• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How do you decide if something you personally encounter is or is not evidence for God?

Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 11, 2017
Messages
5,544
Reaction score
1,061
Location
Arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.
Click to expand...

That may be because of the way you post in these threads you have been creating . . .
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...

If I encounter something I cannot rationally explain with the laws of science as I understand them, then it is possible that it is evidence for God, but it is also possible that my understanding of the laws of science is simply inadequate. I cannot rule out the former, but neither can I rule out the latter. Due to past experience, I presume that the latter is the more probable scenario.
 
lwf said:
If I encounter something I cannot rationally explain with the laws of science as I understand them, then it is possible that it is evidence for God, but it is also possible that my understanding of the laws of science is simply inadequate. I cannot rule out the former, but neither can I rule out the latter. Due to past experience, I presume that the latter is the more probable scenario.
Click to expand...

Thanks, you're going further than any other atheist so far has, your honest answer is refreshing!
 
  • Like
Reactions: lwf
Mr Person said:
That may be because of the way you post in these threads you have been creating . . .
Click to expand...

Yes it may, like asking questions that atheists don't want to be asked, that is nasty of me isn't it.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...
How do you decied it is evidence of God???

I mean, I can show why the way a rock falls and lands on a place not below its' starting point is evidence of the rotation of the earth.

It is the person making the positive claim to show the evidence not those who don't get it.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...
My thesis would be if you cannot logically answer this question then they cannot logically be a theist
 
A tall tale takes more evidence to believe than a mundane one. And the taller the tale, the more evidence required.

I caught a fish -- OK, maybe I take that claim on face value. Why not?
I caught the biggest fish this lake has ever seen -- Possible. But I'd like to see some evidence of that one
I caught a 200 ton whale out of this lake -- Yup...need evidence to believe that one otherwise I call BS.

God is a VERY tall tale.

What evidence would I need? Personal revelation of some kind -- I'd know it when I see it. Or, a logical proof with sound premises and a logical conclusion which is that "God" exists.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...
First of all, there is no proof of God and that you can prove.

To prove God you would have to be bigger than Him and able to define Him.

When confronted with a miracle, it only proves that there is power.

Even though you can't prove God, you can use his existence to prove other theories.

The material conception of God does not exist and this is not always true.
 
Tim the plumber said:
How do you decied it is evidence of God???

I mean, I can show why the way a rock falls and lands on a place not below its' starting point is evidence of the rotation of the earth.

It is the person making the positive claim to show the evidence not those who don't get it.
Click to expand...

I never made a claim, I asked a question, predictably you did not answer it - that's the bottom line here, you did not answer the question.
 
See, so many here - except one honest exception - are unwilling to answer my question, some are even angry it seems.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
I never made a claim, I asked a question, predictably you did not answer it - that's the bottom line here, you did not answer the question.
Click to expand...

The question has no merit because, as others have said, it presupposes a God, which is exactly backwards from the manner that evidence is supposed to work.
 
Drowning Man said:
A tall tale takes more evidence to believe than a mundane one. And the taller the tale, the more evidence required.

I caught a fish -- OK, maybe I take that claim on face value. Why not?
I caught the biggest fish this lake has ever seen -- Possible. But I'd like to see some evidence of that one
I caught a 200 ton whale out of this lake -- Yup...need evidence to believe that one otherwise I call BS.

God is a VERY tall tale.

What evidence would I need? Personal revelation of some kind -- I'd know it when I see it. Or, a logical proof with sound premises and a logical conclusion which is that "God" exists.
Click to expand...

Well that's another honest reasonable answer, shame more atheists can't do this.
 
IF there is a god that created this universe, then that God apparently does not interfere in its workings or violate its cosmological/physical laws.

While this in itself does not unequivocally rule out the existence of a god, it strongly suggests as much [to me].
 
As god is nothing more than imagination then it must be up to the theist to provide whatever they deem evidence and not the atheist to guess what imaginary qualities a theist thinks a god has. Sherlocks dishonesty is in demanding that evidence is somehow apart from a theists imagination and therefore observable without first a theists explaining it.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...

How many times are you going to ask the same question????

Is it supernatural??? No? Not god.
 
Sherlock Holmes said:
The thread is about the issues raised by the question that is the title.

I've found no atheists who are prepared to honestly answer or honestly explore the issues this question raises.

My thesis is that if a person cannot answer this question then they cannot logically adopt atheism because atheism is predicated on the recognition of evidence and if this is not possible then atheism is just a belief.
Click to expand...
Where are the actions that you claim to be evidence of a supernatural creator deity?

Watching you desperately attempting to construct religious strawman armies is quite amusing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom