Quick questions (well not so quick)

[Polymath257]

Something you decided automatically?

I don't see it as a decision.

I experiences jesus. I know buddhism is the truth. I dont practice either anymore. Truth isnt reflected on bible, sutras, jesus, mind. Its deeper than an external view of god. I found this through the arts.

Was it a personal experience that singled out one truth? Do you see the other beliefs as lies?

Personal experience isn't what determines truth. One 'singles' out the truth via rejecting falsehoods through observation and testing of hypotheses.

Beliefs, as in opinions, are not true nor false. On the other hand, those beliefs that are counter to observation are simply false.

Lies are statements that are deliberately false. A person isn't telling a lie, in my opinion, when they are stating a falsehood that they truly believe to be true. They are, in that case, simply mistaken.

 

[LuisDantas]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

Probably not. I see the whole idea of "belief in god" as somewhat misguided.

Gods are very much a freestyle concept, but generally speaking, the trend is that the existence of quality evidence would make the entity no longer qualify as a god or rather make belief unnecessary, even unapplicable. Gravity and chemical reactions are not usually regarded as evidence for the divine for that reason alone.

On a more practical level, I stand unconvinced that belief in God is worth its many dangers and drawbacks.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

I have little notion. It sounds just too unlikely a situation for me to imagine.

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

Beats me. It is too far fetched an idea for me to know.

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

In that case, we are talking of fantasy/sci-fi levels of imagination. You might as well ask who I would side with in Westeros - and I would have a far better idea of what to answer in that case.

 

[ChristineM]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

Please dont speak for atheists as a whole. If it doesnt apply to you, Letter B.

If the evidence could be independently validated then there would be no option but to consider/accept the evidence.

Same as any other evidence. The evidence would show a god existed.

Again, if the evidence of a loving god could be independently validated.

 

[Willamena]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

Not likely. Any evidence of a physical being, for instance, would immediately engender skepticism, as it would conflict with my current understanding of god. However, I have known very good evidence pointing at a non-literal existence that garnered belief.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

N/A. The benefit of evidence is its utility in being a pointer at existence. We don't "use" utility, it just is.

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

That's the only way to assume...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How did you discover truth if not a result of your experiences?

What facts are there to observe that you found god?

I cant imagine a god outside of human experience.

Lies are statements that are deliberately false. A person isn't telling a lie, in my opinion, when they are stating a falsehood that they truly believe to be true. They are, in that case, simply mistaken.

Could it be possible you may fall into this category?

We can still benefit from our interpretation of facts as truth even though in reality we are mistaken.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Not likely. Any evidence of a physical being, for instance, would immediately engender skepticism, as it would conflict with my current understanding of god. However, I have known very good evidence pointing at a non-literal existence that garnered belief.


N/A. The benefit of evidence is its utility in being a pointer at existence. We don't "use" utility, it just is.


That's the only way to assume...

What is your understanding of god?

 

[Polymath257]

How did you discover truth if not a result of your experiences?

Not *just* experiences, but tested hypotheses based on observation. It is required that any hypothesis be actively challenged: attempting to show it *wrong*. Only those that survive such tests can be held as true.

What facts are there to observe that you found god?

I cant imagine a god outside of human experience.

I don't know. This is your hypothetical. I have no idea how you could manage to show God to actually exist or which God could be shown, so anything further is speculation, at best.

Could it be possible you may fall into this category?

of course. That is why all hypotheses need to be actively challenged.

We can still benefit from our interpretation of facts as truth even though in reality we are mistaken.

If we are mistaken, they aren't really facts. I'm not sure what benefits you are claiming.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

Since for a rational person belief is not a choice I hope that I would. Assuming that the evidence was sufficient.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

I am not sure what you are asking here.

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

Again, not sure. If you are asking if my concept of a "god of love" was wrong would I change my mind? I would hope so.

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

Please dont speak for atheists as a whole. If it doesnt apply to you, Letter B.

What!? Are you trying to take away my job as the international spokesman of all atheists?

 

[Altfish]

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?
Yes, I'd believe in him (or her) but doubt I would 'worship' them.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?
I'm not sure I understand the question but I don't see any benefit in a god existing.

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?
Again, I'm not sure I understand the question. But, yes I'd believe god exists but probably little else. I don't need a god to feel love.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Not *just* experiences, but tested hypotheses based on observation. It is required that any hypothesis be actively challenged: attempting to show it *wrong*. Only those that survive such tests can be held as true.

Do you think other people can use these tests you used and end with the same result to prompt them to believe god based on facts not beliefs?

If we are mistaken, they aren't really facts. I'm not sure what benefits you are claiming.

Could you be mistaken?

 

[Curious George]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

There is evidence. I just do not find the evidence credible or substantial. If you are asking if I would have any qualms with accepting the existence of a god or gods if sufficient evidence was available, then I can answer: if such were the case, I would have no issue accepting a god or gods existence.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

The benefit of evidence is that evidence forms belief.

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

Let me rephrase this question to be sure I understand. Are you asking: If the evidence for god supported the conclusion that god was different than I assumed, such that god was defined as love, would I believe and why?

No. I think that people do this all the time. People create abstract, amorphous concepts of god that are so far removed from any definitive god hat they no longer bear any relationship to the topic. This is no different than saying god is Truth. If you want to discuss abstract notions that connect using the identifier "god" does little except confuse the subject. God denotes an intelligent entity. If we are talking about esoteric concepts such as Brahman, Love, Truth, Chi/Qi/Ki then let us discuss those. If we are not discussing an intelligent entity with agency, then we are not discussing a god.

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

Please dont speak for atheists as a whole. If it doesnt apply to you, Letter B.

Lol, I appreciate your use of the idiom "let her be."

 

[Polymath257]

Do you think other people can use these tests you used and end with the same result to prompt them to believe god based on facts not beliefs?

Once again, I do not believe there is a God. YOU are the one that proposed some sort of sufficient evidence was presented to warrant a God belief. If that evidence does, in fact, warrant a belief in a God, then others would be able to do the same tests and get the same results. That's sort of what is required to warrant belief.

Could you be mistaken?

Of course. And if I am mistaken, then my beliefs are not facts.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Once again, I do not believe there is a God. YOU are the one that proposed some sort of sufficient evidence was presented to warrant a God belief. If that evidence does, in fact, warrant a belief in a God, then others would be able to do the same tests and get the same results. That's sort of what is required to warrant belief.



Of course. And if I am mistaken, then my beliefs are not facts.

No need to caps. I wasnt rude I just asked a question. It was misplaced. It was for @Willamena Poly,please ask instead.

 

[Milton Platt]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

Of course. However, since there has not been sufficient evidence provided over thousands of years in spite of the best efforts of believers, I am not expecting this to happen.
I am not even certain what evidence would convince me. The more extreme the claim, the stronger the evidence must be, and the god claim is arguably a very extreme claim.

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

This is an odd question. The benefit of sufficient evidence to believe anything whether a god or anything else is that it makes it a rational belief.

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

A god of human emotion caused by body chemistry? That is basically what love is, right? If there is some other, please provide evidence of such.But to answer the question, it would not matter what kind of god it was, as long as the evidence was sufficient to believe. It is another question whether once convinced of the existence of a god whether I would pay it any mind. That would depend upon other factors, not merely the fact that it existed.

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

If I wished to just assume a god existed, then I would not be an atheist.......

Please dont speak for atheists as a whole. If it doesnt apply to you, Letter B.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Polymath257

If I wished to just assume a god existed, then I would not be an atheist.......

This reminds me of christians who cant think in hypotheticals.

You already answered my question OP. If you want to talk about it, dont be rude. If not, let it be.

 

[OliviaB]

Then you can discuss, criticize, etc whatever....

Atheists, if there was evidence for god's existence, would you change your mind to believe In him?

What are the benefits of evidence in god assuming there is evidence and how would you use these benefits (not consequences) to help you?

Also, if there were evidence and god was love different than how you first interpreted as an former atheist, say god of love would you believe and why?

This is assuming god Does exist not maybe and not kinda.

Please dont speak for atheists as a whole. If it doesnt apply to you, Letter B.

There can't be evidence for 'god' as the term is too vague...You would first have to define 'god' and then determine would would falsify his existence in order to have evidence.

 

[OliviaB]

Haha thank you for answering.

How would knowing god exists benefit you?

It wouldn't....knowing a god exists would be like living in North Korea with a celestial dictator. It would be horrid.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

There can't be evidence for 'god' as the term is too vague...You would first have to define 'god' and then determine would would falsify his existence in order to have evidence.

Lets say the christian god (not christ)

Evidence. How you define it. If you found evidence you agree with, would you believe in god?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It wouldn't....knowing a god exists would be like living in North Korea with a celestial dictator. It would be horrid.

Huh?

Its a straight forward question not a debate topic. Let it be.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Polymath257 Im cutting the conversation. I dont argue with staff.