and power to be evidence of God . . . NOT prove God completely.
Your "evidence" also suggests that aliens on a distant planet that created the human race also exist. I no more accept your proclamations as evidence for them any more than I accept them as evidence of any god, your's, the Christian god, or any other.
Their ubiquity, scope and power speak for themselves. If they are not evidence . . . nothing could possibly be. Essentially you have set the bar for evidence beyond any conceivable level attainable by us puny creatures. Evidence merely has to support the existence of God to be more than ZERO evidence. You are denying the possibility of evidence by requiring it PROVE God completely before it will be accepted as evidence supporting the existence of God . . . in essence a reverse tautology or circular argument denying the consequent by denying the premise. It refuses to look at the evidence we have and ask if it is of sufficient ubiquity, scope and power to be evidence of God . . . NOT prove God completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
Your "evidence" also suggests that aliens on a distant planet that created the human race also exist. I no more accept your proclamations as evidence for them any more than I accept them as evidence of any god, your's, the Christian god, or any other.
That is absolutely ridiculous! It suggests no such thing. There is nothing that points to aliens of any kind or distant planets as the Source identified as God. I am dealing ENTIRELY with the generic existence of God, period . . . not Christian, or any other man-described version. The EXISTENCE of God is evident . . . NOT all the things that are believed ABOUT God.
Yes I do. And to all the naysayers, I need logical proof, not emotional rebuttals from them that there could not ever have existed a supreme Amighty creator. Meanwhile, I invite Bible supporters to consider what Paul wrote about God: "His invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made." (Romans 1:20) With those words in mind, take a close look at the human body, the earth, the vast universe, the ocean depths. Examine the fascinating world of insects, of plants, of animals—whatever field interests you. Then, using your own power of reason, ask yourself, ‘What would convince me that there is a Creator?’
To answer that question, lets looks at the human body. It’s so detailed and complex, and all of its parts work so well together. The human body couldn’t have evolved. And I have learned a lot about how the body works. It’s amazing, for example, how the pancreas—a little organ that hides behind the stomach—does such a huge job in keeping blood and the other organs working. More proof lies in the fact that we have a spiritual side, as well as an appreciation for beauty and a desire to learn. These traits not incidental, are also not needed for survival, as evolutionists would have us believe. The only explanation that makes sense is that we were put here on a perfectly designed magnificent planet, by someone very loving who actually wanted us to enjoy life! And when I consider even the role plants play in sustaining life and the mind-boggling complexity of our makeup in compatibility with theirs and Earth's atmosphere, I am certainly convinced that there is a Creator.
That is absolutely ridiculous! It suggests no such thing. There is nothing that points to aliens of any kind or distant planets as the Source identified as God. I am dealing ENTIRELY with the generic existence of God, period . . . not Christian, or any other man-described version. The EXISTENCE of God is evident . . . NOT all the things that are believed ABOUT God.
And, there's nothing that points to God. Let me spell is out for you, your proclamations provide no evidence of aliens or any god, which also includes the generic existence of God, period.
Yes I do. And to all the naysayers, I need logical proof, not emotional rebuttals from them that there could not ever have existed a supreme Amighty creator. Meanwhile, I invite Bible supporters to consider what Paul wrote about God: "His invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made." (Romans 1:20) With those words in mind, take a close look at the human body, the earth, the vast universe, the ocean depths. Examine the fascinating world of insects, of plants, of animals—whatever field interests you. Then, using your own power of reason, ask yourself, ‘What would convince me that there is a Creator?’
To answer that question, lets looks at the human body. It’s so detailed and complex, and all of its parts work so well together. The human body couldn’t have evolved. And I have learned a lot about how the body works. It’s amazing, for example, how the pancreas—a little organ that hides behind the stomach—does such a huge job in keeping blood and the other organs working. More proof lies in the fact that we have a spiritual side, as well as an appreciation for beauty and a desire to learn. These traits not incidental, are also not needed for survival, as evolutionists would have us believe. The only explanation that makes sense is that we were put here on a perfectly designed magnificent planet, by someone very loving who actually wanted us to enjoy life! And when I consider even the role plants play in sustaining life and the mind-boggling complexity of our makeup in compatibility with theirs and Earth's atmosphere, I am certainly convinced that there is a Creator.
Our bodies are FAR from perfectly designed. For example, male nimples, brains too large for wisdom teeth, location of our spine, the blind spots and floaters in our eyes, hiccups, unsupported intestines, and many more. If there was a designer of our bodies, he/she/it did a very poor job. Btw, the Earth is far from perfect, especially considered its on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy, not to mention that the large majority of the Earth's surface cannot sustain human life.
Our bodies are FAR from perfectly designed. For example, male nimples, brains too large for wisdom teeth, location of our spine, the blind spots and floaters in our eyes, hiccups, unsupported intestines, and many more. If there was a designer of our bodies, he/she/it did a very poor job. Btw, the Earth is far from perfect, especially considered its on a collision course with the Andromeda galaxy, not to mention that the large majority of the Earth's surface cannot sustain human life.
Originally Posted by mythunderstood So, if there is no proof that something does NOT exist, is that a reason to believe that something DOES exist (if there is no proof that it does)?
The op asked if one finds zero evidence for the existence of god, is it ok to believe in god? I think you guys are getting stuck on the word: "ok". Of course it is "ok" to have whatever beliefs one wants, wrong or otherwise, (as long as it doesn't hurt anyone). I think the more appropriate word to use would be "justifiable."
The question I would like an answer to is:
If one find zero evidence for the existence of god, is it justifiable (or even reasonable) to believe in god? I'm not going to get into arguments about whether one needs to justify their beliefs. I'm just asking, can they? If a person has found no evidence whatsoever (zero!) that a god exists, can they justify a belief in one? Based on what?
::Sigh:: Another of the "zero evidence" cohort . . . with the narrow and absurdly limited definition of evidence. Is the Source of our life and existence God? Is the Source of our entire reality and its "laws" and ubiquitous "processes" that constrain, support and evolve life and our universe God? Is the Source of our fantastic consciousness and intelligence God? Why do you limit the evidence you will accept for God to those that would establish the unprovable man-made BELIEFS ABOUT God? This is so tedious having to deal with the persistent and wrong claims of "zero evidence."
Where did I ever personally make a claim in this thread that there is zero evidence for the existence or non-existence of god? Did you read the op? I was arguing the topic which was: if a person wants to believe in god, but finds zero evidence (objective or subjective) for the existence of god, then is it ok to believe? Sort of like an atheist who has found no objective evidence and additionally has had no subjective experience of any god......is it ok (justifiable) for them to "just believe" as they are told to do by many Christians (via Pascal's Wager)? What would be the basis of this belief?
Their ubiquity, scope and power speak for themselves. If they are not evidence . . . nothing could possibly be. Essentially you have set the bar for evidence beyond any conceivable level attainable by us puny creatures. Evidence merely has to support the existence of God to be more than ZERO evidence. You are denying the possibility of evidence by requiring it PROVE God completely before it will be accepted as evidence supporting the existence of God . . . in essence a reverse tautology or circular argument denying the consequent by denying the premise. It refuses to look at the evidence we have and ask if it is of sufficient ubiquity, scope and power to be evidence of God . . . NOT prove God completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
Your "evidence" also suggests that aliens on a distant planet that created the human race also exist. I no more accept your proclamations as evidence for them any more than I accept them as evidence of any god, your's, the Christian god, or any other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
That is absolutely ridiculous! It suggests no such thing. There is nothing that points to aliens of any kind or distant planets as the Source identified as God. I am dealing ENTIRELY with the generic existence of God, period . . . not Christian, or any other man-described version. The EXISTENCE of God is evident . . . NOT all the things that are believed ABOUT God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amaznjohn
And, there's nothing that points to God. Let me spell is out for you, your proclamations provide no evidence of aliens or any god, which also includes the generic existence of God, period.
Don't be ridiculous. You are saying that the Source that is responsible for our very existence is NOT evidence for God. That is the most myopic and obtuse view of reality conceivable.
Don't be ridiculous. You are saying that the Source that is responsible for our very existence is NOT evidence for God. That is the most myopic and obtuse view of reality conceivable.
You have yet to define the source or even provide evidence that a source is necessary.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
