sort of "other" criteria would you find "acceptable" to convince you into believing in God? ...And let's say that God happened to "appear" to you one day, wouldn't you by default just conclude that his obvious appearance could be "rationally" or "scientifically" explained, instead of just accepting the frickin' obvious?
2007-02-12 14:57:54 · 34 answers · asked by Loathe thy neighbor. 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Haha, don't kid yourselves. Even if the "proof" you require "appeared" in front of you, you'd brush it off as something that "science" could explain. It's just in your nature (as an Atheist) to be closed-minded like that -- closed to the possibility that God exists.
2007-02-12 15:26:44 · update #1
It is the Holy Spirit alone who leads hearts to the revelation and truth of God.
2007-02-12 15:01:42 · answer #1 · answered by Dr. Phil 3 · 1⤊ 7⤋
It is not about their belief, it's trying to force that belief on others. What business is it of theirs if someone who is NOT their religion learns evolution or a homosexual marries? Our laws are not supposed to support only one religion. THAT'S what makes it bigotry - not the belief, the unwillingness to permit another to follow a different belief. It's the very definition of bigotry, whatever it is based on. There can be a literalist that doesn't do this, but there are very few and they aren't the ones you hear of (or likely the ones being called bigots). I'd not have a problem with someone who doesn't WANT a gay marriage themselves, or wants to teach their children creationism - I don't know anyone who would have issue with that. Making it illegal for others, and replacing science for other people's children in public school... that's entirely different. Also, many of the bible quotes that are commonly used are Old Testament, while huge sections of that are ignored. The Bible also says to follow the law in your land and love your neighbors, EVEN if they are sinners. It might be religious beliefs that they use as arguments, but they still use the ones convenient to them to push an agenda.
2016-05-24 03:52:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Here is a list of some things that would convince me to believe in God.
1) If the Bible made any sort of prediction that was proven correct. And I don't mean something vague, I'm talking about a prediction like "In the year of your Lord 1492, a Man shalt sail forth across the Ocean Blue; and he shall be called Christopher". It hasn't.
2) Any sort of bona-fide, documented, unexplainable-by-anything-other-than-divine-intervention miracle, such as a person rising from the dead, a person capable of flying, the moon suddenly turning into yellow cheese and exploding, etc. It's never happened.
3) Here's the last, and most important: Any sort of evidence whatsoever that might possibly lead to the conclusion that a god or gods exist. There isn't any.
Hope this helps, and have a good day.
2007-02-12 15:05:12 · answer #3 · answered by SomeGuy 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
How about a length of human DNA that can be decoded to spell out the Bible in the original languages? That might be some evidence that something unusual is going on. Or how about a signal in the cosmic background radiation that can be decoded to spell out the Koran? Or perhaps having the Baghavad-Gita encoded in the signals from a pulsar? I'd think that any of these would strongly suggest that one or the other of our scriptures was actually part of the larger universe in a non-trivial way.
If I suddenly had a 'vision' of a deity, I would think that I was given a hallucinogen, I was developing schizophrenia, or that I was overly stressed. Why can't YOU accept the frickin' obvious?
2007-02-12 15:08:37 · answer #4 · answered by mathematician 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I wonder why some theists are so interested in what it will take to convert an Atheist. Why not just accept that belief for some is illogical and let it go?
In my opinion, God does not care if we believe or not. Most souls cross over and religion has nothing to do with it.
I will say that short of Him appearing in the sky there will never be proof of God.
2007-02-12 15:08:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If God appeared, and could demonstrate that he was god, I'd believe.
In light of the fact that god hasn't appeared, you've got no basis at all for assuming that we would "by default just conclude" that it wasn't him. How would you know that? You can't just assume that we'd ignore evidence if there ever were any, particularly as we atheists are the ones who have so far demonstrated the ability to pay attention to the evidence. It is the believers who have a solid record of ignoring the frickin' obvious.
If there were a god, he could convince me he existed simply by appearing and conversing with me on a variety of esoteric topics while precisely anticipating my replies and predicting a few specific events that then occurred right in front of me. Child's play for an omnipotent being...but far beyond anything the believers have to offer.
If you'd like, we could just use a test out of the Bible. The Bible claims that god was put to the test against the prophets of Baal with a couple of altars. Surely if Christians are so sure their god exists, they'd be more than happy to set up the altar test. I won't even ask them to agree to be killed (as were the prophets of Baal) when they fail the test.
Later: Shall we summarize your argument? Let's see here... you believe in something for which there is no evidence. You insist that those who do not believe in it are wrong, and you go out of your way to insult them. Now you insist - again without any evidence - that if there WERE evidence for your belief, those others would still not believe it, and when challenged on your closed-mindedness, insist that it is those others who are closed-minded.
What you fail to do is to present any evidence either of the belief in god or of your claim that others would resist believing even in the face of evidence.
In short, you're as closed-minded as one could possibly get on this question, and even as you clearly display your closed-mindedness in public, you think you can paint others as the closed-minded ones.
You're living in a little dark rathole, kid, and apparently proud of it.
2007-02-12 15:02:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Actual evidence of some kind would work for me. People believing something and an old book are not evidence. God appearing to me (and others at the same time) would be a good start.
2007-02-12 15:03:25 · answer #7 · answered by N 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If there was just one shred of evidence, just one........But christians have faith. Faith that what you believe is true. In other words you have to have hope that it is true. How can you live your life with the hope that something is true. You hope it's true that Jesus walked on water, that Jesus rose up from the grave, that God created the earth just the way it is now, with no evolution, that Eve was made from Adam's rib - - I can go on forever. Have you ever heard of Pandora's Box? She opened the Box and released all the ills on earth. Do you know what the last thing that came out of the Box was? It was hope.
2007-02-12 15:12:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If he or she appeared in a way that everyone could see. I'd accept the obvious.
Your goofy extra comment shows your lack of understanding of science. Science is dependent on systematic empiricism. In the case of god floating down from the sky, empiricists would accept the conclusion that there is a god. Until that day, we're stuck arguing faith.
2007-02-12 15:02:31 · answer #9 · answered by T_and_the_Captain 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
One little boy asks another little boy what it would take for him to believe that there is an apple sitting on the table in front of them.
The second little boy looks at the table. It is empty.
The second little boy says, I would have to seen an apple on this table for me to believe that there is an apple on the table.
The first little boy says, Hah, don't kid yourself. Even if an apple were to appear on this table, you'd just brush it off and say that there was some other explanation for there appearing to be an apple on the table than for an apple to actually be sitting on the table. It's just your nature to be closed-minded like that, closed-minded to the possibility of an apple sitting on this table...
2007-02-12 16:41:14 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Make it $11M. It's interesting that you persist in referring to god as male - just an observation. Really, in lieu of irrefutable, empirical evidence - something that would absolutely convince me that I was indeed seeing or speaking with god, the whole notion is "frickin" absurd to me. It's all so ludicrous, contradictory, self-serving, self-perpetuating, damaging to society, judgmental, self-righteous, spiteful and destructive. What's to love?
2007-02-12 15:14:43 · answer #11 · answered by Skeff 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋