If there was a loving God, would you accept him?

[The Valkyrie]

People die for their convictions every day, whether that conviction be religious or something else.

Because a person was tortured to death for their religion neither devalues their sacrifice or those who have died for other convictions. Unless, of course, those convictions are in direct conflict with the wellbeing of others.

Well, they say that they suffer for their belief in God, something that is beyond everything that is imaginable. What I was trying to tell is what are you ready to die for? Are you ready to die for others, give your life away freely, be a cobblestone in the road to that higher purpose that you profess your conviction in?
I personally do not think that liberal humanism presents anyone with a basis for such a conviction.

Every single shred of "information" about any god that ever has been believed in, here on Earth, has been provided by humans.
Who they were? Beats me... most likely, someone trying to comfort their loved ones, or trying to keep their own mortality at bay...

What afterlife?

But humans who have been appointed by God. They are not mere men, they are prophets.
And in the case, that God decided not to use an intermediary, but actually stepped forward and told you that he existed, what then?

I don't know which god you're talking about, but he/she/it/they never required anything from me.
Every single shred of "information" about that god you talk about has come to you through people. PEOPLE!
Every requirement that you perceive to come from that god has come to you through people. People are not the god.
If that information, that requirement is that important, the medium of "information" transmission should never be the fault-ridden people that we see carrying it.

So now tell me.... who's requiring me to do what? and about what?

And I understand, but you need to understand that I'm not talking about that. We're speaking of a hypothetical case here.

Would I sacrificed myself for my convictions? I've already answered that when I stated I don't know until the time comes. No one can know for certain. Often the most gung-ho are the first to back down.

For every religious martyr who died for their cause famously, how many people backed down from their convictions when faced with the reality of their situation?

As for torture. Yes, a "good" torturer can get anyone to admit/profess/claim anything under duress. If someone tortured me to make me worship their god I'd likely end up telling him I do just to make the pain stop. That doesn't mean I actually started worshipping it and an all powerful deity would know that.

Finally, Joan of Arc and her canonisation. That's hardly convincing. Yes, she died in agony in the flames, as did many under the dubious care of the Catholic Church. Those who died in their fires, not part of their cause, were "heretics", while others who died in their cause are "saints" and "martyrs". Thousands of kamikaze pilots died believing their cause was just and that their emperor was divine. Does that make the divinity of the emperor real?

And it seems that the criteria for sainthood isn't what it used to be. With the latest two, we have to ask just how many of these saints have been made so for political reasons?