To the skeptics: what evidence would convince you?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Black_Rose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hooding_Trees said:
Well not really you have to remember that rational thinking takes skills that many people in history did not possess. Furthermore we know have a level of knowledge that must influence the way we look at the universe. The enlightenment and modern education have changed the goal posts for religion.

I personally do not believe there is a rational reason for believing that which there is no evidence.
Click to expand...
I think that I also said that most people even NOW are theists. There is a lot of evidence for God in general and the Catholic God
 
lemondiesel said:
lol dude you guys are completely turning everything i say against me. I am saying i FULLY UNDERSTAND what God is, trust me i do, i just have not received faith to believe in him. I was raised Christian for 19 years man, i know who God is…
Click to expand...
I wasn’t attempting to turn anything you said against you. I was merely asking you what you meant by your post. I had to ask you twice because you didn’t directly answer my question the first time. Misinterpretation is very easy on a forum; that’s what I was trying to avoid.
 
TomD123 said:
The blank represents the many proofs of God that are clear and obvious
Click to expand...
Without this starting into a proof of God thread, could you just expand on this with a few sentences?

My thoughts are quite different. For example, if you and I are sitting together watching the sun go down, you might say “What a beautiful creation by God.” However, I would reply, “Sunlight is composed of a spectrum of colors, and it is passing through the atmosphere.” (without trying to get to in depth). We all have a way of expressing the inexpressible…

USMCatholic, my apologies. Those were meant more to explain how God IS.
 
I post this video just to present my viewpoint…

If this video offends the forum go ahead and remove it, just simply posting it…

youtube.com/watch?v=7ImvlS8PLIo

Please watch if you plan on replying to me on this subject.
 
R_Daneel said:
Evidence would be anything that cannot be rationally denied. The theists enumerate a whole lot of specific attributes of their God. We could select some of these attributes and set up tests for them. If this alleged God can fulfill these tests, then we would have to accept it. If he fails them, we could deny it. That sounds simple, doesn’t it?

There is one basic postulate here: “no sane person can deny his own sanity”. If one doubts his own sanity, he is already insane. The reverse is not true. An insane person can truly believe that he is sane.

So, going back, if a test would put me into the position where I would have to choose between my sanity which tells me to accept the offered evidence and insanity to reject the offered evidence, then I would accept the evidence. As always, the devil is in the details. But your question was generic, so I will stop here.
Click to expand...
Yes, my question was generic, and I see no compelling reason for anyone to seek a generic god. As I have stated before in another thread, such a generic god who does not intervene in this universe is irrelevant to most people. It is obvious that most people do not believe in a generic god because deism has no contemporary popularity. Furthermore, deism is not an intermediate stage of religious conversion or deconversion: one either (1) converts to one religion or another maybe retaining belief in the same God in the process but adopting different doctrines; (2) converts from atheism/agnosticism to belief in a religious deity; or (3) deconverts from religious belief to atheism/agnosticism. I am experiencing (2) and it seems that none of those processes involve a deistic transition. Once belief in a personal god is abandoned, the concept of god itself vanishes suggesting that belief in God is not independent from religious belief although historically the Enlightenment provided an appropriate counterexample where the belief in a watchmaker God flourished.

Personally, my view of the world is rather Laplacian who famously stated that he had no need for God in his scientific work because one does not need to invoke a hypothesis to explain the features of the natural world even though I currently believe in a personal God’s existence.
 
prodigalson12 said:
They are deaf and blinded. No evidence at all will ever be good enough. I know, it’s sad, but that’s simply the way it is.
Click to expand...
Oh stop it. I will say though that the only evidence that would convince them would likely be direct revelation from God…but who is to say that this is a bad thing? They make good points to be honest.
 
prodigalson12 said:
He already came down to us, Jesus is one example…so he should come down like every 20 years for you guys?
Click to expand...
Come on, a book from 2,000 years ago telling the story of Jesus is not good enough evidence to believe in God.
 
Even if God and all his glory comes from his throne and is carried by angels into the home of an atheist and tells him that he is God. The atheist will probely say " yeah will prove it".😛
 
s4angel said:
God is God is God!

It does not take you believing in him to make him real, what part of that did you not get? He is who he is, He is the I am! He is the beginning and the end.

What part of one day being like a few million years to you. He is time, there for time (AS WE KNOW IT) does not exist.

I am sure there are apes that kind of resemble us in the skeleton ( look at the modern day apes) Shorter stature of man? well, come on now did you not think as his children he would not build us to adapt? Maby we did look something like apes but then again why are there still apes? why did we not all evolve? certainly we all adapted?. Oh, ya, the Gene factor. somehow with no forthought we just miraculously adapt into humans? while our brothers stay apes? ok, sorry aint buying this, as I told my 7th grade math teacher, " you may be and ape, you kinda look like one, I was created by God and I am human! I was suspended for about 45 minutes until they couldn’t prove I wasn’t created by God!
Click to expand...
Wow, I have never heard someone be so ignorant of the theory of evolution. The points you just made are completely irrelevant to evolution and to be honest make absolutely no sense.
 
lemondiesel said:
Without this starting into a proof of God thread, could you just expand on this with a few sentences?

My thoughts are quite different. For example, if you and I are sitting together watching the sun go down, you might say “What a beautiful creation by God.” However, I would reply, “Sunlight is composed of a spectrum of colors, and it is passing through the atmosphere.” (without trying to get to in depth). We all have a way of expressing the inexpressible.
Click to expand...
I will not make this into a proof of God thread but my point was that many theists try to present proofs of God in general, of Christianity, and of Catholiscism. Some of these “proofs” or demonstrations are logic proofs like the argument of how can something come of nothing, some are proofs regarding the Bible’s prophecies or the early Christians being willing to be eaten by lions to preserve the faith. Other proofs are proofs like healing miracles or Eucharistic miracles. No matter how many demonstrations an atheist gets they will always respond by saying basically that it didn’t happen.

If there is no God, why would anyone call the sun beautiful? Why would anyone call anything beautiful? I do not see what evolutionary adaptation beauty is. There is no survival value to the beauty of music, stars, the ocean, a waterfall, etc.
 
Just_Lurking said:
This is sadly often the case. See here for one example.
Click to expand...
LOL…I laughed when he pulled that spam out. Praying making someone feeling better isn’t proof of God anyway…that could work with or without God existing.

EDIT: wow, son of spam is hilarious too.

I have good friends that are atheists, have heard all of their arguments, and believe that they have some good arguments with great merit. Atheists would say that all of us are deaf and blind and nothing will change our stance. I have had some religious experiences in my life that have made me believe in God. IF these events did not happen, I doubt that I would believe in God today. I am skeptical by nature to be honest.
 
CatholicGuy22 said:
Even if God and all his glory comes from his throne and is carried by angels into the home of an atheist and tells him that he is God. The atheist will probely say " yeah will prove it".😛
Click to expand...
Very true! Atheism is an act of will to not believe in God. Although it does not deal directly with atheism, look at Luke 16:31
 
TomD123 said:
A typical debate of atheism vs. Christianity

Christian: There are many proofs of God including the universe!
Atheist: If anyone is willing to give me evidence then I will believe
C: What about this proof__________
A: Too subjective, you need a lab environment
C: Try this one______, I think its pretty clear
A: Nope unless God appears then I will not believe! (by the way Christians, I am open to evidence)
C: Jesus appeared and he was God
A: Unless God appears right here right now and he heals an amputee then I will not believe! (Still no one has given me evidence)
Click to expand...
This is so off. A lot of atheists actually win these debates. William Lane Craig is the only theist that consistently wins debates against atheists to be honest. Winning a debate doesn’t prove your point though, it just proves that one side presented their argument more effeciently.
 
okay so answer me this. Without God, would you still do what is morally right? Can you not do what is right without God? Do you do something good because God will reward you and think well of you? To me that seems extremely selfish because shouldn’t you do good just because it is good?

People. as conscious beings, just feel lonely in our universe. (you can see the theme of loneliness in literature etc) and God fills that void by directly coming into contact with us…
 
Hooding_Trees said:
Well not really you have to remember that rational thinking takes skills that many people in history did not possess. Furthermore we know have a level of knowledge that must influence the way we look at the universe. The enlightenment and modern education have changed the goal posts for religion.

I personally do not believe there is a rational reason for believing that which there is no evidence.
Click to expand...
Also, lets talk about people that believe in Buddhism? Are they rational? They don’t believe in Jesus and believe in reincarnation. What about Hindus? The same goes for hindus…and hindus and buddhists make up almost a quarter of the world population. Are they rational or irrational?
 
hellopeople said:
LOL…I laughed when he pulled that spam out. Praying making someone feeling better isn’t proof of God anyway…that could work with or without God existing.

EDIT: wow, son of spam is hilarious too.

I have good friends that are atheists, have heard all of their arguments, and believe that they have some good arguments with great merit. Atheists would say that all of us are deaf and blind and nothing will change our stance. I have had some religious experiences in my life that have made me believe in God. IF these events did not happen, I doubt that I would believe in God today. I am skeptical by nature to be honest.
Click to expand...
Its ok to be skeptical but if you truly want to know God you must have faith in him first and put your pride to the side. That is the only way to know God.
 
TomD123 said:
If there is no God, why would anyone call the sun beautiful? Why would anyone call anything beautiful? I do not see what evolutionary adaptation beauty is. There is no survival value to the beauty of music, stars, the ocean, a waterfall, etc.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t make any sense to me. If there is no God, there can be no beauty? What? And who are you to say that there is no survival value to the beauty of music, stars, the ocean…
 
Black_Rose said:
Personally, my view of the world is rather Laplacian who famously stated that he had no need for God in his scientific work because one does not need to invoke a hypothesis to explain the features of the natural world even though I currently believe in a personal God’s existence.
Click to expand...
I loved that answer from Laplace. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top