[duffyd (OP)]

I don't know if I am starting a new thread or if this is the proper format and place. I'm trying to do it correctly even though I couldn't find info on how to do it.
Does God Exist? is my question. How can we find out? Can we find out? Are there "proven" methods or ways to find answers to these questions? How? What works? What doesn't? Are there forms or ways of "knowing" that are not "scientific" that are valuable and reliable? For example?

[duffyd (OP)]

In my opinion we can discover with certainty that he does exist. I believe the evidence that proves HE IS is overwhelming. OVERWHELMING.
Yet, "evidence" is not what is critical for most people when they decide if GOD is or is not. Does what they hear correspond with what they already believe?, that is the key for most of us. Bear that in mind and see if it is true for you. If it is, experiment and pretend you are a tabula rasa for the sake of this discussion.

[duffyd (OP)]

We have a useful, concise definition of evidence now.
 
"Evidence is a reason to think that what you say is true."

People, millions and millions of us, since roughly 33 A.D. proclaim that we have had the same experience as other believers in Jesus Christ: powerful, loving, healing, transformative, other worldly, unexpected, the greatest thing ever to happen to us, the release of hatred, bitterness, self-pity, a completely new relationship with everything and everyone, new goals focused on helping others, feeling loved, forgiven, understood, wanted and important, that our prayers are heard, a new friendship with the GOD of the universe, joy, peace and on and on. (Not bad, huh?)  Many of us knew nothing about Him or believers when we experienced being born from above. We didn't know what to expect, if anything at all. Our backgrounds vary as much as a truly random sampling of 7 billion people. 

[Bored chemist]

OK.
This is a science forum so, whether anyone likes it or not, evidence is important.
Among other things it has to meet certain standards.
For example, hearsay, which is often regarded as some sort of support  for an  assertion in day to day life, is not adequate evidence in court and I don't think it  should be considered as up to the job here. If I say "I saw a duck" then you can cross examine me about by eyesight, knowledge of ornithology etc.
If I say "my brother told me he saw a duck" then that's evidence of him having made the statement, but it's not evidence of the existence of the duck. He might have been joking. He might have been mistaken. We simply don't (and can't) know.
So we can not rely on it.

Similarly, while we should avoid falling into "argument from authority", we need to recognise that the testimony of some people must be considered questionable.
For example, if the only evidence supporting something is the testimony of someone who has previously  said things that are not true, we should not accept that contention as being (what the law calls) beyond reasonable doubt. This is particularly important if they have been found to say things that are not true on several occasions.

On that basis , anything that Duffy say isn't going to convince me, because I have seen that he makes false statements.
Anything that Duffy reports that someone else said isn't going to convince me, because itis hearsay.

This could be a short thread.

[alancalverd]

No problem. Define God and list one experimentally verifiable quality or quantity that is uniquely possessed or demonstrated by it, to the extent that you can predict the outcome of that experiment and not ascribe it to any other cause. Otherwise, you preachin' to the choir, brother!

[duffyd (OP)]

He is eternal and infinite, by definition.

BC you are ruled out as a contributor. In the future if you hope to participate in a thread I start, don't accuse me of lying.
Alan, you were asked on several occasions to address the fact that you said no one began to write the New Testament for 200 years after Christ lived. You didn't respond. Respond now or you are preaching.

[duffyd (OP)]

Companies that conduct polling base their predictions on the results of a very small number of participants. It is amazing how accurate they are with so few responders.
 
When drug companies test the efficacy of a new drug to do what they designed it to do, they rely on double blind, controlled experiments. It is considered to be the gold standard of testing protocol. Neither the tested nor the testers knows which form of "medication" the tested receives during the trial. Often, the only options are a sugar pill or the drug being tested.

I mention these 2 forms of testing because I think they can be applied to some degree to determine whether or not God exists.

[duffyd (OP)]

The fact that there is a universe suggests a creator. Its vastness, its beauty, its complexity, that we know of no other way to explain how it got here, all point to a creator. That it can be dated means that it is not eternal, a prerequisite of God.

[Bored chemist]

Duffy, if you don't want me to point out that you say things that are not ture, don't say things that are not true.
For example don't say

You refuse to define evidence.

When, in fact, I had already defined it.

Evidence is a reason to think that what you say is true.

Show everyone where I refused to define it, or admit that you were not telling the truth.

[Bored chemist]

The fact that there is a universe suggests a creator.

Not really.
A rock exists, but nobody says it needs a creator.

More importantly, "suggests" is not the same as proves.

That it can be dated means that it is not eternal, a prerequisite of God.

Not really; a competent God could, if He wished, make it eternal.

Companies that conduct polling base their predictions on the results of a very small number of participants. It is amazing how accurate they are with so few responders.

Statistical inference can't be used here. We have a sample size of 1. There is only 1 universe (the hint is in the name).

I think they can be applied to some degree to determine whether or not God exists.

You are on record as thinking things that are not true,

[Bobolink]

In my opinion we can discover with certainty that he does exist. I believe the evidence that proves HE IS is overwhelming. OVERWHELMING.

What is the evidence?

Lots of people believe in Christianity and lots believe in Islam and lots believe in Hinduism and lots don't have a religious belief.  That is evidence that people have different beliefs and nothing more.

The universe exists, that is not evidence of a god, that is evidence that the universe exists.

If you have evidence that God exists I would love to see it.  If it is compelling evidence then you could even convert this old atheist.  Just give some real evidence.

[duffyd (OP)]

People, millions and millions of us, since roughly 33 A.D. proclaim that we have had the same experience as other believers in Jesus Christ: powerful, loving, healing...

The enormous numbers of people who claim to have had the same experiences as the result of "encountering" this person, Jesus Christ, carries a  powerful message for all. Statistically, it is significant that huge numbers of people conclude their lives have been dramatically and permanently changed in fundamental and in similar ways through this man. Scientifically, this significant statistical data is foundational in establishing the credibility of this individual's claims to be God's Son.
If millions of people drank vodka and reported it had no impact in any major life function, it would not be used as an intoxicating beverage. Numbers have consequences.

[alancalverd]

He is eternal and infinite, by definition.

So is a straight line. But nobody uses it as an excuse to throw stones at children. Try harder. 

[duffyd (OP)]

In my opinion we can discover with certainty that he does exist. I believe the evidence that proves HE IS is overwhelming. OVERWHELMING.

What is the evidence?

Lots of people believe in Christianity and lots believe in Islam and lots believe in Hinduism and lots don't have a religious belief.  That is evidence that people have different beliefs and nothing more.

The universe exists, that is not evidence of a god, that is evidence that the universe exists.

If you have evidence that God exists I would love to see it.  If it is compelling evidence then you could even convert this old atheist.  Just give some real evidence.

Keep reading.

Evidence is: "Evidence is a reason to think that what you say is true."

[alancalverd]

Scientifically, this significant statistical data is foundational in establishing the credibility of this individual's claims to be God's Son.

Irrelevant. The question is about the existence of god, not those who others think might be descended from it.

Statistically, the world is flat and Christians are infidels who must be converted or eliminated. A majority opinion is not evidence.

[duffyd (OP)]

He is eternal and infinite, by definition.

So is a straight line. But nobody uses it as an excuse to throw stones at children. Try harder.

Alan stated:
"Not in any bible I have read. He wasn't that stupid. And even if he had, why would you believe him, let alone a third-hand edited translation of a book written 200 years after his death..."? Back that up.

[duffyd (OP)]

He is eternal and infinite, by definition.

So is a straight line. But nobody uses it as an excuse to throw stones at children. Try harder.

Alan stated:
"Not in any bible I have read. He wasn't that stupid. And even if he had, why would you believe him, let alone a third-hand edited translation of a book written 200 years after his death..."? Back that up.

Then, support this, "I have no reason to doubt that he existed. As I said much earlier, he was a radical rabbi (addressed by his friends as such) who was killed for causing trouble. Nothing unusual about that, nor was the radical Judaism he preached beyond the very broad span of our ancient traditions." Alan
If you do so adequately, we'll continue. Sound good?

[duffyd (OP)]

Using nonsensical diversions will be ignored.
Responding intelligently to support statements some have made previously is the only way to prove your intentions for this thread are worthy of consideration.

[chiralSPO]

Let us assume that there is a God, and that it fulfills your three criteria of: infinite, eternal, and created the universe.

What else follows or is implicit in these facts? Must God have consciousness? Free will? Omniscience? Omnipotence? Omnipresence? Infallibility? Do you believe that this god has any special interest in humanity? Is subject to human logic?

[duffyd (OP)]

So far we've received mostly trash intended to subvert the stated purpose of this thread. It is my opinion their silliness is due to their inability to present sound reasons for their faith. Garbage will be ignored. For example, a straight line is not eternal and bull like that from Alan or anyone else may get a few laughs but nothing else. You get the idea.