Where's the evidence?

If, as many christians repeatedly claim, there are heaps of evidence that their god is real and that their religion is the only correct one, why can't they ever present any of it? All they ever do it tell others to look for it themselves.

It would be just as valid to say there are heaps of evidence that The Flying Spaghetti Monster is real. Anyone who doubts that should look for the evidence themselves and they'll find it's true.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

EditaPaperCom · 41-45, M

There are a few different reasons why Christians might claim that there is evidence for the existence of their God, but may not be able to present it to others in a way that satisfies their doubts or questions. Here are a few possible explanations:

Different people may have different understandings of what constitutes "evidence." Some people might consider personal experiences or feelings to be evidence of God's existence, while others might require more concrete, empirical proof. It's possible that Christians who believe in the existence of God may feel that they have plenty of evidence for their beliefs, but that this evidence might not be persuasive to someone who has a different understanding of what counts as evidence.

The nature of faith is such that it often requires a certain level of belief or trust without necessarily having all of the answers or all of the evidence. For many Christians, faith in God is a central part of their identity and their understanding of the world, and they may not feel that they need to have all of the answers in order to believe.

It's also possible that Christians may not have a clear, coherent response to questions about the existence of God because they may not have given the matter much thought themselves. While many people grow up in religious communities and are taught to believe in God from a young age, they may not necessarily have thought critically about their beliefs and may not have a well-reasoned argument to present to others.

Overall, it's important to remember that questions about the existence of God and the validity of different religious beliefs are complex and multifaceted, and there is no one-size-fits-all answer that will satisfy everyone. While it's certainly possible to find evidence and arguments that support the existence of God, it's also important to approach these questions with an open mind and to consider a wide range of perspectives.

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@EditaPaperCom Would acceptance of what is offered as evidence result in a less rational outcome than if the evidence were rejected?

There’s no compelling necessity to even postulate gods, and the postulation explains nothing (not even itself). It’s simply less rational to invent convenient fictions than to maintain the status quo, and that renders the question of ‘evidence for gods’ moot.

Faith is irrelevant when discussing evidence. Faith is pretending to know something that you do not actually know... it is mere pretence.

EditaPaperCom · 41-45, M

@newjaninev2 The concept of evidence plays a crucial role in determining the validity and reliability of certain claims or beliefs. In order to determine whether a given claim is true or false, it is important to consider the evidence that is presented to support it.

There are various types of evidence that can be used to support a claim, including empirical evidence, logical evidence, and testimonial evidence. Empirical evidence refers to evidence that is based on observations or experiments, and is often considered the most reliable type of evidence. Logical evidence refers to evidence that is based on reasoning or logical argument, and may be used to support or refute a claim. Testimonial evidence refers to evidence that is based on the testimony of others, and may include personal anecdotes or eyewitness accounts.

The acceptance or rejection of evidence can have significant consequences, as it can influence the way in which we view the world and make decisions. For example, if we accept evidence that supports a certain claim, we may be more likely to believe that the claim is true and act accordingly. On the other hand, if we reject evidence that supports a claim, we may be more likely to doubt the validity of the claim and question its validity.

In the case of the existence of gods, the question of whether or not to accept or reject evidence for their existence is a complex and controversial one. Some people may argue that the existence of gods cannot be proven or disproven using empirical or logical evidence, and therefore faith is necessary to believe in their existence. Others may argue that the lack of concrete evidence for the existence of gods renders belief in their existence irrational or unfounded.

Regardless of one's stance on the existence of gods, it is important to approach the question of evidence objectively and critically. This means examining the evidence that is presented to support or refute a claim and evaluating its reliability and validity. It also means being open to the possibility that our beliefs or assumptions may be incorrect, and being willing to revise them based on new or additional evidence.

In conclusion, the acceptance or rejection of evidence can have significant consequences, and it is important to approach the question of evidence objectively and critically in order to arrive at the most rational and informed conclusions. While faith may play a role in some belief systems, it is ultimately the evidence that supports or refutes a claim that determines its validity and reliability.

Sharon · F

@EditaPaperCom

While it's certainly possible to find evidence and arguments that support the existence of God, it's also important to approach these questions with an open mind and to consider a wide range of perspectives.

In that case, go ahead and present some of this evidence. You must have some in order to know [i]"it's certainly possible to find"{/i] some. I mean real, independently verifiable, evidence, not just vague feelings and unverifiable claims of christian apologists.

newjaninev2 · 56-60, F

@EditaPaperCom

the evidence that supports or refutes a claim

Religions have a two-part task...

1. They need to demonstrate a compelling necessity to even postulate the existence of gods (otherwise we need not even formulate the idea, let alone entertain it)

2. When postulating gods, one of the requirements is that they be able to violate the physical laws of the universe (otherwise what use are they?). These violations therefore qualify as ‘magic’, but are called ‘miracles’.

The standard for such evidence of such magic was addressed by David Hume:
"No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish"