No Evidence for God?

Many atheists I see on youtube or facebook will make claims like “there is no evidence for the existence of God.”  People literally have no reason for believing He exists, apparently.

To me, this seems obviously false.  There are many reasons for believing that God exists.  First, there’s the cosmological, teleological, moral, and ontological arguments for God’s existence, which some find convincing.  For many others, personal experience of God is their reason.  While personal experience won’t convince many non-Christians, it does serve as a type of evidence.

So, it looks wholly false that there is no evidence for God’s existence.  The question is: is this good and convincing evidence.  That’s the debatable thing.  Saying “there is no evidence” comes of as simple dismissal to me.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Philosophy, Science, Theology. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to No Evidence for God?

  1. tearmatt says:

    A few years ago in England a woman was sat on the back of a truck holding her baby, this truck hit a rock. The lady dropped her baby and the little thing fell in to the road and was crushed before her very eyes by the car behind. Since this happened the lady became a heroine addict, and later after years of depression, committed suicide. Was this Gods will?

  2. otove says:

    Ultimately truth is all we will be left with after the flames of science have licked at religion, God may well be there, gleaming amongst the ashes of religion.

  3. “So, it looks wholly false that there is no evidence for God’s existence. ”

    There is no good, non-subjective, empirical evidence for any god’s existence.

    Saying ‘there is no evidence’ is easier, and means almost the same thing.

    • Are you saying all evidence must be empirical? And what do you mean by “subjective?”

      • I’m saying that good evidence must be empirical, yeah. If you want it to be convincing to other people, at any rate.

        A personal experience would be good subjective evidence. But that doesn’t make it good evidence for anyone else, only yourself.

  4. “I’m saying that good evidence must be empirical, yeah. If you want it to be convincing to other people, at any rate.”

    Empirical evidence is good for some things, yes, but I don’t think it’s the only kind of evidence that counts as “good.” There’s historical evidences and inferences to the best explanation, for example. There’s also the issue of moral obligation. Empirical evidence doesn’t tell me that rape is wrong and that I ought not do it, for example, but we typically believe it is.

    • “There’s historical evidences and inferences to the best explanation, for example. ”

      Those are okay. They aren’t good enough for extraordinary claims, however.

      “Empirical evidence doesn’t tell me that rape is wrong and that I ought not do it, for example, but we typically believe it is.”

      Not the same thing. Concepts are not true in the same way that facts are true. If you want to argue your god is a concept, I welcome you to it.

  5. I think it would all depend on what you mean by “God.”

    Mark Blasini

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s