What extraordinary evidence for God’s existence would be acceptable?
I have been thinking of this question for the last few weeks. I once believed in a God - specifically the Christian one. In discussion with theists, I’ve admitted that if convincing evidence could be shown for this God’s existence, I would believe again. I have seen many nontheists post something to this effect here before - in one thread which I think was entitled “Could you believe?” a poster said something to the effect of “heck yeah, if I saw the son of man coming in power and glory in the clouds, I’d convert!”. And that makes me think.
What evidence for the existence of the Christian God would make us nontheists convert? What evidence would be convincing enough? For that matter, let’s not limit this to the J\C God - what evidence would be convincing for the existence of any gods?
[ul]
[li]A big miracle, videotaped for later review? One that is not reproducible by human efforts?[/li][li]Solid statistical evidence that followers of said God display extraordinary changes in behavior (for the better)? (in my experience, modern Christians taken as a whole do not)[/li][li]A certain, impending disaster that is clearly and unmistakably prevented by said God? Like an earth bound asteroid broken up into a million pieces by a massive disembodied hand?[/li][/ul]
Any of these would go a long way towards convincing me that some kind of God exists.
What extraordinary evidence for God’s existence would be acceptable to others?
Solid statistical evidence that followers of God X are more likely to floss, give to charity or something like that is not evidence of the existence of said God. The same effect can be reached without the existence of a divine being.
Okay, let´s assume something big and hard to refute like this comes up. While this may lead me to admit that “Hey maybe there is a big hand in the sky”, it does not neccessarily make me want to suck up to (worship) the big hand in the sky.
Well…If God appeared in front of me in all his glory, I would likely make an appointment with a psychiatrist, so that wouldn’t work.
God appearing to many people and videotaped would be fine if there’s enough people, the case was thoroughly investigated, leaving few room for doubt.
Miracles could be better, actually. Evidences that people praying the god X get extraordinary results for their petitions, miracles medically/scientifically verifiables happening very frequently in some sacred place, etc…
Something obvious to many (and if at all possible including me) , consistent, which could be investigated and verified could do the trick. An odd miracle in Lourdes or some milk pouring from a statue of Ganesh wouldn’t.
Coil - good points. What extraordinary evidence for God’s existence would be acceptable to you, assuming you are a nontheist?
Does anyone out there take the position that there is no evidence that could conceivably be proferred that would be convincing of the existence of a God or gods?
I think one thing that Mars is getting at is that, while saying you demand evidence is fine, giving an example is tough. Almost anything you can name, other than God convincing you personally and subjectively, is interpretable as something natural. At worst, it would be something unknown, and no one wants to believe in any god of the gaps.
Examples from Mars’s listing:
A big miracle, videotaped for later review? One that is not reproducible by human efforts? — That’s sort of the opposite of what Randi, et al, are asking for. They want something reproducible. I mean, you could say that the creation of the universe qualifies for this one, but it wasn’t videotaped, and you can always speculate about infinite universes and such.
Solid statistical evidence that followers of said God display extraordinary changes in behavior (for the better)? — Brain farts. Epilepsy. Something along those lines.
A certain, impending disaster that is clearly and unmistakably prevented by said God? Like an earth bound asteroid broken up into a million pieces by a massive disembodied hand? — A renegade planetoid shaped like a hand. People would be accused of “Face on Mars” hallucinations.
Mars wrote:
That’s the position I take, if you mean objective type evidence. At least, that was always true for me. It was a subjective experience (followed by ongoing experiences) that convinced me.
I think the responses here kinda sum up standard, non-theistic rationale: There is no god, and any evidence that proves there is a god must be explainable by some other means, because like I said, there is no god. If God took every non-theist in the world, stuck them in a giant room, came over and performed a dozen miracles, and gave them a comemorative videotape to remember it by, they would counter with, “Wow, musta been mass hypnosis.”
Reminds me of a Calvin and Hobbes strip… Calvin sees a cloud spontaneously take the form of his head, and stick its tongue out at him. He tells Hobbes, who asks, “Wow, what do you think it means?” Calvin replies with something like, “I dunno, strange upper atmospheric winds, or something.”
Similarly, a devout Christian could see Vishnu come down and carefully explain how Christianity is incorrect, you should be Hindu, and here’s a bunch of evidence to support my claims, and he would explain it away as, “Musta been the devil trying to trick me.” These things are pretty much beyond the realm of reason and logic for most people. You believe because it feels right.
Now that’s not to say that people never change religions, or that atheists don’t become believers, or whatnot, but I don’t think these changes are based on reason. They’re based on emotion. It feels right, so they do it.
Jeff
Anything that can be empirically observed can be claimed to be something less than God. A big hand in the sky need not be the hand of God - you observed a big hand in the sky, that’s all you can report with certainty. The rest is speculation. Further study required. Perhaps, with an embarrassed cough in the report, suggestions of what evidence might support the hypothesis that this was the hand of God.
Or perhaps not. The hypothesis that “This is God,” it seems, is not empirically falsifiable. You want to do a test of the power of prayer? That’s fine, you can do so. But a confirmation that “prayer works,” should one ever turn up, does not demonstrate any more than that.
I doubt if science, which deals in observable phenomena, is equipped with the tools to find God. It can, however, make enough observations that we can describe a universe where God is not necessary - and by parsimony, either irrelevant or assumed not to exist. This hasn’t happened yet… and if God does in fact exist, I have faith that science never will.
The evidence that I would require would be evidence that makes the God-Hypothesis more likely than the Natural-Events-Hypothesis. For example, were the event of the Rapture to actually happen and a whole bunch of Christians disappear and the dead start rising from their graves and the Christian God appears in all His Glory, well, I’m going to think that the Rapture-believing Christains may have gotten something right. Of course, I would require independent coroboration by other people, video, newspapers, etc.
Subjective experience…mmm, that’s risky. If I believed what my feelings told me were true I’d believe there was a boogeyman under my bed and and ax murderer outside my shower. If feelings shouldn’t be valid proof that ax murderers are outside my shower, why should they be valid evidence that an omniscient omnipotent being with a abiding interest in my sex life exists and wants me to worship Him? (And I must note that I have never had a subjective experience that managed to convey this impression to me, and find it rather odd to contemplate getting an emotion that can provide evidence all by itself of the existence of a being with certain attributes.) When are “feelings” alone valid evidence that a being exists?
I think it is unfair to both theists and non-theists to say “oh, your mind will never be changed, even if you saw the dead rise or Vishnu appear, you would still not believe.” Though it is perhaps slightly more accurate for certain theists, given the emphasis in many religions on “having faith” even in the face of reasons to doubt, and the avowed assurance from some that they will never lose their faith; but many have formed their opinions based on evidence, and further evidence could likely sway them. I don’t really have faith in the lack of a God; I don’t beleive there is a God, but if evidence comes up that there is one, I don’t think I’m going to go through any traumatic crisis of faith on a par with what some theists losing their faith might go through. I don’t think I’ll be trying to cling to my atheism because “I must have faith”, though there may very well be some resistance since few really like accomodating fundamental shifts in their worldview right off.
Being a mere human, it is beyond my abilities to define God. The best I could hope for would be to witness some event, or series of events, that could be described as “god-like”. I.e., turning the rains on & off with the wave of the hand, raising my dead grandmother, etc. Even then, I’d need mass corroboration from trusted friends & other sources because, well, people do go insane from time to time, and I could be one of those people.
Even then, we have to deal with the fact that we still have a number explanations that are equally as fantastic. For example, somebody being able to make it rain with a wave of his hand migth just be a being from the future with a weather control machine in his pocket.
Confronted with a being capable of performing god-like acts that current science is unable to explain, many of us will simply elect to fall back onto cherrished (read: preferred) beliefs & superstitions, finally able to claim vindication.
I contend if God existed and was going to perform a miracle, then he/she/it wouldn’t blow something up on TV and then record on VHS and give everyone a VCR so they could watch it over and over again in slow-motion.
If there was a God and he really wanted to prove to me he was real, he would come to me as a logical being as he supposedly created us to be. I would ask questions and he would answer. He would ask questions and I couldn’t answer. That is how God could convince me and if God can be every where at once, then this should be no inconvenience for him.
The only contact I’ve received from the alleged God are from his followers. If God was reasonable he would understand that I can’t base my beliefs on another mans word about his word.
I think that any evidence sufficient to suggest that some divine power is altering the natural workings of the world would have to be sufficiently improbable that the probability that we simply misperceived the evidence would swamp it.
After all, I misinterpret things all the time: it’s a fairly parsimonious explanation. It’s more rational to believe that a mistake has been made by us.
So, what would work? It would have to be something where the probability of error was very small: communicated over a length of time through sensory modalities that can verify each other. It would help if many people were exposed to it as well. It would have to be something that is so difficult to replicate or simulate that human error or devious trickstery is actually less likely than divine intervention… so it needs to be fairly major.
Finally, any one form of revelation might be open to fakery. However, several different forms occurring at once (or very close together temporally) would be extraordinarily hard to pull of.
If many stars, all across the sky, suddenly began having luminousity shifts that spelled out a message in binary, I would consider that as incontravertible evidence that something utterly beyond our current understanding was taking place. It might be a universe-spanning alien entity… but that’s fairly close to a god in any case.
Not Sufficient: “God” shows up in person, 1 mile high and weilding lightning bolts and roaring at me as I leave work this afternoon, “AHunter3, behold, I am God and you are up shit creek!”. (Big deal. Any hypothetical mile-high supernatural entity with the ability to read minds and hurl lightning bolts could do that. Doesn’t make it “God”. I could still be up shit creek though.)
Sufficient: It is laid out for me how the denizens of the world can live in peace with each other, without oppression or coercion, without loser and winners or victors and victims, efficiently and comfortably, as free and equal partners, and neither war nor deprivation nor categorical hate need be with us ever again. It is laid out for me how, once having this knowledge in my possession, I am to proceed to make it happen without disturbing people who have a stake in the present system, or think they do. It is laid out for me how to convey all of this information to the species at large, attracting the necessary amount of attention in the most convenient manner. And all of this gives a final answer to the human hunger for justice and peace, and to the inner voice that says things are supposed to make sense and that people should be able to be nice to each other and trust each other without getting betrayed and hurt in the process.
**Nicely put, Rabbit. A simultaneous diety interrogation would fit the bill for me
Yes. This is another problem I have with the currently accepted notions of God, that there is supposedly a Truth that is out there, and yet no two groups out of the thousands that exist can completely agree on what this Truth is. At least if all the theists agreed on God and His Message, it would be easier.
Aren’t we all missing the obvious here? It’s God - (for a Christian God, at least) he should know the perfect way to convince everybody. If he wants, he could just click his fingers and everybody would ‘know.’
If you asked God for a $5 bill to appear before you and it did, would you believe? What if you were sitting outside on a bench in a park, the leaves whistling with the wind, and seconds after you asked God, a slow falling $5 landed in your lap. Would you give credit to the wind, to the guy chasing the flying $5 bill, or to God?
I think it’s really about if you want to believe. I really do. Now don’t jump all over my case for saying that because it does work both ways. If I wanted to change my mind and become an atheist (as some of you have) then that would be because I wanted too.
I see prayers answered all the time. I choose to believe they are answered by God. I choose to believe that the reason rainbows appear after it rains is because God said he would do that. I choose to believe everything I can physically see, smell, hear, taste, and touch, are created by God.
So it’s really all about you personally and what you want to believe. IMHO there’s nothing that’s going to convince anyone in such a way that there could be no other explanation. He’s already done so much and still so many don’t believe.
Guess we’ll have to wait for the rapture to see though ;).
Right now to me, the idea of a Christian God would require extraordinary proof. I don’t think it would be hard for such a God to convince me he exists.
If the rapture happened, where many Christians disappeared overnight much like how the rapture is said will be done, then the idea of a Christian God existing would become the most plausible explanation and any other theory (like aliens) would require proof in order for me to change my mind.
“He’s already done so much and still so many don’t believe.” I’m really intrigued by this, all my Christian friends tell me this too. I ask you, has he really? Please explain to me exactly what he has done, or is this one of those things that I won’t believe because I’m too stuburn?
Then again, remember that you’re too stuburn too. How you may ask? Well, my Muslim friend says there is plenty of evidence to convince you to convert, so why aren’t you going to convert you wicked heathen, you? The same reason I’m not, because it seems illogical. Now take how you feel about converting to Islam and apply it to my position about Christianity. Has he still done so much? And I say this with all sincerity, please enlighten me of what he has done that no other religion can’t take credit for.
