Proof and Evidence

[Razi_Alaster]

I was going to post in the "Do you believe my Atheistic views are unreasonable?" thread about proof and evidence. I decided not to in the end. Last time I posted in one of these major debates, I was off topic. I'll leave that thread alone for now.

I have noticed a "rabbit trail" debate that seems to come up in a fair number of threads. It is the topic of Proof and Evidence, both for and against the existence of God. I am going to start a thread that is solely for this debate. This is a place where anyone who has proof, examples, theories, arguments, or anything else pertaining to the proof and evidence of God, for or against, can come and post.

I was attempting to find out the different views and opinions on these forums that related to proof and evidence. When I discovered it rather difficult to sift through all the threads and gather bits and pieces here and there.

In my research, albeit not that thorough for lack of time, I found a few trends in these forums. The ones I have come across go as follows:

1. "Give me evidence that God exists." - "There is no concrete proof."
2. "The proof is all around us." - "Then give me proof."
3. "Give me proof that God doesn't exist." - "There is no proof God exists."
4. "Everything in this world points to a Creator." - "Everything in this world points to no Creator."

That being said, I have no desire to try and prove God.

As DV, my favorite to quote from, once said:

I'm content to say, "I don't know".

I am also content to merely let God's light shine in me, if people are interested, they will come and ask about the light. Rather then shinning the light directly into people's eyes. In my experience, the latter only brings out our defensive nature. I am to be the messenger, and the messenger only. If the messenger has done his job properly, the reciever will say, "I agree" or "I disagree", and send his response back to the sender. It is not the messenger's job to convince the reciever to agree if he disagrees. That is the job of the message he brings.

I, infact, avoid getting involved in these debates. Though I am troubled by the amount of bickering that is a result of this. No side ever gives, or seems to see the same viewpoint, yet both sides insist they understand the other. If someone can be convinced into believing something by me, then someone more persuasive will come along and convince them otherwise. I am not interested in this flip flop faith. My suspicion is, God isn't either.

I would just like to start off this thread by asking something I am curious about:

What proof do you need?
What would be sufficient?
Is it considered proof to see a change within a person?

These questions are meant for everyone.

Some versus that seemed relative, but neither meant as proof or disproof.

James 2:14-18
14What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to him, "Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed," but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

18But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds."
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.

Acts 11:21-23
21The Lord's hand was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord.

22News of this reached the ears of the church at Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch. 23When he arrived and saw the evidence of the grace of God, he was glad and encouraged them all to remain true to the Lord with all their hearts.

 

[[toj.cc]phantom]

Well done!

 

[Dark Virtue]

I think you've fallen a bit short of the mark by not defining a few terms, not least of which is "proof".

I would also suggest defining reasonable, reason and evidence for starters.

The definitions I use are pretty strict and definately lean toward the scientific end of the spectrum. Why? Well, we are talking about proof aren't we? That's not a subjective term, it should be objective.

To answer your questions:

What proof do you need?

That which would lead me to believe in the existence of God. I can't be more specific than that because if I knew the answer, then I would have what I needed. Keep in mind it is necessary for you to define your terms before this question can be analyzed adequately.

What would be sufficient?

See the above.

Is it considered proof to see a change within a person?

Proof of what? God's existence? Again, be very careful and deliberate in your questions if you expect a careful and deliberate answer.

I'll make an educated guess though and assume that you are asking if I would consider a positive change in a person as proof of God's existence. The simple answer is no. If you want me to be more specific, you need to set some parameters for your question.

I am also content to merely let God's light shine in me, if people are interested, they will come and ask about the light. Rather then shinning the light directly into people's eyes. In my experience, the latter only brings out our defensive nature. I am to be the messenger, and the messenger only. If the messenger has done his job properly, the reciever will say, "I agree" or "I disagree", and send his response back to the sender. It is not the messenger's job to convince the reciever to agree if he disagrees. That is the job of the message he brings.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. What is this "light"? How do you distinguish this "light" from the good works/attitude of a nonChristian?

Keep one more thing in mind. When I ask people for proof, it is not because that I actually expect to see proof. It's more to show that people are using that term inappropriately. If God DOES exist, the only one who can furnish proof of his existence is God. That is why I am interested in what leads a Christian to believe in God. Somehow, somewhere, there was evidence and proof to believe in God. Otherwise, their belief is simply irrational.

 

[Eon]

I've already said that if you say to me "I believe God exists because I have faith." then I can do more than smile and nod. It's an automatic draw - I am not about to debate someone's faith with tawdry fact.

If, on the other hand, you want a little science and history with your bible, then I'm going to kick up a fuss - because I believe that the bible is not factually accurate, and I believe that if you teach someone a wrong fact then you're doing them harm.

If you tell me "I don't know." then I'll tell you that your club card and t-shirt are in the mail.

 

[DarthDapor]

I believe that the bible is not factually accurate, and I believe that if you teach someone a wrong fact then you're doing them harm.

How are you doing them harm (please explain)?

 

[Razi_Alaster]

To sum up my post, since it's been misunderstood.

Is I simply want to see everyone's views on this. Including what they would define proof and evidence as. I did not intend to define anything or lay out any proof. Merely to get the thread started

I will not prove God's existence or try to. No one will be convinced, and I don't want anyone to be convinced.

I want to understand why it is so important for most people. I am also the entirely wrong person to start this thread. As Eon said, we run into a stalemate. I believe with faith. It is between God and myself. I'm content with that and I see all the evidence I need through people. Both Christian and non-Christian. I begged and prayed and asked God to show me himself, but got nothing for 8 years, so I gave up, but didn't entirely denounce my faith. Then I watched as a person changed right before my very eyes as they grew to love and accept Jesus. That alone is enough for me to live the Christian life whether God be true or false. Regardless of what anyone says, in my opinion, if there is no God in the end, the Christian life is still worth living.

 

[Dark Virtue]

To sum up my post, since it's been misunderstood.

Is I simply want to see everyone's views on this. Including what they would define proof and evidence as. I did not intend to define anything or lay out any proof. Merely to get the thread started

I will not prove God's existence or try to. No one will be convinced, and I don't want anyone to be convinced.

I want to understand why it is so important for most people. I am also the entirely wrong person to start this thread. As Eon said, we run into a stalemate. I believe with faith. It is between God and myself. I'm content with that and I see all the evidence I need through people. Both Christian and non-Christian. I begged and prayed and asked God to show me himself, but got nothing for 8 years, so I gave up, but didn't entirely denounce my faith. Then I watched as a person changed right before my very eyes as they grew to love and accept Jesus. That alone is enough for me to live the Christian life whether God be true or false. Regardless of what anyone says, in my opinion, if there is no God in the end, the Christian life is still worth living.

Are you saying that nonChristians can't grow and become good, happy people? Or are you saying that you simply haven't met one? If the latter is true, you REALLY need to get out more.

Why are you opposed to defining the terms that I listed? If you're going to be an active participant in this thread, you need to get down in the trenches with the rest of us.

 

[Razi_Alaster]

You've said your piece, and I greatly appreciate it. Let it be for now. Please give it some time to develop. Give some other people a chance to post. Thank you. I want to hear more then just your opinions. From my understanding, this a Religous Discussion message board, not a Dark Virtue verses Christians forum.

I do value your opinions, but I want to see the views of others as well. I often hold off my opinions till later for lack of anything to compare it with. As well as to have time to think about them during different situations of life. I also like to experience life with these thoughts in mind. Often I see new things that I had never seen before.

I speak from a Christian influence and perspective. As I always will. I understand we will not see terms the same way. That is fine. I don't expect us to. Give me your view as it pertains to your definitions, and I will do the same. That is what I want in this thread. I do not want to see everyone adjust their opinions to one definition. How one views the terms, in my opinion, is just as critical to ones views as is the view itself. I want everyone's individual and unique views.

 

[Dark Virtue]

You're not playing fair

 

[Genesis1315]

If someone can be convinced into believing something by me, then someone more persuasive will come along and convince them otherwise.

It is not my job to convict or convince, it is only my job to present the Truth.

Gen

 

[Dark Virtue]

It is not my job to convict or convince, it is only my job to present the Truth.

Gen

Then you cannot do your job.

How are you supposed to present the "truth" when you can't convince me that God exists?

At best, the only thing you can do is present a Theory.

 

[Eon]

Actually, wouldn't it be a hypothesis?

 

[[toj.cc]WildBillKickoff]

I just got back from a missions trip Cuba, and partook in the following story firsthand:

My friend Shawn and I were walking along the streets of Havana (Habana to locals) going door to door with our interpreter and sharing the Gospel. Shawn turns to me and says, "I don't think that Cuba is going to be the only place I go on missions." I replied, "Why is that?" He replied, "Well, I feel like I God is leading me to Kenya. I've only been feeling it for a few seconds, but I feel extremely strongly about this."

We tabled the discussion to knock on the next door. At the next home, we were invited inside by a young woman who later accepted Christ. We asked her name-- and her name was Kenya.

My question to the non-Christians-- how much would you weigh a story like this? I understand that I'm just some random guy on the Web, so I'm very easy to dismiss, but what if you actually witnessed this happen? Would you pass this off as coincidence, or would you reconsider your worldview?

Of course, this doesn't fall under the realm of scientific proof, as it is most certainly an unrepeatable, untestable phenomenon. I guess the crux of the matter is this-- do you consider firsthand experiential evidence as important as scientifically testable evidence? If so, why? And if not, why not?

 

[DarthDapor]

<sigh> Why does every one ignore me when I ask a simple question?

 

[Dark Virtue]

I just got back from a missions trip Cuba, and partook in the following story firsthand:

My friend Shawn and I were walking along the streets of Havana (Habana to locals) going door to door with our interpreter and sharing the Gospel. Shawn turns to me and says, "I don't think that Cuba is going to be the only place I go on missions." I replied, "Why is that?" He replied, "Well, I feel like I God is leading me to Kenya. I've only been feeling it for a few seconds, but I feel extremely strongly about this."

We tabled the discussion to knock on the next door. At the next home, we were invited inside by a young woman who later accepted Christ. We asked her name-- and her name was Kenya.

My question to the non-Christians-- how much would you weigh a story like this? I understand that I'm just some random guy on the Web, so I'm very easy to dismiss, but what if you actually witnessed this happen? Would you pass this off as coincidence, or would you reconsider your worldview?

Of course, this doesn't fall under the realm of scientific proof, as it is most certainly an unrepeatable, untestable phenomenon. I guess the crux of the matter is this-- do you consider firsthand experiential evidence as important as scientifically testable evidence? If so, why? And if not, why not?

Let's say for the sake of argument that I believe everything you just said.

What, exactly, does it mean?

 

[Eon]

Wildbill, it's a GREAT story. As you say, I could write a hundred like it with no basis in fact that would be factually indistinguishable from yours - let's waive the "Random Internet guy" factor for the sake of pleasant conversation, otherwise nobody here would be able to express an opinion - we'd just quote authors at each other.

Now, here's a story for you.

Some weeks ago a friend of mine and I met with other friends to spend a pleasant afternoon by the canals in Holland. At the close of the afternoon the group broke up and, rather than go home, she followed me home so we could continue our discussion comfortably and not get eaten alive by mosquitoes.

One thing led to another and soon it was 23:00 - a girl that intends to bike home alone does well to be home before midnight and so she decided to leave. I walked her to the front door and we stepped outside to where she'd left her bike - chatting pleasantly as we went, but the mood was soon spoiled because her bike was missing!

After helping her over the initial shock and anger I agreed to walk around the block with her looking for it - not because I had any great expectation of finding the bike, you see, but simply because I'd rather she didn't wander in the dark alone on a Saturday night and because I thought she might need pleasant company in her fruitless quest.

As we turned the very first corner past my house I turned to a darkened spot where a railway bridge is and said "If they needed to do anything to get the bike rideable after cutting it from the fence - here's where they'd do it. As we stepped closer, Lo and Behold, there was her bike, leaned neatly against a fence.

The main lockchain had been cut off it, but the little secondary lock over the back wheel was still engaged and undamaged. The bike didn't have more than a scratch and after she unlocked the back wheel it was good to ride. Heartily grateful she set off and reached home just fine.

Now there's a tale of providence, no? And yet neither she OR I are religious. I'm certainly not - and yet a little something led me to that darkened spot when rationally I didn't believe the bike would be found.

 

[[toj.cc]WildBillKickoff]

Let's say for the sake of argument that I believe everything you just said.

What, exactly, does it mean?

As has been discussed ad nauseam, anecdotal evidence is pretty much weightless (when it comes to weighing evidence). I don't expect you to believe everything I just said at face value... but I'm not asking you to believe me. Also, what I believe it means does not matter in the grand scheme of things. What I asked was, how would you take a story like that?

Since you asked, I'll just say that to me, it was further affirmation that God does indeed speak to us inaudibly at times. Not confirmation, but affirmation.

Now there's a tale of providence, no? And yet neither she OR I are religious. I'm certainly not - and yet a little something led me to that darkened spot when rationally I didn't believe the bike would be found.

Eon, you made a logical assumption that turned out to be correct. Nice use of your gray matter.

 

[Eon]

Logic would have said that said bike would be miles away in the town centre abandoned. In order for my little leap of faith to be logical I would have had to have known that the thieves would be spooked whilst trying to get the lock off.

I know that they didn't have all the time they needed, because people like that tend to sabotage bikes that resist them.

 

[Dark Virtue]

As has been discussed ad nauseam, anecdotal evidence is pretty much weightless (when it comes to weighing evidence). I don't expect you to believe everything I just said at face value... but I'm not asking you to believe me. Also, what I believe it means does not matter in the grand scheme of things. What I asked was, how would you take a story like that?

Since you asked, I'll just say that to me, it was further affirmation that God does indeed speak to us inaudibly at times. Not confirmation, but affirmation.

That's precisely what I don't like about anecdotal evidence being used as "proof". You are incorrect when you say that what you believe does not matter. It most certainly does because it colors your perception of the story. How you react to the story and how I react to the story are dependant upon our beliefs.

There are many Christians that consider nonChristians a "challenge". They're a target for conversion, and they pull out all the stops to sway the nonChristian. I have been confronted by many of these zealots that didn't hesitate to lie for Jesus; make up stories, bend the truth, take verses out of context, etc.

Right or wrong, those experiences have made me a bit jaded when confronted with personal stories. That's why I depend on real proof, not anecdotal evidence.

That is also why I chose to assume that everything you said was true. Under that assumption, your story doesn't amount to much for me, because it doesn't deal with anything evidentual. It's simply a colorful story about chance and odds. You described it as a confirmation, not an affirmation. Do you understand why it wouldn't mean much to a nonChristian who has yet to believe in God, let alone small confirmations of abstract communications?

 

[[toj.cc]WildBillKickoff]

That's precisely what I don't like about anecdotal evidence being used as "proof". You are incorrect when you say that what you believe does not matter. It most certainly does because it colors your perception of the story. How you react to the story and how I react to the story are dependant upon our beliefs.

There are many Christians that consider nonChristians a "challenge". They're a target for conversion, and they pull out all the stops to sway the nonChristian. I have been confronted by many of these zealots that didn't hesitate to lie for Jesus; make up stories, bend the truth, take verses out of context, etc.

Right or wrong, those experiences have made me a bit jaded when confronted with personal stories. That's why I depend on real proof, not anecdotal evidence.

That is also why I chose to assume that everything you said was true. Under that assumption, your story doesn't amount to much for me, because it doesn't deal with anything evidentual. It's simply a colorful story about chance and odds. You described it as a confirmation, not an affirmation. Do you understand why it wouldn't mean much to a nonChristian who has yet to believe in God, let alone small confirmations of abstract communications?

As for those other folks who lied to you, obviously, they've done more harm than good. They should have thought that one through... besides the fact that their faith is so small that they feel they have to lie to make anyone believe them.

And yes, I completely understand that what happened wouldn't mean much to an atheist. I'm also pretty certain a Muslim would attribute what happened to Allah, that a Hindu might attribute what happened to Vishna or one of their many gods. I was simply interested in how an atheist would react... and your reaction is that it means nothing, which is consistent with your worldview.