Dear Believers, prove your god or gods is/aren't just fiction(s).

foghorn said:
Does any of that prove a god is not just something in your head?
Remembering the thread title.
Click to expand...
And we’re back to square one.
What do you think God is, why you think there should be evidence of God’s existence?
What would you regard as evidence for God?
I ask because I don’t fully understand your question.

If you don’t have a definition, it begs the question as to what your atheism is based on.
Let’s go with this basic definition of God, and I would like you to explain what evidence you would be prepared to accept, and why (if it gets that far)

God : the supreme or ultimate reality: such as. a. : the being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped (as in Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism) as creator and ruler of the universe. Throughout the patristic and medieval periods, Christian theologians taught that God created the

Good luck with that!
 
Trek said:
You asked, and I delivered.
Now explain what type of evidence you would accept for God, and why.
Put up, shut up
Click to expand...
Onus still remains on you.

Describe your God and your evidence and well let you know if it passes the bar.

But you won't. Partly because you dont have the courage of your beliefs, but also because you have already conceded that you cannot produce any evidence.
 
DaveC426913 said:
Describe your God and your evidence and well let you know if it passes the bar.
Click to expand...
I know it won’t pass the bar, because you’ve no intention of discussing anything.
I could be wrong. All you have to do is explain what you would accept as evidence for God.
Now I got banned for calling you a liar.
Now is the chance to prove me wrong
 
Trek said:
I could be wrong. All you have to do is explain what you would accept as evidence for God.
Click to expand...
Again no. That is not the OP, we asked to you to provide evidence that your god is more than a fairy tale.
The onus has always been on you so stop lying.
You provided a wiki link, that is how weak your argument is.
I.e. you have NO argument.
 
Trek said:
Are you referring to the defund the police people?
Click to expand...
You disparage reporting to the moderator as (and i quote) "crybabying". That's a pretty juvenile stance, the kind of thing you hear on a playground.

It helps your cause if you are not reported for your bad behaviour because you hope to get away with it. You didn't.

Truth and honesty flourish, even in in the eye of moderated discussion. The people who disparage moderation are those who prefer to sneak around in the shadows.
 
Gods have been claimed by many cultures over the years. None have shown up to defend themselves. It's really as simple as that. The hysteria that comes from being depend on a nonexistent being shouldn't spill over onto the rest of us. BUT doing horrible things in the name of God should be punished in kind.
 
Trek said:
If you don’t have a definition, it begs the question as to what your atheism is based on.
Click to expand...
This isn't correct.
Let's take the example of a Glipzt. Do you have a definition of it? No. If you don't, can you say whether or not it exists? No. Therefore most people would not have the belief that a Glipzt exists, right?

Therefore you should accept that one does not need to have a definition of something in order to not have the belief that it exists.

Note that this is different to having the belief that it does not exist.

Atheism covers both positions with regard God.
If one lacks a meaningful definition of the word, one would likely lack the belief that it exists.
 
The sad part is "mystery" covers so many unsolvable problems with religion. Low standards regarding evidence should make one afraid to go on trial for their life.
 
Sarkus said:
This isn't correct.
Let's take the example of a Glipzt. Do you have a definition of it? No. If you don't, can you say whether or not it exists? No. Therefore most people would not have the belief that a Glipzt exists, right?
Click to expand...
I can’t say anything about a Gliptz because I do not know what one is, so I can neither believe or lack belief. I can’t even be agnostic unless I have at least a known and understood definition.
Having a definition allows me to decide whether or not a Gliptz exist, and if asked why I lack a belief, I would be able to explain based on my definition/understanding. I would not need to know your definition unless it differed from mine.

So my question (what evidence would convince you about the reality of God?) is legitimate because all I hear is “lack of evidence” with regards God. If you know there is a lack of evidence, despite evidences all over the internet which you reject, it signifies that you would know what the evidence would be, if it were to show up. All I’m doing is asking what it would be because at this point I have no clue what you mean by God.
I think it’s time you guys came clean
Sarkus said:
Therefore you should accept that one does not need to have a definition of something in order to not have the belief that it exists.
Click to expand...
What do you think “belief” is?
Do you think you can believe in anything without having some knowledge or understanding of that thing?

Sarkus said:
Note that this is different to having the belief that it does not exist.
Click to expand...
Regardless, you still have to know something about why you believe something does not exists.

“I don’t believe the Gliptz exists because…”
“I don’t believe in the Gliptz because…”
The former can be the reason for the latter, but for it to be rational you have to have some knowledge of said Gliptz.
Sarkus said:
Atheism covers both positions with regard God.
If one lacks a meaningful definition of the word, one would likely lack the belief that it exists.
Click to expand...
All that means is that you lack belief in the word God.
I’m asking about the meaning of the word.
What do you think God is, why you lean toward atheism or agnosticism?
 
Pinball1970 said:
Again no. That is not the OP, we asked to you to provide evidence that your god is more than a fairy tale.
The onus has always been on you so stop lying.
You provided a wiki link, that is how weak your argument is.
I.e. you have NO argument.
Click to expand...
I’ve responded to the thread.
You can’t prove anything outside of mathematics.
Don’t blame me for the title of the thread, but it has been addressed by me.
Now it’s y’all’s turn to answer my questions, at least to make sense of what God is, so your atheism is justified. So far it seems to be based on nothing but a word
 
foghorn said:
No one here is anthropomorphising " mathematics" . It's a tool for modelling Nature.
Click to expand...
He asked for proof..
Nothing can be proven outside of mathematics.
I addressed that multiple times.
Now it’s my turn to ask questions.

He is still asking for proof.
Look at his above post.
So now it’s my turn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top