What proof do you have for a God's existence? Proof must be empirical, and cannot be something vague
"Look at the world around you" Does not constitute as proof.
If you are looking for something material that you can perceive with your five senses, that would be difficult to provide since God is not made of matter but is rather the source of the materal world. It is like me asking you to give me empirical evidence that you have thoughts.
You believe you have thoughts right? But how do I know that? Can you provide empirical evidence? You can show me results of your thoughts such as this question or something you created, but can you prove that your thoughts are the source of these items?
Many thinkers have made a strong case for the existence of God mathematically and logically. Try reading Pascal or C.S. Lewis. One thing that Pascal says it that there is enough evidence for God to convince people who want to believe and enough evidence against to convince people who don't want to believe. So it really comes down to whether or not you want to believe. Pascal also makes an excellent case for why it's the wiser choice to believe.
The best debate concerning this was between Christopher Hitchens and Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, John Lennox. You probably will not see a better cerebral match up about the question and validity of religion. John Lennox as a scientist and also a devout christian who gave numerous historical references in regards to what he perceived as empirical evidence. Most would assume considering his background in the hard sciences, he would be centered on logic and order for justification. This was were he based that irrefutable proof. However, that perspective is open to much attack and interpretation.
Richard Dawkins gives a great argument against - being a scientist himself and looking at the anti-order/chaos and randomness of the evolutionary creation of life. As a result, I do not see the empirical proof based on what senses we have as human beings. In essence, it becomes an easy cop out strategy to refer to the empirical by such bombastic highly self interpretative means of defining proof. To be honest, if empirical evidence was needed - one must first come to define what constitutes empirical evidence in light of the question. There must be an agreement. Hard evidence no- soft evidence - yes/no depending on your belief, so in essence like the Hitchens/Lenox debate the answers were equally convincing but depending on your perspective unchanging. In the end, if you are religious there tends to be a more"open" definition of what constitutes empirical which in my book seems highly dubious since that very "open" perspective is not all encompassing to other facets of life. ie: religious fundamentalism.
Ok, but carol, how is it that an immaterial thing can interact with a material thing?
And so you know there is proof that thoughts and memories are not something you can see. It's been shown in studies that you can replace memories because theyre imprinted in proteins. Thoughts can be sensed as well, they're ultimately electrical and chemical transmissions. Your counter argument is invalid.
To keep it simple. Jesus.
Also look at Romans 1 vs;20.
Should answer your question
by Jason2917 6 years ago
Would proof of God's existence alone be enough for you to worship Him?(This is not a trick question and I'm not looking for a debate. I am genuinely curious in what someone who doesn't believe in God would think. Consider it this way, if all of the sudden all of the evidence of His existence was...
by Tevin Marshall 3 years ago
Do you guys believe that God doesn't exist due to empirical evidence or Skepticism (detailed below)As an Atheist, Do you guys believe that God doesn't exist due to empirical evidence (If so provide please) or are you guys more so skeptical that he doesn't exist, but feel that he could? and if so,...
by Eric Dierker 4 years ago
I just started a forum looking into the subject. It was great and polite but the discussion veered into all about people who believe in God and how that is fallacious.Here I hope we focus on the atheist. Can the atheist actually know something that is not empirical. For this discussion let us...
by spiderpam 9 years ago
"Absolute truth implies that truth cannot be subject to one's own mind, but is rather established by an absolute and common Creator, therefore proving God's existence. If there is no absolute truth, it cannot be absolutely held true that God does not exist." unknownWith the above in mind,...
by pisean282311 6 years ago
God ....the word which has been with human beings in one form or another since humans began to think...So many religions , school of thoughts and version have come out of god ...No body has been able to disprove or prove existence of god...Do you think we as human beings would ever have such proof...
by aka-dj 8 years ago
What do I mean?If all the atheists here are correct, and there isNo God " Heaven " Eternity " Spirit world/realm " No afterlife etcand we all are evolved animals who live for the here and now,why bother refuting...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|