Poll: If a judge were to ask you in front of millions of people if there is scientific evidence without referring to the Bible for God...?

What would your answer be? Would you use circular reasoning, lies, strawman fallacies, etc?

20 Answers

Relevance
  • Wundt
    Lv 7
    4 weeks ago
    Favorite Answer

    Even though I am an atheist, I don't think this would prove much of a challenge to most Christians.Β  They will simply say, "My personal experience of God/Jesus."Β  And, they might even be answering completely honestly, telling stories of unhappiness, addiction, illness, mental health issues all 'cured' by their acceptance of God and the Bible.

    While this 'evidence' would fail a test of validity in science (and even in many business situations) it would be accepted in a court of law where eyewitness testimony is often given greater weight than demonstrable science... even though there is more than enough evidence to show eyewitnesses are often wrong.

    • Wundt
      Lv 7
      4 weeks agoReport

      Not true at all. Scientific validity only requires independent reproducibility. I.e. can the results be repeated consistently by independent individuals. The 'evidence' of religion all is subjective experience and anecdotal, which are, by definition, not reproducible.

  • 4 weeks ago

    My answer would be that there is not one single fact that religion can point to, to even suggest it is possible.Β  By definition, magic, the supernatural and deities cannot exist.Β  Religion is the most dishonest position a person can have.Β  It is dishonest to assert as fact that which is not evidently true.Β  THAT, is a fact.

  • Paul
    Lv 6
    4 weeks ago

    Science is the study of the natural universe in natural terms. Supernatural/spiritual realities lie totally outside the realm of science, therefore Science cannot provide evidence of such realities, or evidence against such realities.

  • 4 weeks ago

    You people make me chuckle... you want physical evidence for something that is Spiritual... yet choose to ignore the physical evidence of everything that exists. Science has always been the attempts of man to understand, organize and present their beliefs about the things of God. Even quantum mechanics has proposed that all matter, everything that exists, is composed of vibrating "strings" of energy, known as the "String Theory". Sound being a vibrating source, it not a far stretch to propose that science has proven that God (or something we as yet can not fully comprehend) did indeed "speak" everything into existence. Call it the "big bang" or whatever you would like... it happened. Without randomness, but deliberately and with purpose. Science once believed in a geocentric earth and that the earth was flat, among many other things. It is not infallible.

    • Wundt
      Lv 7
      4 weeks agoReport

      1) The existence of the universe is not evidence of the existence of God. That is like arguing that the existence of forests is evidence fairies exist. 2) You argue that God is spiritual thus not physical and then claim a physical effect you attribute to God.Β  Which is it?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • BJ
    Lv 7
    4 weeks ago

    The same answer that

    Abraham Lincoln President of USA said:

    I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist.

    But I cannot conceive how a man could look up into the heavens and say there is no God.

    I agree with Lincoln.

    • Mack
      Lv 7
      4 weeks agoReport

      So limited imagination is your excuse....

  • Hi T
    Lv 7
    4 weeks ago

    Simple, not too difficult to do a search, your honour:

    https://duckduckgo.com/?q=scientific+evidence+for+...

    As for circular reasoning and straw men arguments, they are best left to the Atheists. Such as "We know fossils are millions of years old, because they're found in very old rocks. We know the rocks are very old, because they contain fossils."

    Source(s): Christian U.K.
  • 4 weeks ago

    You people are so stupid.

    Everything is evidence.

    There are many proofs of God.

    And God has shown sufficient to all.

    Only those who do not want Him deny this.

    • Ernest S
      Lv 7
      4 weeks agoReport

      Go on then, define evidence ... if you can !

  • Did you know before a miracle is confirmed by the Catholic Church the church will send in a team of scientists to make sure there is no natural explanation? They conduct dozens of interviews with eye witnesses, medical doctors, etc.. The church eliminates every natural explanation before declaring a miracle. Β It’s because the church is not aftaid of reason and science. When you hear a miracle was approved by the church it is slam dunk God was involved. No doubts

    • Madam Sin Bin
      Lv 5
      4 weeks agoReport

      The fact that the Catholic church thinks there are miracles in the first place is problematic, dear.Β 

  • 4 weeks ago

    First you have to state what the alleged crime is, that I was being charged with. Everyone knows there is scientific evidence for a whole raft of things, but is this a court case where science is the accused in the dock, or a person who believes the Bible? Have you forgotten that in millions of court rooms, people have to swear on the Bible to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? The Court refers to the Bible, so your hypothetical scenario is a shambles.

    Anyway, my answer would be that the US National Academy of Sciences said, "Science is a way of knowing about the natural world. It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes. Science can say nothing about the supernatural. Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral." The judge would then realize that not even Science can enter into the metaphysical question of the existence of God.

    • Madam Sin Bin
      Lv 5
      4 weeks agoReport

      Yeah, you can choose to swear on whatever book or document you wish. That's the actual law in American courts. Swearing a Bible doesn't make the Bible's contents true or valid. It just means that person chose to swear on the Bible. If they lied under oath, as many do, it's perjury. The Bible doesn't

  • My personal experience is all I need. I don't care if you or a judge believes.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.