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.
Doesn't work like that. First you need to define the God you are requesting for us to give you a proof framework for. Simply saying "what proof do you need of God" is too vague. If you want a specific list of evidence that would be accepted, you must provide a specific description of what is supposed to be proven.
I will give you an example:
A literal interpretation of the Bible would provide us with a God who created a flood that covered the entire surface of the Earth in a very short time. Thus an evidence point for this claim would be if the science of geology indicated that such a flood happened, the science of paleontology and archaeology demonstrated mass extinction strata that was ordered and consistent with to such a flood, etc.
Unfortunately for that particular viewpoint, scientific observation directly contradicts this idea and instead proves the opposite. If it did not, that would be an example of a single evidence point in favor of the literal Biblical interpretation. Unfortunate again that literal interpretations tend to place all their eggs in one basket so to speak, so when faced with the overwhelming scientific evidence that there was no worldwide flood event, they are left only with rote denial.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova
You didn't get here on your own.
Doesn't work like that. That statement itself is unproven conjecture based solely on an opinion stated in an authoritative manner. So FIRST, you will need to provide evidence that that statement is true. SECOND you will have define the God you think this (currently unproven statement based only on authority) is proof of, at that point we can see if it qualifies as evidence for that specific interpretation of "God".
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 09-14-2017 at 01:53 PM..
Not wishy-washy hopeful thinking and "somebody said" evidence.
Evidence of what? Him? Physically? You won't get that on this side of life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zzzSnorlax
Doesn't work like that. First you need to define the God you are requesting for us to give you a proof framework for. Simply saying "what proof do you need of God" is too vague. If you want a specific list of evidence that would be accepted, you must provide a specific description of what is supposed to be proven.
I will give you an example:
A literal interpretation of the Bible would provide us with a God who created a flood that covered the entire surface of the Earth in a very short time. Thus an evidence point for this claim would be if the science of geology indicated that such a flood happened, the science of paleontology and archaeology demonstrated mass extinction strata that was ordered and consistent with to such a flood, etc.
Unfortunately for that particular viewpoint, scientific observation directly contradicts this idea and instead proves the opposite. If it did not, that would be an example of a single evidence point in favor of the literal Biblical interpretation.
It really doesn't matter. I'm just asking YOU (or whomever) what YOU require to believe that God exists. I didn't say I was going to prove it... I just want to know what your requirements are.
It really doesn't matter. I'm just asking YOU (or whomever) what YOU require to believe that God exists. I didn't say I was going to prove it... I just want to know what your requirements are.
First you have to describe what God you are talking about. As it stands you just throw out a nebulous "what would it take you to believe in god" as if the billions of different personal interpretations of god housed in peoples' minds are all functionally interchangeable.
I cannot give you a proof framework if you refuse to describe the attributes of what it is I am supposed to be proving. Without context the request is an absurdity, a fallacy.
Might as well ask me what proof I would accept for the existence of "schmooples" with zero context as to what a "schmoople" even is.
For now you can just call me an "Aschmoopleist".
What evidence would it take for you to believe in "Schmooples"? Have you heard the good news about "Schmooples" today?
Last edited by zzzSnorlax; 09-14-2017 at 02:18 PM..
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.
