What would make me accept the existence of a deity?

[Ryantology]

By the same rules making God impossible to disprove, theists have made God impossible to positively prove, so if I ever see 'God' claiming to make an appearance, I am never going to accept it at face value, because every other explanation for it would make more sense.

[pocaracas]

How would you identify it?

Tele-transport may be used by a sufficiently developed society.

Well presumably he'd have me pick a hard, and then I'd put it back in the deck and then he'd know what card it is!

He'd be fucking god, he would do godlike things. If there was an alien posing as god that was omnipotent, then that is the same as that alien being god.

yeah, I guess we've been spoiled by the Q in star trek.

[CapnAwesome]

By the same rules making God impossible to disprove, theists have made God impossible to positively prove, so if I ever see 'God' claiming to make an appearance, I am never going to accept it at face value, because every other explanation for it would make more sense.

You know, I guess I'm not that entrenched. If God, or a being of such incredible power as to be indistinguishable from God, appeared that would be good enough for me. I think the chances of this happening are about the same as the chances of me crapping up a unicorn this morning.

[Celi]

By the same rules making God impossible to disprove, theists have made God impossible to positively prove, so if I ever see 'God' claiming to make an appearance, I am never going to accept it at face value, because every other explanation for it would make more sense.

You know, I guess I'm not that entrenched. If God, or a being of such incredible power as to be indistinguishable from God, appeared that would be good enough for me. I think the chances of this happening are about the same as the chances of me crapping up a unicorn this morning.

What exactly would that entail, though? I think any scenario involving miracles that would seem to confirm God's existence is bound to be invalidated by Clarke's Third Law. If a powerful being appeared and did something that seemed impossible and godlike to us, we would have no way to determine whether it was accomplished through a greater understanding of the universe than ours, which is just sufficiently advanced technology, or a deity performing miracles.

[Angrboda]

You know, I guess I'm not that entrenched. If God, or a being of such incredible power as to be indistinguishable from God, appeared that would be good enough for me. I think the chances of this happening are about the same as the chances of me crapping up a unicorn this morning.

What exactly would that entail, though? I think any scenario involving miracles that would seem to confirm God's existence is bound to be invalidated by Clarke's Third Law. If a powerful being appeared and did something that seemed impossible and godlike to us, we would have no way to determine whether it was accomplished through a greater understanding of the universe than ours, which is just sufficiently advanced technology, or a deity performing miracles.

[CapnAwesome]

What exactly would that entail, though? I think any scenario involving miracles that would seem to confirm God's existence is bound to be invalidated by Clarke's Third Law. If a powerful being appeared and did something that seemed impossible and godlike to us, we would have no way to determine whether it was accomplished through a greater understanding of the universe than ours, which is just sufficiently advanced technology, or a deity performing miracles.

It would be good enough for me. It's kind of funny that you guys are being this stubborn. Do you really expect god(s) to appear tomorrow and you to nitpick at him? Of course not, because there is no god(s). If everyone got a god broadcast into their minds every morning would you all nitpick and be so dogmatic about it? If it did happen I would have to accept that as plausible positive evidence. Nothing like that is every going to happen though. So I safely remain an Atheist and always will be.

[Celi]

What exactly would that entail, though? I think any scenario involving miracles that would seem to confirm God's existence is bound to be invalidated by Clarke's Third Law. If a powerful being appeared and did something that seemed impossible and godlike to us, we would have no way to determine whether it was accomplished through a greater understanding of the universe than ours, which is just sufficiently advanced technology, or a deity performing miracles.

It would be good enough for me. It's kind of funny that you guys are being this stubborn. Do you really expect god(s) to appear tomorrow and you to nitpick at him? Of course not, because there is no god(s). If everyone got a god broadcast into their minds every morning would you all nitpick and be so dogmatic about it? If it did happen I would have to accept that as plausible positive evidence. Nothing like that is every going to happen though. So I safely remain an Atheist and always will be.

The fact that the question is hypothetical doesn't change the answer. When one possible explanation is divine, and another is non-supernatural, the latter will always be more likely because the very thing that makes something supernatural is its impossibility. If I got a message supposedly from God every morning straight into my mind, some sort of technologically-achieved telepathy would seem infinitely (literally) more plausible than God. I don't think that's dogmatic.

Practically speaking, of course, if a being repeatedly displays godlike powers, there comes a point where you have to sort of accept it as being an immensely powerful being. But as for whether it was supernatural rather than technological, I would always remain agnostic. I really can't think of any evidence that would convince me otherwise.

[Ryantology]

If everyone got a god broadcast into their minds every morning would you all nitpick and be so dogmatic about it? If it did happen I would have to accept that as plausible positive evidence.

Absolutely I would. I can think of too many ways one might duplicate many of God's supposed powers with sufficiently advanced technology. And I am not going to worship anybody just because he has better toys than I do. Someone from the Middle Ages might think I am God, or something close to it, because of the things I could do with access to modern technology.

Why shouldn't we be skeptical?

[Angrboda]

If everyone got a god broadcast into their minds every morning would you all nitpick and be so dogmatic about it? If it did happen I would have to accept that as plausible positive evidence.

Absolutely I would. I can think of too many ways one might duplicate many of God's supposed powers with sufficiently advanced technology. And I am not going to worship anybody just because he has better toys than I do. Someone from the Middle Ages might think I am God, or something close to it, because of the things I could do with access to modern technology.

Why shouldn't we be skeptical?

How does one judge whether something is a god if not by the effects? What criteria would "rule in" a god? It sounds like you would rule out any and all potential gods. If they have a method, their godhood is technological and not real; if they have no method, you eliminate the hypothesis as being an argument from ignorance. It sounds like you've rigged the game so that no god can possibly win. That seems to make your disbelief as irrational as the belief of those who accept a god based on too little evidence.

[Ace Otana]

This is what all theists want to know. What would make an atheist accept the existence of a deity?

Strong scientific evidence. Without it, there's no chance.
If the existence of god cannot be tested, it will be rejected. What cannot be tested, cannot be used.
The main reason why I don't believe is the total lack of evidence. Secondly it makes no sense, none of it, and thirdly, seems a bit primitive and childish...

So what would it take to make me believe? Lots of evidence, consistency (everything making sense). That might do it.