I have an honest question for theists.

[Reforged]

But thats not comparable, if free-will was an illusion you'd have no choice but to act as if you had it because whatevers pulling your strings has chosen thats how you should behave.
If you were given conclusive proof God didn't exist, that is to say that its 100% certain, you're saying you'd willingly, knowingly ignore it to fit in with your own beliefs on how reality should be.
Now correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that be textbook definition of self-delusion that borders on psychosis?

If it were discovered that God was real and proven conclusively then that would be fascinating, it would change everything and it'd be a subject of intense study. Of course it would be met with intense scepticism but so is every subject of scientific study, if the undeniable proof was there then we'd concede it as a fact yet you wouldn't be willing to change your views if it was irrevocably proven he wasn't? You wouldn't take an active interest in finding out how we really came to be? You'd just cling to your beliefs?
Is that really true?

Well I guess I would say it depends how convincing the proof is. If I was convinced 100% God doesn't exist, as opposed to 99.9%, then it changes. If I was 100% sure, I would not be able to act as if God exists.

Well, 100% certainty is the question posed to you.
If you were given 100% conclusive proof that God didn't exist how would you live your life? What would you make your purpose? Would you view the world with less wonder as a construct without meaning or with more wonder as a mystery still yet to be unravelled? Would it make you more motivated to live or less?
I mean theres so many implications and questions you'd have to consider, thats what this hypothetical is about.

[FallentoReason]

I'll lavish the lovely girl because I'd think much of her. Kindness, a show of love and the sort. What's your point hobbit from the Shire?

I know you would lovva

Point is: love beats logic

Isn't it some sort of 'pseudo-fact' that acting out of emotion can be dangerous?

[Mystic]

Well I guess I would say it depends how convincing the proof is. If I was convinced 100% God doesn't exist, as opposed to 99.9%, then it changes. If I was 100% sure, I would not be able to act as if God exists.

Well, 100% certainty is the question posed to you.
If you were given 100% conclusive proof that God didn't exist how would you live your life?

An argument can be 100% conclusive, but a different thing to be 100% convinced by it.

[Whateverist]

How about this argument, which is not a knock out one (not conclusive):

Morality is inspiring with God.
Morality is not inspiring without God.
We are inspired by morality whether we acknowledge God or not.
Therefore God exists.

Seems a little desperate.

[Reforged]

Well, 100% certainty is the question posed to you.
If you were given 100% conclusive proof that God didn't exist how would you live your life?

An argument can be 100% conclusive, but a different thing to be 100% convinced by it.

---

Well, 100% certainty is the question posed to you.
If you were given 100% conclusive proof that God didn't exist how would you live your life?

An argument can be 100% conclusive, but a different thing to be 100% convinced by it.

If it was 100% conclusive, as in absolutely certain its accurate, then why wouldn't you be convinced? That'd be like:
RD: This is a stone.
MK: Na-uh.
RD: What? Look at it, feel it, experiment on it. Its a stone.
MK: I'm not convinced, I think its a sponge.
RD: WHAT!?
GC: I agree.
RD: Nobody asked you. -.-

... got sidetracked but you get the point.

[Mystic]

An argument can be 100% conclusive, but a different thing to be 100% convinced by it.

---

An argument can be 100% conclusive, but a different thing to be 100% convinced by it.

If it was 100% conclusive, as in absolutely certain its accurate, then why wouldn't you be convinced? That'd be like:
RD: This is a stone.
MK: Na-uh.
RD: What? Look at it, feel it, experiment on it. Its a stone.
MK: I'm not convinced, I think its a sponge.
RD: WHAT!?
GC: I agree.
RD: Nobody asked you. -.-

... got sidetracked but you get the point.

Not really. I can present contradictions, and logical problems in Quran, but most believers would not be convinced, even if they were logically sound.

Any proof against God would be philosophical, and philosophical arguments often seemed sound to people, but they didn't know for sure, and were often wrong.

So if an argument against God was presented and proven, it's all together a different thing to put total trust in the argument, specially when philosophical arguments have been debunked. It may very well be sound but it's a different thing for us to be 100% convinced.

Look at the argument against the incompatibly between free-will and future knowledge of God. It seems like it's a sound argument, but believers are not convinced otherwise.

It's a one thing to have a concrete argument, it's another thing to be convinced.

[Minimalist]

Seems a little desperate.

Seems like horseshit.

[Reforged]

If it was 100% conclusive, as in absolutely certain its accurate, then why wouldn't you be convinced? That'd be like:
RD: This is a stone.
MK: Na-uh.
RD: What? Look at it, feel it, experiment on it. Its a stone.
MK: I'm not convinced, I think its a sponge.
RD: WHAT!?
GC: I agree.
RD: Nobody asked you. -.-

... got sidetracked but you get the point.

Not really. I can present contradictions, and logical problems in Quran, but most believers would not be convinced, even if they were logically sound.

Any proof against God would be philosophical, and philosophical arguments seemed sound to people, but they didn't know for sure.

So if an argument against God was presented and proven, it's all together a different thing to put total trust in the argument, specially when philosophical arguments have been debunked. It may very well be sound but it's a different thing for us to be 100% convinced.

Look at the argument against the incompatibly between free-will and future knowledge of God. It seems like it's a sound argument, but believers are not convinced otherwise.

It's a one thing to have a concrete argument, it's another thing to be convinced.

But we're not talking about simply an argument or contradictions in a holy book, we're talking about undeniable, solid proof that God doesn't exist and you're telling me that even if this hypothetical proof existed and was shown to you and it was undeniable you still wouldn't be convinced.
I mean, wow. I'm sorry but thats pretty damning. If this is all a ploy so you don't have to imagine not basing your life around your belief system then could you cut this short and just say so? Not being rude, thats fine and if thats the case we'll leave it there but if thats the case and you just carry on diverting the conversation to avoid discussing it then all you're doing is wasting my time and yours.

[Mystic]

But we're not talking about simply an argument or contradictions in a holy book, we're talking about undeniable, solid proof that God doesn't exist and you're telling me that even if this hypothetical proof existed and was shown to you and it was undeniable you still wouldn't be convinced.

No I said I'm not sure, if I would be convinced or not convinced. I assuming I most likely will have a small doubt about it, because, it would be an argument of a philosophical nature.

If this is all a ploy so you don't have to imagine not basing your life around your belief system then could you cut this short and just say so?

I'm trying to imagine. I guess I'm not sure. Perhaps I would focus less on soul development and more on enjoying life. Perhaps I would become a moral nihilist and not believe in objective morality. Perhaps I would become depressed or more happier. I don't know. I guess it's true I can't really imagine life without belief in God.

[Reforged]

But we're not talking about simply an argument or contradictions in a holy book, we're talking about undeniable, solid proof that God doesn't exist and you're telling me that even if this hypothetical proof existed and was shown to you and it was undeniable you still wouldn't be convinced.

No I said I'm not sure, if I would be convinced or not convinced. I assuming I most likely will have a small doubt about it, because, it would be an argument of a philosophical nature.

If this is all a ploy so you don't have to imagine not basing your life around your belief system then could you cut this short and just say so?

I'm trying to imagine. I guess I'm not sure. Perhaps I would focus less on soul development and more on enjoying life. Perhaps I would become a moral nihilist and not believe in objective morality. Perhaps I would become depressed or more happier. I don't know. I guess it's true I can't really imagine life without belief in God.

Fair enough.