Is the atheist threshold for evidence of God too high?

[NeedImprovement]

Honestly, the only way any atheist I know could ever be convinced that there IS a God; would be for God to materialize out of thin air right in front of him or her, and announce that He is God. And probably perform a miracle or three.

One potential problem with that is the (what shall we call him/her (?) - the recently converted* atheist emeritus*) might have to struggle with getting their free will back and in working order afterwards.Exercising free will after an experience like that, for one who didn’t want to believe, can be difficult if the person perceives God as imposing His presence.They might be significantly apprehensive in attempting anything that could go against the grain . I think there is a good reason our Blessed Lord remains hidden in the Holy Eucharist.

What I can’t seem to understand is that atheists commonly acknowledge the past existence of historical figures such as Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Genghis Kahn, even Moses.

So it’s peculiar that Jesus is commonly not included in this group. That kind of outlook suggests the presence of a marked prejudice - hardly something that could be hammered into the “objective” category. . . Kind of a “Don’t go into that 'hood”. mentality.

(* speaking of hammering: @ rfournier : Your siggy is killing me [LOL] )

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I take a some what ignostic stance on this. I’ve come across many incompatible god-concepts. It’s almost as though “god” (or God) is an umbrella term for a wide range of concepts and abstractions (that’s why I tend to use the name “Yahweh” here since that to some degree restricts the range of god-concepts to something slightly more specific, though there’s still much variation in Yahweh-concepts). So the statement “God exists” has very little meaning to me by itself. It’s used to talk about concepts of entities that are personal, impersonal, invasive, non-interactive, changing, unchanging, or having a number of other attributes. Before talking about whether or not a specific entity exists it would first be necessary to know how to identify what is being asked about. For now I only use the word as a referent to some one else’s beliefs.

As for the threshold of evidence, I’ve not got one defined. I went through the exercise of trying to define one during the period in which I still considered myself a Christian. But I’ve never confidently or speculatively identified any non-physical or spiritual phenomenon, nor have I had any experiences that I could recognize as an interaction with Yahweh or any other deity. So as I build my mental representation of the world around me non-physical entities are not present and thus far this model has been useful in interacting with the world. That’s not to be confused with a declaration that no such entity exists. There may exists an experience or collection of information that would convince me to include some specific god-concept in my mental model of the world. But I don’t know what it is. Trying to guess what would be convincing to me may be putting the cart ahead of the horse since, as I mentioned before, there’s a wide range of conceptual entities that have bee proposed to me that fall under the umbrella terms {g/G}od.

Honestly, the only way any atheist I know could ever be convinced that there IS a God; would be for God to materialize out of thin air right in front of him or her, and announce that He is God. And probably perform a miracle or three.

Having what could be recognized as an experience with a deity may be convincing to some. But in this scenario I could also see one asking the entity further questions in trying to see if it is the same entity that inspired the description(s) that one had heard. For example, if some one grew up with the Lord Brahma concept being the most frequent referent of the term “God” would an entity appearing and calling itself "God convince the person that the Brahma concept is correct? An interaction that goes deeper then hearing that single declaration may help out here.

The parallel is that you have faith in the pilot’s ability to fly you safely to your destination, with hardly a whit of evidence, yet have no faith in the possibility of God’s existence, despite quite a bit of evidence.

I’ve thought about this scenario before. I’m not sure that some one placing themselves on a plane is an expression of faith. It can be, but I don’t think it is always so.

You only need to walk onto the plane and take a seat even though this may be contrary to your confidence in getting to your destination safely. It’s possible for a person to place themselves on a plan even in the presence of strong feelings that it won’t make it. I’ve got two people that I’m putting on a transatlantic flight next week. Both of them are afraid of planes and heights (among other fears, such as travelling outside of their home country and being in a place where they don’t know the language). One of them has already demonstrated this to me after a slight loss of bladder control and frantic crying during a acrophobic reaction on a Ferris wheel. The belief that the plan will make it safely isn’t required, though it does make placing one’s self on a plane easier.

If they have enough positive experiences they may become desensitized to their fears. I’m not sure whether or not you would consider emotional desensitization as a form of “faith” though. I’ve got another friend (that’s not going on this trip) that has a fear of flying because she’s been on a plane that had a mechanical failure before landing and she had the experience of landing with no wheels. Her anxiety is especially high when ever the plane is landing. She’s only had that one bad experience with a plane. She’s also got a fear of suspension bridges since a bridged local to where she had lived collapsed in 1980. Yet she is still able to drive over large bridges despite her anxiety.

Any thoughts on this?

Even after 10 demonstrations of divine power, Pharoah still chose the hard heart.

My understanding of the story is that Yahweh was responsible for Pharoah having a “hard heart.”

Exo 9:12"But the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart and he would not listen to Moses and Aaron, just as the LORD had said to Moses."

 

[ThinkingSapien]

For some atheists there will never be enough evidence. They just don’t want to be convinced. Recently I heard an apologist (can’t remember which one) giving a talk on a youtube video and he mentioned his favourite question to atheists. If, after a discussion the atheist is still unconvinced, the apologist asks “if Christianity were true would you become a Christian?” A surprising number answer with a resounding “NO”.

I’m curious as to what it means to the people in question to “Be Christian.” People have had varied experiences with people that carry the label “Christian” and various interpretations of the bible that are labeled as “Christian.” There are some rather loving and kind people that have called themselves Christians. There’s also some people that in general have not been well liked that call themselves Christian. Which Christians were the people that were questioned saying that they would not be?

 

[seagal]

I wonder how many christians, if asked whether they would adopt atheism if it were true, would respond similarly.

Would you?

 

[zro_x]

Would you?

to be technical, I don’t know what I’d do. No one does, until they’re in that situation. It is difficult to predict you’ll do when your whole worldview comes crashing down. I know what I hope I’d be able to do: be able to reject theism and follow reason.

and you?

This gives me a great idea for a poll…

 

[seagal]

I’m curious as to what it means to the people in question to “Be Christian.” People have had varied experiences with people that carry the label “Christian” and various interpretations of the bible that are labeled as “Christian.” There are some rather loving and kind people that have called themselves Christians. There’s also some people that in general have not been well liked that call themselves Christian. Which Christians were the people that were questioned saying that they would not be?

There’s only one definition of a Christian: a person who believes Jesus is the Christ and follows his teachings. Now, there are many different ways of doing that, and that is what causes such division among Christians. In any case, I may have mispoken. I think he asked the atheist if God were real would he become a theist. (What can I say, my memory isn’t what it was )

 

[Linusthe2nd]

When it comes to the existence of a god, however, you’re asking me whether this magical being that can not be demonstrated to exist and does not manifest itself in the physical world exists. With such a claim, I don’t even know whether the being in question exists.

You know what is " magical " to me? That the universe could exist all on its own without having a cause for its existence. That puts the shoe on the other foot.

But the existence or non existence of God is a pretty important question don’t you think? I think, if I were you, I would not dismiss the question lightly. I certainly wouldn’t want to go to my grave disbelieving in his existence unless I knew absolutely he did not existence - and I wouldn’t base that conclusion on the biased opinion of some of these wild eyed physists roaming the world today.

Have you read any of ST. Thomas Aquinas ? Try it out, both Summas are online for reading. Have you read the Scriptures? I’m sure you will find much there to complain about but you will find much more to admire, especially the life of Christ. Could anyone have dreamed all that up? I really doubt it.

Have you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church ? Its online too. Linus

 

[Zachary]

ThinkingSapien you’re doing it backwards. You have to believe there is a God before you can know the real one. Otherwise it’s like you’re trying to find your way through a forest with a 1000 maps you cannot understand.

 

[down_under]

ThinkingSapien you’re doing it backwards. You have to believe there is a God before you can know the real one. Otherwise it’s like you’re trying to find your way through a forest with a 1000 maps you cannot understand.

which brings us right back to post 11 which went something like this

This is maddening to me. Mostly because as obscure as it is to atheist girl, Gods existence is “brick in the faced” obvious to me. (incidentally I have been hit in the face with a brick. it hurt)
This is a philosophy forum lets talk philosophy

-You do not exist-
you suffer the problem of contingency. Your life is contingent on a great many things. like the act that your mother and father performed a few years back that gave you life. you do NOT exist in and of your self. It is brick in the face obvious that there needs to (philosophically) be a being that does exist and is not contingent. That simply is in and of himself. We call this being God.

-from science primordial molecule-
you object to the head of NASA’s claim that he used all the tools of science to climb the highest peak of science and at the top coming face to face with the theologies who have been there for centuries. NASA found a closed door. that all of there skill at science cannot open and will never be able to open no matter how much we learn. Because they found the moment were all matter came into existence, in one moment of light and energy, out of nothing. Either the last 400 years of science is a big coincidence or the law of causality which science uses applies here. Anything that has a beginning has a cause. We call that cause that existed before everything existed (the first cause, the unmoved mover) God.

and welcome to the world of agnosticism. Because these arguments are irrefutable. you wanted physical evidence, there it is enjoy. (No i don’t believe anyone was just converted. but the argument is still irrefutable. you can deny it but that does not stop it from being logical and true.)

 

[IBombAtomically]

If I may ask, politely, to my atheist friends on here, what evidence would be convincing to you? I had a friend once who said he would believe in God if we magnified every grain of sand and written on each one was “God Exists.” I thought that was very poetic.

Anyway, I think it’s important to be aware of our own Confirmation Bias (you know, the universal tendency to automatically dismiss anything that conflicts with our beliefs without further evaluation, and to easily accept anything that confirms what we already believe… I believe that’s the gist of it). If you already don’t believe in God, anything at affirms His existence will be met with automatic doubt rather than honest investigation.

For me, the existence of neurological centers that specially respond to religious experience, the universality of deism throughout civilization, and the thousands of formally-studied Near Death Experiences which are strikingly similar despite differences in the people’s age, culture, and previous knowledge or expectations about the afterlife, are some reasons why I believe A God exists. I’m a Christian because of any other religion, it probably has the most proof in Jesus himself, the miracles like Our Lady of Guadalupe and some involving the Eucharist, and that as I child, while praying the Rosary with my mother, we both simultaneously were hit with the strong scent of roses and an almost ethereal feeling of peace. Then the scent disappeared quickly, and my mom was smelling everything in the room to figure out where it had come from, and please believe me when I tell you there was no possible source. At the time, I had no idea that roses were a sign of the Virgin Mary. Finally, I’m a Catholic because if you’re gonna follow Christ, you might as well stick with the Church he founded, because everything else it sort of further permutations, and if Catholicism is wrong, then everything else must be REALLY wrong. Just a few thoughts. What do you think?