Just Curious

Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Just Curious

I'm new here, but I've seen a few posts here that refer to words like proof / evidence / etc.

I'm curious, what would constitute proof to an athiest that God exists..?? Give me just one or two examples of something that would provide indisputable evidence of the existence of God...??

Some of you are asking the theists for proof / evidence - so what would that proof / evidence be..??

RationalSchema's picture
Posts: 358
Joined: 2007-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Exactly, which is why the

Exactly, which is why the idea of God is ridiculous. If you can't have evidence for something or against it, you can't have something. There is no way to prove it, so why believe???

"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."

Juvenile Narcissist
Silver Member
Juvenile Narcissist's picture
Posts: 115
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod wrote: Exactly!

deludedgod wrote:

Exactly! If there truly was a God who did send his son to die for our sins (as Dawkins pointed out, what was the point? If God wanted to forgive our sins, why not just forgive?) 


and who sacrifices himself to himself to appease himself? makes god sounds like a looney.  


atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2843
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
CatholicTheist wrote: I'm

CatholicTheist wrote:
I'm new here, but I've seen a few posts here that refer to words like proof / evidence / etc. I'm curious, what would constitute proof to an athiest that God exists..?? 

How hard is it to prove that you exist? Have you ever had a problem proving you exist?


"Hitler burned people like Anne Frank, for that we call him evil.
"God" burns Anne Frank eternally. For that, theists call him 'good.'

High Level ModeratorSilver Member
ShaunPhilly's picture
Posts: 473
Joined: 2006-03-15
User is offlineOffline
What would be sufficient

What would be sufficient evidence to believe in God?

Well, if when I looked at the world, using the various methodologies available to us and discovered that nuturalistic explanations were insuffcient, that would be a first reason to suspect that a god might be involved.  And for most of human history--before science was developed--the explanatory power of God was greater than it currently is because of the lack of explanations for how the world functions.

If I saw that people who were religious were genuinely nicer,happier, healthier people, that might make me suspect that there may be something to belief in God, and that might make me feel that the issue of God's existence might be more likely.  I'll state the qualifier that this would only speak for belief in god and not existence, but it would lend more credence to the idea for me.

If the history of human progress, knowledge, and wisdom steadily did not move away from necessitating a god to explain the world, I would then feel that belief in god is justifiable.  

So, in short, the evidence I would need to believe in God would be if the world were fundamentally different than it is.  The nature of the world, as it functions now, does not lend and credence to the belief in any gods.  If the nature and functioning of the world were to change (even temporarily, such as miracles which could be supported sufficiently) then I would be much more likely to believe.  

But since the nature of the world seems as if it were designed (sic) to not point to god, then it seems like the necessary evidence will not surface.   


I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.