What would it take?

The very idea of a god judging people based on their incredulity is extremely silly to me.  If a god wants me to believe in him, there is no reason to hide. 

I would worship any god that would openly provide me with a level of altruism I couldn't fully reciprocate. 

Primarily evidence... and, to be original (since a similar thread has already been done on this), emotion. A lot of people claim that they can feel some sort of transcendental spirit move within them, the spirit being divine. If I felt something like this, then perhaps I would be convinced. I don't think that solely emotion would win me over, but I think that if there was a tie-breaker, emotion may be the clincher, depending on how passionate I feel about it.Genetic_Code

I had a very tear-jerking public moment as young teenager.  At the end of the day people do and say a lot of stupid things when they are emotional.  While emotion can be all well and good for social bonding, it has eff all to do with examination of hard facts.

[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"]Primarily evidence... and, to be original (since a similar thread has already been done on this), emotion. A lot of people claim that they can feel some sort of transcendental spirit move within them, the spirit being divine. If I felt something like this, then perhaps I would be convinced. I don't think that solely emotion would win me over, but I think that if there was a tie-breaker, emotion may be the clincher, depending on how passionate I feel about it.Sitri_

I had a very tear-jerking public moment as young teenager.  At the end of the day people do and say a lot of stupid things when they are emotional.  While emotion can be all well and good for social bonding, it has eff all to do with examination of hard facts.

True, but with some people, they use emotion as a citation for theism.

It would take any of the following to convince most rational people. video 1 and video 2

Two words: Super Powers

:P

But seriously, given the overall lack of a HISTORY OF EVIDENCE, I would be more likely to doubt my own sanity in the event of some sort of miraculous "proof."

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

Definitive Proof.TenP

That would remove the need for faith. And there's a simple reason why it is necessary:

"Without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." - Hebrews 11:6 

Furthermore, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet still believe." - John 20:29   

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

Lansdowne5

4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

:|

I'm sorry but how exactly do you know why any of us are atheists. And using a 2000 year old book written by people sitting in caves is ludicrous.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

felixlynch777

4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

:|

I'm sorry but how exactly do you know why any of us are atheists. And using a 2000 year old book written by people sitting in caves is ludicrous.

Many of you have previously stated why you are atheists, that's how I know. And the reason behind it, is as I said: "the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers".

It's not a "2000 years old book", it's a 3600 year old compilation of 66 books written under the influence of the Holy Spirit. ;)

Many of you have previously stated why you are atheists, that's how I know. And the reason behind it, is as I said: "the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers".

It's not a "2000 years old book", it's a 3600 year old compilation of 66 books written under the influence of the Holy Spirit. ;)

Lansdowne5

I don't consider myself blinded. It's nice to know that I'm thought of as disabled.

He's referring to the New Testament. I think that was pretty obvious.

Peace.

[QUOTE="felixlynch777"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

Lansdowne5

4The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

:|

I'm sorry but how exactly do you know why any of us are atheists. And using a 2000 year old book written by people sitting in caves is ludicrous.

Many of you have previously stated why you are atheists, that's how I know. And the reason behind it, is as I said: "the god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers".

It's not a "2000 years old book", it's a 3600 year old compilation of 66 books written under the influence of the Holy Spirit. ;)

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

Lansdowne5

NNNNNOOOOOWWWWW I get it.  God is tricking people who grow out of a fantasy-esque life so he can send them to hell.  Gotcha.  That joker obviously befuddled the logic and corrupted the veracity of those speaking his message too as a further attempt to fool us.  

I found a different literary reference that gives a good explaination of our problem.

All religions bear traces of the fact that they arose during the intellectual immaturity of the human race - before it had learned the obligations to speak the truth. Not one of them makes it the duty of its God to be truthful and understandable in his communications.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

You have all the evidence you need. Look up 2 Corinthians 4:4 if you want to see the true reason why you don't believe in God. :) 

Sitri_

NNNNNOOOOOWWWWW I get it.  God is tricking people who grow out of a fantasy-esque life so he can send them to hell.  Gotcha.  That joker obviously befuddled the logic and corrupted the veracity of those speaking his message too as a further attempt to fool us.  

I found a different literary reference that gives a good explaination of our problem.

All religions bear traces of the fact that they arose during the intellectual immaturity of the human race - before it had learned the obligations to speak the truth. Not one of them makes it the duty of its God to be truthful and understandable in his communications.

You think the Romans were intellectually immature? Are you actually serious? :roll:

Anyway, whoever said God is tricking people? 2 Corinthians 4:4 certainly doesn't say so. 

You think the Romans were intellectually immature? Are you actually serious? :roll:

Anyway, whoever said God is tricking people? 2 Corinthians 4:4 certainly doesn't say so. 

Lansdowne5

Yes in a great many regards.  Any high school graduate has a better understanding of the natural world than the most educated people of that time.  Science FTW.

2 Cor 4:4  The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

My initial reading was interpreting the god of this age as the mono god.  It was admittedly a bit hasty of me; when I reread it that was likely not the intention.  But seeing as how I don't believe in a god of this age, who is apparently more powerful than the mono god I also don't believe in, and there were unbelievers in every age, the passage changes from deception to irrelevance.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

You think the Romans were intellectually immature? Are you actually serious? :roll:

Anyway, whoever said God is tricking people? 2 Corinthians 4:4 certainly doesn't say so. 

Sitri_

Yes in a great many regards.  Any high school graduate has a better understanding of the natural world than the most educated people of that time.  Science FTW.

2 Cor 4:4  The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

My initial reading was interpreting the god of this age as the mono god.  It was admittedly a bit hasty of me; when I reread it that was likely not the intention.  But seeing as how I don't believe in a god of this age, who is apparently more powerful than the mono god I also don't believe in, and there were unbelievers in every age, the passage changes from deception to irrelevance.

Comon dude. Intellect =/= Knowledge.

And the god of this age isn't a literal deity . . . . . :roll:

Comon dude. Intellect =/= Knowledge.

And the god of this age isn't a literal deity . . . . . :roll:

Lansdowne5

No but people today have a better method of deduction, the scientific method.  Also they can use this exponentially greater knowledge when attempting logical deductions.  How does the old saying go?  ~If lightening is the work of god, then god must be chiefly concerned with trees~ Knowledge is intrinsically linked to intelligence. In this instance, knowing how lightening works leads to an intellectually more sound reason for why something was struck.

Since it is meant to apply to any age, why is age even important.  Why not say "other stuff" rather than "the" metaphoric "god of this age"?

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Comon dude. Intellect =/= Knowledge.

And the god of this age isn't a literal deity . . . . . :roll:

Sitri_

No but people today have a better method of deduction, the scientific method.  Also they can use this exponentially greater knowledge when attempting logical deductions.  How does the old saying go?  ~If lightening is the work of god, then god must be chiefly concerned with trees~ Knowledge is intrinsically linked to intelligence. In this instance, knowing how lightening works leads to an intellectually more sound reason for why something was struck.

Since it is meant to apply to any age, why is age even important.  Why not say "other stuff" rather than "the" metaphoric "god of this age"?

That's flawed logic. The circumstances of what is possible to discover by method are not linked to the physical ability of the mind.

God has His reasons.

That's flawed logic. The circumstances of what is possible to discover by method are not linked to the physical ability of the mind.

God has His reasons.

Lansdowne5

Knowledge base as well as methods of reasoning are relevant to intelligence.  No one in their right mind would argue otherwise, You are just trying to get pedantic about one of the definitions of intelligence to either distract from or not acknowledge what was said.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

That's flawed logic. The circumstances of what is possible to discover by method are not linked to the physical ability of the mind.

God has His reasons.

Sitri_

Knowledge base as well as methods of reasoning are relevant to intelligence.  No one in their right mind would argue otherwise, You are just trying to get pedantic about one of the definitions of intelligence to either distract from or not acknowledge what was said.

1. The Romans were not intellectually immature. Could an intellectually immature society have built an extensive highway system that connected the desert of Egypt and Palestine to the cold, snow-covered forests of Germania and Northern Europe, meaning that the Roman legions could have easy travel from one width of the Empire to the other?

2. Truth is at the heart of Christianity, it is not built on a lie.

1. The Romans were not intellectually immature. Could an intellectually immature society have built an extensive highway system that connected the desert of Egypt and Palestine to the cold, snow-covered forests of Germania and Northern Europe, meaning that the Roman legions could have easy travel from one width of the Empire to the other?

2. Truth is at the heart of Christianity, it is not built on a lie.

Lansdowne5

They may have built a highway from egypt to palestine but they had no hopes of conceiving a global networking system that allows you and I to read what each other writes almost instantaneously on opposite sides of the atlantic ocean.

–noun

They were immature in this regard.  The original quote which I really don't know why you are contesting says much the same thing as this one:

"In those parts of the world where learning and science have prevailed, miracles have ceased; but in those parts of it as are barbarous and ignorant, miracles are still in vogue." -Ethan Allan

You think the Romans were intellectually immature? Are you actually serious? Lansdowne5

YES!!! I do!

Could an intellectually immature society have built an extensive highway system that connected the desert of Egypt and Palestine to the cold, snow-covered forests of Germania and Northern Europe?Lansdowne5

YES!!! No-one said they weren't crafty! Beavers are crafty! Ingenuity and technological talent (plus a little thievery) does not equal "intellectual maturity." The are smart enough to build something like the Colosseum and yet what do they do in it? They celebrate MURDER! OF SLAVES!!!