Is the evidence compelling?

[Nimrod]

Adherents of various religions believe that there is compelling evidence for their beliefs. Those who do not accept the tenets of various religions believe that the evidence for those beliefs is not compelling.

Evidence:
1. an outward sign
2. something that furnishes proof
3. information or signs indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
4. a thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment

Compelling:
1. to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly
2. tending to persuade by forcefulness of argument
3. drivingly forceful
4. powerfully evoking attention or admiration
Working definition of compelling evidence: An outward sign that powerfully or irresistibly indicates that a belief is true.

For atheists and agnostics, there is no compelling evidence for the existence of a god.
For Christians, Muslims, Hindus, and other theists, there is compelling evidence for the existence of a god and for the particular beliefs surrounding that evidence. However, for theists, there is no compelling evidence for any religious belief other than those beliefs held by those particular theists.

Religious debates involve disagreements about which evidence is compelling.

Any suggestions for a standard of compelling evidence?

[Benster]

"Adherents of various religions believe that there is compelling evidence for their beliefs."

According to the definition you are suggesting, "compelling evidence" seems to include faith. But I don't think of faith as evidence at all. It is the antithesis of reason.

Usually, and especially up until about 1990, you could search far and wide and not find a christian who would claim to have real evidence for God. That's changed, now.

I frequently find theists claim that they have evidence. But this is usually a throw-away line. They are playing with rhetoric. They can't really come up with any evidence. They mean say-so, third-hand testimony.

[lee_merrill]

Hi everyone,

I would say compelling evidence would be a high probability, say 90% or more, that a view is true. Good evidence would be that a view is just likely, though not necessarily high probability, say 60% or more. And supporting evidence would be something not totally improbable, say, a 10% or more probability...

My 3c...

Blessings,
Lee

[Seasanctuary]

It's more like there's compelling evidence for too many Gods.

[Nimrod]

If that's the case, which God do you choose?

[Nimrod]

I would say compelling evidence would be a high probability, say 90% or more, that a view is true. Good evidence would be that a view is just likely, though not necessarily high probability, say 60% or more. And supporting evidence would be something not totally improbable, say, a 10% or more probability...A valiant attempt at quantification, but how do you calculate the probability?

[lee_merrill]

... but how do you calculate the probability?
Well, each case is different, I would say, some evidence (the probability of correctly predicting the throw of some dice, Eze. 21:22) is easy to come up with a probability for, other evidence is not. But if you can try and boil it down to a number, you can take that value (with a little hand-waving) to indicate how compelling a given piece of evidence may be.

Blessings,
Lee