What would count as proof of God

[Rhea]

My team prayed and asked all their internet friends to also pray, so we achieved 20 prayer-hours in 15 minutes.

 

[Drew2008]

As I pointed out some time ago, and which you did not address, you are mistaken in claiming that theism, if true, entails a universe. It is logically possible to imagine God exists without a universe at all. Since God is supposed to be omnipotent, he can choose to create a universe, or not to create a universe. If that is not so — if God MUST create as universe — then God is not omnipotent, as in at least this one circumstance his hand would be forced.

noun
noun: theism

belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism).

Did you look up the meaning of theism prior to pointing out my error?

Moreover, as I also pointed out, God is supposed to be perfect in every respect. If that is the case, what need has he to create a universe? If God felt the need to create a universe, this suggests that he was not perfect in every respect, because the lack of a universe would indicate that something was missing in God.

And you're mistaken again. Every single post of mine says this.

I'm a theist. No specific God belief in a Creator.

If the universe was the result of cranky scientists from another dimension that knew how to create a universe theism would correct.

I suggest that you do not flatter yourself that you are teaching anyone anything.

No in this case just pointing out your mistakes.

 

[Drew2008]

If you claimed tree dwelling Elves caused trees to exist and pointed to the trees existing as evidence I would agree the existence of trees makes your claim more probable then if trees didn't exist. This is obvious, plain and as simple as I can make it. […] Since theism is defined as the universe being intentionally created by God the universe is evidence the claim maybe true. Evidence are merely facts that make a proposition more likely.

Let the record show that Drew has just logically proved that the existence of his god is EXACTLY AS LIKELY as the existence of tree elves.

No not in the least. The claim Elves caused trees to exist is easily falsified. Unlike the universe we do in fact have a naturalistic explanation for the existence of trees. The basis on which elves exist is false.

 

[pood]

Drew,

did you notice the especially part of your definition?

Since it is possible to imagine a god without him creating anything, your idea that theism entails a creation is demonstrated to be false.

 

[pood]

So cranky scientists in another dimension are now gods?

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

The argument for a god from cranky scientists in other dimensions. This is some pretty convincing religious stuff.

 

[abaddon]

I've seen the "maybe scientists in another dimension" thing among a few creationists now and it boggles my mind. They seem to not give much of a damn what the creator is. The important thing is, their life feels more meaningful if they are created objects. If they're simulations even. "If I'm not a toy in someone's sandbox then my life is for nothing". Oh the agony.

 

[pood]

Also, Drew, as I pointed out, even if it were true that the existence of a god entaIled the creation of a universe, the lack of a universe is not, as you claimed, a falsification of god. That is because if there were no universe, there would be no one around to notice that god was falsified.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I've seen the "maybe scientists in another dimension" thing among a few creationists now and it boggles my mind. They seem to not give much of a damn what the creator is.

Oh, of course they do. Just remember the purpose of ID is not to scientifically examine the question of the existance of gods, it's to pretend there's actual science to show the universe must be caused.
If you're an antitheist dead-set against even the possibility of God, no matter how compelling the evidence (eye-rolling smilie here), maybe you'll be more amenable to a near-sighted creator in a lab coat? Or at least being open to the evidence (eye-roll) on offer?

 

[Drew2008]

Some people believe that pan-dimensional pixies created the universe with intelligent life in it
This belief would be falsified if a universe with intelligent life in it did not exist
The universe exists, and there is intelligent life in it
Therefore, the existence of the universe with intelligent life in it is evidence for the existence of pan-dimensional pixies

Some people believe we owe our existence to mindless forces that didn't intend their own existence, the existence of the universe or life and least of all intelligent humans. They don't believe it was intentionally caused to exist. Its just like mindless forces to pull a stunt like this some how come into existence and accidentally cause the conditions for theism to be true. No matter how much blathering and posturing is done in the final analysis nothing we observe has to be true for the belief God doesn't exist to be true. There doesn't have to be a universe, galaxies, stars, planets, water, oxygen, carbon, laws of physics, gravity.

I'm not attempting to convince anyone responding to my posts the truth of my belief. Its a belief, an opinion. I'm not stating it's a fact. I don't deny there is evidence which supports a natural view of the world. No one here knows how or why a life permitting universe exists. If we discover how life actually got started and how it could have occurred that would be big fact in favor of naturalism. If it turns out this is in fact one of an infinitude of universes with varying characteristics then time and chance would rule.

I knew I was going to run into a buzz saw because its pratically a hallowed concept of atheism that there is no evidence, no facts, no data, no information no reason in the world anyone should think our existence might have been intentionally caused. We should just accept (evidently on faith) that our existence is the result of chance caused by mindless forces that didn't intend our existence. You don't feel people should be skeptical of your claim.

 

[Drew2008]

Also, Drew, as I pointed out, even if it were true that the existence of a god entaIled the creation of a universe, the lack of a universe is not, as you claimed, a falsification of god. That is because if there were no universe, there would be no one around to notice that god was falsified.

Its a falsification of theism. You think only if humans notice something its true or false?

 

[pood]

But, Drew, SOMEONE, whether human or not, has to notice a falsification. Otherwise there is no falsification.

Maybe you think that because a universe exists, then god is not falsified. That‘s right. So? I don’t think anyone here has claimed that the very existence of a universe falsifies god.

 

[steve_bank]

As I pointed out some time ago, and which you did not address, you are mistaken in claiming that theism, if true, entails a universe. It is logically possible to imagine God exists without a universe at all. Since God is supposed to be omnipotent, he can choose to create a universe, or not to create a universe. If that is not so — if God MUST create as universe — then God is not omnipotent, as in at least this one circumstance his hand would be forced.

noun
noun: theism

belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in one god as creator of the universe, intervening in it and sustaining a personal relation to his creatures.

the belief in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation (distinguished from deism).

Did you look up the meaning of theism prior to pointing out my error?

Moreover, as I also pointed out, God is supposed to be perfect in every respect. If that is the case, what need has he to create a universe? If God felt the need to create a universe, this suggests that he was not perfect in every respect, because the lack of a universe would indicate that something was missing in God.

And you're mistaken again. Every single post of mine says this.

I'm a theist. No specific God belief in a Creator.

If the universe was the result of cranky scientists from another dimension that knew how to create a universe theism would correct.

I suggest that you do not flatter yourself that you are teaching anyone anything.

No in this case just pointing out your mistakes.

Obviously the dictionary you quote must be the inspires words of the creator. The dicyionary must be absolutely true.

 

[abaddon]

Oh, of course they do. Just remember the purpose of ID is not to scientifically examine the question of the existance of gods, it's to pretend there's actual science to show the universe must be caused.
If you're an antitheist dead-set against even the possibility of God, no matter how compelling the evidence (eye-rolling smilie here), maybe you'll be more amenable to a near-sighted creator in a lab coat? Or at least being open to the evidence (eye-roll) on offer?

If we're simulated by aliens then the universe isn't made by gods at all and thus the capital-G God becomes that much less convincing. So this line of ... thinking?... doesn't help theism at all. It does the opposite.

The definition of God can't be so vague that just anything that "creates" becomes a god.

(And by chance if "I'm created" is supposed to give any of the sense of meaning or purpose to a life, that's daft too. Having a creator didn't help Frankenstein's creature at all, not even with a F2F encounter with the fellow).

 

[Keith&Co.]

Oh, of course they do. Just remember the purpose of ID is not to scientifically examine the question of the existance of gods, it's to pretend there's actual science to show the universe must be caused.
If you're an antitheist dead-set against even the possibility of God, no matter how compelling the evidence (eye-rolling smilie here), maybe you'll be more amenable to a near-sighted creator in a lab coat? Or at least being open to the evidence (eye-roll) on offer?

If we're simulated by aliens then the universe isn't made by gods at all and thus the capital-G God becomes that much less "logically necessary".

But they don't expect to fully reach THAT conclusion.
It's just a bait-and-switch.
If you accept that, i dunno, the beauty of a sunrise, or the smell of a baby's neck, or puppies, something supports the possibility that the universe is a crafted one, then you can no longer logically oppose the rejection of an uncaring, meaningless, scary universe and scary arbitrary creation.

The definition of God can't be so vague that just anything that "creates" becomes a god.

It's not. All those possibilities are just placeholders.

Recall, every time ID is proposed for public schools, ghey swear, "It's SCIENCE!!"
When ID is rejected, they cry, "You're angering GOD!!" as if it wasn't already obvious who they meant.

 

[atrib]

Some people believe that pan-dimensional pixies created the universe with intelligent life in it
This belief would be falsified if a universe with intelligent life in it did not exist
The universe exists, and there is intelligent life in it
Therefore, the existence of the universe with intelligent life in it is evidence for the existence of pan-dimensional pixies

Some people believe we owe our existence to mindless forces that didn't intend their own existence, the existence of the universe or life and least of all intelligent humans. They don't believe it was intentionally caused to exist. Its just like mindless forces to pull a stunt like this some how come into existence and accidentally cause the conditions for theism to be true. No matter how much blathering and posturing is done in the final analysis nothing we observe has to be true for the belief God doesn't exist to be true. There doesn't have to be a universe, galaxies, stars, planets, water, oxygen, carbon, laws of physics, gravity.

I'm not attempting to convince anyone responding to my posts the truth of my belief. Its a belief, an opinion. I'm not stating it's a fact. I don't deny there is evidence which supports a natural view of the world. No one here knows how or why a life permitting universe exists. If we discover how life actually got started and how it could have occurred that would be big fact in favor of naturalism. If it turns out this is in fact one of an infinitude of universes with varying characteristics then time and chance would rule.

I knew I was going to run into a buzz saw because its pratically a hallowed concept of atheism that there is no evidence, no facts, no data, no information no reason in the world anyone should think our existence might have been intentionally caused. We should just accept (evidently on faith) that our existence is the result of chance caused by mindless forces that didn't intend our existence. You don't feel people should be skeptical of your claim.

At this point your posts have degenerated into an emotional rant against atheists. Many people find it hard to believe that their cherished beliefs might be wrong, and I expect that is what you are experiencing. There is no good reason to believe in gods, no matter what you might have been indoctrinated into believing, and I think you understand that now, even if you are unwilling to acknowledge it publicly.

You are new here, and I hope you stick around and continue to participate in these discussions. Perhaps you will bring yourself to reflect on these discussions when you have calmed down, and make an effort to understand the perspectives of the people who have tried to engage you.

 

[atrib]

If you claimed tree dwelling Elves caused trees to exist and pointed to the trees existing as evidence I would agree the existence of trees makes your claim more probable then if trees didn't exist. This is obvious, plain and as simple as I can make it. […] Since theism is defined as the universe being intentionally created by God the universe is evidence the claim maybe true. Evidence are merely facts that make a proposition more likely.

Let the record show that Drew has just logically proved that the existence of his god is EXACTLY AS LIKELY as the existence of tree elves.

No not in the least. The claim Elves caused trees to exist is easily falsified. Unlike the universe we do in fact have a naturalistic explanation for the existence of trees. The basis on which elves exist is false.

If you go back and read my argument again, you will find that I DID NOT make the claim the Elves caused trees to exist. You really should make the effort to read and understand what people are saying, instead on simply going with whatever you think they are saying.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Drew's argumentum dictionarium reminds me of a guy i ran across on DeviantArt. He quoted a passage from Harry Potter where Harry walks past some dangerous creature. Some sort of dog. Maybe a Barghest? Or something she made up.
Whatever.
But rather than getting attacked, the book says 'Harry got past them, unmolested.'
The poster knew that 'molested' means 'raped,' and was shocked that Rowling put a (potential) sex scene in a kids' book.
No amount of discussion would dissuade this guy that there are other uses of the word, 'molest.' Rowling said Harry avoided getting raped by magic dogs. That was it, no other interpretations were available.

 

[Jarhyn]

So, placeholder here to remind me, make an argument supporting the existence of "tree dwelling elves" when I get on lunch.

 

[Drew2008]

Some people believe that pan-dimensional pixies created the universe with intelligent life in it
This belief would be falsified if a universe with intelligent life in it did not exist
The universe exists, and there is intelligent life in it
Therefore, the existence of the universe with intelligent life in it is evidence for the existence of pan-dimensional pixies

Some people believe we owe our existence to mindless forces that didn't intend their own existence, the existence of the universe or life and least of all intelligent humans. They don't believe it was intentionally caused to exist. Its just like mindless forces to pull a stunt like this some how come into existence and accidentally cause the conditions for theism to be true. No matter how much blathering and posturing is done in the final analysis nothing we observe has to be true for the belief God doesn't exist to be true. There doesn't have to be a universe, galaxies, stars, planets, water, oxygen, carbon, laws of physics, gravity.

I'm not attempting to convince anyone responding to my posts the truth of my belief. Its a belief, an opinion. I'm not stating it's a fact. I don't deny there is evidence which supports a natural view of the world. No one here knows how or why a life permitting universe exists. If we discover how life actually got started and how it could have occurred that would be big fact in favor of naturalism. If it turns out this is in fact one of an infinitude of universes with varying characteristics then time and chance would rule.

I knew I was going to run into a buzz saw because its pratically a hallowed concept of atheism that there is no evidence, no facts, no data, no information no reason in the world anyone should think our existence might have been intentionally caused. We should just accept (evidently on faith) that our existence is the result of chance caused by mindless forces that didn't intend our existence. You don't feel people should be skeptical of your claim.

At this point your posts have degenerated into an emotional rant against atheists. Many people find it hard to believe that their cherished beliefs might be wrong, and I expect that is what you are experiencing. There is no good reason to believe in gods, no matter what you might have been indoctrinated into believing, and I think you understand that now, even if you are unwilling to acknowledge it publicly.

You are new here, and I hope you stick around and continue to participate in these discussions. Perhaps you will bring yourself to reflect on these discussions when you have calmed down, and make an effort to understand the perspectives of the people who have tried to engage you.

My posts are an emotional rant? Have you looked at the responses I've gotten?

You want to replace the word God or Creator with Pixies. I can replace natural causes with mindless forces. My belief is due in part to the three facts I listed. No God of the gaps. Just facts.

F1 The universe exists

I believe it was intentionally caused to exist. You believe it was unintentionally caused by forces that didn't intend their own existence. You believe all the circumstances to cause intelligent human life exist occurred naturally with no plan or intent for it to happen. We owe our existence to a fortuitous stroke of luck. You have an alternate explanation? If a universe didn't exist theism would be falsified.

F2 Life exists

You know of any law or rule that says life of any sort has to exist? Did mindless forces have to cause a universe to exist? Does a universe and life have to exist for theism to be true? Yeah they do. If any condition has to be true for a claim to be true those conditions are evidence the claim is true.

F3 Intelligent life exists.

Theism is the belief the universe was caused for the purpose of creating intelligent life. Did intelligent life have to exist? Is there some law of physics that compels mindless forces to create a universe with the properties that can subsequently cause intelligent life to exist?

F4. The fact the universe has laws of nature, is knowable, uniform and to a large extent predictable, amenable to scientific research, the laws of logic deduction and induction and is explicable in mathematical terms.

These characteristics are necessary for the second and third facts to obtain which are necessary for theism to be true. This fourth fact is not only essential for theism to be true it directly contradicts the belief this universe was caused by unguided forces with no plan or intent to cause intelligent life to occur.

No one has disputed the facts I've listed are true. Not one of them needs to be true for atheism to be true. All four have to be true for theism to be true. Your explanation for the aforementioned facts is shit happens. It wasn't intentional just an accident. A happy fortuitous luck of the draw.

If I were you I'd point out the chaotic nature of the universe, how evolution appears to account for how organisms become more complicated. How the earth formed by natural causes as well as the natural universe. But we can't have that discussion because you can't bring yourself to admit there are factual reasons why people believe the universe was intentionally caused to exist. So instead you resort to the usual tactics. Those tactics only impress your fellow totally committed atheists.