Tmach137:
I have a simple question for d christians...

does any of u have any credible, objective, verifiable, empirical evidence that your particular god (in this case, Yahweh) exists? Can dis evidence be accepted in a court of law or in a Science classroom in any secular university?

If any christian here can present such evidence, i will surely convert to Christianity and share my testimony here on nairaland with reference to the moniker dat won my soul.

As someone who has been asking these questions for years, im going to predict the kind of answers the Christians of this forum will give me

1. Answers dat mistake knowledge with beliefs

2. Answers dat display ignorance on what constitutes evidence for the existence of something

3. Answers dat betray lack of understanding about d burden of proof

4. Answers dat are at conflict with science

5. Answers dat reveal lack of understanding of who atheists are and what atheism is

6. Answers dat conflate religion with d existence of God's

And finally,
7. Ad hominem, direct threats and insults


I want to be proven wrong but unfortunately dis has been my experience with Christians. Like I said anyone who can answers dat question in a straight and honest matter will not only win my soul to Christ but will earn my highest respect.

Before anything I am not a Christian
Neither do I belong to any religious faction

But I would like for you to answer a question if you will.

Is there any evidence for the power of mind over matter?

kingxsamz:


Except that light bulb and electricity can be examined, identified and proven.
So that analogy cannot work.
You can't use logic to defend the illogical.

This is the problem of you atheists you like to reason in an abstract way logic that borders on foolishness. the maker of the bulb had the thing carefully put together after much calculations and tests. One fellow, like you will see the light and would want proof if there is amaker. Tomorrow morning, just walk down your street and logically enter any car parked because there is no proof of the ownership and continue to drive. Once in my undergraduate days, there was this clown of a lecturer who came to teach us a course like that in faculty of engineering. He wanted to impress us by making a 'logical' statement. He said,'you scientists are foolish: you say two parallel lines cannot meet, how far have you drawn them?' We all were laughing at him. His logic can't produce a piece of chalk!

MasterJayJay:
You are not the author of the definition of God.
Listing the criteria that must be met before you accept that God exists remains a delusion.

God will not condescend to fit into your wrong, misinformed way of what God should be.

DEATH will awaken the spiritual eyes, no debate when you take your last breathe.

Appeal to subjectivism.

In this case God can be an imaginary being. That's the delusion.

And who's the author of definition of God? Why must one be dead to know God exist?

Listing a criteria to be convinced a God exist is very valid and rational, not a delusion.

MightySparrow:
Which one is abuse na. Electricity claims to have created light in a bulb, the bulb now ask for a proof for existence of electricity and the light can deny its own existence.

Wait are you saying Electricity doesn't have proof?

tintingz:

Wait are you saying Electricity doesn't have proof?

What proof?

MightySparrow:
This is the problem of you atheists you like to reason in an abstract way logic that borders on foolishness. the maker of the bulb had the thing carefully put together after much calculations and tests. One fellow, like you will see the light and would want proof if there is amaker. Tomorrow morning, just walk down your street and logically enter any car parked because there is no proof of the ownership and continue to drive. Once in my undergraduate days, there was this clown of a lecturer who came to teach us an bogus course like that in faculty of engineering. He wanted to impress us by making a 'logical' statement. He said,'you scientists are foolish: you say two parallel lines cannot meet, how far have you drawn them?' We all were laughing at him. His logic can't produce a piece of chalk!

If there must be a maker for everything, who's the maker of God?

MightySparrow:
What proof?

I asked you, does electricity have no proof?

tintingz:
I asked you, does electricity have no proof?

Yes, it has. light , heat, magnetism, motion and more are proof that electricity exists, We know you agree with me. has any one seen an electron producing it? may be philosophers and atheists like you

MightySparrow:
Yes, it has. light , heat, magnetism, motion and more are proof that electricity exists, We know you agree with me. has any one seen an electron producing it? may be philosophers and atheists like you

Oh my goodness.

You mentioned motion, heat, magnetism and you're still asking as anyone seen how it's produced.

tintingz:


Oh my goodness.

You mentioned motion, heat, magnetism and you're still asking as anyone seen how it's produced.

I can now see where your problem lies as an atheist, as an engineer i understand perfectly what am talking about, as a logical, ignorant, conceited person who know next to nothing about the subject matter but abstract logic are still looking for proof. good luck in your search.

MightySparrow:
This is the problem of you atheists you like to reason in an abstract way logic that borders on foolishness.

Ok.

the maker of the bulb had the thing carefully put together after much calculations and tests. One fellow, like you will see the light and would want proof if there is amaker.

Okay.
So, going by your poor analogy. If I go ahead to ask who created the light bulb, would they be able to prove it? Yes or No. I await your answer on this.

Tomorrow morning, just walk down your street and logically enter any car parked because there is no proof of the ownership and continue to drive.

Well according to this failed analogy, poorer than the first one though, the fact that the car is parked there shows that it has an owner, because the whereabouts of the owner can be accounted for or known.
Oh well, tell us where your sky daddy lives.

Once in my undergraduate days, there was this clown of a lecturer who came to teach us a course like that in faculty of engineering. He wanted to impress us by making a 'logical' statement. He said,'you scientists are foolish: you say two parallel lines cannot meet, how far have you drawn them?' We all were laughing at him. His logic can't produce a piece of chalk!

Ok.

kingxsamz:

Ok.

Okay.
So, going by your poor analogy. If I go ahead to ask who created the light bulb, would they be able to prove it? Yes or No. I await your answer on this.



Well according to this failed analogy, poorer than the first one though, the fact that the car is parked there shows that it has an owner, because the whereabouts of the owner can be accounted for or known.
Oh well, tell us where your sky daddy lives.



Ok.

The same old question. God himself claimed to have created everything. If anything created him, let that thing make a bold claim. As far as I know, The One who Claims ownershsip of everything is the one I know. In this world of matter, there are so many things around that we don't see yet they are. you life depends on oxygen without it you are dead. wind in all its power cannot be seen or where it lives yet you cannot prove its existence and you can't deny its activties either. these are just physical things.

MightySparrow:
The same old question. God himself claimed to have created everything. If anything created him, let that thing make a bold claim.

Lol. The irony.
let your god make his claim known to all also.
Instead you're the one making the claims on his behalf. The op challenged you to prove your god's existence, and you have failed to do that.

As far as I know, The One who Claims ownershsip of everything is the one I know.

Yeah the flying spaghetti monster also claims to be the creator of the universe. Do you believe?

In this world of matter, there are so many things around that we don't see yet they are. you life depends on oxygen without it you are dead. wind in all its power cannot be seen or where it lives yet you cannot prove its existence and you can't deny its activties either. these are just physical things.

@bolded is the reason why I won't continue this conversation.
Your logical thinking is too low to engage you in a conversation.
Wind can not be proven to exist?
And I'm sure you're a graduate.
And the way you dodged my question is just pathetic.
Please don't quote me again.
I'm done.

If you are looking for evidence of God's existence, I'll suggest you ask Google "Is it historically verifiable that Jesus really rose from the dead?" and click on the first article you see, because one of the best proof of God's existence is the resurrection of Jesus.

And if you're also questioning the existence of Jesus, know that every historians (even atheists) believe he actually existed.

MightySparrow:
I can now see where your problem lies as an atheist, as an engineer i understand perfectly what am talking about, as a logical, ignorant, conceited person who know next to nothing about the subject matter but abstract logic are still looking for proof. good luck in your search.

First, you no nothing of logic as you've committed many logical fallacies which I've pointed out to you, you've failed to answer who the maker of God is.

Asking if anyone sees electron produces electricity is nonsensical, I don't understand what this argument tries to prove.

We can and have demonstrated how electricity are produced many times, it's observable.

So it's either you didn't propose your argument well or your argument is nonsensical.

kingxsamz:

Lol. The irony.
let your god make his claim known to all also.
Instead you're the one making the claims on his behalf. The op challenged you to prove your god's existence, and you have failed to do that.

Yeah the flying spaghetti monster also claims to be the creator of the universe. Do you believe?


@bolded is the reason why I won't continue this conversation.
Your logical thinking is too low to engage you in a conversation.
Wind can not be proven to exist?
And I'm sure you're a graduate.
And the way you dodged my question is just pathetic.
Please don't quote me again.
I'm done.

His argument are very weak and childish.

MightySparrow even committed circular reasoning fallacy.

"God claim he created everything therefore God exist and created everything."

It's like saying "Superman claim he can fly therefore Superman exist and can fly."

You have to prove that God exist, the particular God that exist and he's one that created everything, you can't just use "claims" as evidence or prove, where does that work in an argument?

I can as well claim an alien spoke to me he created everything and I write a book about this revelation, how can he disprove that?

tintingz:



His argument are very weak and childish.

MightySparrow even committed circular reasoning fallacy.

"God claim he created everything therefore God created everything."

It's like saying "Superman claim he can fly therefore Superman can fly."

You have to prove that God exist, the particular God that exist and he's one that created everything, you can't just use "claims" as evidence or prove, where does that work in an argument?

I can as well claim an alien spoke to me he created everything and I write a book about this revelation, how can he disprove that?

Good point.
It's more like arguing with a child.
The OP predicted the childish response he'd get on his post, and this guy just proved him right.

kingxsamz:


Good point.
It's more like arguing with a child.
The OP predicted the childish response he'd get on his post, and this guy just proved him right.

Lol, I commend the OP for that.

He knew their childish and fallacious response already.

kingxsamz:

Lol. The irony.
let your god make his claim known to all also.
Instead you're the one making the claims on his behalf. The op challenged you to prove your god's existence, and you have failed to do that.

Yeah the flying spaghetti monster also claims to be the creator of the universe. Do you believe?


@bolded is the reason why I won't continue this conversation.
Your logical thinking is too low to engage you in a conversation.
Wind can not be proven to exist?
And I'm sure you're a graduate.
And the way you dodged my question is just pathetic.
Please don't quote me again.
I'm done.

I agree I am not an expert in logic, please logicily prove that I don't exist.