Atheists: What would be evidence of God’s existence?

[Subduction Zone]

The Messengers are evidence that God exists but the claim of the Messenger is NOT evidence because that would be circular reasoning.
Do you understand what I mean?

But you are assuming that they are a messenger of God. How do you determine that? What is your claim based upon. Are you going back to your failed prophecies. It was explained why they are not evidence that the person is a messenger of God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

"The Last Hour has drawn near, and the moon has split." Al-Qamar
Where is the rent? It is still one piece.

Sorry, I laughed because my mind used the other definition of rent. As the rent is due on my apartment. I understood what you meant but my mind put a funny spin on it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Denial of what?
Answers to what?
How were you going out of your way to help me?

I cannot have a conversation when I have no idea what you are talking about.

Denial of how you have been refuted time after time. Answers to your questions. The answers will help you.

 

[CG Didymus]

God never comes down to earth because God is not a material being, God is spirit.

But this doesn't count, because we know it never happened? In other words... religions make things up?

Genesis 3:8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the Lord God among the trees of the garden.​

There is witness testimony, and there was more than one witness.

Here's the "testimony" of a couple of NT writers and they claim there were witnesses. Do you believe them?

Matthew 27:52-53 52and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. 53They came out of the tombs after Jesus' resurrection and went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
Acts 1:3 After his suffering, he presented himself to them (the apostles) and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive.​

I said that God leaves empirical evidence because the religions of God that the Messengers of God establish come from God.

And there you go again. You bring up the "religions" of God. What "empirical" evidence did Hinduism leave? And who was the messenger of God that established Hinduism?

I think Baha'is would be better off in just saying that they have studied the writings of Baha'u'llah and have come to believe the things he says... And he says God is real.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Sorry, I laughed because my mind used the other definition of rent. As the rent is due on my apartment. I understood what you meant but my mind put a funny spin on it.

Fun is welcome. That is why we come to the forum - and presence of Trailblazer (and others) is necessary for that. Without them, how would we have such fun?

And who was the messenger of God that established Hinduism?

We don't have that baloney.

 

[firedragon]

"The Last Hour has drawn near, and the moon has split." Al-Qamar
Where is the rent? It is still one piece.

Thats not "an example of evidence this person is asking for".

Cute, but invalid.

 

[viole]

How many hundreds of times to I have to say that I do not believe that any Messenger of God was a Messenger of God because He said so. That would be circular reasoning.

I believe because of the evidence that indicates that He was a Messenger of God, NOT because He said He was a Messenger of God.

I wonder why people don't pay any attention to what I say.

I am also a messenger of Superman. Ask me for evidence that I am really what I claim.

ciao

- viole

 

[Trailblazer]

It is the believers that call corrections a put down. It isn't. People are just trying to get you to reason rationally. And I myself have said that there is no problem believing in something. The problem arises when one claims that one's religious beliefs are rational. That puts a burden of proof on the believer.

So once again, corrections are not attacks.

Why do you have a need to correct me? That is what I suggest you ask yourself

"People are just trying to get you to reason rationally."

No "people" are not doing that, you are doing that.

They absolutely are attacks when they are personal - you. That is not a correction to a belief, it is a personal criticism.

Why is it that @QuestioningMind and @Nimos can disagree with me and not get personal?

Why do you have to put down others and their beliefs? Who are you to judge who is rational and who is not? Who are you to say what beliefs are rational and not? Why are your non-beliefs any more rational than my beliefs? This is all personal opinion, none of it is fact.

If you want to play this game, I will play for a while but just remember who stated this totally unnecessary exchange.

 

[viole]

I was not defining something that I would consider as evidence....
That is totally unrelated to what I was talking about. I was not talking about evidence.

Well, that is the OP, isn’t it? You asked what atheists would consider as evidence, and I told you. You said it will happen, eventually. But again, everybody can say that, for basically everything.

ciao

- viole

 

[Trailblazer]

I am also a messenger of Superman. Ask me for evidence that I am really what I claim.

ciao

- viole

Okay, what is the evidence that shows that you are a messenger of Superman?

 

[viole]

That's true but why would it matter how many people see it as evidence?

How many people believe something has nothing to do with whether it is true or false. That is the fallacy of argumentum ad populum

Where did I say it matters? I said people believing in a God different from yours would not be convinced either.

ciao

- viole

 

[viole]

Okay, what is the evidence that shows that you are a messenger of Superman?

What motivation would I have to say something like that, if it wasn’t true?

ciao

- viole

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

One cannot 'establish' that God sent a Messenger because that cannot ever be known as a fact, and that is why it is a belief.

Then "Messengers" aren't evidence for God.

The way we can identify someone as a Messenger of God is by looking at all the evidence that supports their claim.

When we haven't already established that God exists, any evidence that actually supports the claim that someone is a "Messenger of God" would also have to be evidence of God.

Why wouldn't you just use that evidence to argue for God instead of all the extra circular steps?

My method might not work for you because you are a different person who thinks differently from me.
I believe that there is a rational path to belief in God but first one has to be able to think rationally.

You've effectively told me that such a path can't exist.

No, not exactly. Initially I was attracted to Baha'u'llah's message. Baha'u'llah wrote about God and since I believe everything He wrote is true, I believe that God exists and that everything He wrote about God is true.

Okay. So not exactly the sort of path you would expect someone else to follow... right?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Okay, what is the evidence that shows that you are a messenger of Superman?

Does such a claim requires any evidence?

 

[Trailblazer]

I found a logical fallacy already, thanks to F1fan. This is a black and white fallacy. Do you know why?

That is not a black and white fallacy. A Messenger who claimed to speak for God was either (a) a Messenger speaking for God or (b) a messenger who did not speak for God. Those are the only two options available.

The Black-or-White Fallacy is the provision of only two alternatives in an argument when there are actually more options available. ... It's also sometimes called the Gray Fallacy, between black and white options, or the middle-ground fallacy, after a middle ground between two warring camps.

black and white fallacy examples in politics - Nazwa.pl

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That is unacceptable in a debate forum when you make accusations and cannot provide any evidence, it is called chickening out.
No, it has not been explained to me why what I said was fallacious.

I've pointed out a couple fallacies you used in this thread and why they're fallacies.

 

[Trailblazer]

And you mist the point of objective evidence. It is not to test God. It is to test your messenger.

Then go ahead and devise a test for my Messenger.

 

[Trailblazer]

I've pointed out a couple fallacies you used in this thread and why they're fallacies.

Sorry, I cannot remember that because I have been on this computer for 10 hours.

 

[Trailblazer]

Denial of how you have been refuted time after time. Answers to your questions. The answers will help you.

You have not refuted me one single time. You just believe you have.

I do not need your help, I have God's help.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That is not a black and white fallacy. A Messenger who claimed to speak for God was either (a) a Messenger speaking for God or (b) a messenger who did not speak for God. Those are the only two options available.

The Black-or-White Fallacy is the provision of only two alternatives in an argument when there are actually more options available. ... It's also sometimes called the Gray Fallacy, between black and white options, or the middle-ground fallacy, after a middle ground between two warring camps.

black and white fallacy examples in politics - Nazwa.pl

So you understand the fallacy but you do not understand how you are guilty of it. There is at least one other possibility. And perhaps more. The person could easily be delusional. Or merely wrong.