Question for atheists

[Sapiens]

The OP posits a ridiculous hypothetical that is unworthy of a serious answer.

 

[Left Coast]

Even contingent upon it occurring directly after a completely miraculous healing event that goes against everything we know about the human body?

In normal circumstances I'd agree, but after an event that is so out of the boundaries of probability I'd be of the opinion that it was more likely to be Divine intervention than 'natural' healing followed by a hallucination.

How do you tell the difference between an event that is extremely improbable but naturally caused and divine intervention?

 

[stvdv]

The OP posits a ridiculous hypothetical that is unworthy of a serious answer.

My heart pumps daily, no need to boot it up in the morning. Humans are born from sperm and egg, even elephants. Stars are born, what not? And this is ridiculous hypothetical? Not for me.

 

[Augustus]

How do you tell the difference between an event that is extremely improbable but naturally caused and divine intervention?

You can't, but hearing god contingent on you miraculous regrowing limbs instantly at full strength and regenerating multiple other parts of your body in a manner that we currently assume is impossible I'd consider god to be the more probable. In addition, it also makes more sense to err on the side of 'god did it' as there is minimal downside to being wrong yet potentially massive upside (if it was a heaven/hell god).

 

[Augustus]

The OP posits a ridiculous hypothetical that is unworthy of a serious answer.

"I'd just like to take the time to inform you all that I have no intention of taking part in this thread because it doesn't interest me. Just in case you were wondering if I'd take part in this thread."

 

[LuisDantas]

So, if you were burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, had no ability to grow hair, and two amputated limbs, but while in the hospital somebody laid their hands on you and prayed over you, and the scar tissue left, your limbs were restored, and your baldness replaced with a full head of hair, would you consider the possibility that God exists, especially since you used your new limbs to run around the hospital twice, and heard a voice loudly and clearly say, “I am God”, and proceeded to tell you some of what is true about him, and there was no one else to be seen nearby.

Would you still be an atheist? Would you start praying?

Honestly, no idea.

Your scenario is quite heavy-handed and, yes, ludicrous. So heavy-handed that you might as well ask whether it is more likely that I would suspect myself of schyzophreny or of theism.

I do not find it useful nor advisable to dwell into such matters about god-belief. It is simply not a worthy goal for anyone, far as I am concerned. And I do not think that there are people much less inclined towards theism than me, in any case.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

So, if you were burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, had no ability to grow hair, and two amputated limbs, but while in the hospital somebody laid their hands on you and prayed over you, and the scar tissue left, your limbs were restored, and your baldness replaced with a full head of hair, would you consider the possibility that God exists, especially since you used your new limbs to run around the hospital twice, and heard a voice loudly and clearly say, “I am God”, and proceeded to tell you some of what is true about him, and there was no one else to be seen nearby.

Would you still be an atheist? Would you start praying?

So this God was fine for me to be burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, have no ability to grow hair, two amputated limbs, but fix it all if a believer prays?

Sure I'd believe.
Bit pray to this being? Worship it? No...why would I?

 

[Twilight Hue]

So, if you were burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, had no ability to grow hair, and two amputated limbs, but while in the hospital somebody laid their hands on you and prayed over you, and the scar tissue left, your limbs were restored, and your baldness replaced with a full head of hair, would you consider the possibility that God exists, especially since you used your new limbs to run around the hospital twice, and heard a voice loudly and clearly say, “I am God”, and proceeded to tell you some of what is true about him, and there was no one else to be seen nearby.

Would you still be an atheist? Would you start praying?

I just try to be realistic. This scenario ain't going to happen. ;0)

 

[Left Coast]

You can't,

Exactly.

but hearing god contingent on you miraculous regrowing limbs instantly at full strength and regenerating multiple other parts of your body in a manner that we currently assume is impossible I'd consider god to be the more probable.

How? We just agreed you can't tell the difference, and in both cases we're talking about something incredibly improbable.

In addition, it also makes more sense to err on the side of 'god did it' as there is minimal downside to being wrong yet potentially massive upside (if it was a heaven/hell god).

Downsides include magical thinking and the inevitable baggage associated with the various types of theism (behavioral restrictions, other required beliefs, etc.).

The potentially massive upside of a favorable afterlife assumes that this event prompts us to believe in the right type of deity, and that such a deity a) cares if we believe in it and b) assigns eternal destinies on the simple basis of who believes it exists, and not on different or additional requirements.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

That would be enough to say that we don't understand some aspects of how humans heal. I'm not sure why it relates to the existence of a creator of the universe.

Hearing the voice would make me wonder if I am hallucinating.

I agree, but I think if I saw someone pray over severed limbs and the limbs instantly grew back, I would be very intrigued. Of course it wouldn't prove that the deity they prayed to exists, but it would be enough to make me believe in it. Of course, this scenario will almost certainly never happen.

 

[Augustus]

How? We just agreed you can't tell the difference, and in both cases we're talking about something incredibly improbable.

My body has just instantly regenerated and there is a lot of evidence that this is not possible. I've also heard god speaking to me. The main argument against god's existence is a lack of evidence, I've just had some evidence that he does.

Downsides include magical thinking and the inevitable baggage associated with the various types of theism (behavioral restrictions, other required beliefs, etc.).

The potentially massive upside of a favorable afterlife assumes that this event prompts us to believe in the right type of deity, and that such a deity a) cares if we believe in it and b) assigns eternal destinies on the simple basis of who believes it exists, and not on different or additional requirements.

It's not magical thinking if my body has just magically regenerated. I've not seen any evidence that religious people are less happy on average, so don't see that as a major downside. A reasonable chance at eternal hellfire as opposed to eternal bliss, is a pretty big downside.

As I said earlier, assuming he tells me which is the right religion, I'd become an adherent. It would be stupidly irrational not to.

Put it this way, if there was even a 1% chance that a gangster wanted to kidnap and brutally torture you for 40 years and you could do something to possibly prevent it, would you: a) do something to prevent it even if that something is a minor inconvenience b) do nothing and hope for the best.

 

[Father Heathen]

Would you believe in vampires if a bat flew through your window and then turned into a vampire who bit you and sucked your blood but then the sunlight came through the window and caused it to scream as it combusted into ash?

 

[stvdv]

Would you believe in vampires if a bat flew through your window and then turned into a vampire who bit you and sucked your blood but then the sunlight came through the window and caused it to scream as it combusted into ash?

Yes. Of course only if the vampire sucked my blood in the amount of a blood donation. If it sucked all my blood I would be dead and not able to believe in anything

Unless you mean that after been sucked to death a doctor gave "me" a death certificate and then the vampire combusted into ash and my blood was miraculous restored. Coming back to life, seeing my death certificate and remembering all what happened, then of course I would believe in vampires also.

I love personal experience.

 

[Left Coast]

My body has just instantly regenerated and there is a lot of evidence that this is not possible. The main argument against god's existence is a lack of evidence, I've just had some evidence that he does.

If you can't tell the difference between divine intervention and a natural but improbable event that you just don't understand, then no, the event is not evidence for God's existence.

If some event occurs, and there is no way to tell whether I did it or @Revoltingest did it because either of us could have, then the occurence of the event is not evidence I did it as opposed to Rev.

It's not magical thinking if my body has just magically regenerated.

But we just established that there's no way to tell the difference between magic and science you don't understand. So we don't know that your body just magically regerated.

I also just meant in general that there would be a negative side effect of magical thinking in other realms (if magic helped me that time, maybe it will this time!).

I've not seen any evidence that religious people are less happy on average, so don't see that as a major downside.

Depends on the religious people. Have you talked to many LGBTQ+ people raised in a religious environment?

A reasonable chance at eternal hellfire as opposed to eternal bliss, is a pretty big downside.

But a completely unpredictable one, as I explained.

As I said earlier, assuming he tells me which is the right religion, I'd become an adherent. It would be stupidly irrational not to.

If we could confirm he actually said that, okay. But we just agreed that it's impossible to confirm that.

Put it this way, if there was even a 1% chance that a gangster wanted to kidnap and brutally torture you for 40 years and you could do something to possibly prevent it, would you: a) do something to prevent it even if that something is a minor inconvenience b) do nothing and hope for the best.

That would depend entirely on 1) how capable that gangster is of following through on his desires and 2) what would be required to prevent it. PS - an entire re-working of one's worldview is not a minor inconvenience. Take it from someone who's done it.

If I can't even tell that said gangster even exists, and then can't tell what would prevent their torturing me, yea doing nothing is vastly preferable to living out of some vague indiscernible fear.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you can't tell the difference between divine intervention and a natural but improbable event that you just don't understand, then no, the event is not evidence for God's existence.

If some event occurs, and there is no way to tell whether I did it or @Revoltingest did it because either of us could have, then the occurence of the event is not evidence I did it as opposed to Rev.



But we just established that there's no way to tell the difference between magic and science you don't understand. So we don't know that your body just magically regerated.

I also just meant in general that there would be a negative side effect of magical thinking in other realms (if magic helped me that time, maybe it will this time!).



Depends on the religious people. Have you talked to many LGBTQ+ people raised in a religious environment?



But a completely unpredictable one, as I explained.



If we could confirm he actually said that, okay. But we just agreed that it's impossible to confirm that.



That would depend entirely on 1) how capable that gangster is of following through on his desires and 2) what would be required to prevent it. PS - an entire re-working of one's worldview is not a minor inconvenience. Take it from someone who's done it.

If I can't even tell that said gangster even exists, and then can't tell what would prevent their torturing me, yea doing nothing is vastly preferable to living out of some vague indiscernible fear.

I didn't do it.
No one saw me do it.
You can't prove a thing.
- Bart Simpson

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

My heart pumps daily, no need to boot it up in the morning. Humans are born from sperm and egg, even elephants. Stars are born, what not? And this is ridiculous hypothetical? Not for me.

How are any of these things even remotely analogous or comparable to the nonsense hypothetical in the OP

 

[Augustus]

If you can't tell the difference between divine intervention and a natural but improbable event that you just don't understand, then no, the event is not evidence for God's existence.

Of course it is evidence. Evidence =/= proof.

Hearing god directly tell you about the one true faith immediately after an assumedly impossible event occurring certainly is evidence. Until a better explanation is presented, I'd consider it the most likely. We do have an enormous amount of evidence that such things don't occur naturally, and the hundreds of injuries I've had and numerous scars on my body tells me it doesn't heal magically.

But a completely unpredictable one, as I explained.

With asymmetric payoffs, you can be far from certain about something yet it is still rational to assume it may happen.

I'm of the opinion that it makes far more sense to assume it was god than was not god. You think that absent 100% certainty it better to assume it was not god. It's a difference in philosophy regarding uncertainty.

I'm not 100% certain man-made global warming is happening, but I still think it prudent to assume it is until proven otherwise as the costs of being wrong are too great.

Anyway, it's not like the OP scenario is actually going to happen

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So, if you were burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, had no ability to grow hair, and two amputated limbs, but while in the hospital somebody laid their hands on you and prayed over you, and the scar tissue left, your limbs were restored, and your baldness replaced with a full head of hair, would you consider the possibility that God exists, especially since you used your new limbs to run around the hospital twice, and heard a voice loudly and clearly say, “I am God”, and proceeded to tell you some of what is true about him, and there was no one else to be seen nearby.

Would you still be an atheist? Would you start praying?

I think it's rather hilarious, and telling, that you felt like you needed to go to such lengths of absurdity in order to create a scenario where belief in the supernatural sounds half-rational.

Since even this scenario of you is still problematic (it just asserts a causal relationship between the prayer and the healing - it is never demonstrated), I'll reformulate it...

Sure, in the face of undeniable evidence, I'ld accept the claim.

So how about you? If on a beautifull sunny blue-sky day, you suddenly hear thunder roar and a great flash of light appears near you, accompagned by even more thunder and lightning, after which a dreamy blonde body builder with shiny armour is standing on a circle with rune symbols while holding a hammer that nobody else can lift and he tells you "I am Thor, the son of Odin the Alvader!".... would you believe Thor exists?

 

[HonestJoe]

So, if you were burned from head to toe in a car crash, disfigured by scar tissue, had no ability to grow hair, and two amputated limbs, but while in the hospital somebody laid their hands on you and prayed over you, and the scar tissue left, your limbs were restored, and your baldness replaced with a full head of hair, would you consider the possibility that God exists…

I already consider it possible for some kind of god to exist but it’s also possible for countless other things to exist, many of which would directly contradict the existence of a god. Possibilities alone don’t really mean anything though. The effects you describe only mean something caused them. I see no reason to jump to any conclusions as to what exactly what that something would be.

…especially since you used your new limbs to run around the hospital twice, and heard a voice loudly and clearly say, “I am God”, and proceeded to tell you some of what is true about him, and there was no one else to be seen nearby.

In that case I’d know (not believe) of the effects and voice but I wouldn’t necessarily have reason to believe everything I’m being told was 100% true or accurate. It’d also be impossible to ignore the possibility of some kind of hallucination, especially given the extreme circumstances you’ve described.

Would you still be an atheist? Would you start praying?

I don’t like the label but I still wouldn’t specifically believe in the existence of any god or gods, I’d just have additional information to build on what I know and how I respond to that in my daily life. I’m not convinced there needs to be a “belief” stage between “don’t know” and “(probably) know”.

As for praying specifically, even if a god exists the idea of specifically praying doesn’t make much sense to me. A god shouldn’t need telling what I want and shouldn’t be responding to empty pleas and begging over responding directly to the needs of everyone. That’s moving on from the existence of a god in to religion though, and I think they should be treated as two entirely distinct topics.

 

[stvdv]

How are any of these things even remotely analogous or comparable to the nonsense hypothetical in the OP

sense of awe and wonder