The demand of some atheists for scientific evidence for God’s existence is born of either disingenuousness or a lack of understanding.
They can’t use empirical testing to prove that only empirical testing qualifies as evidence, as that is a circular reference.
They also make a category mistake. You don’t use a scale to weigh the color blue, because colors don’t have weight. In the same way, you don’t use methods designed to test material things if you want to determine the truth about immaterial things.
Christians can point to all sorts of evidence for the existence of God, the resurrection of Jesus and the accuracy and reliability of the Bible: Cosmological, teleological, logical, moral, historical and more. See any of the Apologetics links to the right, such as Does God exist?
If they want to debate the evidence, that is fine. But skeptics really tip their hands when they insist that only empirical evidence is permitted, or that we have no evidence or that they have the same amount of evidence for their Flying Spaghetti Monster. Consider the premise of that argument:
- There is something that doesn’t exist (e.g., the Flying Spaghetti Monster).
- We know it doesn’t exist.
- Therefore, God doesn’t exist.
As you can see, that argument proves nothing.
Also consider their typically dismissive reaction to the evidence of the testimony of eyewitnesses or reliable sources. They often insist that they only trust empirical evidence and not that of eyewitnesses, but that would mean they’d have to create their own test equipment and replicate every single experiment before they trusted the results. They obviously don’t do that. They use their judgment and experience to determine who they think is trustworthy and they rely on their conclusions. We do the same thing.
So even with their scientific evidence they are constantly relying on the evidence of eyewitnesses or what they deem as reliable sources.