Johnny Skeptic

I would be willing to become a Christian if certain kinds of evidence of my choice became available. Would fundamentalist Christians be willing to give up Christianity based upon any kind of evidence?

Edit: Oops, I meant to post this at the General Religious Discussions Forum. I request that a moderator move this thread there.

Edit: On second thought, if possible, will moderators please leave this thread at this forum? If that is not acceptable, the General Religious Discussions Forum would be fine.

DaMan121

What kind of evidence? If there was a bunch of documentation that some dude named Jesus was executed by the orders of Pilate, a bunch of historians recording an eclipse and earthquake around the same time, and the subsequent Day of the Dead scenario in Jerusalem - you would believe Jesus was / is God, the one and only creator of the entire universe?

Soul Invictus

Do you mean theist or specifically Christian?

Johnny Skeptic

Even if the ancient evidence was twice as good as it is now, that would not be good enough for me. Ancient evidence is much too subject to tampering and innocent but inaccurate revelations. I would require the following evidence:

1 - A personal appearance by a being claiming to be the God of the Bible.

2 - A demonstration of power. Speaking a new galaxy into existence would be acceptable.

3 - Sufficient answers to some questions.

4 - Evidence that heaven and hell exist.

In my opinion, under those conditions, even though I could not be sure of the supposed God's identity, Pascal's Wager would be a good bet to accept. At present, Pascal's Wager is not a good bet to accept. How is the Bible any more convincing than my hypothetical scenario?

Tigers!

Not any kind of evidence Johnny but rather that "certain kinds of evidence of my choice became available."

Mikael

the only evidence I need , is a Cookie.
A simple cookie, I leave it to God to choose which kind it is.
If God can not even grant me a Cookie, how am I suppose to give Him my soul ?

couch_sloth

Would you give your soul to Otis Spunkmeyer?

motorhead

The problem is what evidence do we have that Christianity is the "ultimate truth"? The NT? It's been said before, and here we go again, but clearly the NT has errors and is full of contradictions. Non-believers are supposed to accept this as the message from the perfect God of the universe? I realize most Christians will say the NT has no errors and contradictions but this is laughable as any reasonably intelligent person can read and study the NT and see for themselves.

Johnny Skeptic

In my opinion, it is an issue of whether or not it is reasonably possible that any being has an opportunity to influence my eternal future. In other words, it is an issue of self-interest. At present, there is not sufficient evidence that such a being exists. If a powerful being showed up, claimed to be a God, spoke a new galaxy into existence, demonstrated that he could raise people from the dead, demonstrated to my satisfaction that he was moral, asked me to accept him, and stated that the alternative would be becoming dust in the ground after death, that would not prove that he was God, but it would prove that he had the power to provide me not with just immortality, but with a comfortable immortal life.

Would any Christians and skeptics at this forum accept that supposed God? I would. That evidence would surely be much better than the evidence that Christianity offers.

Valdemar

I would, too. But as a previous poster suggested, creating a cookie for me would do as proof of power, if not godhood. (If only it could be shown not to be a parlor trick, of course.)