atheists/what would you consider as proof that God exists?

Question

this is,nt a set up. I really want to know.

GOD as in
1.supreme inteligence,creator of the universe,earth ,man and beast.
2.father, creator of all.
these are two separate versions. provide answers for both.

thanks so much for those who are answering my question seriously and rationaly.
shame on you who who say i have no right to ask.the begining of tolerance is trying to understand an opposing veiw. you claim to be more rational than i am yet you wont share that rationality with me.if you dont want to share do,nt respond.I cant force you.

many seemed to think I was asking them to prove Gods non-existance. im not placing burden of proof on you.

I thought it was a simple Question.

what would you accept as proof?

Answer 1

I will answer this the same way I always do.

I would accept it if God came down from heaven introduced himself to me, signed a copy of the Bible, took a handful of dirt and starting making people out of it.

Answer 2

Ok, lets see some of the miracles witnessed and recorded in a way that there is no question that it was miracle. Let science see the miracle and have a chance to properly record the miracle.

Lets say a person gaining sight from a healer.

First we would need evidence that the person was blind and that there was no chance of the person gaining sight from some other process. There would need to be a medical examination and a medical history of the person explaining the blindness. A report needs to be made by these medical professionals explaining that the subject will never gain sight again. We need to verify that the subject is actually blind.

Next, having people with scientific knowledge witness this healing in a controlled environment. The healing needs to be well documented. Plenty of witnesses and have video recordings as well. Getting medical readings from the healer and the subject would also be very interesting. Pulse, heart rate, temperature, things like that.

Finally, have these results duplicated with several different people. Not too many. Perhaps 10 or so. One or two would shock the world, but 10 permanently blind people gaining their sight thru the work of a healer would be fairly conclusive. If science could show that the healing happened in these cases and science could find absolutely no explanation for it then it would rock the world of atheists and science as well.

Now, this is not actually a proof that a god exists, however it would open up the door to the idea that a miracle can happen. That will give strength to the bible. If some of the miracles could actually be proven to have happened (in a modern scientific setting) then you would have something.

All of these tests would probably take a year or so. We just need someone to come and do them for us. A healer or a representative from god or whatever. That is one of the biggest problems that there is with religion. The bible talks of all of these wonderful and magical things that seemed to happen all of the time back then, yet today they do not happen.

There are those today who claim they can perform miracles, but they never open themselves up to testing like this. Reverend Jim Jones routinely "healed" people. It is now known that he faked those healings.

Answer 3

I don't want to cause offence to anyone, cos you'r all allowed your choice of whatever...

1. The only reason there is religion is because it solves people's main questions in life: how do we get here? where do we go after death? we are just a ball of chemicals. we degrade obviously like everything else. its obvious where religion came from: in the ancient times, before science, people wanted answers so assumed it must be a huge man up there. religion has lingered on, and is dying out slowly as science explains stuff much more clearly and logically

2. Religion is the cause of the most tragic and disgusting things in history: 9/11, hollocaust, crusades etc etc etc. Ummm what trouble have atheists caused?

3. How can people say god is good?!! he's done nothing! well apart from let the things happen as mentioned above.

4. The bible makes pathetic attempts at trying to explain evil (apple? snake?) haha give me a break. we do bad things from our tendancy of survival of the fittest.

5. Why the hell did he put a snake in the garden of eden!?! What a prat. bet he's kicking himself now

6. Why is there no mention of dinosaurs in the bible? even though they were around for billions of years? maybe because the bible was written before anyone knew about dinosaurs? mmmm

7. why did god wait billions and billions of years to put humans on the earth?! haha!

8. Why can't religious people explain evolution? even though it's rediculously obvious it exists

9. All atheists i'v met are much more easy going and happy than religious people. we know we will dye very soon. we are insignificant and irrelivent essentially. may aswell enjoy it yeh

I could go on but its quite boring explainting things which are so obvious

Also, whoever made this, the burden of truth isnt on atheists, its on you lot. you can't prove something that does not exist! if you told me that king kong roaming about london, i would not believe it until someone proved to me it was true. You give me rock solid evidence that god is real and i'd listen. I somehow think that evidence will be hard to find

Answer 4

I am an atheist, and there are only two things that would change my mind:
(1) Indisputable evidence of a true, supernatural miracle
(2) Direct, personal revelation from a deity (ie, a deity revealing itself directly to me)

I have never seen any such miracles or revelations, although I have tried to be open-minded and receptive toward the possibility. Because of this lack of evidence, I continue to believe that the existence of God is not necessary to explain the world.

Answer 5

Physical evidence that can be measured, examined and repeated that could only point to the existence of a deity. That is the same level I have for most things. Basically it would need to pass peer review so that it could be published in a scientific journal, again just like all the scientific theories.

I haven't the slightest idea what that would be. You guys have made it such a moving target to prevent science from disproving it, that it has become pretty hard to say what type of evidence that there could be. It is your hypothesis, and that leaves it to you to test it. But I am sure that a deity could come up with a few ways to do it.

Answer 6

Does God truly Exist? Does God Exist? some Scientists answer PHYSICS professor Ulrich J. Becker, of the Massachusetts Institute of technologies, reported even as commenting on the existence of God: "How am i able to exist and not using a author? i'm no longer attentive to any compelling answer ever given." Did this contradict his medical perspectives? The professor's concept-frightening answer became, "in case you stumbled on how one wheel contained in the 'clock' turns—you are able to speculate how something flow, yet you're literally not entitled to call this medical and bigger positive go away on my own the question of who wound up the spring." opposite to the opinion of a few, many respected adult males of technology do no longer rule out the concept of there being a God—a good Mastermind in the back of the creation of the universe and guy. evaluate 2 more suitable examples in this aspect. even as arithmetic professor John E. Fornaess, of Princeton college, became requested for his ideas on the existence of God, he replied: "i have self belief that there is a God and that God brings structure to the universe on all degrees from consumer-friendly debris to residing beings to superclusters of galaxies." Physics professor Henry Margenau, of Yale college, stated that he became confident that the guidelines of nature were created by technique of God, including: "God created the universe out of no longer something in an act which also added time into existence." He then stated that contained in the e book The secret of existence's starting place, 3 scientists clarify that a author is a conceivable reason in the back of existence's starting place. helping this view, astronomer Fred Hoyle has reported that believing the first cellular originated by threat is like believing that a tornado ripping through a junkyard finished of Boeing 747 plane aspects dismembered and in disarray could produce a 747.

Answer 7

Great question... I suppose I would consider any evidence that I could not explain through natural mechanisms.

That may or may not include personal revelation (since they are often easily explained through psychological phenomena).

A suspension of physical laws would be good evidence (provided there was not a more probably explanation).

Then there is the kind of mathematical proof that Carl Sagan explained in his book "Contact." That would be acceptable.

Answer 8

Any evidence that offers no alternative explanation. If I met up with someone claiming to be God, I would demand an explanation of the ultimate theory of everything, showing how it prescribes the masses of the known fundamental particles. Einstein spent the last years of his life looking for such a theory, and never found one. Neither has anyone else; the problem is fiendishly difficult.

Answer 9

A great booming voice from the sky with a visual stating "people of earth, I am your god" oh but wait - any old alien being with advanced technology has the ability to do that - oh wait - several have though they went away completely about 6 thousand years ago and haven't given a rat's patootie for the planet since!

Answer 10

Proof of a supernatural being, a supernatural being that created this world or a supernatural being that loves us all are different issues. It is not that simple. I already know that there is no loving god. I don't see any reason to believe that there is a god like being that created. If there is some supernatural higher power I don't really care except from a scientific point of view.
It is not something that I worry or care about.

Answer 11

First, you'd have to explain to me what this "god" is. How do you define it? How will I know it's been proven until I know what we're trying to prove?

"Creator" doesn't tell me what God IS, it only tells me what he does. He "creates". Fine, fine, but so do I. I've created life. That life is taking a nap in his crib right now. If you tell me he created all life, that stirs up more questions than answers. In fact, it's not even an answer at all... it's just speculation. It's just an assumption.

So... "creator" isn't good enough as a definition. What is god that he can create as he supposedly does?