Evidence for God

If this question has been asked please show me the link where this question has been asked, and answered.What evidence out side of the bible do we have that clearly demonstrates it is Yhwh/Yhvh not Allah who is the infinite complex uncreated & uncaused creator that created/caused the complex universe ex-nihlo?(I am not seeking proof that god exists.)

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

The only difference between the two is one of cultural symantecs.They are one in the same.

There is no evidence.

Then let us consider YHVH/ "VS" any other god who is currently worshiped
today.Thanks for the reply!

---

People are not stupid, religion is.

quote:

---

There is no evidence.

---

There must be....

---

People are not stupid, religion is.

But there's not. No objective evidence for any deity has ever been shown. As far as evidence goes, all deities are equal.In fact, the evidence equally supports any and all deities ever imagined, ghosts, goblins, fairies, Santa Claus, the easter bunny, your imaginary friend from when you were 4, and the voices in a schizophrenic person's headThat's the problem with having no objective evidence - everything becomes equally unlikely.

'cept there isn't.If you got some no one has ever seen then please share.

Well in that case I'll refer to Larni's response.

Than what method does one use to decide which invisible being is real? Typically when making the most important decision in one's life evidence would be reviewed, studied, discussed & evaluated.Edit - partly deleted....Edited by PurplyBear, : delete

---

People are not stupid, religion is.

Most often, the method used is "What do my parents/friends/neighbors think?" It's quite obvious that kids born in a Christian house are more likely to believe in Christianity than Shintoism, and vice versa.

I quite agree, assuming an individual intellectually strong enough to seek and evaluate the evidence absent the emotional baggage of acculturation and one's own desires.In this case, unfortunately, there is no evidence to evaluate, dispassionately or otherwise.Absent any evidence we have only speculations.Speculations come in two kinds:Formal Speculations and Absurd Speculations.Formal speculations are those that are built upon a foundation of empirical first principles and have a strong (formal) logical path from first principles to the speculation. An example is the speculation of extra-terrestrial life. There is no empirical evidence of such but the logical path from empirical first principles (physics, chemistry, biology, cosmology) is very strong and lends credence to the efficacy of the speculation.Absurd speculations have no such foundation in first principles. My favorite example, in keeping with a cosmological genre, is the existence out there of a planet wholly accreted from Philadelphia Brand Cream Cheese. Not any of that store brand generic stuff either but the real Kraft Philadelphia brand ... with chives. Again, like above, there is no evidence of such but there is also no logic from empirical first principles to support the speculation.We treat these two speculations differently.Formal speculations may, in appropriate instances, be treated as fact. In our example we see this when we reason why we should not only sterilize our space probes going out, but, sterilize the everlovin’ hell out of those parts we bring back.Absurd speculations, on the other hand, must be ignored (in any valid scientific treatment) until evidence of efficacy can be shown.For your purposes in this thread, there being no empirical evidence of what invisible metaphysical magician(s) may or may not exist (let alone which one(s) may be greater or greatest) leaves the matter of their existence as speculation. Couple this with the fact that there is no logical path that can connect any empirical first principles to anything metaphysical (by definition) means the speculations of invisible metaphysical magicians are absurd speculations and must be ignored.Your quest for a method (an empirically-based process) to determine which god(s) is(are) greatest is doomed to failure.Edited by AZPaul3, : The usual suspects like spelling and punctuation and syntax.

Why?ABE:I see what you mean: I think the point that people do hold superstitious beliefs has been dealt with above.I would add however that it is part of our psychology to belive all kinds of nonsense as it has been shown that how we appraise the world includes a predeliction to superstitious thought (see Borkovec, Halett-Stevens and Diaz, 1999).We get cause and effect wrong in our heads and it gets reinforced by our up-bringing and culture (as mentioned above).There is no objective evidence that anything supernatural exist and you will be amazed and aghast at the logic hoops some people will jump through to get around that fact.Edited by Larni, : After reading the rest of the thread I added more.

I think how you were raised is the biggest factor for most theists.As for people that choose a religion as an adult, it seems to be a matter of preference. Whichever religion's ideologies seem to be most compatible with the person's constitution.
I don't know that anyone conducts scientific research in order to reach a logical conclusion about which god is real, because most people that value both scientific research and logic don't believe in gods.

I don't have the numbers in front of me to back this up, but I don't believe your claim is true. IIRC, a majority of scientists believe in some sort of god. It may be merely a god who started the big bang and then let the universe go, like a wound up clock, but they believe in something.