And I very much respect your opinion and enjoy your posts.
Just out of interest, have you ever listened to or read the testimonies of people who have had their lives changed by God? Nicky Cruz, Jackie Pullinger, Francis Collins, Lee Strobel or especially Saint Peter or Paul in Acts for example…
Is that evidence?
No, I can't say I've read these particular testimonies, but I'm sure most of us have come across other such examples. But, can you prove that none of what these people you talk about could not have happened without putting God into the equation? Does taking God out of the equation totally dissolve the testimony? Including St Peter or Paul in your list is troubling, given that they are a part of the mythology. So no, this is not even reasonable evidence, and what is needed is absolute evidence.
Yet these testimonies I've listed above are such a tiny part of a huge amount of evidence that exists at the personal level of individuals that currently is not (or cannot) be measured objectively at this time.
But tell me, what comes first? The faith or the testimonies? How much of these experiences are driven either by fevered faith or a near total feeling of helplessness? You admit yourself that at least some of this cannot be measured objectively; I would debate that
none of this has yet to be be measured objectively.
By the way you write, I guess you are very aware subjective evidence can be valid scientifically when put in the proper construct (which unfortunately it isn’t being at the moment).
Of course it can, this is part of what science is all about. My question is,
why is this not being done? You would think at least some of the scientists out there who are also persons of faith (and we know there are many) who could be doing this work to further their faith? I think it actually is taking place but the proofs have been between scant and nil. How fortunate that you think it
isn't being done at the moment such that you can persist to believe it can be.
Or failing that have you actually ever verbally asked God to show He exists to you personally? Just to see if anything happens? That of course is the best evidence you will ever receive.
And what if I tell you I just tried this now and nothing happened? Would you think I was lying? Would you think I was being honest but wasn't ferverent enough doing it? Do I need to wait for a clearheaded moment to receive a subtle response, ie an epiphany? You really put yourself and your faith out on a limb by suggesting I ask God himself if he exists; it's seemingly do or die for the faithful, all riding on the results. Or is it? Because the faihful have always covered their tracks in the ways I describe above in this paragraph. It always ends with someone of faith telling me that God works in mysterious ways. This is frankly nonsense. God exists and it's up to me to verify it?
I became an atheist as a teenager, raised Catholic before that. Those were nearly 18 long years in which the evidence could have presented itself to me in some form. Why should one need to go out of his way and ask an entity to prove itself to me?
When I was a young adult, I once had a long distance girlfriend and found myself constantly tied up on the phone for hours talking about inane things (adimittedly they probably seemed inane because I wasn't absolutely crazy about this girl). I woke up early one morning to the ringing telephone and the phone cord was wrapped around me and the bed several times; I could not move. It was realistic, I thought I was wide awake until I logically thought it through and realized the absurdity of the situation, then I woke up for real. Relieved.
Was this just one of those waking dreams? Was this a sign from God? What did it mean? I need to dump the girl, or shame on me for not being more dedicated to her? The point being, the relationship was something that was on my mind constantly, for good or for bad, and it was obviously a trigger for the dream though she wasn't involved in it. What I'm suggesting is that such a method (my asking God whether he exists) is filled with too much ambiguity.
If I believed as a practicing Catholic, God apparently never felt a need to present himself to me. But now I don't believe and you suggest I need to go ask him to present himself? Essentially, this is what I did, I asked God if he existed, and nothing happened. Do you understand the absurdity of this?
When you boil it all down, it's apparent to me that there is no scientific proof, only "subjective proof," whatever that means. I think "subjective proof" is nothing more than another expression for "faith."