What if a new god showed up.

MooseJam

What if another god appeared from another dimension and he was a really nice guy, didn't smite people or drown them or damn them to eternal hell, and he had a great sense of humour and laughed at jokes and he created another heaven where all were welcome, and he openly gave you the choice of following him, would you switch allegiance ?

crotalus667

MooseJam wrote: »

What if another god appeared from another dimension and he was a really nice guy, didn't smite people or drown them or damn them to eternal hell, and he had a great sense of humour and laughed at jokes and he created another heaven where all were welcome, and he openly gave you the choice of following him, would you switch allegiance ?

Would that not make him the only god that people already worship ,?? Would it not be the case that some of the prophets where just off a bit ??

Run_to_da_hills

MooseJam wrote: »

What if another god appeared from another dimension and he was a really nice guy, didn't smite people or drown them or damn them to eternal hell, and he had a great sense of humour and laughed at jokes and he created another heaven where all were welcome, and he openly gave you the choice of following him, would you switch allegiance ?

Don't believe in it, Satan himself can appear as an angel of light.

"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect". Matthew 24 23/24.

The true church will not fall for a false imposter.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me, and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand". John 10 vs 27&28

Pompey Magnus

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Don't believe in it, Satan himself can appear as an angel of light.

"Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect". Matthew 24 23/24.

How can you be certain, absolutely certain, that Jesus was not Satan in disguise who came to Earth to lead people away from the Torah and the Jewish way of life that God demanded in the Old Testament?

Maybe Christians are actually infuriating God by worshipping a false prophet?

Fanny Cradock

Probably in much the same manner that some atheists can be certain, absolutely certain, that there is no God.

At some stage you just have to look at the evidence presented to you and go with your informed decision. For a Christian this would mean rejecting the idea that betterment through Jesus actually comes from a being incapable of goodness.

AtomicHorror

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Probably in much the same manner that some atheists can be certain, absolutely certain, that there is no God.

Generally they merely consider it to be unlikely enough to be irrelevant.

Pompey Magnus

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Probably in much the same manner that some atheists can be certain, absolutely certain, that there is no God.

For the record I'm not absolutely certain that there is no God.

At some stage you just have to look at the evidence presented to you and go with your informed decision. For a Christian this would mean rejecting the idea that betterment through Jesus actually comes from a being incapable of goodness.

Would it really be goodness though if ultimately he would be fooling people into worshipping a false God and damning themselves by choosing wrongly? It sounds like just the kind of practical joke old Beelzebub would try and pull.

Or alternatively maybe Jesus was really the Messiah, but it was St Paul who was working for the Devil? From the NT it seems like Jesus advocated the continued use of the Torah and Jewish Law and never sought to replace it or deminish its importance, but then along comes this mysterious Saul who leads Christians away from the Jerusalem Church of the true followers and family of Jesus and tricks them into rejecting the Jewish faith of Jesus for his own Pauline Christianity.

Maybe when Matthew was warning of false prophets he had Paul in mind, after all Matthew was the Gospel writer to have Jesus say that whoever teaches others to break the commandments "will be called least in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:19). The Pauline interpretation of Christianity would have been gaining in popularity by the time Matthew was writing, perhaps he saw what Paul was up to and tried to warn Christians against it?

philologos

This question is about as useless as asking, what if a blue unicorn turned up outside your front door.

Fanny Cradock

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Generally they merely consider it to be unlikely enough to be irrelevant.

Indeed! I'll admit that there was a wee bit of hyperbole involved in my statement. Although I would point out that I have encountered a few atheists (I didn't specify any names) who have categorically denied the possibility of the existence of God or any gods. Though they may also be slipping into hyperbole, I have no reason to believe them liars when they state this. Besides, to me the term 'unlikely enough to be irrelevant' seems like just a diplomatic way of saying 'when it boils down to it, there is no chance'.

Lets face it, Depeche Mode. Both of us - and for completely different reasons - could probably agree that your theory is unlikely enough as to be irrelevant.

jaffa20

Jakkass wrote: »

This question is about as useless as asking, what if a blue unicorn turned up outside your front door.

Then why did u ask it

Queen-Mise

it would be downright hilarious.

it does raise a question though, if another god did turn up, would this then prove the existence of the christian god, or would it just be the first god that could be proven

what fun would be had in theology/philosophy departments

Fanny Cradock

He didn't. However, to find out who did ask the question, you will have to solve a series of riddles each more devious than the last!

philologos

jaffa20 wrote: »

Then why did u ask it

As Fanny Cradock said, I never asked it.

Pompey Magnus

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Lets face it, Depeche Mode. Both of us - and for completely different reasons - could probably agree that your theory is unlikely enough as to be irrelevant.

I think if we get to the stage where we are debating whether supernatural forces are at work in this world then nothing is irrelevant and it anything is possible.

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

I would point out that I have encountered a few atheists (I didn't specify any names) who have categorically denied the possibility of the existence of God or any gods.

hmm... I'm intrigued -- who are these people? I've never met any m'self!

Tim_Murphy

Jakkass wrote: »

This question is about as useless as asking, what if a blue unicorn turned up outside your front door.

Indeed. if a person is completely unwilling to question their belief then yes it is.

robindch

MooseJam wrote: »

would you switch allegiance ?

If you mean, would I believe that he existed, then fwiw yes, I expect I probably would. An ounce of visible presence easily outweighs a ton of invisible immanence.

eamon234

How can a new one show up - the old one hasn't showed up yet!

PDN

MooseJam wrote: »

What if another god appeared from another dimension and he was a really nice guy, didn't smite people or drown them or damn them to eternal hell, and he had a great sense of humour and laughed at jokes and he created another heaven where all were welcome, and he openly gave you the choice of following him, would you switch allegiance ?

There can only be one God (capital G - meaning the supreme being beyond which no higher being can exist). So, if this 'new god' (small g) is simply a being superior to us, but not the supreme being, then he should be rejected as one who is trying to steal away our worship from the one true God.

If this new God is really the one God (capital G) then that would mean that we have been wrong all along about who God is. In that unlikely event then obviously we should worship the only true God.

However, in the absence of this new god showing up, I will continue with my existing allegiance to a God who does smite people, but who also has a great sense of humor, laughs at my jokes, created a heaven where everyone is welcome, and openly gives us the choice of following Him.

crotalus667

PDN wrote: »

If this new God is really the one God (capital G) then that would mean that we have been wrong all along about who God is. In that unlikely event then obviously we should worship the only true God.
.

Would it mean you where wrong ?? or would it just mean that the some of the profits where just a bit off / false ??

PDN wrote: »

, and openly gives us the choice of following Him.

Hmm is it or is it not a case of follow me or go to hell ??

Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death."

PDN

crotalus667 wrote: »

Would it mean you where wrong ?? or would it just mean that the some of the profits where just a bit off / false ??

That would depend on how big the differences were.

BTW, I hope the mispelling of 'prophets' was not intentional?

Hmm is it or is it not a case of follow me or go to hell ??

Since hell is an utter complete absence of God, yes.

Bduffman

PDN wrote: »

There can only be one God (capital G - meaning the supreme being beyond which no higher being can exist). So, if this 'new god' (small g) is simply a being superior to us, but not the supreme being, then he should be rejected as one who is trying to steal away our worship from the one true God.

Yes, but how can you know this 'new god' is not the real deal? Isn't it just as likely that he is the 'one true god' as your god? I mean, at least he has the decency to turn up & categorically remove any doubt about his existence.

PDN wrote: »

If this new God is really the one God (capital G) then that would mean that we have been wrong all along about who God is.

Obviously impossible :rolleyes:

PDN wrote: »

However, in the absence of this new god showing up, I will continue with my existing allegiance to a God who does smite people, but who also has a great sense of humor, laughs at my jokes, created a heaven where everyone is welcome, and openly gives us the choice of following Him.

Have you actually heard him laughing at your jokes?? Maybe what you hear is this 'new god' laughing at you??

crotalus667

PDN wrote: »

BTW, I hope the mispelling of 'prophets' was not intentional?

No it was not intentional (Im mildly dyslexic normally I type everything out in word before posting)

PDN

crotalus667 wrote: »

No it was not intentional (Im mildly dyslexic normally I type everything out in word before posting)

When listening to some of today's preachers it sometimes seems as if profits are more important than prophets.

Akrasia

crotalus667 wrote: »

No it was not intentional (Im mildly dyslexic normally I type everything out in word before posting)

Are you using firefox? its got a built in spell-checker that's really really handy

crotalus667

PDN wrote: »

When listening to some of today's preachers it sometimes seems as if profits are more important than prophets.

You cant be talking about people like benny hinn !!!:rolleyes: (notice lower case b and h) Have you seen the clips of him holding his head like he’s getting some divine message while he gives out details on how to fill out the credit card details on the donation cards at his stadium shows

People like him really do give decent Christians a bad name (and im saying that as an atheist :eek:)

Are you using firefox? its got a built in spell-checker that's really really handy

To be honest Im happy enough using word , but if I have to change pc’s I might give fire fox a go (I have heard good things about it)

Zombrex

It is an interesting question MooseJam

If another "(G)od" turned up and came to humans offering similar stuff as the Christian God, all the love and companionship and the after life etc, and he seemed a bit nicer (less of the go destroy that civilization please) would people choose him over the Christian God.

PDN seems to imply that a person should always worship the top dog god (with a capital "G"). I would be interested in the reasoning behind that.

If one had the choice between "gods", who all offered similar stuff with small differences, why would someone not simply choose the god that offered them the best match?

Also the assertion that there can only be one God (I assume that means the creator of everything) seem rather unsupported.

If it is possible that one eternal being exists surely it is just as possible that more than one eternal being exists.

Zombrex

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Probably in much the same manner that some atheists can be certain, absolutely certain, that there is no God.

Well no, not really.

Atheists largely work on the assumption that supernatural agents don't exist (or where created by the imagination of humans), and that the physical rules of the universe bind the entities inside the universe.

Theists on the other hand are perfectly happy to imagine supernatural agents existing, and that these supernatural agents (God, Satan, angels etc) can easily manipulate the rules of the universe at will.

The problem with that (as posters such as myself regularly point out) is that testing and assessment go out the window if one accepts the existence of such supernatural agents, because supernatural agents are not bound by any physical rules.

So how does one seriously test God/Jesus in any proper fashion when one has already accepted the idea of a being that has supernatural powers and can manipulate anything at will.

The standard response to that seems to be that Jesus appears to us to be truthful in what he does, and truthfulness implies goodness. Therefore it is more logical conclude that Jesus is good rather than bad.

There is of course problems with that logic. Firstly, truthfulness doesn't necessarily imply goodness. Also how Christians actually view what God/Jesus claims to have done is through his own religion, through books that are supposed to have been inspired by him. There is little independent views of this evidence, and one would question if such independent assessment is even possible given that, again, we are dealing with a supernatural being. Jesus/Satan could simply manipulate dissenting views to make them favorable.

The other response is that following Jesus leads to an improved life, and an improved life implies that what improved it was good.

Again, there are flaws in that view as it is entirely possible to imagine an evil Jesus seeking to manipulate people away from some truth (such as the Jewish God) rewarding people who follow him to encourage them to stray even further away.

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Also the assertion that there can only be one God (I assume that means the creator of everything) seem rather unsupported.

I would be interested to know how you can have two Gods each of whom created everything.

Bduffman

PDN wrote: »

I would be interested to know how you can have two Gods each of whom created everything.

erm.... half each?

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

I would be interested to know how you can have two Gods each of whom created everything.

Pretty easily, one would imagine, as an act of a joint/pooled action or will.

I don't mean that one created half of everything, and the other created the other half.

I mean the creation of everything was a combined act.

If I remember my world religions class from secondary school there is an Asian religion that believes something along the lines of this, that a "male" god and a "female" god joined "hands" (at least in the PG rated version) and created the world/universe in an instant, the world being a reflection of their joint will.

bushy...

crotalus667 wrote: »

To be honest Im happy enough using word , but if I have to change pc’s I might give fire fox a go (I have heard good things about it)

Try Safari too ( Web browser from Apple ) :

http://www.apple.com/safari/download/ god2.0 compatible too

Zombrex

bushy... wrote: »

Try Safari too ( Web browser from Apple ) :

http://www.apple.com/safari/download/ god2.0 compatible too

boo ... hiss ...

robindch

PDN wrote: »

I would be interested to know how you can have two Gods each of whom created everything.

Since, as a christian, you believe that the god who created everything comes in three parts, I'd have thought that believing in a two-part god was a cinch. No?

.

philologos

Tim_Murphy wrote: »

Indeed. if a person is completely unwilling to question their belief then yes it is.

Not really. Questioning the beliefs would involve looking at what was actually written in the Bible, and then making a counter argument against it, and perhaps bringing some reason to the table. If the OP wishes to critique what is written about monotheism, he / she should make an argument against it, and at least try to convince us instead of asking hypothetical questions with little or no basis.

Zombrex

Jakkass wrote: »

Not really. Questioning the beliefs would involve looking at what was actually written in the Bible, and then making a counter argument against it, and perhaps bringing some reason to the table. If the OP wishes to critique what is written about monotheism, he / she should make an argument against it, and at least try to convince us instead of asking hypothetical questions with little or no basis.

I think the purpose of the question was as a thought experiment.

I don't think MooseJam was actually arguing for the existence of multiple gods.