To the skeptics: what evidence would convince you?

[Black_Angel_1]

There is no evidence you can give to an an Atheist or Agnostic to convince them.

Here is a simple fact that most Christians either deny, or don’t realize:

Atheists are aware of Christian Beliefs better then Christians themselves. For example: The Bible HAS been edited throughout the years, most Christians deny this.

In FACT, most Atheists were once of a theistic religion, most of them were once Christian but realized it didn’t make sense so they went Atheist.

Agnostics have the correct idea. Their view is “There isn’t enough evidence to prove God exists or doesn’t exist.”

Atheists aren’t deaf and blind. Do you really think that they ignore the bible verses you recite to them? Or the “miracles” of God? No. They listen. But those things you mention are irrational thoughts.

Evidence of a God to present to an Atheist is like the human race becoming invincible. Its not real. The EVIDENCE of God is not real. All evidence of the events of the bible do not exist, Nor Jesus’ miracles.

That is why there is BELIEF, and FAITH.

If there was evidence, then belief and faith would be meaningless.

I’ve heard many Atheists say they went Atheist from Christianity. Some of them were even Priests. They always have perfectly logical understandable reasons then Christians ever give them to believe in God.

Point is: There is no evidence or truth that God exists, nor is there evidence or truth that God doesn’t exist. However, the reason why Atheists feel so strongly that God doesn’t exist is not because of the ignorance you people claim.

But rather because of the simple fact, that the world and its current events make sense if God was imaginary. When they put it as God did exist. The world makes no sense whatsoever. This is a fact. This is why they feel so strongly.

To convert an atheist who had reason to become one is to erase their capability to think rationally and completely forget everything they ever learned about the world.

Christians will always fail at this.

Point is again: No evidence to prove God does or doesn’t exist, so stop pushing your beliefs on others.

 

[flyingfish]

What would convince the atheists and agnostics that God exists? Is there any evidence that would convince people that a God exists Furthermore, for the converts what evidence convinced you that a general God exists (or even your specific deity such as the triune Christian God for most people here.) I am not sure anyone who was born Catholic was convinced by any evidence because most of their “proofs” seem to be developed post hoc to justify their religion after they acquire it.

Things that would convince me:

1. Definite miracles (such as stars being rearranged to say “there is a God”), or if things that couldn’t possibly happen did (such as limbs growing back before everyone’s eyes following prayer to a God)
2. If books claimed to be revelation had things that human beings of that time could not possibly know (such as quantum physics)
3. If evidence showed that prayer worked
4. If the relics of some religion (such as holy books) were indestructible, or had a magical glow around them
5. If God made an appearance, took me on a tour of the afterlife

Things that would tip the balance in favor of a deity:

1. A universe that was centered around us, such as earth at the center of the universe, maybe a small universe that only existed about as long as we have. No parasites/diseases praying on humans, hurricanes wiping out our homes. Something that is so old and vast that we’re a blink of an eye for it on a tiny spot doesn’t seem like it was made for us.
2. If we appeared designed (like no obvious flaws such as the appendix, non optimal systems, genetic diseases etc.)

Just some things off the top of my head

 

[tonyrey]

Things that would convince me:

1. Definite miracles (such as stars being rearranged to say “there is a God”), or if things that couldn’t possibly happen did (such as limbs growing back before everyone’s eyes following prayer to a God)
2. If books claimed to be revelation had things that human beings of that time could not possibly know (such as quantum physics)
3. If evidence showed that prayer worked
4. If the relics of some religion (such as holy books) were indestructible, or had a magical glow around them
5. If God made an appearance, took me on a tour of the afterlife

Things that would tip the balance in favor of a deity:

1. A universe that was centered around us, such as earth at the center of the universe, maybe a small universe that only existed about as long as we have. No parasites/diseases praying on humans, hurricanes wiping out our homes. Something that is so old and vast that we’re a blink of an eye for it on a tiny spot doesn’t seem like it was made for us.
2. If we appeared designed (like no obvious flaws such as the appendix, non optimal systems, genetic diseases etc.)

Just some things off the top of my head

These “improvements” are off the top of your head all right! It took you about ten minutes to think of them without really exercising your brain but to implement them would take you longer than eternity! Let’s get down to the nitty-gritty, shall we? Let’s have some information about **the detailed mechanisms **by which you in your infinite wisdom would design the universe to meet all your requirements… It’s easy to spout but to fill the jug is a totally different proposition.

 

[flyingfish]

These “improvemnets” are off the top of your head all right! Let’s have some information about the detailed mechanisms by which you in your infinite wisdom would design the universe to meet all your requirements… It’s easy to spout but to fill the jug is a totally

I’m not saying they’re improvements, I’m saying that a universe with humanity at its center would make me think we’re special, and taken together with us appearing designed would make me think there might be a theistic god A universe that existed for 13500000000 years and us existing for 100000 years (0.0007 % of the universe’s lifetime), that has 10000000000000000000000 stars (and this is just ordinary matter which makes up something like 5% of the universe, the rest of it is dark matter and dark energy which we don’t even understand at the time) screams at me that it’s not a place made for us.

Re your edit: I don’t see why you need detailed mechanisms. I was just listing things that would convince me there is a God, which is what the OP asked.

Limbs growing back before my eyes after a prayer, general evidence that prayer works, stars being rearranged before my eyes to say “God exists”, God appearing in front of me to talk to me, indestructible holy books containing advanced physics and mathematics from a time when human beings did not have this knowledge, a design of the human being without failures or a history of gradual build up, a small universe friendly to us and centered around us etc. All these things would make me a believer in a theistic God.

 

[tonyrey]

These “improvements” are off the top of your head all right! Let’s have some information about the detailed mechanisms by which you in your infinite wisdom would design the universe to meet all your requirements…

You **want **the humanity to be at the centre of the universe so that you can believe!!! Is that supposed to be a rational argument?

A universe that existed for 13500000000 years and us existing for 100000 years (0.0007 % of the universe’s lifetime), that has 10000000000000000000000 stars (and this is just ordinary matter which makes up something like 5% of the universe, the rest of it is dark matter and dark energy which we don’t even understand at the time) screams at me that it’s not a place made for us.

If its screams are ringing in your years you’re likely to go crazy! Nietszche did… Your notions of economy are pathetically parochial. You prefer a cosy little universe just made for the select few where you can be one of the big bosses…

Re your edit: I don’t see why you need detailed mechanisms. I was just listing things that would convince me there is a God, which is what the OP asked.

You are assuming that they are feasible within the context of evolution. Try again. Without evidence of feasibility your suggestions are worthless…

Limbs growing back before my eyes after a prayer, general evidence that prayer works, stars being rearranged before my eyes to say “God exists”, God appearing in front of me to talk to me, indestructible holy books containing advanced physics and mathematics from a time when human beings did not have this knowledge, a design of the human being without failures or a history of gradual build up, a small universe friendly to us and centered around us etc. All these things would make me a believer in a theistic God.

You’re living in a fantasy world. “a small universe friendly to us and centered around us” - so that we are the stars of the show! Do you really feel so insignificant?

Do you think it really matters to us whether you believe in God or not? You don’t seem to realise it’s entirely up to you. We’re not here to be compelled to believe in anything. No one is going to ram it down your throat. If you choose not to believe good luck to you! If you think life is meaningless and purposeless too bad! We all get what we deserve anyway…

 

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

What would convince the atheists and agnostics that God exists?

Black Rose,

Actually in a sense I find the question itself rather a dangerous one.

In other realms of discourse it operates in a way it should operate here. Someone postulating a theory should:

1. Put forward the theory.
2. Put forward the evidence for that theory.
3. Explain how 2 supports 1 and why.

It is not for others to specify the evidence for you. Not only is it not for them to do it but as I said I think it is dangerous to do so.

If you pre-suppose what the evidence has to be, you risk missing the actual evidence because it does not fit your preconceived notions of what you expected and you end up passing it by.

That said, as someone who is not convinced by the claims of the religious, I leave myself open to ALL evidence presented to me and I consider each piece of it on its own merits in and of itself. If someone came here telling me a pink car with yellow Pokka dots was evidence for god, I would patiently sit with them and ask them to explain how and why and then consider the claim. It is the last thing I EXPECT to be presented as evidence for god, but that does not mean I should ignore it or move on because it does not fit my preconceptions.

So far I have to say that in near 20 years of asking for it, no one has ever shown me a single shred of a scrap of arguments, evidence, data or reasons to lend even credence, let alone support, to the claim that there is a non-human intelligence responsible for the creation of and subsequent maintenance of our universe. If you feel you have any please feel free to contact me directly to present it. At least then we will have established Deism, before we have to move on to any particular brand of Theism.

What I CAN do however is answer a different question to what you ask. I can talk all day about what I would NOT take as evidence. These include but are not limited to:

1. Anything which requires that you accept the conclusion before the evidence for that conclusion becomes valid.
2. Anything which is not evidence but is actually an attempt to make you want to believe it despite the lack of evidence (Pascals Wager, threats of hell, claims that believers are happier or act nicer etc etc)
3. Things that are excuses for not having evidence such as “I would give you evidence but…… you would not understand it” or other such nonsense such as made in post #2 “I would give evidence but…. It would not be good enough for you anyway”.

In my own experience category 3 is the most common, followed by 2 and followed by 1.

In my own opinion they are also not useful in that order, with 3 being a total useless cop out by people with no arguments but who feel that saying something makes you look smarter than saying nothing at all. 2 being just frankly dishonest, but 1 at least being a valid honest attempt to present something we can at least discuss on level grounds.

I hope this helps on your quest!

 

[flyingfish]

You **want **the humanity to be at the centre of the universe so that you can believe!!! Is that supposed to be a rational argument?

If its screams are ringing in your years you’re likely to go crazy! Nietszche did… Your notions of economy are pathetically parochial. You prefer a cosy little universe just made for the select few where you can be one of the big bosses…

We’re talking about theism here. A large universe is consistent with deism, but theism is supposed to be a God who is interested in human affairs, who makes humans the central point of creation.

Having a small universe with humanity at its center would to me be evidence of theism. I’m not saying I prefer this…

Do you think it really matters to us whether you believe in God or not? You don’t seem to realise it’s entirely up to you. We’re not here to be compelled to believe in anything. No one is going to ram it down your throat. If you choose not to believe good luck to you! If you think life is meaningless and purposeless too bad! We all get what we deserve anyway…

Huh? The OP asks skeptics what evidence would convince them… So I listed things that would convince me…

I don’t think life is meaningless or purposeless

 

[Zoe_Brain]

A quote from my blog:

I’ve written in a previous post about a simple experiment that would show the existence of a non-material form of perception and consciousness. I don’t believe such will be found, but it’s worth a look, just to make absolutely sure. That post also delved into attempts to synthesise an intelligence, a mind, by emulating each of its known components. We already know that we can take very simple electronics, and have the resultant entity replicate the behaviour of a simple creature such as a spiny lobster. To me, that argues against spiny lobsters being terribly intelligent, but others may disagree.

I’ve also written in many previous posts about the quantum weirdness that is currently our only explanation - and our only reason for looking for it - for a split between Mind and Brain. Almost all of psychiatry, a whole branch of medicine, is predicated on such a split existing, or at least, it relies on such a split being a useful model, a facet of the truth, even if the thing as a whole is purest hokum.

It’s no accident though that a profession that was once largely about dream-analysis and racial-memory recovery is now more about balancing neurotransmitters and titrating doses of chemicals. The “God of the Psychiatric Gaps” has lost much of his temple now, and it’s shrinking all the time.

One thing though that has been lost in the shuffle: the disproof of the narrowest definition of Theism. We can’t prove that the Universe wasn’t created. We can prove that if a creator (or Creator) existed, then only Deism is consistent with the facts. That such a Creator certainly can’t be Omniscient - for as an observer, the Creator would cause the collapse of wave-functions that we know remain indeterminate. We can show that any Divine Intervention would require things to be quite different, and outside existing physical laws.

It’s possible to postulate such an Entity, one who can do anything, outside all physical bounds, but such an Entity would be utterly ineffable, and completely outside our understanding in even the smallest respect. If He can do anything whatsoever then there’s no point in saying that anything is cause or anything is effect. The Invisible Pink Unicorn does the lot.

Maybe so. And maybe you who are reading this blog only came into existence a microsecond ago, complete with memories and a whole physical Universe to exist in. I can’t prove you didn’t, and neither can you. All you have to do is to suspend all physical laws, which the Invisible Pink Unicorn has to be able to do in order to intervene in even the smallest way.

To me, a really impressive Deity would be one who sets the ball rolling, then gets out of the way, hoping and expecting that after the requisite eons of cooking, that the recipe will be a success. Perhaps not the first time He’s done it, either.

 

[LilyM]

Come on, a book from 2,000 years ago telling the story of Jesus is not good enough evidence to believe in God.

And books from 2,000 years ago telling historians about Julius Caesar’s wars in Gaul is enough evidence to believe in them, of course.

For 99% of the history of these wars it remains the only evidence available to us.

Books which were written by that same Julius Caesar, no less. But they believe implicitly in every word of 'em all the same, of course. And teach it to all of us as fact.

How about Captain James Cook’s claim to have sailed further south than any previous explorer. He, of course, if memory serves, was the only one on board ship educated enough in navigation to be able to do the calculations and know what latitudes he reached - no-one else could verify his claims.

You believe these and many more things on less evidence than exists for the claims made about Christ (at least there were numerous outside observers who all claimed to have seen Him risen and ascended, for one thing).

 

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

And books from 2,000 years ago telling historians about Julius Caesar’s wars in Gaul is enough evidence to believe in them, of course.

I do not want to derail the thread by specifically getting into the evidence for wars in Gaul and Captain cook, which are a little more than just a book.

Instead I must point out that before you believe the contents of a book you must FIRST, before anything else, put that book through a credence test.

If I read a book about Ceaser in Gaul I first note that this book is about a leader and a war. Both of these things I can verify the existence of BEFORE I proceed to engage with the specific claims of the book and whether or not to believe them. Our world is full of leaders and full of wars. There is nothing in the book about Ceaser therefore that sets off the alarm bells of the initial credence test.

This is NOT true of the bible. Its claims are about a god. No one has shown me any evidence, arguments, data or reasons to lend any credence to the notion that such an entity exists.

Therefore the bible fails the initial credence test BEFORE we get to believing the claims of it at the 2nd level you refer to above.

 

[LilyM]

I do not want to derail the thread by specifically getting into the evidence for wars in Gaul and Captain cook, which are a little more than just a book.

Instead I must point out that before you believe the contents of a book you must FIRST, before anything else, put that book through a credence test.

If I read a book about Ceaser in Gaul I first note that this book is about a leader and a war. Both of these things I can verify the existence of BEFORE I proceed to engage with the specific claims of the book and whether or not to believe them. Our world is full of leaders and full of wars. There is nothing in the book about Ceaser therefore that sets off the alarm bells of the initial credence test.

This is NOT true of the bible. Its claims are about a god. No one has shown me any evidence, arguments, data or reasons to lend any credence to the notion that such an entity exists.

Therefore the bible fails the initial credence test BEFORE we get to believing the claims of it at the 2nd level you refer to above.

Firstly your idea that things should be dismissed which aren’t immediately credible-sounding is bunk. Who, in the Middle Ages, would’ve dreamed of such notions as matter being comprised of cells, or of the atom, or the sub-atomic particle? Or of the earth being round, for that matter? If they’d followed your logic, any talk of such things would’ve been immediately dismissed as being contrary to what logic combined with observable facts of nature suggested, and the truth about them would remain undiscovered as a result.

I never referred to biblical claims about God - I referred to biblical claims about Jesus Christ. Who was a man, a man who did and said things, including (the Bible claims) rising from the dead and ascending to heaven.

These are physical events, happening to a physical man, which could be and were observed by people around Him, people who saw Him very actually dead and then three days later very actually still alive and bearing the wounds of His death.

People who physically saw Him rise into the heavens.

People who appeal for the truth of their accounts to numerous other named observers, observers who were, mostly, still alive at the time they were written, and thus could easily contradict them or deny the truth of their claims if there was in fact any doubt about the fact that they had occurred.

 

[tonyrey]

We’re talking about theism here. A large universe is consistent with deism, but theism is supposed to be a God who is interested in human affairs, who makes humans the central point of creation.

 

[flyingfish]

They seem quite arbitrary to me. Our limited knowledge and intelligence are hopelessly inadequate to determine what kind of universe should exist. There is only one thing that really matters from our point of view - and that is what happens on this planet. What we do know is that **we **are capable of making our home a happy place for all and yet millions of people go to bed hungry every night…

You’re missing the point of what I said. I am talking about the kinds of things that would make me believe in a theistic God. The points about the universe are not even the main points.

The main points would be evidence:

-limbs growing back in front of my eyes after praying to God
-other prayers being answered, and statistical evidence showing that prayer works
-God performing obvious miracles like rearranging stars in the universe to tell us he exists,
or appearing before us to talk to us
-holy texts containing information it would have been impossible for humans to know (such as the Old Testament having the equations of General Relativity)
-holy texts and other relics displaying magical properties such as indestructibility

These, for example, would make me become a believer again.

 

[tonyrey]

You’re missing the point of what I said. I am talking about the kinds of things that would make me believe in a theistic God. The points about the universe are not even the main points.

The main points would be evidence:

-limbs growing back in front of my eyes after praying to God
-other prayers being answered, and statistical evidence showing that prayer works
-God performing obvious miracles like rearranging stars in the universe to tell us he exists,
or appearing before us to talk to us
-holy texts containing information it would have been impossible for humans to know (such as the Old Testament having the equations of General Relativity)
-holy texts and other relics displaying magical properties such as indestructibility

These, for example, would make me become a believer again.

You are the one who missing the point. You argued that the size of the universe is uneconomical and should have been tailored to our requirementsl! You also expect miracles to occur on demand as if God is your humble servant at your beck and call. How preposterous! Has it not occurred to you that it would defeat the purpose of making us free to decide what to believe and how to live? If you are forced to believe you might as well be a zombie!

 

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Firstly your idea that things should be dismissed which aren’t immediately credible-sounding is bunk.

Bunk it may be but that is because this is not the claim I am making.

My claim is not that things should be dismissed because they are not credible sounding. I say we can not make the first move towards accepting them if they do not pass ANY level of credence whatsoever.

This applies to things that are ENTIRELY credible, but still have nothing to lend to their credence. An example would be if I offered to drive you to the shop in my car, this is a very credible statement, but if there is simply nothing on offer to you to suggest I HAVE a car, then you can not lend credence to the original claim.

Even things I have heard on the news today are not credible sounding to me, but they pass the credence test in that nothing within the claims being made are alien or unknown to me. As fantastic as the news was, it at least gets past the credence test because every constituent part of it are things known to me. The people. The places. The type of events. Etc.

What I am saying about the bible is that it is based wholly around an entity there is no reason on offer to me to think exists.

This does not mean I dismiss the bible because it is not credible and that is simply that. It just means I explore to find out if the basis for its claims are credible and until such time as they are shown to be, I dismiss the claims of the bible.

And since there is no evidence, argument, data, or reasons being offered to me to suggest that the entity on which the claims of the bible are based even exists, there is no avenue open to me by which I can lend credence to its claims. The whole book and the magical events therein are all based on a foundation that this entity exists, and nothing in my experience suggests that even this BASE claim is true. How then can you expect me to lend credence to things that then follow on from this base claim?

Were you to be privy to such data however, I would be agog to hear it. It would change everything.

 

[tonyrey]

There is no evidence you can give to an an Atheist or Agnostic to convince them.

How do **know **that? Is that one of **your **infallible doctrines?

Here is a simple fact that most Christians either deny, or don’t realize:

Atheists are aware of Christian Beliefs better then Christians themselves. For example: The Bible HAS been edited throughout the years, most Christians deny this.

Edited by whom? Founders of sects who claim to be inspired?

In FACT, most Atheists were once of a theistic religion, most of them were once Christian but realized it didn’t make sense so they went Atheist.

You think it’s one-way traffic! Produce your statistics…

Agnostics have the correct idea. Their view is “There isn’t enough evidence to prove God exists or doesn’t exist.”

You’re implying that atheists have the incorrect idea!

Atheists aren’t deaf and blind. Do you really think that they ignore the bible verses you recite to them? Or the “miracles” of God? No. They listen. But those things you mention are irrational thoughts.

Prove it!

Evidence of a God to present to an Atheist is like the human race becoming invincible. Its not real. The EVIDENCE of God is not real. All evidence of the events of the bible do not exist, Nor Jesus’ miracles.

Prove it!

If there was evidence, then belief and faith would be meaningless.

Nonsense? Evidence need not convince.

I’ve heard many Atheists say they went Atheist from Christianity. Some of them were even Priests. They always have perfectly logical understandable reasons then Christians ever give them to believe in God.

One side of the story…

Point is: There is no evidence or truth that God exists, nor is there evidence or truth that God doesn’t exist. However, the reason why Atheists feel so strongly that God doesn’t exist is not because of the ignorance you people claim.
But rather because of the simple fact, that the world and its current events make sense if God was imaginary. When they put it as God did exist. The world makes no sense whatsoever. This is a fact. This is why they feel so strongly.

This is sheer unsubstantiated nonsense!

To convert an atheist who had reason to become one is to erase their capability[to think rationally and completely forget everything they ever learned about the world.

Poppycock!

Christians will always fail at this.

Balderdash!

Point is again: No evidence to prove God does or doesn’t exist, so stop pushing your beliefs on others.

What do you think you’re trying to do? Push your disbeliefs on others! Your user name is most appropriate. Do you always look on the **black **side?
[/quote]

 

[flyingfish]

You are the one who missing the point. You argued that the size of the universe is uneconomical and should have been tailored to our requirementsl! You also expect miracles to occur on demand as if God is your humble servant at your beck and call. How preposterous! Has it not occurred to you that it would defeat the purpose of making us free to decide what to believe and how to live? If you are forced to believe you might as well be a zombie!

I think it’s “preposterous” that a God would expect us to believe without evidence. The evidence for Christianity is the same as the evidence for Islam or Hinduism or Mormonism etc. If I were to believe in a specific God, I would have no way to distinguish between these.

I guess it makes sense for God to make our eternal future ride on choosing the right religion, and give us nothing to distinguish the various world religions from one another, and nothing to know whether God exists.

If God deliberately gave us no evidence, then it stands to reason that specific religions are man made, and God doesn’t care if we believe in any of them.

 

[fisherman_carl]

I see this argument a lot from atheists. They say there is no evidence for God. It seems they have utterly convinced themselves of this. I could list a few public evidences for God quite easily.

1. Incorruptible bodies of saints.
   youtube.com/watch?v=EMSCubd3hAg
2. Miracle of the Sun, Fatima
   fatima.org/essentials/facts/miracle.asp
3. Miracle of the image on the tilma from Our Lady of Guadalupe which can still be seen today 500 years after the fact.
   bridegroompress.com/snippets/guadhandout.pdf

Then there is the fact that God reveals himself personally to us who seek him in many different ways. For instance, I was praying the rosary not too long ago and while I was praying I thought that it would be nice if I could go to a certain city tomorrow for work so I would have time to listen to my Catholic teachings in the car. The very next morning I got a call to go to that city because a machine had broke and needed repair and I was the technician chosen to go. There was probably a 2% chance of that happening on any given day. But because I was unsure about praying the rosary for the first time after many years I knew that I should be praying the rosary after that.

A number of years ago, I went on a pilgrimage overseas to a popular religious site. While I was there the Jesus figure on my rosary miraculously turned blood red. It went from silver to pure dark red, the color of blood. Many people witnessed it. I had forgotten about that because it was many years ago. But it did happen and I can not explain it. It’s amazing what we will forget. Just like many people forget God.

There are many ways in which God reveals himself to us. But we need to be open to it. Only God can really convince somebody he is real and loves them. But God does love each and everyone of you whether you realize it or not.

God Bless

 

[JCnMe]

There is evidence- you can believe or not-but it is presented here…
stores.lulu.com/GodsGallery

 

[Black_Angel_1]

I see this argument a lot from atheists. They say there is no evidence for God. It seems they have utterly convinced themselves of this. I could list a few public evidences for God quite easily.

1. Incorruptible bodies of saints.
   youtube.com/watch?v=EMSCubd3hAg
2. Miracle of the Sun, Fatima
   fatima.org/essentials/facts/miracle.asp
3. Miracle of the image on the tilma from Our Lady of Guadalupe which can still be seen today 500 years after the fact.
   bridegroompress.com/snippets/guadhandout.pdf

Then there is the fact that God reveals himself personally to us who seek him in many different ways. For instance, I was praying the rosary not too long ago and while I was praying I thought that it would be nice if I could go to a certain city tomorrow for work so I would have time to listen to my Catholic teachings in the car. The very next morning I got a call to go to that city because a machine had broke and needed repair and I was the technician chosen to go. There was probably a 2% chance of that happening on any given day. But because I was unsure about praying the rosary for the first time after many years I knew that I should be praying the rosary after that.

A number of years ago, I went on a pilgrimage overseas to a popular religious site. While I was there the Jesus figure on my rosary miraculously turned blood red. It went from silver to pure dark red, the color of blood. Many people witnessed it. I had forgotten about that because it was many years ago. But it did happen and I can not explain it. It’s amazing what we will forget. Just like many people forget God.

There are many ways in which God reveals himself to us. But we need to be open to it. Only God can really convince somebody he is real and loves them. But God does love each and everyone of you whether you realize it or not.

God Bless

And that’s main point in the argument. All that “proof” of God, can be seen as coincidences or hallucinations.

My main personal issue is how can you see God as Good? Look at all the starving children, all the innocent people who are dying. Did God chose to let them suffer because they were sinners? then that means God isn’t loving. Atheists choose not to believe in God because believing that he is imaginary makes the world actually make sense.

The Argument between Atheists to Christians is that Atheists see Christians lacking morality and rational thinking. The argument from Christians to Atheists is that their “rational thinking” is either sin, or Satan, or that they are blind

P.S: I mean morality as in doing what is right for the greater good of man, not in the religious sense which makes things worse in that it causes more arguing and fighting.