Your stance on Hard Atheism

[trmof]

Yes, if we invented time travel and traveled 150 years into the past, we would rightfully be seen as gods and could probably convince people to worship us. How is that not useful definition?

Because if we qualify,it is not a concept of anything qualitatively new.I daresay noone here would pronounce such a thing an impossibility, yet it has little to do with what is commonly meant by a god.

The vast majority of historical gods were created by other gods, usually through childbirth. Creator Gods are few and far between. There is one creator God and the other gods are simply created beings convincing people to worship them. They are the same as us but with technology that appears to be magical to us.

---

Let me repost this again for Boru, as it got lost in that edited post back there.:

I have a non-sarcastic question: If perfect bionic eyes existed or full eye transplants were possible, and a person you never met contacted you out of the blue and said God told them to purchase you a new eye, would you consider this evidence of the existence of God?

No. I would consider it evidence that my benefactor believed in God, but his simply saying so doesn't veridicate his claim. He might, for instance, as easily have told me that a pot of tea told him to buy me the eyes. In no case would I accept what he said as true, simply because he said it.

Boru

Well in that case, it is possible that God simply sees it as useless to try communicating with you.