I saw a ghost on All Hallows Eve, so that's evidence of God enough for me. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I felt sad for the ghost, she was miffed and tried to scare me. However, my corporeal self remained swayed more by munching candy.
I know. It's just that your reply makes me wonder if you actually read anything. Once again, assuming that you read anything, I'm not sure why you would say that. I go to lengths to specifically explain how the existence of God ... actually I even go to broader lengths and talk about how the existence of anything one would care to evidence ... determines the specific form such evidence takes and the manner one arrives at it. Therefore it is no coincidence that geologists (and not astronomers) call upon geology (and not astronomy) or that we use litres and not celcius to measure volume or that we look down one specific end of a telescope (and not the other) to survey things further afield. It also explains why, if one wants to directly see the president, one has to negotiate the political reality and security detail of his exclusiveness and not just merely a "physical" series of doors and stair cases within the White House. In all cases, the form of evidence is obedient to the category of the object one is calling up for observation. Disregard that at your own peril. In otherwords, the big mistake the atheist camp commonly makes in these discussions is to demand a specofic form of evidence that disregards the category of God. If the whole purpose of atheism is to problematize the category of God, one has to wonder why they don't do their homework and actually start with the same category of thing that theists are discussing. If your very premise of evidence is lodged in a form that is incongruent to the form of the object, you simply don't get the evidence. On one hand, this outcome may be very amicable for the atheist camp, but it just begs the question whether atheism is purpose driven by its own needs or a need to properly analyze the nature of God's existence. Which comes as no surprise. Its a stance akin to Andaman Islanders seeing no evidence of their political sovereignty to India. Which you reject as inference. Just try and solve the problem of seeing the president in terms of doors and staircases and not bodyguards and secretaries and see how far you get. On the contrary, the special pleading belongs to you. It is you who is determining a specific set of terms devoid of any analysis of the "category of God". It is just like assuming that because you live in a house with stairs and doors and the president also lives in a house with stairs and doors, the problem of seeing the president can be solved by merely negotiating the problem of stairs and doors. It won't work, of course, because the president belongs to not only a different category than you, but a superior one. Well, if one deems that the problem of the existence of the president can only be solved by direct perception (as per, the standard dictated by the atheist camp) and not all this "pesky inference" of third person accounts (ie, newspspers and media) or "logical inferences" (testimony built from analysis of history and/or political hierarchies), how would you propose to "evidence the president"? Does the category of the president take him beyond any such means as "direct perception"? Or does the nature of his category dictate a specific form such an exercise would have to take in order to yield results?
Aside from the god believed in by Christians, are the beliefs & evidence discussed here applicable to other gods? Google can probably find hundreds if not thousands of gods currently & historically believed in. Obviously the gods accepted by those who believe in more than one god cannot be considered equivalent to the Christian, Jewish , or Islamic god. BTW: Do some Jews & some Christians think that they worship the same god? I wonder if believers in monotheistic religions might be accepted by Christians, Jews, & Islamics as be;ieving in the same god.
We’ve already given evidence, but you cannot recognise it. Why? Because you’re an atheist. A person who makes a deeply personal vow, “there is no God”. Jan.
This kind of post is why these guys are here, posting on this forum. Provide them a platform, and they will provide as much repetition of disparagement of science and reason and anyone who employs science and reason as it takes to fill that platform.
Because you didn't post it. "Ask someone else" is not posting it. You may have some, deep in your brain, but apparently you can't even write it down. Why do you think that posting stuff that is dead wrong helps your case? It simply confirms that you're pretty much immune to logic.
No, I gave indirect evidence for God with a ghost --I had my phone on me and took a picture. You haven't given evidence that is not, well, some wish fulfilling illusion. And I mean that explicitly in a Freudian sense.
Makes no difference whether I posted it, or tell you where to find it. The evidence is there. It matters not that you deny it, because that is your occupation as an atheist. What is “dead wrong” about the evidence I told you to seek out? Or is this simply more atheist denial? Jan
What do you mean by “god” or “god’s”? Here’s what I mean. God - Origin Cause of all causes gods, humans all other forms of life, effects. Why don’t you start a thread regarding religious belief? Jan
I'm not, James R, who started this thread. AND I'm not going over this stupid thread with a fine tooth comb, yet, have given you the opportunity to choose points of argument.
Thank you for admitting that you cannot post any evidence. You just think it's out there somewhere. (A rather poor position from which to defend your beliefs - 'well, somewhere out there, someone has some evidence. I think') You think my occupation is "atheist?" This gets funnier and funnier. You are dead wrong about my being an atheist. But I am sure that my beliefs are so far outside your mental box that they wouldn't make any sense.
This is adorable. Like - grade school adorable. There is evidence out there that the world was created by a flick of the Cosmic Unicorn's Tail. But I'm not going to tell you where to find it. There is evidence out there that Jan Ardena eats live kittens. But I'm not going to tell you where to find it.
Great! What am I denying? Ah, the old "try to redefine words to win the argument" strategy! Love it. You are really living up to your image. I've already described that. Google it!
You deny the God that you know exists. The “image” as set forth by folk who foolishly deny God? No problem. So you I assume you think the term “occupation” only applies to one thing? Jan.
You don’t believe in God? That makes you atheist. Unless of course, you do believe in God. I’ll assume you don’t. Jan
