Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Edgarcito

Evidence Types

Recommended Posts

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have only one requirement, but it's unlikely it will ever be met:  A personal encounter with a god-like being in the physical world.  Testimonies, scriptures, dreams, visions, improbable events are all off the table as they're just too weak to convince me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

 

Relevant, credible and probative evidence is a good start.  To the extent the claimed evidence violates accepted laws or scientific theories of physics, chemistry, mathematics and/or biology, then it should, at a minimum, be empirical and capable of being observed and understood by any sentient human being.  Whether it is repeatable is a strong consideration.

When it comes to witness testimony, such as personal one-time experiences, it is helpful if the witness can be verified to be clear of cognitive biases, such as expectation and confirmation biases, deeply instilled religious indoctrination or other malady which would affect honesty, and, it is important to determine whether the witness is lying, delusional, etc.

Of course, evidence from several congruent, convergent and/or disparate sources, all leading to the same (or similar) rational inference(s) is weighed heavily.

In your presentations so far in this forum, you have only provided sparse and rather poor evidence.  But you are quite good merely asserting.  Mere assertions are not evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Astreja and Sdelsolray. Tangible, testable, understandable, independently verifiable evidence.

 

If the messages of the alleged Christian god are as important as Christians say they are, and if said god is as powerful as claimed, then he would not hide from his subjects, and would make his messages abundantly and perfectly clear, and not fill them with contradictions, logical fallacies and non-sequiturs, or couch them in riddles and mystery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

 

Evidence that totally excludes the use of faith, Edgarcito.

 

 

  On 10/28/2019 at 6:04 PM, Edgarcito said:

No sir, nice try....based on faith, the definition of the Standard is not standard. 

 

Then faith destroys the meaning of words. 

The meaning of words is agreed upon by reason, not by faith. 

When someone (in this case, you) chooses to assign their own individual meanings to words, then communication breaks down. 

Hence, this thread.

It becomes impossible to reason with a devout Christian (or Edgarcito) because they use their faith to destroy the meaning of words.

 

 

 

That's an example of you in your faith-driven mode, Edgarcito.  So, to reaffirm my answer to your question, in this thread I will only accept evidence (and dialogue) from you if you agree to totally exclude faith from the equation.  With faith gone it will interesting to see if its possible to reason with you.  

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

 

Public presentation. Jesus sets up a permanent office somewhere, goes on tv, does some miracles. Meets people. Why would I think he's real otherwise? Because a book says so? Because some gullible people say so?

 

Why is it important that we believe he's real?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

Edgar,

 

I think this is a come-on to get one or more of us to describe a scenario for belief so you can attempt to find something close and cut it to size, hammer it to fit, and paint to suit.

 

That said, IF god/Jesus is really the creator of the universe and know(s) all things AND wants us all to be saved then he/she/it will already know what it takes to convince all and promptly go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mat 16:4 informs us that no sign shall be given. In other words, believe and have faith for no particular reason other than someone told you so. That's about as lame as it gets.

 

Since it is written that no sign shall be given we can conclude that there shall be no evidence provided whatsoever to those who do not believe the extraordinary claims of ancient goat herders and storytellers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, MOHO said:

Edgar,

 

I think this is a come-on to get one or more of us to describe a scenario for belief so you can attempt to find something close and cut it to size, hammer it to fit, and paint to suit.

 

That said, IF god/Jesus is really the creator of the universe and know(s) all things AND wants us all to be saved then he/she/it will already know what it takes to convince all and promptly go there.

No sir, was just thinking about the communication impasse between believers and non.  We have defined all these different types of evidence, apparently trying to define what the human "analytical instrument" determines as repeatable/reproducible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty daunting subject really.....but since we are bored, let's start simply.....means of communication with the reported God of Christianity....i.e. the Holy Spirit. 

 

The question is what capabilities do our brains and body possess.  Can our brains make up shit that is outside of our consciousness, our own knowledge base.  I personally think the answer is yes.  And how is this possible.  How is my mind able to make shit up outside of my own knowledge base.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are some things that would make a difference to me.  And I mean this in all sincerity, because this is exactly the kind of thing that I thought about long and hard before leaving the fold.

 

Better evidence in the bible.  After his resurrection, Jesus could have walked into downtown Jerusalem and talked to Pilate and company, leading the Romans and secular historians to document it more firmly as a historical fact.  (Of course you could still argue the swoon theory.)  But the appearances in the gospels and acts were just to a few, and believers at that.  Paul says he appeared to 500 people at once; who were these people, why did no one else ever mention it, and could they not have included someone like Pilate or Josephus?

 

The gospels also say that during the crucifixion, there were 3 hours of darkness, and an earthquake opened the tombs and many dead people were raised.  Where is THAT in Josephus or any other secular historian?  Nowhere.  The gospel writers made it up.  As it is, I do not know of anything that would convince me otherwise.

 

The creator of the universe could have revealed the true nature of the solar system to the author of Genesis.  It would have been a weird story of a spherical earth and the other planets revolving around a large distant sun, amid even more distant sunlike stars.  Waiting for science to confirm it.  As it is, the genesis story is a primitive myth, plain and simple, like those of any other culture.  No evidence of any sort of divine revelation.

 

As to the present day, Jesus and some of the prophets performed miracles.  Faith healers make people walk again, but when did one ever make a missing limb reappear?  Or reassemble the parts of someone killed by a bomb?  There have been a number of christian martyrs in the mideast lately; how about a miracle like the hebrew children in the fiery furnace, on video for the whole world to see?  Pople John Paul II ascribed his survival of the assasin’s bullet to a miracle, because it wounded him but missed killing him.  I am sorry but that is not a miracle, it is one of many possible real-world outcomes.  A MIRACLE would have been for the bullet to stop and hover in midair, for all to see, then fall harmlessly to the ground.  (Like in the x-men.)

 

These are all things that anyone could see.  If I had a vision or some such, that was not linked to any real-world event, I would think I was hallucinating.  People in delirium in the hospital see this kind of thing all the time.  Real example: a hole opening up in the floor waiting to swallow them.  If everyone, including family, friends, and hospital staff had seen and documented this hell hole, I think I would have to acknowledge it.

 

I could go on.  Bottom line:  if you step back and look at it with unbrainwashed eyes, christianity, like all religions, is a bunch of fairy tales that people actually believe.  Sad, but true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Edgarcito said:

Pretty daunting subject really.....but since we are bored, let's start simply.....means of communication with the reported God of Christianity....i.e. the Holy Spirit. 

 

The question is what capabilities do our brains and body possess.  Can our brains make up shit that is outside of our consciousness, our own knowledge base.  I personally think the answer is yes.  And how is this possible.  How is my mind able to make shit up outside of my own knowledge base.

 

How is the mind able to make up shit? I've wondered that myself. Since I dont know I usually attribute it to a soul. I also try to compare the brain to a non-creative thinking computer. But a 'better' idea might just be you and I are part of the ALL ...which would kind of eliminate the need to worship Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to know what sort of evidence I'd require, now I'm not sure what kind of evidence would convince me the Christian God as defined exists.

 

If the evidence is natural then how does that prove the supernatural, and if the evidence is supernatural how can we even know its evidence towards the proposition?

 

And how do we distinguish evidence for a god from that of any significantly advanced alien species? It was Arthur C Clarke that said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

 

Thus were we to go back 20-50k years we would be Gods, almost having power of life and death. Bu we wouldn't be gods would we? We'd just be the same species but more advanced. Imagine then an extremely advanced alien species. Think something like Q from Star Trek. Even he, with all his powers wasn't God.

 

I guess that's the evidence conundrum for me.

 

Apart from that I agree with Astreja and Sdelsolray.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, midniterider said:

 

Public presentation. Jesus sets up a permanent office somewhere, goes on tv, does some miracles. Meets people. Why would I think he's real otherwise? Because a book says so? Because some gullible people say so?

 

Why is it important that we believe he's real?

 

Funny that you mention that. SDA's have a belief that the devil, posing as jesus, will go around trying to prove to people that he is jesus returned at some point during the end times. Showing nail holes and other signs that it's really him!

 

So we were taught from childhood that the bible says that when jesus returns, his feet will not the ground. As in he will arrive from space with the new jerusalem in tow and with a host of angels, but never set foot down on the physical earth. That's the big give away as to whether it's really jesus, or the devil pretending to be jesus. 

 

I would say you can't make this shit up, but, apparently, you can.....

 

😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TEG said:

Better evidence in the bible.  After his resurrection, Jesus could have walked into downtown Jerusalem and talked to Pilate and company, leading the Romans and secular historians to document it more firmly as a historical fact.  (Of course you could still argue the swoon theory.)  But the appearances in the gospels and acts were just to a few, and believers at that.  Paul says he appeared to 500 people at once; who were these people, why did no one else ever mention it, and could they not have included someone like Pilate or Josephus?

 

Yes please! 

 

Is it too much to ask an all powerful, all knowing being? Some irrefutable documentation would be nice! 

 

2 hours ago, TEG said:

The creator of the universe could have revealed the true nature of the solar system to the author of Genesis.  It would have been a weird story of a spherical earth and the other planets revolving around a large distant sun, amid even more distant sunlike stars.  Waiting for science to confirm it.  As it is, the genesis story is a primitive myth, plain and simple, like those of any other culture.  No evidence of any sort of divine revelation.

 

 

An accurate cosmology is apparently too much to ask! Even for a divinity, apparently! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

What evidence would you offer to our ten-year-old sex slave?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

trying to define what the human "analytical instrument" determines as repeatable/reproducible. 

In science, this is done by publishing a report that details the method, instrumentation, reagents/materials, and such used to produce your data.  Presumably, if your data is correct, another lab can reproduce it by repeating your experimentations. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Edgarcito said:

Pretty daunting subject really.....but since we are bored, let's start simply.....means of communication with the reported God of Christianity....i.e. the Holy Spirit. 

 

The question is what capabilities do our brains and body possess.  Can our brains make up shit that is outside of our consciousness, our own knowledge base.  I personally think the answer is yes.  And how is this possible.  How is my mind able to make shit up outside of my own knowledge base.

 

And how do you know this, Edgarcito?

 

That God's means of communication is the Holy Spirit?

 

By faith? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Funny that you mention that. SDA's have a belief that the devil, posing as jesus, will go around trying to prove to people that he is jesus returned at some point during the end times. Showing nail holes and other signs that it's really him!

 

So we were taught from childhood that the bible says that when jesus returns, his feet will not touch the ground. As in he will arrive from space with the new jerusalem in tow and with a host of angels, but never set foot down on the physical earth. That's the big give away as to whether it's really jesus, or the devil pretending to be jesus. 

 

I would say you can't make this shit up, but, apparently, you can.....

 

😂

 

I think Satan could probably do a look-a-like without the nail holes as well. Hmmm.

 

I bet Satan could reroute your heavenly prayers to the fake Satan Jesus too. Always worry about this. :)

 

The other day I saw an upside down cross on a bible....till I turned it over anyway. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

And how do we distinguish evidence for a god from that of any significantly advanced alien species? It was Arthur C Clarke that said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"

I have sometimes wondered how soldiers in medieval wars would have reacted if a helicopter flew over the battlefield and used a p.a. system to tell all of them to knock it off and go home. I think they'd have wet their pants and run like hell, and all the atheists among them (if there were any) would be joining Edgarcito in the pews of the nearest cathedral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2019 at 2:38 AM, Edgarcito said:

Per our recent conversations.....the question in my mind is what types of evidence will a non-believer accept? 

 

That question is irrelevant. The more might God has, the easier it should be to give me evidence. The more God knows, the more precisely he knows what it is that I need to believe in him.

 

The real question is what evidence do I have, and where does it lead me to. If there's God, I can only assume he will give me and has given me whatever he wants me to have and the rest is up to me. If it doesn't lead me to the truth, then that is also part of God's plan. I can therefore only have faith.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2019 at 10:46 AM, midniterider said:

 

Public presentation. Jesus sets up a permanent office somewhere, goes on tv, does some miracles. Meets people. Why would I think he's real otherwise? Because a book says so? Because some gullible people say so?

 

Why is it important that we believe he's real?

 

Yeah. This. Just like he does in "South Park"!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Joshpantera said:

 

Funny that you mention that. SDA's have a belief that the devil, posing as jesus, will go around trying to prove to people that he is jesus returned at some point during the end times. Showing nail holes and other signs that it's really him!

 

So we were taught from childhood that the bible says that when jesus returns, his feet will not the ground. As in he will arrive from space with the new jerusalem in tow and with a host of angels, but never set foot down on the physical earth. That's the big give away as to whether it's really jesus, or the devil pretending to be jesus. 

 

I would say you can't make this shit up, but, apparently, you can.....

 

😂

 

So they don't think the devil could hover?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Citsonga said:

 

So they don't think the devil could hover?

 

 

Or they don't think that jesus would allow his real second coming described in revelation to be mimicked. That's one that I never thought of asking. The apologetic's run wild. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ToHellWithMe said:

 

That question is irrelevant. The more might God has, the easier it should be to give me evidence. The more God knows, the more precisely he knows what it is that I need to believe in him.

 

The real question is what evidence do I have, and where does it lead me to. If there's God, I can only assume he will give me and has given me whatever he wants me to have and the rest is up to me. If it doesn't lead me to the truth, then that is also part of God's plan. I can therefore only have faith.

It's not irrelevant with respect to believers and non-believers attempting to communicate.  There appears to be many forms of evidence due to humans being unique, not receiving and processing information the same.  Non-believers seem to think believers obstructionists.  

 

I guess the question is, can we achieve certainty via all the varied forms of evidence or do they hinder one form or another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.