Would atheist worship The biblical God if his existence was proven?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

You tell us we are sinners, and you speculate that there is such a thing as sin. As you have not presented ample evidence for anyone here to take your word for it, we must maintain a neutral position: there is no such thing as sin.

You are saying there is no such thing as sin. So you also must prove your postitive.

Are you making the claim that sin does exist?

You're the one advocating a concept and we're the ones assessing its validity based on your testimony and evidence.

Sorry bucko, you can't shift your burden that easily

[Avodaiah]

So does that mean that anything anyone imagines at any given point in time has to be taken at face value with an equal degree of certainty and uncertainty?

No, it just means that if you don't know whether something exists or not (i.e. no evidence either way), you can't be completely sure it doesn't.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So does that mean that anything anyone imagines at any given point in time has to be taken at face value with an equal degree of certainty and uncertainty?

No, it just means that if you don't know whether something exists or not (i.e. no evidence either way), you can't be completely sure it doesn't.

Which leads to the logical conclusion of everything being possible, including me having sex with you when you're asleep. But every time you wake up, I'm back at home having sex with a female version of myself.

Possible, no?

The lack of evidence, coupled with the absurdity of the claim and the knowledge that it contradicts reality as we know it renders the claim moot.

The more logical position would be that of pragmatism, in that if we were to discover a state or expand our knowledge of reality to the point where such an event occurring were not just imaginable (some how) but possible, then we could accept it as potentially true. Indeed, this is the position I hold, but as currently the claim invalidates reality as we know it (or could possible know it), and has nothing to back it up aside assertion, it is false, and I can dismiss it with the same confidence as it was proposed (asserted).

[Sinnersburninhell100]

You are saying there is no such thing as sin. So you also must prove your postitive.

Are you making the claim that sin does exist?

You're the one advocating a concept and we're the ones assessing its validity based on your testimony and evidence.

Sorry bucko, you can't shift your burden that easily

It is evidence to most people that creation had a creator. The secularist don't want to feel guilt for their sin and decide that nothing gave birth to something. That seems proof that some divine code instrumental in our morals and laws,

[Ryantology]

It is evidence to most people that creation had a creator.

To people with actual, functioning brains, that is not so much evidence as it is an unfounded, uneducated and patently ridiculous assumption.

The secularist don't want to feel guilt for their sin and decide that nothing gave birth to something.

I wouldn't give any more of a fuck if your god was real. His opinions would be just as meaningless to me.

That seems proof that some divine code instrumental in our morals and laws,

[Jackalope]

it is evidence to most people that creation had a creator. The secularist don't want to feel guilt for their sin and decide that nothing gave birth to something. That seems proof that some divine code instrumental in our morals and laws,

[Cyberman]

It is evidence to most people that creation had a creator.

No, that's a claim and it needs supporting.

The secularist don't want to feel guilt for their sin and decide that nothing gave birth to something.

What sin?

And before you go running away with this silly idea that the Universe came from nothing, that's not what Big Bang cosmology shows at all. Not to mention that the originator of Big Bang Theory, Georges Lemaître, was a priest as well as an astronomer and physicist. So asserting that it's a secular idea intended to absolve sinners from guilt etc is skating on astonishingly thin ice.

That seems proof that some divine code instrumental in our morals and laws,

"Proof"?

[Bad Writer]

You tell us we are sinners, and you speculate that there is such a thing as sin. As you have not presented ample evidence for anyone here to take your word for it, we must maintain a neutral position: there is no such thing as sin.

You are saying there is no such thing as sin. So you also must prove your postitive.

Okay, if there's sin, then prove it. Convince us.

[themonkeyman]

You have sacrificed your own morality to a book written 1000's of years ago by superstitious, Bronze Age barbarians.

You know, deep down, that no one deserves eternal torture for finite crimes. Yet, in order to maintain your faith based beliefs, you are forced to try to justify the actions of the immoral deity depicted in the Bible.

What a great thing that such a deity doesn't actually exist. Too bad so many of his followers do.

I sometimes have doubts but I feel that when I see the world so broken that perhaps humans are corrupted. The world could be better if people followed Jesus's example and thought about how Christ loved them so much that they do not have to burn in hell because of his sacrifice.

I respect what Jesus did but do you not think Christians are pretty much lie Jesus. He went around causing a stir and he also was very condescending

[pineapplebunnybounce]

So does that mean that anything anyone imagines at any given point in time has to be taken at face value with an equal degree of certainty and uncertainty?

No, it just means that if you don't know whether something exists or not (i.e. no evidence either way), you can't be completely sure it doesn't.

So?

Why do theists say this as if it's something to be proud of? You willingly reduce something you worship to the level of of possibility with the wildest imaginary creature. That is the lowest form of possibility anything can have. That is what you get when you have ZERO evidence.

It's not something to be proud of. It's not something to bring people's attention to and say, look, you can't deny my god just like you can't deny unicorns.

I don't know if you've thought this through or you're just parroting something some stupid religious leader said. But when theists say this even I feel embarrassed.

Get your act together.

And it's not true that we do not have evidence against your god. Physical laws dictate that Noah's ark could not have happened. I know, this is where you start on the "you're not interpreting it right" "argument", just ... get your story straight with yourself, alright?