If Gods existence was proven...

Genghiz Cohen

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

Teutorix wrote: »

im, sorry but show me something that proves god wrote the bible. because im fairly certain it was written be men.

So it was written by some guys having a wicked high, believing a god was talking to them? Why is the center of Christianity then?

Hagar wrote: »

Why don't I look like Eddie Murphy, or Christina Applegate if it come to that?

Oh you.

conbhui wrote: »

created in his image? do you believe that?

No but there are people who do.
I'm just saying that if we were created to be like him, then we should be able to think like him, at least a little,

JimiTime

Dinner wrote: »

If a murderer kills someone, he's a prick.
If a murderer kills someone but explains that that person would be the next Hitler, I could understand but he's still a prick.
If a murderer kills someone and says 'it's alright, I have a plan', he is most definitely a prick.
Hiding behind 'we cannot possibly understand' doesn't wash with me.

If god can do anything, then he can explain his plan to us mere mortals so we can understand why he thinks it's right to kill a baby, but it would need to be a damn good reason.

Again, I don't get it. I do know why you say such things, but its poorly thought out at best. Stupid, arrogant or wicked at worst. Valmont put it best. Its something that I wouldn't even argue with someone about tbh. IMO, if someone can't see the issue with that thinking, it would be foolish to try convince them.

Teutorix

Genghiz Cohen wrote: »

So it was written by some guys having a wicked high, believing a god was talking to them? Why is the center of Christianity then?



Oh you.



No but there are people who do.
I'm just saying that if we were created to be like him, then we should be able to think like him, at least a little,

if that question had an object of inquiry in it, i might be able to answer it.

I assume you mean, "why is "it" the center of Christianity?" Probably because it was told to everyone since it was written that it is the word of god.

mewso

Valmont wrote: »

Surely we wouldn't be qualified to make such an assertion as we are mere mortals who could never comprehend his cosmic plan.

Hypothetical as this is, thinking you could know more than or outright castigate an omnipresent and immortal entity is either arrogant or foolish, or both.

If this God of the bible gives me a rule to follow he is using language that I can comprehend to do it. Hes not saying

"Whatever you do never ever ever ljlkjdldfsjgl ljdlk pouiop 98fsad789 dljgag; - got that? We are talking pain and suffering if you ever do that."

The rules are understandable. They are in human terms. Comprehension naturally allows for questioning.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

JimiTime wrote: »

I'm glad someone see's this. I really don't get the 'Well he's a prick if he does exist' malarky. I think you put it well in your post.

That only works if we all assume he has some secret unknown cosmic plan that unprickifies all the prick things he has done.

Its like see a man punching an old woman in the face until she started crying and begging him to stop and thinking "Wow, he is a prick" to be told "Hold on now, you don't know that this man has some unknown yet perfectly valid reason for doing all that so you aren't justified in saying he is a prick"

It may be within the vast realms of infinite possibility that this guy actually does have a perfectly valid reason for doing this (the woman is actually an alien trying to steal our oxygen), but until I find out this perfectly justifiable reason, I think he is a prick.

Any time God wants to inform me of why mass genocide was actually a good idea he can. Until then he is a prick.

To assume there must be a reason why all the stuff in the Bible was actually justified is, in my opinion, just looking for an excuse to square the circle in order so that believers can feel ok about worshipping such a horrible deity and not feel guilty about looking forward to the rewards.

Since I'm on a role with Godwins law, I'm sure lots of people found Hitler's methods distasteful but had faith that he knows best for Germany because they wanted to believe that this was true, Germany was great, her people were great, and her leaders were great.

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

That only works if we all assume he has some secret unknown cosmic plan that unprickifies all the prick things he has done.

Its like see a man punching an old woman in the face until she started crying and begging him to stop and thinking "Wow, he is a prick" to be told "Hold on now, you don't know that this man has some unknown yet perfectly valid reason for doing all that so you aren't justified in saying he is a prick"

It may be within the vast realms of infinite possibility that this guy actually does have a perfectly valid reason for doing this (the woman is actually an alien trying to steal our oxygen), but until I find out this perfectly justifiable reason, I think he is a prick.

Any time God wants to inform me of why mass genocide was actually a good idea he can. Until then he is a prick.

To assume there must be a reason why all the stuff in the Bible was actually justified is, in my opinion, just looking for an excuse to square the circle in order so that believers can feel ok about worshipping such a horrible deity and not feel guilty about looking forward to the rewards.

Since I'm on a role with Godwins law, I'm sure lots of people found Hitler's methods distasteful but had faith that he knows best for Germany because they wanted to believe that this was true, Germany was great, her people were great, and her leaders were great.

Again, I don't need it reiterated as to why you think the way you do. I understand why you are saying what you are. My view still stays the same though.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

JimiTime wrote: »

I understand why you are saying what you are. My view still stays the same though.

Ok, what bit do you "not get" then? You claimed you didn't get the He is a prick if he does exist bit. Do you now understand the reason why someone would think he is a prick even if he exists?

If you don't my point is that there are, I would imagine, plenty of people who you think are bad that you don't give the benefit of the doubt to that they have some secret unknown reason for being bad that you are simply not aware off.

Very few people, I would imagine, would think "It is easy to judge Hitler as bad but perhaps we are being too harsh, for all we know he had a very good reason for what he did that we just don't know about. How can we judge him without knowing that this very good reason doesn't exist"

You may change your opinion of them if this reason is made clear but that isn't the same thing as assuming it exists in the first place. So what is different about God? There may be a good reason, but it hasn't been given. Why assume it exists at all? The only reason I can see to assume there must be a good reason is that a wicked God has no appeal to believers so they dismiss the concept outright. But logically a wicked evil God is as probable as a righteous good God. There is no reason to think one is more likely than the other so why assume there is a good reason that we don't know rather than simply thinking God is a prick?

So it really should not be that hard to understand why many, including myself, would view God as a prick.

Flamed Diving

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt66kbYmXXk

Apt.

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

Ok, what bit do you "not get" then? You claimed you didn't get the He is a prick if he does exist bit. Do you now understand the reason why someone would think he is a prick even if he exists?

If you don't my point is that there are, I would imagine, plenty of people who you think are bad that you don't give the benefit of the doubt to that they have some secret unknown reason for being bad that you are simply not aware off.

Very few people, I would imagine, would think "It is easy to judge Hitler as bad but perhaps we are being too harsh, for all we know he had a very good reason for what he did that we just don't know about. How can we judge him without know that this very good reason exist"

You may change your opinion of them if this reason is made clear but that isn't the same thing as assuming it exists in the first place.

So it really should not be that hard to understand why many, including myself, would view God as a prick.

I always understood why some of you guys say what you do. What 'I don't get', is how you don't see the issue with your thinking. Valmont put it well IMO. As I said, I'm not looking to argue you out of your position. I would appeal that you maybe give it a little more thought. If your view reamains the same, so be it.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

JimiTime wrote: »

What 'I don't get', is how you don't see the issue with your thinking.

The only issue here is the assumption that if God exists he must be good, which is forcing some to assume that a good reason must exists for the Bible and that without ruling this out we cannot judge God.

But all that is unfounded. For a start an evil god is as likely as a good god.

So the argument that we lack the ability to judge God falls down.

We no more lack the ability to judge God than we lack the ability to judge Hitler. Perhaps Hitler had a very good reason for doing what he did. Does that stop you judging him simply because you physically lack the ability to know for absolute certain that he didn't have a very good reason?

We judge based on the evidence we have.

It would be foolish to pretend that any human has completely access to all information. If it is demonstrated that Hitler had a very good reason for the Holocaust then I certainly will change my judgement. But at the moment that information is not available.

The fallacy here is not that we judge God, it is that we should assume the possibility that there is a reason, unknown to us, that he did all the things he did other than simply that he is an evil prick.

And that just stems from the believers need for a good God.

A person who believes that Hitler must have been a good person will put forward to his judges that they lack the ability to conclusively determine for certain that he did not have a good reason for what he did, and as such we are unable to judge him.

But that would hold little weight with most people. Most people are content to judge Hitler as an evil bastard, with the cravat that if further information becomes available they will reassess the judgement.

The only reason you think that none of this applies to God is because you are coming from a theological position of faith that God is good.

JimiTime

Wicknight wrote: »

The only issue here is the assumption that if God exists he must be good, which is forcing some to assume that a good reason must exists for the Bible and that without ruling this out we cannot judge God.

But all that is unfounded. For a start an evil god is as likely as a good god.

So the argument that we lack the ability to judge God falls down.

We no more lack the ability to judge God than we lack the ability to judge Hitler. Perhaps Hitler had a very good reason for doing what he did. Does that stop you judging him simply because you physically lack the ability to know for absolute certain that he didn't have a very good reason?

We judge based on the evidence we have.

It would be foolish to pretend that any human has completely access to all information. If it is demonstrated that Hitler had a very good reason for the Holocaust then I certainly will change my judgement. But at the moment that information is not available.

The fallacy here is not that we judge God, it is that we should assume the possibility that there is a reason, unknown to us, that he did all the things he did other than simply that he is an evil prick.

And that just stems from the believers need for a good God.

A person who believes that Hitler must have been a good person will put forward to his judges that they lack the ability to conclusively determine for certain that he did not have a good reason for what he did, and as such we are unable to judge him.

But that would hold little weight with most people. Most people are content to judge Hitler as an evil bastard, with the cravat that if further information becomes available they will reassess the judgement.

The only reason you think that none of this applies to God is because you are coming from a theological position of faith that God is good.

Well at least it seems you have a train of thought for your conclusion. Not sure if thats a good or a bad thing. i wont argue.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

JimiTime wrote: »

i wont argue.

Probably wise

togster

Wicknight wrote: »

The only issue here is the assumption that if God exists he must be good, which is forcing some to assume that a good reason must exists for the Bible and that without ruling this out we cannot judge God.

The only issue here is the assumption that god is an entity somewhere up in heaven. Mis-representation by religious groups have changed what Jesus really said about "god". Perhaps there is something at play that is you, me, everything around us. Perhaps the world is "god". The OP is based on the christian belief system, of a hell and heaven etc. So they believe in Christ. They don't really believe in what he said.

It's easy to adopt a view point and defend it tooth and nail but do you really know what you are fighting against? I mean that of every religion, catholicism, Islam and atheism.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

togster wrote: »

The only issue here is the assumption that god is an entity somewhere up in heaven. Mis-representation by religious groups have changed what Jesus really said about "god". Perhaps there is something at play that is you, me, everything around us. Perhaps the world is "god". The OP is based on the christian belief system, of a hell and heaven etc. So they believe in Christ. They don't really believe in what he said.

It's easy to adopt a view point and defend it tooth and nail but do you really know what you are fighting against? I mean that of every religion, catholicism, Islam and atheism.

I'm sure that made sense in your head but I've not the foggiest what you are trying to get at there

togster

My point is that everyone seems to know what they are defending or denying.

Sorry for the ramble.

CodeMonkey

What if gods existence was proven but god has no concept of good or evil, it just sees earth and the critters in it as part of a self sustaining system. It never played any role in earths or the universes history apart from kick starting it all and then observing how lifeforms develop and evolve in the universe. It doesn't care about being worshiped and doesn't want anything from us. It doesn't care who's right, who's wrong, who dies and who's in power etc.

I'd imagine this wouldn't really affect atheists and agnostics. What I am wondering is how would this change things for the religious people. Would they cling on to their believes still? Are they now free to do what they want to since there's no consequence to their actions as there's no afterlife and god doesn't judge.

Goduznt Xzst

CodeMonkey wrote: »

What if gods existence was proven but god has no concept of good or evil, it just sees earth and the critters in it as part of a self sustaining system. It never played any role in earths or the universes history apart from kick starting it all and then observing how lifeforms develop and evolve in the universe. It doesn't care about being worshiped and doesn't want anything from us. It doesn't care who's right, who's wrong, who dies and who's in power etc.

You'd be describing Deism. I'd say the first question from the religious towards such a God, if it's existence was proven, would be "ok so you don't care about good and bad, but do we still get to live forever?"

That being said, I would never be foolish enough to guess the extent at which people will go for their beliefs. Even if such a God did contact us and tell us it created the Universe, I'm sure many would dismiss it as Satan acting the maggot again and continue to go about praying to Jesus.

Valmont

I'm an atheist/agnostic and it wouldn't change a thing.

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

I'm sure many would dismiss it as Satan acting the maggot again and continue to go about praying to Jesus.

I'm sure a lot atheists and theists would carry on with their respective belief systems regardless. Funny thing how people can hold onto their beliefs in the face of contradicting evidence. I know that this effect is well documented regarding stereotypes. I don't have a link handy.

Zombrex

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

Valmont wrote: »

I'm sure a lot atheists and theists would carry on with their respective belief systems regardless. Funny thing how people can hold onto their beliefs in the face of contradicting evidence. I know that this effect is well documented regarding stereotypes. I don't have a link handy.

The issue with God appearing before us and telling us he exists is of course how do you determine that it is actually God. This is something a lot of theists seem to ignore, the problem in actually testing the claims of a supernatural being (possibly because it is a problem that applies to them now as much as it would to an atheist with "God" before him).

If God wasn't God could you tell? The response I hear the most is along the lines of Of course it would be God, what else could it be. Well, anything, that is the point.

So I'm some what doubtful that it could ever be determined that God actually exists. We could determine that something exists and that something could say it is God, but we could not know.

Zillah

We had some good ones from the last thread. I always thought "If he changes some universal variables" is a pretty good test for divinity. Or create a paradox. My favourite was spelling my name out in blackholes.

If I recall Dades said that if something made me believe then he'd consider it.

But there's always going to be the problem that just because some entity (or races of aliens etc) is cosmically powerful it does not necessarily mean it created the universe.

I think there's a book about that actually, where Yahweh is just some mighty cosmic entity that found the universe and decided to claim responsibility.

Teutorix

Wicknight wrote: »

The issue with God appearing before us and telling us he exists is of course how do you determine that it is actually God. This is something a lot of theists seem to ignore, the problem in actually testing the claims of a supernatural being (possibly because it is a problem that applies to them now as much as it would to an atheist with "God" before him).

If God wasn't God could you tell? The response I hear the most is along the lines of Of course it would be God, what else could it be. Well, anything, that is the point.

So I'm some what doubtful that it could ever be determined that God actually exists. We could determine that something exists and that something could say it is God, but we could not know.

Exactly, people used to think the sun was (a) God and look what we know now.
As soon as the sun was perceived as not being a god, people stopped thinking of it as such. People thought the Pharaohs were gods, but where are the pharaohs now?

So eventually people made up a god that could not be disproved (and by default proved either) ie. the abrahamic god

ChocolateSauce

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

If the god of the Bible was true, it would be the most terrible thing I can imagine. I'd rather live in North Korea; at least there you have your own brain.

Zillah

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

If the god of the Bible was true, it would be the most terrible thing I can imagine. I'd rather live in North Korea; at least there you have your own brain.

Slightly ironic choice considering both Christianity and North Korea worship a dead supreme leader

robindch

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

Zillah wrote: »

Slightly ironic choice considering both Christianity and North Korea worship a dead supreme leader

Actually, not so.

Most christians will tell you that their leader is still alive, as indeed will most North Koreans tell you that Kim Il Sung, Eternal Life President of the DPRK, lives on too.

That's why the media refer to the son, Kim Jong Il, as the "Leader" of the DPRK, not the "President" like his old man was. More on that piffling weirdness here and here.

Off-topically, while in the DPRK, our group visited a vast mausoleum just outside Pyongyang where KIS's corpse is said to reside. On hopping out of our Mercedes bus, we entered a large building and were conveyed by perhaps ten or twelve long runs of horizontal conveyor belt, totalling maybe half a mile, past thousands of unsmiling DPRK soldiers -- thankfully being conveyed in the other direction -- through multiple metal detectors, very many pattings down, and an extraordinarily bracing air shower, into a room where something vaguely Eternal President-shaped lay on a slab.

He didn't seem to be all that alive to me I have to say, though even in his supine state, I've little doubt that he's a more effective ruler than the Little Leader is.

The most authoritative book on the Kim dynasty in the DPRK suggests that Kim Il Sung was born to a christian evangelical family, if memory serves, in Khabarovsk in Russia, and that he remained an ardent fundamentalist until he took up the fight against the Japanese in WWII. A fight he was losing until the Russians bailed him out at the end of the war.

Highly recommended -- http://www.amazon.com/Under-Loving-Care-Fatherly-Leader/dp/0312323220

c-note

I'm an atheist/agnostic and it wouldn't change a thing.

i voted for:
i'm an atheist etc but that would convert me

because

if i refused to believe in the face of proof, It would make me a hypocrite for refusing to believe when proof was given.
it would almost be as outlandish as insisting on a god without proof!!:D

Zillah

robindch wrote: »

Actually, not so.

Well, yes so. I didn't say they admitted it! But they do worship dead supreme leaders.

creepy north korea story

North Korea freaks me out the more I hear about it.

aidan24326

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

Wicknight wrote:

If God wasn't God could you tell? The response I hear the most is along the lines of Of course it would be God, what else could it be. Well, anything, that is the point.

So I'm some what doubtful that it could ever be determined that God actually exists. We could determine that something exists and that something could say it is God, but we could not know.

Arthur C. Clarke said 'any sufficently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic'.

Well we could just as easily say that any sufficiently adavanced alien entity/lifeform would be indistinguishable from a god. We'd have no way to test it as you say.

And what would the criteria be for an entity to qualify for the title of god anyway? That it have set the universe in motion? A highly advanced alien species could in theory achieve such a thing, so we still don't really need 'god', certainly not of the religious type anyway.

The religious notion of a petty and petulant god who needs its ego massaged by worship and devotion is embarrasingly naieve and rather stupid.

dvpower

I'm an atheist/agnostic and it wouldn't change a thing.

aidan24326 wrote: »

Well we could just as easily say that any sufficiently adavanced alien entity/lifeform would be indistinguishable from a god. We'd have no way to test it as you say.

And what would the criteria be for an entity to qualify for the title of god anyway? That it have set the universe in motion? A highly advanced alien species could in theory achieve such a thing, so we still don't really need 'god', certainly not of the religious type anyway.

An advanced alien might be able to conclusively answer the question "Does God Exist?".

If they could show that God doesn't exist we could ask them to post on the Christianity forum, but they'd probably get banned under the new charter.:rolleyes:

Sam Vimes

I'm an atheist/agnostic and it wouldn't change a thing.

Wicknight wrote: »

The issue with God appearing before us and telling us he exists is of course how do you determine that it is actually God. This is something a lot of theists seem to ignore, the problem in actually testing the claims of a supernatural being (possibly because it is a problem that applies to them now as much as it would to an atheist with "God" before him).

If God wasn't God could you tell? The response I hear the most is along the lines of Of course it would be God, what else could it be. Well, anything, that is the point.

So I'm some what doubtful that it could ever be determined that God actually exists. We could determine that something exists and that something could say it is God, but we could not know.

If it was God as we know it as opposed to an impersonal creator he could simply reach into your mind and remove all doubt

robindch

I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.

Briefly putting on a mod's hat...

dvpower wrote: »

we could ask them to post on the Christianity forum, but they'd probably get banned under the new charter.:rolleyes:

Regardless of the merits or otherwise of the recent update to the christianity forum charter, the Help Desk is the place to comment upon them, not here

Much obliged!