Will a sign from God will convince us of his existence?

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Okay try this one...suppose the name Jesus was found inscribed on the cell walls of a bacteria presumed to have been present since the dawn of creation...

That you would even propose such a bizarre hypothetical as something that could convince us to accept this Jesus bloke (whoever that was) as a god (whatever that is) I think speaks volumes about this entire discussion.

But as others have said, if it stood up to scrutiny and was the last and importantly only reasoned explanation as to why it would be the case left after all others had been eliminated, it would be compelling in that given time frame.

Of course, the next day someone could come up with another more evidenced explanation and blow it right out of the water.

And that's the beauty of science; it's never static. It's always changing as claims are are countered/updated with other claims that have more evidence (or a better explanation of the available evidence) behind it.

[CapnAwesome]

Okay try this one...suppose the name Jesus was found inscribed on the cell walls of a bacteria presumed to have been present since the dawn of creation...

If it were super clear, in times new roman font, in English, I would be convinced. Muslims are seeing Allah written all the time in nature in Arabic. In the clouds, on a cow, all kinds of stupid shit. The problem is that Allah looks like just a couple of squiggly lines.

[Ben Davis]

I STILL would no get on my knees and worship and ask for things and life eternal, why in the world I would do that, what would be the possible reason for that ?

For some reason, I read this comment in this voice:

[truthBtold]

If a turd had the word god on it... its still a piece of shit.

[Neo-Scholastic]

So the answer to the OP is no. Not even a sign from God Himself would sway an atheist.

So now I know, as do you, that you have lost all right to demand evidence since you have no intentions of receiving any.

[Tonus]

Well, I guess theists are off the hook now.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So the answer to the OP is no. Not even a sign from God Himself would sway an atheist.

So now I know, as do you, that you have lost all right to demand evidence since you have no intentions of receiving any.

I mean.........fuck.

Just to clarify, you have literally ignored every post in response to your questions and continued to parrot a claim that nobody here has made, right?

[SteelCurtain]

So the answer to the OP is no. Not even a sign from God Himself would sway an atheist.

So now I know, as do you, that you have lost all right to demand evidence since you have no intentions of receiving any.

So we have no intentions of receiving evidence because we would try to find a natural explanation for things before assuming the supernatural?

Are you even reading the posts? Nearly everyone said that they would accept evidence, but that 'God' would not be their de facto explanation for said evidence. That they would require the same standard for that evidence as they would for any other claim? And that also your particular brand of god wouldn't be the natural conclusion for any evidence for a God, save for the asinine Jesus bacterium you proposed. Aside from ridiculous hypotheses, why would it even surprise you that we (atheists) would require fantastic evidence for a fantastic claim?

So basically, what I'm reading is that you want to play the game, but you want special rules?

[Esquilax]

So the answer to the OP is no. Not even a sign from God Himself would sway an atheist.

So now I know, as do you, that you have lost all right to demand evidence since you have no intentions of receiving any.

Wow. I mean, there's no getting around this: that is a flat out lie you just told, fucker.

I love how obvious you've made your agenda here, how complete your commitment is to avoiding curiosity and investigation when it might show a result other than your preconceived notions. In accusing atheists of being intractable, all you've done is showcase how utterly dishonest and intractable you are.

Atheists: "Hey, why don't we fully examine this evidence and give it its due as a piece of data, as we would any other scientific artifact!"

Chad: "You didn't accept that it was god outright! You're treating evidence for god differently than anything else! You don't want evidence at all!"

I mean... Fuck, dude. That's just disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself for stooping that low, Chad.

[Minimalist]

It would have to be one hell of a fucking sign.... and would most likely be compromised by the nut waving it.