What, if anything, would constitute proof?

axer

So what would it take?

Seeing some sort of vision or anything in that line would not do it for me since I would just assume that I have some sort of mental condition or tumor. I don't think I actually know what proof would satisfy me into believing there is a god.

I suppose if there was some logical explanation as to how the god came into existence etc and how the world etc was created then that would be a start.

How about you?

sink

axer wrote: »

So what would it take?

Seeing some sort of vision or anything in that line would not do it for me since I would just assume that I have some sort of mental condition or tumor. I don't think I actually know what proof would satisfy me into believing there is a god.

I suppose if there was some logical explanation as to how the god came into existence etc and how the world etc was created then that would be a start.

How about you?

If god came down to earth went on cnn/sky news and parted the Atlantic ocean which was verified scientifically. Even then I would still be a sceptic as a more probable reason would be that he's a time traveller from the future or from an advanced race of aliens.

Thinking about it the only thing that would convince me 100% without a doubt would be if god could scientifically demonstrate how he created the universe.

ChocolateSauce

Nothing would ever 100% convince me, except if god unilaterally altered my mental state to accept him.

Otherwise, if a seemingly divine being came to me, in the presence of others (particularly other atheists) and tried to prove he was god, and the others agreed he was, this would make me inclined to become agnostic, heavily leaning towards theism.

He would need extaordinary evidence to convince me though. Maybe if he raised the dead or blew up the moon...but then again, he could just be a hyper-advanced time-travelling alien.

The Mad Hatter

sink wrote: »

If god came down to earth went on cnn/sky news and parted the Atlantic ocean which was verified scientifically.

I wouldn't believe it until it appeared on BBC.

AtomicHorror

If someone publishes a Nature paper that proves His existence, I'll certainly give the paper a sceptical read through.

gramlab

axer wrote: »

So what would it take?QUOTE]

As much as I dont believe in an almighty, I also dont want there to be one. If all the c*"p that goes on in the world is planned, overseen and ignored by a divine being, then he is one being I would never wish to meet.

Zillah

I'd go for the whole Atlantic parting thing. But like others have said, super powered aliens is still a more rational explanation. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, so if anyone anywhere has enough technology they could well be completely indistinguishable from God.

I suppose if He created another universe for our analysis that would suffice.

Or if he did any of those things that require infinite power. Like creating a paradox.

Dades

If something happened to make Zillah believe, I'd think about it.

robindch

Personally, I'd like to see a god, say, stop a planecrcash in midflight or warn of an upcoming earthquake or tsunami, rather than, say, suspending some of this free-will stuff in order to maneuver neighbors into meeting on opposite sides of a Texas petrol pump.

The first one seems like a useful god to have around. The second one falls rather short of that.

aidan24326

It would be impossible to ever be absolutely certain that what we were witnessing was 'god', rather than just some incredibly advanced alien. I'm defining 'god' as a being or entity that created the universe, exists outside of time and is not subject to the laws of physics in the normal way. An alien lifeform which exists within this universe may be highly advanced and capable of feats we can't imagine but would still not be 'god' in the sense of how I've defined it.

A sufficiently advanced alien being or beings would in effect be 'god' to us anyway, that's the way it's always been when advanced meets primitive. A super-advanced alien could pass himself off as god and we wouldn't be able to tell. Maybe if the god being could demonstrate how he engineered the universe and set it's key constants, and this was verified as scientifically coherent by the best theoretical physicists on the planet.

This god, though a fascinating entity would still not warrant our worship though, and certainly wouldn't demand it either. Respect yes, worship no.

In saying all this, a god entity capable of engineering a universe might well be utterly incomprehensible to us anyway, in the same way that advanced mathematics is incomprehensible to a dog.

Edit: just realised robin,zillah etc made similar points anyway

gramlab wrote:

As much as I dont believe in an almighty, I also dont want there to be one. If all the c*"p that goes on in the world is planned, overseen and ignored by a divine being, then he is one being I would never wish to meet.

Agreed. Even if a god did exist he can't be all-powerful and benevolent, though the religiosos will jump through every hoop in existence to get around that thorny bush.

Zillah

Oh, changing universal constants would be pretty convincing. Making light speed infinite or assembling blackholes to spell out YAHWEH would be hard to refute too.

sdep

Zillah wrote: »

Oh, changing universal constants would be pretty convincing.

How about changing pi to 3?

Dave!

If He were to come down from heaven, create a rock that's too heavy for even He to lift, and then proceed to lift it. Then explain how He did it.

I would then convert to... ahh sh*t...

Well I'd be a theist anyway!

AtomicHorror

robindch wrote: »

Personally, I'd like to see a god, say, stop a planecrcash in midflight or warn of an upcoming earthquake or tsunami, rather than, say, suspending some of this free-will stuff in order to maneuver neighbors into meeting on opposite sides of a Texas petrol pump.

I'm pretty sure that's Superman, not God.

robindch

AtomicHorror wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that's Superman, not God.

Well, baby steps?

failsafe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rqUsC2KsiI

nozzferrahhtoo

I’ve been asked this one a lot by theists. My answer is always the same.

I would not declare what the evidence needs to be in advance. To do so would be to create a bias and reduce open mindedness.

I consider ANY and ALL evidence put before me. So far none has been presented. At all. Ever. Nada. Zilch. Zip. Feck all. None....

Damn I need a thesaurus.....

Zombrex

A testable model of God would be handy, one that it is possible to test each other claims God is supposed to have

Plus spelling out his name in black holes would be good (thanks Zillah)

I certianly wouldn't consider most of the nonsense the theists go on about as proof of anything, such as I followed the Bible, my life improved, it must be real or any such clap trap.

AtomicHorror

Wicknight wrote: »

A testable model of God would be handy, one that it is possible to test each other claims God is supposed to have

Plus spelling out his name in black holes would be good (thanks Zillah)

I certianly wouldn't consider most of the nonsense the theists go on about as proof of anything, such as I followed the Bible, my life improved, it must be real or any such clap trap.

It's all anecdotal. What we need is a large scale trial. 10,000 volunteers, a strict regimen of mass, prayer and bible reading and some means to measure the outcome. Subjective happiness, perhaps personality testing... we could look for all sorts of fun stuff. Would be interesting to see how many of them discard religion during the study time frame. :pac:

Zombrex

AtomicHorror wrote: »

It's all anecdotal. What we need is a large scale trial. 10,000 volunteers, a strict regimen of mass, prayer and bible reading and some means to measure the outcome. Subjective happiness, perhaps personality testing... we could look for all sorts of fun stuff. Would be interesting to see how many of them discard religion during the study time frame. :pac:

It was interesting to see what PDN said when asked what would convince him his religion is wrong. Most of the stuff he said I would consider already to be true, yet he is still a Christian. It is the advantage of anecdotal "evidence", it really means what you want it to me.

aidan24326

Wicknight wrote: »

It was interesting to see what PDN said when asked what would convince him his religion is wrong. Most of the stuff he said I would consider already to be true, yet he is still a Christian. It is the advantage of anecdotal "evidence", it really means what you want it to me.

When much of what you believe is untestable it makes your position a very cosy one, and the smugness is often evident. The things that are somewhat testable, such as the efficacy of prayer, invariably fail the tests but of course these results are dismissed as irrelevant. You can't test god, he moves in mysterious ways you see. It really is remarkable to see someone like PDN, who comes across as an otherwise intelligent guy, often completely abandon all sense of logic and rationality in defence of his faith. As for JC over in the creationism thread, his attempts at talking his away out of a corner are by now legendary. I guess you can believe anything you want if you just make it up as you go.

--amadeus--

As an all powerful god all he has to do is change my mind to make me believe in him, should be pretty easy for someone who can knock together a universe in a wek

anti-venom

--amadeus-- wrote: »

As an all powerful god all he has to do is change my mind to make me believe in him, should be pretty easy for someone who can knock together a universe in a wek

How could you be sure it was god that changed your mind and not some sudden onset of mental illness?

AtomicHorror

aidan24326 wrote: »

When much of what you believe is untestable it makes your position a very cosy one, and the smugness is often evident. The things that are somewhat testable, such as the efficacy of prayer, invariably fail the tests but of course these results are dismissed as irrelevant. You can't test god, he moves in mysterious ways you see. It really is remarkable to see someone like PDN, who comes across as an otherwise intelligent guy, often completely abandon all sense of logic and rationality in defence of his faith. As for JC over in the creationism thread, his attempts at talking his away out of a corner are by now legendary. I guess you can believe anything you want if you just make it up as you go.

J C is either actually utterly committed to a set of self contradictory and unsupportable beliefs or is one of the most dedicated trolls I've ever encountered. It's really hard to tell.

Zillah

AtomicHorror wrote: »

or is one of the most dedicated trolls I've ever encountered.

It would be the most incredible ultra-troll the internet has ever seen. Regretably its more likely that he is actually as insane as it seems.

limerick_woody

A nice easy one for the all-powerful one, 'God Did This' could be encoded into every animals DNA - or, seeing as we Humans are the sole-reason for the creation of the entire universe, only our-own DNA need be encoded, and not some bible-code bull**** either. As a bonus for the masses of bible-literalists, the difference between our DNA and all other life would be absolute proof that we couldn't have evolved from a common ancestor.

I doubt that anything could convince me of the existence of anything remotely resembling the bible nut-job. To paraphrase Woody Allen, just what i would say to such a being would depend on the quality of the apology offered.

Mal-Adjusted

chances are nothing will constitite proof. if a person wants to believe, he'll believe, nomatter what evidence to the contrary is brought forward. if he, or she, i guess...doesn't want to believe, then they wont, even if an angel apeared and gave him a bitch-slap. there is some other explanation. peoples minds are already set.

aidan24326

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

chances are nothing will constitite proof. if a person wants to believe, he'll believe, nomatter what evidence to the contrary is brought forward. if he, or she, i guess...doesn't want to believe, then they wont, even if an angel apeared and gave him a bitch-slap. there is some other explanation. peoples minds are already set.

Not strictly true. You'll find that most of us in the atheist/non-believer camp would be more than willing to reconsider our position if credible evidence came to light. But to make me seriously rconsider that I might be wrong that evidence is gonna have to be something truly amazing, and it's very difficult to know what a god could do that would count as definitive proof he was indeed the creator. Some of what religious believers claim as evidence of god's existence (their own god, of course) is so far removed from what would normally be classed as evidence, in the proper sense, that it only demonstrates either a complete misunderstanding of the word, or more likely a deliberate shifting* of the goalposts.

*by a long long way!

pH

aidan24326 wrote: »

But to make me seriously rconsider that I might be wrong that evidence is gonna have to be something truly amazing, and it's very difficult to know what a god could do that would count as definitive proof he was indeed the creator.

For me it would be the the opposite of that, God's existence would be self evident in the utter mundaneness of his interactions with us here on earth.

A great example of this is found in Philip K Dicks' Eye in the Sky in which (as part of a kind of reality dysfunction) characters live in a world governed by God as described in the Old Testament.

So for example, people who blaspheme would be struck with lightning or be afflicted with boils. These wouldn't be amazing events they'd be absolutely mundane - "I see Johnny has a bad case of boils again - serves the blasphemer right".

We wouldn't need hospitals because prayer and faith would sort out all out health issues and so on. God's existence (and by this I mean the one claimed by Christians, Muslims, Jews etc), if he did the sort of things claimed for him would indisputable*.


* And before the intelligentsia here muck in, I'm not really interested if anyone can invent a God that can't be discounted by observing reality, knock yourself out, invent all the Gods you want to. Just remember you just made them up and I have no real interest in your imaginings.

Weidii

If atheiests -and only athiests - were regularly struck by lightning.

studiorat

Easy, head off into the desert for a month or so and live in a cave on your own. Starve your self to deaths door and until you start hallucinating like a complete nut job. Then potter home and tell all and sundry about the various apparitions and visitations you had out there.

Historical evidence would suggest this is enough to convince anybody.

Mal-Adjusted

??

muinteoir1

If you think about it God shows us he exists everyday, but perhaps in not such a dramatic way.

pH

muinteoir1 wrote: »

If you think about it

I have.

God shows us he exists everyday,

He doesn't.

but perhaps in not such a dramatic way.

At all.

Mal-Adjusted

Come on, u don't have to ridicule someone for having faith, i don't... you'll just end up being a Dawkins clone

Zillah

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Come on, u don't have to ridicule someone for having faith, i don't... you'll just end up being a Dawkins clone

There's all sorts of things we don't have to do, like eating icecream, watching movies, denigrating faith, riding rollercoasters etc.

You realise Dawkins wasn't actually the first person in the world to be critical of faith, right?

Mal-Adjusted

Zillah wrote: »

There's all sorts of things we don't have to do, like eating icecream, watching movies, denigrating faith, riding rollercoasters etc.

You realise Dawkins wasn't actually the first person in the world to be critical of faith, right?

yip, but he's the most vocal:)

Please tell me you didn't just compare faith to eating ice-cram and watching films!? it's a sensative issue and believers should be treated with respect. i've never been atacked for not having faith. it's just common decency

Zillah

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Please tell me you didn't just compare faith to eating ice-cram and watching films!?

No, I compared ridiculing faith to eating icecream and watching films.

it's a sensative issue and believers should be treated with respect.

I'll always treat people with a certain level of respect simply for them being people. Their beliefs, on the other hand, are ridiculous and I don't respect them in the slightest.

Mal-Adjusted

Zillah wrote: »

No, I compared ridiculing faith to eating icecream and watching films.



I'll always treat people with a certain level of respect simply for them being people. Their beliefs, on the other hand, are ridiculous and I don't respect them in the slightest.

Faith is a part of most people, weather we like it or not. (Personally, i don't mind in the slightest:D) you're looking for degrees of separation where none exist. that's just going to piss people off

aidan24326

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

yip, but he's the most vocal:)

Please tell me you didn't just compare faith to eating ice-cram and watching films!? it's a sensative issue and believers should be treated with respect. i've never been atacked for not having faith. it's just common decency

Believers aren't generally treated with any more or less resepct than anyone else. Their ridiculous beliefs on the other hand, do not deserve the tiniest bit of respect. Would you respect an adult who still believed in Santa? Well there's actually more evidence for Santa's existence (I've seen him) than for the vast majority of the nonsense that your average christian or muslim believes in.

muinteoir1 wrote: »

If you think about it God shows us he exists everyday, but perhaps in not such a dramatic way.

I hope you're not really a muinteoir, I'd rather you weren't teaching kids that sort of gibberish.

Zillah

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Faith is a part of most people, weather we like it or not.

Doesn't mean I have to respect it.

(Personally, i don't mind in the slightest:D)

Wait until the day someone is trying to deny you your human rights or treating you as a second class citizen because their God demands it. I think your opinion might change.

you're looking for degrees of separation where none exist.

I don't know what you're referring to.

that's just going to piss people off

I think its very important for members of a democracy to be able to piss each other off. In fact, I encourage it. Far preferable to a conspiracy of silence where we avoid saying important things out of a fear of rocking the boat. Such as 1950s Ireland. Or Stalin Russia. Or Stasi Germany.

Mal-Adjusted

Zillah wrote: »

Doesn't mean I have to respect it.

Wait until the day someone is trying to deny you your human rights or treating you as a second class citizen because their God demands it. I think your opinion might change..

That does'nt happen in the modern world. besides, the vast majority of human rights violations have nothing to do with religion

Zillah wrote: »

I don't know what you're referring to.

If i were to mercilessly rip on how bad your clothes are and how **** the music you listen to is and how stupid your parents are its okay...because i'm not ridiculing You. do you see how this goes?

Zillah wrote: »

I think its very important for members of a democracy to be able to piss each other off. In fact, I encourage it. Far preferable to a conspiracy of silence where we avoid saying important things out of a fear of rocking the boat. Such as 1950s Ireland. Or Stalin Russia. Or Stasi Germany.

So basically your an anarchist?

Dades

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

If i were to mercilessly rip on how bad your clothes are and how **** the music you listen to is and how stupid your parents are its okay...because i'm not ridiculing You. do you see how this goes?

Sorry, who was mercilessly ripping on who?

Anyhow, it can't be helped if posters here find certain religious views to be ridiculous. Would you have them stay quiet?

Have you never had a little joke at the expense of Scientologists or Raelians?

Zillah

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

That does'nt happen in the modern world.

You realise that the long history of anti-homosexual laws and beliefs are a direct legacy of the Christian domination of the Western World? Thanks to the dicates of the Christian faith gay people are still not allowed to get married in many countries, and even those that have relented still relegate it to a second class "civil union".

And thats just the relative paradise of the Western World. In some Islamic nations you can be executed for adultery and homosexuality purely because the Koran says so. Leaving the Islamic faith is also a crime. And then there's the Islamic treatment of women.

We could sit here all day listing the CURRENT horrible things that religion causes in the world. You're far too naive, the days of the Crusades and Inquisiton might be gone, but religion still has a powerful, and often horrible effect on society.

besides, the vast majority of human rights violations have nothing to do with religion

The vast majority of deaths in the world aren't caused by serial murder/rapists but that doesn't mean we should excuse them.

If i were to mercilessly rip on how bad your clothes are and how **** the music you listen to is and how stupid your parents are its okay...because i'm not ridiculing You. do you see how this goes?

You're perfectly entitled to criticise my clothes/music or whatever else you feel like. However, you'll not only come across as a jerk, but also as irrational and quite petty. Those things don't really affect you, but sure, if my taste in music really is a concern to you then please, feel free to write an essay online, ring up radio talk shows etc.

So basically your an anarchist?

I wish I could convey by text the kind of sigh I just made. Its the sort of sigh that carries with it crushing, tired disappointment.

Mal-Adjusted

Dades wrote: »

Sorry, who was mercilessly ripping on who?

if you don't understand the context, i suggest you read through the above posts.

Anyhow, it can't be helped if posters here find certain religious views to be ridiculous. Would you have them stay quiet?

Have you never had a little joke at the expense of Scientologists or Raelians?[/quote]

Of course i have (about Scientologists anyway, never heard if the other one, i'm happy o say) and christians, Muslims, Mormans...just about any faith. and that's what they were...little.

I simply think that these people are perfectly entitled to have faith and should'nt be accosted by people clearly looking to antagonise other people.

Dades

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

I simply think that these people are perfectly entitled to have faith and should'nt be accosted by people clearly looking to antagonise other people.

Are you talking about in this thread, or the Real World™?

Because I don't see anyone in this thread being accosted, and I've no reason to believe users from here go out in public accosting people. Forgive me, I'm just trying to clear up the context of your comments.

Mal-Adjusted

Dades wrote: »

Are you talking about in this thread, or the Real World™?

Because I don't see anyone in this thread being accosted, and I've no reason to believe users from here go out in public accosting people. Forgive me, I'm just trying to clear up the context of your comments.

Both really, i've seen this before. comments here and on other threads (IMDb in particular) are clearly meand to be taken offence at.

Zillah

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Both really, i've seen this before. comments here and on other threads (IMDb in particular) are clearly meand to be taken offence at.

Do you think one should never say anything that could be offensive?

Dades

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Both really, i've seen this before. comments here and on other threads (IMDb in particular) are clearly meand to be taken offence at.

This is an atheist/agnostic forum. It would curious if people were to feel they couldn't express their feelings on theological beliefs. Just like in the Christianity forum we've regularly been told we're hell bound, for example. The point is if you're solid in your beliefs what others say shouldn't matter.

Mal-Adjusted

my argument isn't on beliefe itself, but a general attack on people decause of their beliefes, which i only really find from Atheists (sp.) I stated before, that Christians iv'e met have never had any problem with my lack of faith...so why do other Atheists have such a problem with christians?

And in response to your question, i think it is possible for two sides to have a sensible, mature discussion witouth one just trying to blast the other out of it...though iv'e yet to see it:P

Mal-Adjusted

Zillah wrote: »

Do you think one should never say anything that could be offensive?

not when one is being offensive just for the hell of it, purley to piss off the other crowd. that's not an argument, it's childish and arrogant