Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?

[Trailblazer]

On another thread….

Trailblazer said: Many atheists say they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence.

@ ecco said:
Name one. Show where he/she said "they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence." That isn't what atheists say. That's what theists would like to believe atheists say.

Trailblazer said: Holy moly! ~~~ This is practically all atheists say, at least to me. Sorry, I cannot quote atheists from other forums because that is not right. They posted to me on other forums in confidence. Sure, they are public forums, but it is bad practice to take posts from one forum to another forum. But it is not only on the “other forums” where atheists have said this. They have also said it on RF. I am not saying that ALL atheists would like to believe in God if they had the evidence, since some atheists probably have no interest in God. But if they don’t have any interest in God, why is this forum comprised of as many atheists as believers? Hmmmmm.....

This would be a great topic for a new thread:

“Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?”

Please answer 1, 2 or 3.

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
2) I am not sure. I might like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
3) No, I would not like to believe in God even if there was evidence that was good enough.

* By good enough I mean evidence that was sufficient for you to believe that God exists, evidence that proved to you that God exists.

 

[LiveBetterLife]

Yea.

 

[Skwim]

Yea.

On another thread….

Trailblazer said: Many atheists say they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence.

@ ecco said:
Name one. Show where he/she said "they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence." That isn't what atheists say. That's what theists would like to believe atheists say.

Trailblazer said: Holy moly! ~~~ This is practically all atheists say, at least to me. Sorry, I cannot quote atheists from other forums because that is not right. They posted to me on other forums in confidence. Sure, they are public forums, but it is bad practice to take posts from one forum to another forum. But it is not only on the “other forums” where atheists have said this. They have also said it on RF. I am not saying that ALL atheists would like to believe in God if they had the evidence, since some atheists probably have no interest in God. But if they don’t have any interest in God, why is this forum comprised of as many atheists as believers? Hmmmmm.....

This would be a great topic for a new thread:

“Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?”

Please answer 1, 2 or 3.

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
2) I am not sure. I might like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
3) No, I would not like to believe in God even if there was evidence that was good enough.

* By good enough I mean evidence that was sufficient for you to believe that God exists, evidence that proved to you that God exists.

I guess that would depend on the god. As for the immoral and evil creating god of Abraham, absolutely not.


NOTE: Although not an atheist, like them I too don't believe there's a god.

.


.

 

[columbus]

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.

I already do.
It's the Abrahamic sky king with superpowers that I don't believe in.
Tom

 

[Trailblazer]

I guess that would depend on the god. As for the immoral and evil creating god of Abraham, absolutely not.

NOTE: Although not an atheist, like them I too don't believe there's a god..

So that is 3) since the God of Abraham is God. However, He is not as you describe Him.

I guess that means that you would only like to believe in a God who measured up to your standards of what a God should be?

 

[Trailblazer]

I already do.
It's the Abrahamic sky king with superpowers that I don't believe in.
Tom

If you are not an atheist it is not 1, 2 or 3.
But since you already believe in God, do you LIKE believing in the God you believe in?

 

[Skwim]

So that is 3) since the God of Abraham is God.

Let's just say I'm not convinced there's only one possible god. And if there are more than one, I wouldn't believe in the one known as "the god of Abraham."

However, He is not as you describe Him.

Sure he is. In Isaiah 45:7 the god of Abraham says he creates evil,

Isaiah 45:7 King
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.​

and admits to punishing innocent children

Exodus 20:5
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
​

And killing them

2 Samuel 12:9, 13-15, 18
Why have you despised the word of the LORD, to do what is evil in his sight? You have smitten Uri’ah the Hittite with the sword, and have taken his wife to be your wife, and have slain him with the sword of the Ammonites. . . . [13] David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.” And Nathan said to David, “The LORD also has put away your sin; you shall not die. [14] Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the LORD, the child that is born to you shall die.” [15] Then Nathan went to his house. And the LORD struck the child that Uri’ah’s wife bore to David, and it became sick. . . . [18] On the seventh day the child died.
​

I guess that means that you would only like to believe in a God who measured up to your standards of what a God should be?

Well, not being guilty of creating evil and not punishing and killing innocent children would be a good start.

.

 

[ChristineM]

On another thread….

Trailblazer said: Many atheists say they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence.

@ ecco said:
Name one. Show where he/she said "they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence." That isn't what atheists say. That's what theists would like to believe atheists say.

Trailblazer said: Holy moly! ~~~ This is practically all atheists say, at least to me. Sorry, I cannot quote atheists from other forums because that is not right. They posted to me on other forums in confidence. Sure, they are public forums, but it is bad practice to take posts from one forum to another forum. But it is not only on the “other forums” where atheists have said this. They have also said it on RF. I am not saying that ALL atheists would like to believe in God if they had the evidence, since some atheists probably have no interest in God. But if they don’t have any interest in God, why is this forum comprised of as many atheists as believers? Hmmmmm.....

This would be a great topic for a new thread:

“Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?”

Please answer 1, 2 or 3.

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
2) I am not sure. I might like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
3) No, I would not like to believe in God even if there was evidence that was good enough.

* By good enough I mean evidence that was sufficient for you to believe that God exists, evidence that proved to you that God exists.

Not a point of liking it, if the evidence was valid, with proof that it was not some alien with advanced technology then first the god would need to answer some searching questions like

What's the thing with childhood leukemia?
Why create a race to worship you then impose unnecessary suffering?
So why the thousands of years of hermitage?

And a a few more


If the evidence was valid there would be no choice but to accept that evidence

 

[Trailblazer]

Let's just say I'm not convinced there's only one possible god. And if there are more than one, I wouldn't believe in the one known as "the god of Abraham."

Does it make sense that there is more than one God? Why would we need more than one God?

Sure he is. In Isaiah 45:7 the god of Abraham says he creates evil,

Isaiah 45:7 King
7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.​

and admits to punishing innocent children

Exodus 20:5
5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,​

We have been over this before. God did not say those things. Men wrote them and attributed them to God.

Well, not being guilty of creating evil and punishing innocent children would be a good start.

It would be, if God actually did those things.

 

[Twilight Hue]

On another thread….

Trailblazer said: Many atheists say they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence.

@ ecco said:
Name one. Show where he/she said "they would like to believe in God if they only had the evidence." That isn't what atheists say. That's what theists would like to believe atheists say.

Trailblazer said: Holy moly! ~~~ This is practically all atheists say, at least to me. Sorry, I cannot quote atheists from other forums because that is not right. They posted to me on other forums in confidence. Sure, they are public forums, but it is bad practice to take posts from one forum to another forum. But it is not only on the “other forums” where atheists have said this. They have also said it on RF. I am not saying that ALL atheists would like to believe in God if they had the evidence, since some atheists probably have no interest in God. But if they don’t have any interest in God, why is this forum comprised of as many atheists as believers? Hmmmmm.....

This would be a great topic for a new thread:

“Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?”

Please answer 1, 2 or 3.

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
2) I am not sure. I might like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
3) No, I would not like to believe in God even if there was evidence that was good enough.

* By good enough I mean evidence that was sufficient for you to believe that God exists, evidence that proved to you that God exists.

Sure. If there was a God, I'd have no problems with that.

It would take a God in order to know a God though. That would be the only valid evidence.

 

[Trailblazer]

If the evidence was valid there would be no choice but to accept that evidence

So that means you would have to believe in the God if the evidence was valid, even if the God did things you do not approve of or did not do things you think He should do?

 

[Trailblazer]

Sure. If there was a God, I'd have no problems with that.

It would take a God in order to know a God though. That would be the only valid evidence.

I guess you mean that God would have to show up.
So what if God showed up and He w\as not what you hoped He would be, would you still believe in Him?

 

[Skwim]

Does it make sense that there is more than one God? Why would we need more than one God?

Why don't you ask all those who claim their particular god is the only god, in effect leaving us with many possible gods to choose from?

We have been over this before. God did not say those things. Men wrote them and attributed them to God.

And you know this to be true because ______________________________________________ .

It would be, if God actually did those things.

And you know he did not because _________________________________________________ .


.

 

[LuisDantas]

“Atheists: Would you like to believe in God if there was good evidence for God?”

Please answer 1, 2 or 3.

1) Yes, I would like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
2) I am not sure. I might like to believe in God if there was evidence that was good enough.
3) No, I would not like to believe in God even if there was evidence that was good enough.

* By good enough I mean evidence that was sufficient for you to believe that God exists, evidence that proved to you that God exists.

4) I am an apatheist, which I guess breaks down all three previous options, and an ignostic, which makes me have to ask "which god are we talking about?"

But also, is there even a reason for anyone to believe in _any_ god? As opposed to find some of the god-conceptions useful for practice or inspiration?

 

[InChrist]

Not a point of liking it, if the evidence was valid, with proof that it was not some alien with advanced technology then first the god would need to answer some searching questions like

What's the thing with childhood leukemia?
Why create a race to worship you then impose unnecessary suffering?
So why the thousands of years of hermitage?

And a a few more


If the evidence was valid there would be no choice but to accept that evidence

I was thinking about the questions/thoughts in your post. They are the kind of questions which are worth asking and thinking about. The Bible makes it clear, at least I see it that way, that the suffering in this world is not imposed by God, but was the result of human sin entering into the paradise God created and sin negatively contaminates every aspect of creation. Childhood leukemia and countless other diseases which cause suffering are truly awful. Yet, think about it, If God took away all the things which cause suffering in this world it would be heaven. But this is not heaven because it is a world filled with sin, sin which people willingly choose to do while rejecting God and the sin-free, suffering- free qualities of heaven.

I am not saying a child is responsible for their leukemia or anyone is sick due to their own personal sin, necessarily. My point is that sin which exists in this world harms and damages the life God intended.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why don't you ask all those who claim their particular god is the only god, in effect leaving us with many possible gods to choose from?

There are many conceptions of God because there are many religions, but that does not mean there is more than one God. So what it boils down to is that you have to choose from more than one religion.

And you know this to be true because ______________________________________________ .
And you know he did not because _________________________________________________ ..

And you know God said those things because ______________________________________________ .
And you know God did those things because _______________________________________________ .

 

[Twilight Hue]

I guess you mean that God would have to show up.
So what if God showed up and He w\as not what you hoped He would be, would you still believe in Him?

Given the way nature is, I figured couldn't be better or couldn't be worse. I've learned to let go of expectations.

 

[Trailblazer]

4) I am an apatheist, which I guess breaks down all three previous options, and an ignostic, which makes me have to ask "which god are we talking about?"

Let's say that hypothetically speaking it is the one true God of ALL the religions, the one who revealed the Dharmic Faiths as well as the Abrahamic religions. What if there was evidence that proved to you that God exists. Would you accept or reject that God?

But also, is there even a reason for anyone to believe in _any_ god? As opposed to find some of the god-conceptions useful for practice or inspiration?

If God exists and is All-Knowing and All-Wise, that is enough of a reason to believe in God, Imo.

 

[Trailblazer]

Given the way nature is, I figured couldn't be better or couldn't be worse. I've learned to let go of expectations.

So I guess you are saying that you would believe in God even if He did not measure up to your expectations?

 

[Stanyon]

According to ancient astronaut theorists extraterrestrials are your gods, angels, and demons.