No they don’t, there’s no way you can possibly convince them.
No they don’t, but most atheists can easily be convinced that they’re facing an entity with godlike power by the aforementioned entity doing things that could only be done with godlike power. Admittedly you have to cross the bar where they accuse it of using stage magic, but to an entity with truly godlike powers that should be trivial to accomplish.
Some theists like to claim atheists are being irrational in their denials because they think that if the atheists aren’t being irrational it means that the theists (ie: them) must be.
Meh, we all be convinced in the afterlife. 
So you’re saying that the atheist should ask the God-claimaint to kill them? Sounds risky. What if the God’s a fraud?
(For the record, I’m pretty confident that there will be no afterlife at all. If I somehow wake up in one, though, I will immediately accept that there is indeed an afterlife. I’m not unreasonable after all.)
It wasn’t my analogy. I was arguing against it.
Which wouldn’t necessarily imply the existence of a deity. More likely there would be something entirely natural about the nature of consciousness we just don’t understand.
Plenty of people in the world that believe Allah exists. Are the existences of God and Allah equally proven? (And if you want to argue that Allah and God are just different forms of belief in the same deity, the same argument also to completely distinct deities.)
So either faith proves a lot of different gods exist or it doesn’t prove any of them exist.
Right - it’s one thing to suddenly find yourself in an afterlife, another to believe that some specific dude in that afterlife is a deity (as opposed to being a regular ghost like everybody else is), and a very different third thing to believe that that entity deserves worship, adulation, or constant harp concerts.
I would love to be convinced that there is some divine being that is watching over us, has a plan for us, and has a happy afterlife prepared for us. Who wouldn’t want to believe that?
Autocratic dictators make me nervous, so I’d like to know more about the situation before I buy into it. Starting with a good explanation why we have to wait until the afterlife for the whole ‘planned happiness’ thing to kick in.
Then we’re right, since by definition an omnipotent being could convince us.
“Who wouldn’t want to believe that?” I would HATE that, and I’d HATE believing that.
And… an omniscient being would know how to prove that he exists. But something that doesn’t exist can’t prove anything.
Why do you say this?
Also true of con games.
In the Bible, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses spoke directly to God and didn’t need faith. Was their belief less than those with faith today?
Can God create an atheist so stubborn that even He can’t persuade the atheist to believe His existence?
No, we want to believe that which is best supported by the evidence. Got any?
Imagine if your appeals to faith were used by science. Anyone could give whatever conclusions they desired. Evidence? Nah, appeals to faith. No progress, because incorrect hypotheses would never get rejected based on evidence. There would be a church of the Big Bang and a church of the Steady State (and a dozen others, no doubt.)
Worse than that, many religionists want to pass laws based on what God wants. How do they know? Their version and interpretation of the Bible. How do we know that is accurate? Faith!
And when that happens Vishnu is going to whup your ass. 