Natural explanations must always be preferred to supernatural ones. There is no logical contortion involved in showing that something can happen by natural means. It is incumbant on the person who would like me to believe that the laws of physics have been violated to prove that no other explanation is possible.
To put it simply, “supernatural” is another word for “impossible.” I will assume the impossible is impossible until proven otherewise. If you don’t like “impossible,” then substitute “magic.” So far, there has never been a single phenomenon or event in all of known time and space which would cannot be explained by purely natural processes. Magic is not a rational or supportable or intelligent hypothesis to explain what you don’t understand. To accuse people of being “absurdly skeptical” because they see no reason to speculate that something happened by magic, is itself, an absurd position.
As to the question in the OP, I would have to see some kind of dramatic, undeniable evidence which could be tested and verified by others. Something which absolutely could not be explained by natural means and which could be observed by everyone. turning the moon into a giant Rice Kispy bar, for instance. Even then I would still be skeptical, but it would get my attention.
Russell’s answer might be the one for me. Even then I suspect that I would be a little hesitant.
Also, I might then believe, but in no way could I worship. Assuming that this deity proved him/her/itself to me and then assuming that the Bible contains truths, I could not possibly workship any creature that behaved as the OT God did. I would instead dedicate myself to his/her/its downfall.
God would have to make the effort to convince me. Face to face meeting (if god is all powerful s/he can certainly manifest in some form that can directly converse with me…no showers of light or burning bushes please). Then God needs to convince me s/he is God…should be easy, just relate somethings in my life without any input from me that only I would know. Final proof is I would require a single miricle…a single SPECIFIC miricle, one I asked for on my knees years ago, when I was still a catholic and still believed in God and prayers, but one that never happened. All I got was a lot of people telling me ‘God works in mysterious ways’ and ‘Gods will’…not exactly a comfort to a grieving father.
So, gona take a bit of work for the old boy to convince me at this point…some effort and all that.
Excellent point, Coli. Assuming my decision-making ability were not compromised by the being’s magic, nothing could get me to worship “God,” even if it were proved he exists. Because if he does exist, he’s an asshole.
Picking your atheist/agnostic/believer camp is nothing more than guesswork and gut feelings. You want to be convinced? Hell, I’ve yet to be adequately convinced that I exist.
Why wonderful logical contortions? A priori, there’s no reason to assume that some random extraordinary claim is true. People are lying, are mistaken, are finding order in random occurences (something very unlikely happened to me, so there must be some extraordinary cause for it) all the time. That’s until there are actual consistent evidences that whatever is claimed actually did happen and that the cause proposed to it is at least somewhat more likely than dozens of other more mundane causes.
I don’t know what you’re reering to with the molded bread, for instance (hallucinations caused by lysergic acid, maybe?) but for instance suppose that I get a piece of bread where mold devellop in the shape of a human figure nailed on a cross. That’s very unlikely but out of the millions pieces of molded bread out there, there must be some that will devellop in weird shapes, and in particular in this one. I’ve no reason to assume it’s some sort of miracle. However, as you’re probably aware of, a significant number of people will make such a claim. It shows that you must approach with a lot of caution extraordinary claims because they’re easily made on flimpsy basis.
Some sort of relatively obvious evidence. In the case of god, for instance, it could be numerous verifiable unexplained miracles. Or it could be more indirect. For instance, if instead of facing a multitute of different religions making contradictory (and generally even self-contradictory) unconsistent claims including elements that are verifiably false (say, Genesis), consistent and similar religious beliefs had arisen in many unrelated places in the world (not just very vague claims like “there’s something extraordinary out there, it might be god, or it might be the spirits of the river”), then I could take more seriously these religious claims.
Similarily, in the case of UFOs : there are tons of observations made all the time. When investigated, the overwhelming majority of them can be explained in simple ways, and many are pranks. So, the most logical reflex when faced with another such claim is “must be yet another balloon/prank/venus case”. Now there are some very rare claims that can’t be explained. ut "not explained translates in many minds in “my extraordinary hypothesis of choice must be true”. Unexplained is just that : unexplained (yet). If all (or at least most) of these claims were consistent with each other, I could take the claim more seriously. For instance, if in most of these occurences, people observed or provided pictures of the same kind of ships, behaving in a similar way, affecting people or the enviroment in a similar way, then you could have a case. though it still wouldn’t rule out some more mundane expanations (like : “the chinese have secetely develloped a completely new kindof spy aircraft”). But it’s not the case. There extremely few unexplained occurences, and they are’t consistent with each other. As a result, rather than picking some random theory that doesn’t anyway explain the diverse phenomenons in a very satisfactory way, I just put them in the “unexplained” folder until further eidences come up.
Also, I would note that many people point at some phenomenon stating “science doesn’t provide an explanation, so it must be THIS”. “This” being a completely arbitrary hypothesis picked amongst a myriad of other equally possible hypothesis. For instance, “my god of choice created us” rather than “we’re all brains living in a vask, created and studied in a laboratory by something who just got a grant last tuesday to conduct studies on social behavior. We’re going to be destroyed on sunday”. “We don’t know yet, and maybe we won’t ever know because we aren’t able to” is a perfectly valid answer. Much more so than “my completely arbitrary and unverifiable hypothesis is true”.
How about listing the top three things that don’t “fit well with a purely scientific view of the universe”. I can’t think of even one. You really didn’t think you were just going to get away with a statement like that, did you?
Yes. But it’s a basic postulate precisely because there ae no evidences, so believers have to rely on just faith. You could easily imagine a god who would provide many undisputable evidences of his existence.
“Faith” just means “believing in something despite the lack of any evidences, and even in the face of absurd claims (like the “mysteries” in the the christian belief system)”. It doesn’t become anymore convincing than “I believe in tarot reading because I do” just because it’s applied to a concept like god.
Same for me. Assuming that the experience wasn’t mind-changing (the experience magically makes me a believer instantly), the first thing I would do would be to call a psychiatrist (I’ve a psychotic friend, and what he experiences isn’t much less extraordinary than “god spoke to me”). Though of course, I would probably also entertain the thought that god maybe actually exists and really spoke to me.
It would have to be something that EVERYONE was allowed to see. It would preferably include an explanation on why the ability to save people and things was never exercised when it could have been.
I was going to write something long-winded, but screw it. Seriously dude, fuck God. Not a thing would make me believe, or, more importantly, want to believe.
“If God lived on Earth, people would throw rocks at His windows.”
The stars rearranging themselves instantly from our point of view - the process would’ve had to start hundreds of years ago and ended around four years ago - and spelling out some message along the lines of “toldya so”. That’d be pretty convincing. I can’t imagine any technology that would allow such a feat or any reason for an alien race to arrange things such that the light from all those stars reaches us at the same time.
I still wouldn’t lend any credence to this any particular religious beliefs, though. Just because there’s a god doesn’t mean it did all the things Christians or Jews or Muslims or Greeks or Mayans claimed.
You folks gotta read more carefully. It’s not that Gos is more likely than Precognition, but that God is more likely that Precognition and Audio Hallucinations. And the reason I say so is that you’re multiplying unlikely probabilities. Of course, the probabiluities of all these things aren’t known, but it seems much more unlikely that the universe would arrange itself in sch a way that unlikely things would give the same result as God in the absence of an existing God. Especially since I can’t conceive of a mechanism for precognition.
Simple. “You are God? And you want me to believe it? Then grant me one request: The ability to achieve total peace on Earth.” After doing this, I’d bow down and worship this being as God. Of course this being could just be a superpowerful alien. However, I’d say it was a good deal if I had to worship this being constantly if I brought peace to Earth.
I’ve said it before in these threads and I’ll say it again here. I don’t understand why a benevolent all-powerful deity wouldn’t spell out a message for us in giant flaming letters hundereds of thousands of miles tall, located somewhere above the orbital plane. Said message would explain who the deity was, how it would like to be worshipped, and what sort of rules we should live our lives by. The explanation Kalhoun requests would be nice too.
I can’t understand how belief in a deity can be maintained in the abscence of even a tiny amount of objective evidence.
The idea of the existence of a God (as commonly conceived by the major organized religions) is so ridiculous that it would take far more than the Moon turning into a Rice Krispy bar for me to believe.
If the Moon did become a giant Rice Krispy bar it would be far more logical to assume that this was a natural phenomenon (albeit it a bizarre, unexplainable one) rather than the work of “God”.
There would have to be a myriad of ongoing and varied manifestations, conversations, and miracles witnessed by millions and proven to be unexplainable by anything but a “God” for me to believe that fairy tales really do come true.
