There is no evidence for God, so why do you believe?

[ppp]

No I don't and yes I do.

I've read your posts on and off for a couple of years now. You are no stranger to the argument from ignorance.

But I will ask you straight out. Name a piece of evidence that does not require a pre-existing belief that a god exists, and also exclusively supports your claim that a god exists.

 

[Audie]

What would evidence for a god be?
What would it look like, be made of, etc?

I was walking with this other girl who
picked up an autumn leaf and declared it a
Sign from God, about the trinity.

That's god- evidence.

 

[We Never Know]

I was walking with this other girl who
picked up an autumn leaf and declared it a
Sign from God, about the trinity.

That's god- evidence.

And to her it might be. But not to others

 

[Brian2]

Me: If the evidence doesn't point to a designer, than there's no reason to posit a designer

You: I would say that the evidence of nature points to a designer.


And so we're all the way back at what evidence?

The point under discussion is invoking faith when the evidence isn't up to snuff and whether lack of evidence for god means there is no god.
Again, lack of evidence for god doesn't mean "no god" it just means we don't have any need to enter god into the equation. It doesn't mean we invoke faith and run around declaring this is no god.

You seem to want scientific evidence for God.
There is evidence in nature, but it seems it is not scientific evidence even if it is evidence to support faith.

 

[Brian2]

I've read your posts on and off for a couple of years now. You are no stranger to the argument from ignorance.

But I will ask you straight out. Name a piece of evidence that does not require a pre-existing belief that a god exists, and also exclusively supports your claim that a god exists.

The existence of the genetic code.
This is what Antony Flew said when in his old age he turned to belief in God.

 

[Audie]

So are you saying that if there is evidence for my faith then that means that it is not faith?

Depends on quality of evidence and how dippy
the believer is.

But yes, if you have sold evidence that water boils over a fire, no wish prayer or faith is involved.

Faith in evidence for any of the countless "gods" has all the symproms of actually being faith in one's self.

As in unwarranted trust in ones capacity to detect
and evaluate data.


See the aforementioned leaf girl.

That was faith in herself, not some god.

It was a five-pointed leaf anyway.

 

[We Never Know]

Depends on quality of evidence and how dippy
the believer is.

But yes, if you have sold evidence that water boils over a fire, no wish prayer or faith is involved.

Faith in evidence for any of the countless "gods" has all the symproms of actually being faith in one's self.

As in unwarranted trust in ones capacity to detect
and evaluate data.


See the aforementioned leaf girl.

That was faith in herself, not some god.

It was a five-pointed leaf anyway.

'It was a five-pointed leaf anyway'

What's the significance?

 

[Audie]

The existence of the genetic code.
This is what Antony Flew said when in his old age he turned to belief in God.

Come now.

Raised as a Christian, rebels and proclaims "atheist", then,
reverts. Common as dirt.

A philosopher. Not an organic chemist. No
expertise. Maybe he had opinions about
atomic submarines too.

 

[Audie]

And to her it might be. But not to others

It was only evidence of how her mind works

 

[Audie]

'It was a five-pointed leaf anyway'

What's the significance?

She thought God sent it to represent the trinity.

 

[We Never Know]

She thought God sent it to represent the trinity.

How does five points represent the trinity?

 

[Audie]

How does five points represent the trinity?

She thought it had 3 points.
So she said " trinity"

The rest of the story is i showed her the leaf
( maple) had 5 points.

Then she decided it was about the pentarch or something.

 

[YoursTrue]

The existence of the genetic code.
This is what Antony Flew said when in his old age he turned to belief in God.

I looked up about genetic code. Here is the question after I looked to see what scientists say about its origin: are humans smarter than the genetic code?

 

[McBell]

The existence of the genetic code.
This is what Antony Flew said when in his old age he turned to belief in God.

So to be clear....
is it the genetic code itself you claim as evidence or that Antony Flew believes it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

"An argument from ignorance is an assertion that a claim is either true or false because of a lack of evidence to the contrary. The speaker assumes that their position is true because it has not been or cannot be proven false, or that their opponent's position is false because it has not been or cannot be proven true."

I know you have no evidence to the contrary, but do not say that my evidence is true because of that.
I also don't say that your position is false because it has not or cannot be proven true, even though it cannot be proven true.

You try to make false claims about others having faith. That is why you use an argument from ignorance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

However there is evidence for a creator.

Really? Then why have you never posted any?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You should read the context before commenting imo.

I read enough of the context. You could never justify your claim of "faith".

 

[Subduction Zone]

The existence of the genetic code.
This is what Antony Flew said when in his old age he turned to belief in God.

No, and no. Anthony Flew turned to a deistic God. And he did so when he was becoming senile. Not the best example to use.

How is the genetic code evidence for a God? Oh, and by the way, even when he was senile he knew your God was not the right one. You definitely should not refer to him.

 

[ppp]

The existence of the genetic code.

Those 5 words are not evidence of anything at all.

BTW, you are now appealing to ignorance, and appealing to insufficient authority.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Those 5 words are not evidence of anything at all.

Spoilsport! I wanted to hear him tell us how it is evidence for a God without using an argument from ignorance.