If it can be, how can the "Absence of Evidence" be "Evidence of Absence?".

It has been stated here at EvC and at other evo/creo fora the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.So be it. When I say I don't believe in any gods I get asked what evidence is there that no gods exist?From my own experience I find that those who believe in Jehovah reject Zeus. My point is what evidence are these Theists using to reject Zeus, Ra, Thor, Xipe, etc.Edited by Adminnemooseus, : "Absense" to "Absence" in topic title.Edited by bluescat48, : Suggestion from AdminnemooseusEdited by Admin, : Fix title.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

I must presume that this is a spin-off/sequel to the dearly departed (aka "closed") Pseudoskepticism and logic topic. BTW - "absense" changed to "absence" in above quote and topic title.I think that the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" concept is more often directed by the evolution side (aka "evolutionists") towards the creationism side.I just have bad feelings about the topic as presented in message 1. I think it would be better to do a more generalized version of the titular concept. I suggest the topic title be changed to "If it can be, how can the "Absence of Evidence" be "Evidence of Absence?". Any title change is done via message 1 edit.Please consider such, and if you find it agreeable, please edit topic title and submit a new version opening message (OP) as a new message in this topic. If promoted, the content of message 1 can be hidden with directions to the new OP.Please include something of your own position along with your justification(s) for that position.Adminnemooseus

Original post editted

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

Bluescat has edited his OP.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

The topic title was changed but little to nothing was changed in the message 1 content.I've now reconsidered my thoughts of making the topic theme more generalized, and now do prefer the topic as presented in message 1.I'll promote the topic - We shall see what happens.Adminnemooseus

Thread copied here from the If it can be, how can the "Absence of Evidence" be "Evidence of Absence?". thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

What I would like to know is why they reject Old Man Coyote.The evidence is just as good, and Old Man Coyote is a much more compelling figure.But to be serious, theists generally reject hundreds or tens of thousands of deities in favor of their own particular chosen deity. But how do they choose?The problem with religious apologetics is that scientific evidence does not apply! There is no empirical method for accepting one deity and rejecting all the rest. There is not even empirical evidence for the existence of deities in the first place.The supernatural and an afterlife are a part of the biggest con that mankind has ever played upon itself--but it is a con, a self-deception, in which mankind desperately wants to believe. Considering the alternative that's not surprising. And that's what makes it so easy to sell!And if this doesn't get the thread off to a rousing start of some kind I don't know what else I can do!

---

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

And wise words they are too.- That's a curious thing to ask you.Whilst absence of evidence clearly doesn't equal evidence of absence, absence of evidence is a sound basis for unbelief*. If the absence of evidence extends to all gods (not including 'gods' such as eg: love of wealth and the like - for which there is plenty of evidence) then it's safe to believe that no gods exist.- The fact that Jehovah, for whom evidence exists for those who believe in him, says so. If even God doesn't know for certain that other gods don't exist then we're rightly bunched.- * that said, 'only a fool says in his heart there is no God'. Meaning perhaps, that evidence exists which enables all people to believe God exists - it's just that it's not of the 'pick it up and examine it through a microscope' kind of evidence.

Which you, I and a number of others understands, but still does not give me a reason that they, the theists, can reject some gods and not all.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008

According to one source (KJV), Jehovah is supposed to have said:

quote:

---

Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

---

Perhaps this is an acknowledgement that there are other gods besides Him, and all that matters is that His chosen people remain clear about the pecking order for those other gods relative to This One.Perhaps Jews, Christians and Muslims should likewise acknowledge the existence of Zeus, Thor, Shiva, Ra and all the rest, making sure to attribute some lesser status to them all.I don't know how this ought to play out in terms of day-to-day religious practice. Presumably, since Jehovah cites His Own jealousy explicitly, less acknowledgement of other gods is better, but I don't see any basis for one who believes in Jehovah to deny the existence of those others.Edited by Otto Tellick, : fixed phrasing in last paragraph

---

autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.

that is unlikely considering he plainly showed the Isrealites over and over again that the gods of the nations were fakes. They were invented by the people and were not real gods.
This is why Jehovah told them not to worship any other gods beside him.

But Thor throws lightning bolts *every day*, not just 2000 years ago by the word of someone's brother's friend's account!Heck, Zeus does not even acknowledge the concept of the Christian god and isn't insecure about competition. (Well, for mortals at least. If another god got uppity he would bring the smackdown personally.)

Any specific references or citations you can point to on that? Did He really provide "evidence of absence" for these other gods, or did He just assert His own superiority over them? (If the latter, that sounds to me like a pretty positive admission of their existence.)And how about all the gods that are never mentioned by name in the Bible? Jehovah never said anything about besting the Norse gods, so perhaps it should be assumed possible that they may exist, and if so, the first commandment simply makes sure that they must take their place in line somewhere other than the front.

---

autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.

The absence of evidence is sometimes evidence of absence. If someone puts forward a hypothesis, we can think about what sort of evidence we would expect to encounter if it was true. To take a simple example, imagine you're camping in a snowy field (seems like a stupid thing to do, but still) and from noises you heard outside last night you're convinced a bear walked past.Now, if this was the case, one piece of evidence you'd expect to find would be bear footprints in the snow. If you look outside the tent and there are none, the absence of the footprints is evidence for the absence of the bear. Assuming there wasn't a big snowfall while you slept to cover the tracks, it's very good evidence for the absence of the bear.How useful this kind of reasoning would be very much depends on the circumstances, but the basic reasoning is simple:If a then b.
Not b, therefore not a.The question comes down to how certain you can be that 'a' would definitely entail 'b' in all circumstances.

there are many bible accounts that show the futility of the gods of the nations.1Kings 18 21-38 is the account of Elijah the prophet presenting a challenge to the Baal worshiping Priests. His challenge was for them to set up their alter and request their god to accept the sacrifice by consuming it with fire from heaven. The God who responded would thereafter be proved true.
The result was that after a whole day of crying out to Baal and cutting themselves with knives and dancing around the alter, their god did not answer them. Then Elijah called out to his God and immediately fire came down and consumed the sacrifice.
This caused the Isrealites, who witnessed the contest, to turn back to God and remove Baal worship out of their land and kill the 400 Baal worshiping priests.Another example is that of the 10 plagues on egypt. The plagues served as proof to the Isrealites and Egyptions that the gods of Egypt were worthless and fake. Exodus 12:12And I must pass through the land of Egypt on this night and strike every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from man to beast; and on all the gods of Egypt I shall execute judgments. I am Jehovah

quote:

---

The first plague, the turning of the Nile and all the waters of Egypt into blood, brought disgrace to the Nile-god Hapi. The death of the fish in the Nile was also a blow to Egypt’s religion, for certain kinds of fish were actually venerated and even mummified. (Ex 7:19-21) The frog, regarded as a symbol of fertility and the Egyptian concept of resurrection, was considered sacred to the frog-goddess Heqt. Hence, the plague of frogs brought disgrace to this goddess. (Ex 8:5-14) The third plague saw the magic-practicing priests acknowledging defeat when they proved to be unable by means of their secret arts to turn dust into gnats. (Ex 8:16-19) The god Thoth was credited with the invention of magic or secret arts, but even this god could not help the magic-practicing priests to duplicate the third plague.

​

The line of demarcation between the Egyptians and the worshipers of the true God came to be sharply drawn from the fourth plague onward. While swarms of gadflies invaded the homes of the Egyptians, the Israelites in the land of Goshen were not affected. (Ex 8:23,24) The next plague, the pestilence upon the livestock, humiliated such deities as the cow-goddess Hathor, Apis, and the sky-goddess Nut, who was conceived of as a cow having the stars affixed to her belly. (Ex 9:1-6) The plague of boils brought disgrace to the gods and goddesses regarded as possessing healing abilities, such as Thoth, Isis, and Ptah. (Ex 9:8-11) The severe hailstorm put to shame the gods who were considered to have control of the natural elements; for example, Reshpu, who, it appears, was believed to control lightning, and Thoth, who was said to have power over the rain and thunder. (Ex 9:22-26) The locust plague spelled defeat for the gods thought to ensure a bountiful harvest, one of these being the fertility god Min, who was viewed as a protector of the crops. (Ex 10:12-15) Among the deities disgraced by the plague of darkness were sun-gods, such as Ra and Horus, and also Thoth the god of the moon and believed to be the systematizer of sun, moon, and stars.Ex 10:21-23.

​

The death of the firstborn resulted in the greatest humiliation for the Egyptian gods and goddesses. (Ex 12:12) The rulers of Egypt actually styled themselves as gods, the sons of Ra, or Amon-Ra. It was claimed that Ra, or Amon-Ra, had intercourse with the queen. The son born was, therefore, viewed as a god incarnate and was dedicated to Ra, or Amon-Ra, at his temple. Hence, the death of Pharaoh’s firstborn, in effect, actually meant the death of a god. (Ex 12:29)

---

Prophecy is another example where God shows himself to be the true God. The OT is full of prophecies the, when fulfilled, showed that the Isrealites God was a true God.