Reasonable evidence for God? How it would look likt?

[tigerclaw1000]

Hello, i have been thinking about how an evidence for god would look like. And i cant imagine one, any thing that i conceive of is explainable naturally or it falls under the category of unexplainable which is not an evidence for god.

So how would a reasonable evidence for god look like?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Perhaps. But let me ask you something: in a causal system why is ontological naturalism a qualitatively better inference?

 

[waitasec]

evidence for god would be just as obvious as when you take a shower, you get wet.
when one comes across evidence, it is not going to be subjected to personal experience but an objective one like anything above 100 db's hurts the ears...what it would look like, i wouldn't bother looking for it.

 

[tigerclaw1000]

Perhaps. But let me ask you something: in a causal system why is ontological naturalism a qualitatively better inference?

Not shore what you mean, i am not that familiar with logic,Philosophy
but here go's:
Because ontological naturalism is the most reliable way of demonstrating truth.

 

[PolyHedral]

"WE APOLOGISE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE", in letters of flame 100ft high across Mount Everest would be a good start.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

So how would a reasonable evidence for god look like?

It would look like something that could only be construed as evidence for god. I'll leave it up to god to figure out the details of what that would be - if he's ever interested in providing evidence of his existence to people, that is.

 

[tigerclaw1000]

It would look like something that could only be construed as evidence for god. I'll leave it up to god to figure out the details of what that would be - if he's ever interested in providing evidence of his existence to people, that is.

That is my position as well for some time, but i just wonder maybe some has already seen this evidence and wants to share it.

 

[tigerclaw1000]

"WE APOLOGISE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE", in letters of flame 100ft high across Mount Everest would be a good start.

Haha

 

[Photonic]

Perhaps. But let me ask you something: in a causal system why is ontological naturalism a qualitatively better inference?

Because it would simply be extra baggage.

 

[Photonic]

"WE APOLOGISE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE", in letters of flame 100ft high across Mount Everest would be a good start.

Douglas Adams FTW.

 

[Riverwolf]

I think it would depend on the God.