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

[Trailblazer]

Can you demonstrate any objective evidence that praying to a deity, produces anything more than praying to a toaster?

No.

 

[Trailblazer]

That is the very definition of a subjective belief.

There is not any other kind, although subjective belief can be based upon objective evidence.

 

[Sheldon]

You know that praying to a toaster won't yield any results so that would be dumber than dumb.

Can you demonstrate any objective evidence that praying to a deity, produces anything more than praying to a toaster?

No.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
That is the very definition of a subjective belief.

There is not any other kind,

Really, so the shape of the earth is just a matter of opinion then? I am dubious.

although subjective belief can be based upon objective evidence.

You offered no objective evidence, just the subjective claim:

Trailblazer said: ↑
I can prove it to myself but I cannot prove it to anyone else and I cannot prove it as a fact everyone will accept as true.

 

[Tiberius]

No.

Right. Anything further than that is opinion, nothing more.

 

[Trailblazer]

Really, so the shape of the earth is just a matter of opinion then? I am dubious.

The shape of the earth is not an opinion, it is a known fact.

You offered no objective evidence, just the subjective claim:

Myriad times I have offered objective evidence that supports my subjective belief, but I am not going to offer it again.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Really, so the shape of the earth is just a matter of opinion then? I am dubious.

The shape of the earth is not an opinion, it is a known fact.

You just said all beliefs were subjective, so which is it?

Myriad times I have offered objective evidence that supports my subjective belief,

No, a few times you have offered subjective claims or quotes, that you subjectively interpreted, but claimed were objective evidence, though they were not of course.

 

[Tiberius]

Myriad times I have offered objective evidence that supports my subjective belief, but I am not going to offer it again.

No you didn't. You took objective facts and formed a hypothesis that you believe fit the facts, and then declared that your hypothesis was sound because you based it on objective facts.

I could declare my hypothesis that I could teleport as a child because several times I fell asleep in the car on the way home and woke up in bed the next morning to be just as sound because it too is based on objective facts.

 

[Trailblazer]

You just said all beliefs were subjective, so which is it?

Religious beliefs are subjective, although subjective beliefs can be based upon objective evidence.

No, a few times you have offered subjective claims or quotes, that you subjectively interpreted, but claimed were objective evidence, though they were not of course.

I offered objective evidence by the definition of objective evidence.

What is subjective and objective evidence?

Subjective evidence is evidence that we cannot evaluate. In fact, we have two choices; to accept what somebody says or reject it. ... Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...

We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves thus it is objective evidence

 

[Trailblazer]

No you didn't. You took objective facts and formed a hypothesis that you believe fit the facts, and then declared that your hypothesis was sound because you based it on objective facts.

Straw man. You are so far off base it is not even funny.

I offered the objective evidence regarding the facts surrounding the person of Baha'u'llah, the life of Baha'u'llah, and what He did on His earthly mission. What I believe these facts mean has nothing to do with the facts.

Facts are facts. Some of these facts are depicted in this 22 minute video. What you think they mean is entirely up to you.

Bahá'u'lláh -- Glory of God

 

[Tiberius]

Religious beliefs are subjective, although subjective beliefs can be based upon objective evidence.

I offered objective evidence by the definition of objective evidence.

What is subjective and objective evidence?

Subjective evidence is evidence that we cannot evaluate. In fact, we have two choices; to accept what somebody says or reject it. ... Objective evidence is evidence that we can examine and evaluate for ourselves.
Objective evidence - definition and meaning - Market ...

We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves thus it is objective evidence

You missed a very important part.

The evidence must be checkable by others.

In the example used on the website you linked to, the evidence is objective because the video can be viewed by anyone, and each person who views it will say the video shows the same thing.

If it doesn't have that kind of verifiability, then it's not objective.

 

[Tiberius]

Straw man. You are so far off base it is not even funny.

I offered the objective evidence regarding the facts surrounding the person of Baha'u'llah, the life of Baha'u'llah, and what He did on His earthly mission. What I believe these facts mean has nothing to do with the facts.

Facts are facts. Some of these facts are depicted in this 22 minute video. What you think they mean is entirely up to you.

Bahá'u'lláh -- Glory of God

That's rich, accusing me of using a strawman. It's you who is using the strawman argument here.

Many times you have presented the facts about Mr B's life, and I have NEVER disputed them. I have never claimed he did not write some text you said he wrote, I have never claimed he did not go to some place you claimed he went, I have never claimed he did not do some action you claimed he performed.

What I have disputed is your opinion that these things he said, wrote, and did count as evidence that he was a messenger from God. They do not serve as evidence of that at all.

You have taken the facts about Mr B's life and formed the hypothesis that he was a messenger from God. And while that hypothesis is consistent with the facts, there are many other different hypotheses that are also consistent with those facts, and there is not a single thing you can present to anyone which will eliminate all hypotheses save for the one you hold.

 

[Trailblazer]

You missed a very important part.

The evidence must be checkable by others.

It is checkable by others.

I said : We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves thus it is objective evidence

 

[Trailblazer]

That's rich, accusing me of using a strawman. It's you who is using the strawman argument here.

No you are the one who made the straw man.

Tiberius said: ↑No you didn't. You took objective facts and formed a hypothesis that you believe fit the facts, and then declared that your hypothesis was sound because you based it on objective facts.

I did not take objective facts and form a hypothesis that I believe fit the facts, and then declare that my hypothesis is sound because I based it on objective facts. I never 'declared' anything. I only ever said what I believe that those facts mean to me. That is why you made a straw man.

I did offer the objective evidence regarding the facts surrounding the person of Baha'u'llah, the life of Baha'u'llah, and what He did on His earthly mission.

Many times you have presented the facts about Mr B's life, and I have NEVER disputed them. I have never claimed he did not write some text you said he wrote, I have never claimed he did not go to some place you claimed he went, I have never claimed he did not do some action you claimed he performed.

What I have disputed is your opinion that these things he said, wrote, and did count as evidence that he was a messenger from God. They do not serve as evidence of that at all.

Yes, I know that this is what has transpired. I know what you have said, and I know what you have disputed.

You have taken the facts about Mr B's life and formed the hypothesis that he was a messenger from God. And while that hypothesis is consistent with the facts, there are many other different hypotheses that are also consistent with those facts, and there is not a single thing you can present to anyone which will eliminate all hypotheses save for the one you hold.

No, that is not what I have done, and that is why I said you made a straw man.
I formed no hypothesis, I came to a belief.
I looked at the facts and from those facts I came to believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.

People who do not believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God are the ones who can come up with many different hypotheses that are also consistent with those facts, and there is not a single thing I can present to anyone which will eliminate all hypotheses save for the one I hold.

 

[Tiberius]

It is checkable by others.

I said : We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves thus it is objective evidence

And this objective evidence is NOT the same thing that you claim PROVES to you that Mr B was a messenger from God. THAT is NOT checkable by others.

This is not the first time you have tried to make it appear that the two are the same thing, and I've called you out on it every time I've seen you do it. The fact that you continue to resort to such trickery shows me that you are being intentionally deceptive.

 

[Tiberius]

No you are the one who made the straw man.

Tiberius said: ↑No you didn't. You took objective facts and formed a hypothesis that you believe fit the facts, and then declared that your hypothesis was sound because you based it on objective facts.

I did not take objective facts and form a hypothesis that I believe fit the facts, and then declare that my hypothesis is sound because I based it on objective facts. I never 'declared' anything. I only ever said what I believe that those facts mean to me. That is why you made a straw man.

I did offer the objective evidence regarding the facts surrounding the person of Baha'u'llah, the life of Baha'u'llah, and what He did on His earthly mission.

Rubbish.

You took objective facts (what Mr B said, wrote and did).

You formed a hypothesis that fits those facts (Mr B was a messenger from God).

You have claimed that it is sound (I have lost count of how many times you said you KNOW your beliefs are true).

So don't tell me you didn't do it, and don't tell me I've used a strawman when I haven't.

And don't play your weak game of hiding behind "I'm not stating/claiming/declaring/announcing anything, I'm simply saying what I believe." No one buys it for a second.

Yes, I know that this is what has transpired. I know what you have said, and I know what you have disputed.

Yet you STILL present your posts in a way that makes it look like I have been arguing with those facts. Not very nice.

No, that is not what I have done, and that is why I said you made a straw man.
I formed no hypothesis, I came to a belief.
I looked at the facts and from those facts I came to believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God.

If all you have is hiding behind definitions and wordplay, then your argument has no support whatsoever.

People who do not believe that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God are the ones who can come up with many different hypotheses that are also consistent with those facts, and there is not a single thing I can present to anyone which will eliminate all hypotheses save for the one I hold.

And such people will KNOW they are right just as fervently as you KNOW you are right and that they are wrong.

So if such certainty can be wrong, it follows that your certainty can likewise be wrong, and thus you can't claim to KNOW.

 

[Trailblazer]

And this objective evidence is NOT the same thing that you claim PROVES to you that Mr B was a messenger from God. THAT is NOT checkable by others.

What do you think I said proves to me that Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God that is not checkable by others?

This is not the first time you have tried to make it appear that the two are the same thing, and I've called you out on it every time I've seen you do it. The fact that you continue to resort to such trickery shows me that you are being intentionally deceptive.

What do you think is the secret thing I am hiding?

I have said that I was convinced that Baha'u'llah was because of the evidence, the objective facts.
How important are facts within your religious beliefs?

 

[Trailblazer]

Rubbish.
You took objective facts (what Mr B said, wrote and did).
You formed a hypothesis that fits those facts (Mr B was a messenger from God).
You have claimed that it is sound (I have lost count of how many times you said you KNOW your beliefs are true).
So don't tell me you didn't do it, and don't tell me I've used a strawman when I haven't.
And don't play your weak game of hiding behind "I'm not stating/claiming/declaring/announcing anything, I'm simply saying what I believe." No one buys it for a second.

I never formed a hypothesis that fits those facts (Mr B was a messenger from God).

hypothesis: a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=what+is+a+hypothesis

I never claimed by beliefs are true, I only ever said that I believe they are true..

Yet you STILL present your posts in a way that makes it look like I have been arguing with those facts. Not very nice.

I will present my posts however I want to present them. Do I tell you how to present your posts?

I do not make anything look like anything. You read the posts and come to your own conclusions about what I am saying and often you misinterpret what I write.

If all you have is hiding behind definitions and wordplay, then your argument has no support whatsoever.

I only explain what I did. I am not and never was trying to convince anyone that what I believe is true.

And such people will KNOW they are right just as fervently as you KNOW you are right and that they are wrong.

That argument is not logical. The Baha'i Faith is either true or false. The fact that people will KNOW they are right just as fervently as I KNOW I am right and that they are wrong has nothing to do with what is true or false.

What people believe, be it me or anyone else, does not prove that anything is true.

So if such certainty can be wrong, it follows that your certainty can likewise be wrong, and thus you can't claim to KNOW.

I am not claiming to know but I can say I know and you cannot do a thing about it.

Your problem is that you rely too much upon what other people think or believe instead of thinking for yourself.

What Baha’u’llah wrote in The Kitáb-i-Íqán (The Book of Certitude) on the very first pages is vitally important. The following is part of the last sentence of a longer paragraph, the part I want to point out and explain.

“…… inasmuch as man can never hope to attain unto the knowledge of the All-Glorious, can never quaff from the stream of divine knowledge and wisdom, can never enter the abode of immortality, nor partake of the cup of divine nearness and favour, unless and until he ceases to regard the words and deeds of mortal men as a standard for the true understanding and recognition of God and His Prophets.” The Kitáb-i-Íqán, pp. 3-4

What it essentially says is that we will never discover the truth for ourselves if we use the words and deeds of other people as a standard by which to understand God and His Prophets. In other words, we cannot determine whether Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God according to what other people say or do.

What then do we do? We investigate the truth for ourselves.

How to Independently Investigate the Truth

 

[samtonga43]

That argument is not logical. The Baha'i Faith is either true or false. The fact that people will KNOW they are right just as fervently as I KNOW I am right and that they are wrong has nothing to do with what is true or false.

You do not know that you are right. You believe you are right. (As you have said in the past).

I am not claiming to know but I can say I know and you cannot do a thing about it..

You can say that you know the moon is made of green cheese... we cannot do a thing about it. But we can .

Your problem is that you rely too much upon what other people think or believe instead of thinking for yourself.

And your problem is that you rely on what MrB. thought and believed.

What it essentially says is that we will never discover the truth for ourselves if we use the words and deeds of other people as a standard by which to understand God and His Prophets.

Does this include the words and deeds of MrB.?

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
That is the very definition of a subjective belief.

There is not any other kind,

You said all beliefs were subjective, they clearly are not.

I offered objective evidence by the definition of objective evidence.

No you did not, you offered your subjective opinion about some texts.

What is subjective and objective evidence?

Something is subjective if it is based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. Whereas something is objective if it is not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.

The earth is not flat is an objective fact, since its shape does not change nor is it influences by anyone's opinion.

We can examine and evaluate the evidence for the Baha'i Faith for ourselves thus it is objective evidence

Yes we can, and you have done so subjectively, and offered a subjective conclusion it is divine in origin, but this claim is not supported by any objective evidence.