To former Catholics - a reformed religion?

newmug

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

If indisputable, unquestionable evidence for God's existence emerged such as what you're suggesting, then I'm sure most atheists would have their disbelief severely rattled, and likely begin to believe in a God — or at least an afterlife.

Still ... If the entity told me to follow the Catholic Church I'm not sure whether I could. I'd feel trapped, as if somebody had a gun to my head with the intention of forcing me to do something horrible: follow this organisation, which you thoroughly despise, in order to get into heaven, or be doomed to hell. I'm not sure what I'd do, to be honest: I'd probably begin to follow the church, but with a dull, sickening, almost claustrophobic feeling pervading my entire being. To be honest, I can't imagine anything worse: if that happened I'd call it hell, and I'd doubt that the real Hell could be much worse, so perhaps it would be better to live honestly, not follow the Church, and consign myself to the real Hell, which would be the lesser of two evils.

Delirium

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

No. I could possibly accept the idea that it was God, but I wouldn't see a reason to join a religion. God got a problem with that and condemns me to Hell, well he fails the Koth Deity Test (patent pending :P) and doesn't meet my standards of some that I would support/follow etc.

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

condra

If that happened, and it won't, it would just raise more questions, such as:

• Do I have free will?
• Am I a slave?
• Is it not hypocrytical do good things out of fear of damnation?
• Why did this supernatural being create disease, famine, and suffering?
• Why did this supernatural being create such an infiniitely huge universe, and what did he do with Earth for the 4 and a half billion years before we came along?

Also assuming it is the god of The Bible, questions like:

• What is this guys problem with women?
• Why do I have to worship this guy?
• What's with the ego and the vengeance?

So....

If I knew there was a "god" because of the evidence ... and had to follow a religion .... to avoid burning in Hell for all eternity... I probably would, reluctantly ... out of fear ...

There's my answer anyway.

newmug

koth wrote: »

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

I'd certainly re-evaluate things, but I dont want to give my opinion as what I have to say might influence the poll. I'm specifically asking ex-Catholic athiests, and secondarily just general athiests, not practicing Catholics like myself.

IRLConor

If there was evidence suggesting a deity with the same persuasive strength as the evidence supporting say... gravity then I'd probably believe in the existence of deities.

The deity wouldn't be supernatural though, pretty much by definition. "Physically alternative natural" sounds like you're trying to get "supernatural" in by the back door.

newmug wrote: »

Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

If I don't have any way of finding out if they're a deity or not then I have to assume that they're not. Too many David Koresh-alikes have cried wolf on that one I'm afraid.

Corkfeen

koth wrote: »

No. I could possibly accept the idea that it was God, but I wouldn't see a reason to join a religion. God got a problem with that and condemns me to Hell, well he fails the Koth Deity Test (patent pending :P) and doesn't meet my standards of some that I would support/follow etc.

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

Also if he hypothetically said Christianity was the correct faith. I'd have issues with worshiping a genocidal maniac. :pac:

newmug

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

condra

Perhaps newmug is God, and is doing a little research before "coming out".

IRLConor

newmug wrote: »

But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever.

Why would the deity have to be a violent egomaniac? If we're dealing with hypothetical situations, couldn't the deity just be cool and a kind of live-and-let-live kinda dude? Wouldn't that be so much nicer? (Possibly even worth worshipping? )

condra

newmug wrote: »

you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

A bit like being forced to perform oral sex, with a gun to your head.

Hell yeah I'd do it.

:mad:

(nobody get any ideas, ok?)

Bannasidhe

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

No.

MagicMarker

newmug wrote: »

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

Exactly what are you trying to determine by asking such stupid ****ing questions?

If someone sticks a gun to my head and tells me to do something, then 99% of the time I'm going to do it. As would most people, your questions are pointless.

condra

I don't know why you guys are being so evasive.

The questions are so vacuous they do a great job of exposing the absurdity of religion.

He's kinda doing the opposite of John Lennon.

Imagine theres Heaven..its easy if you try.. imagine there is a Hell..and everyone afraid they'll fry...

... so it goes...

Dades

newmug - you've performed the thought experiment - now it's time for the results.

So what of it?

magicbastarder

if someone was able to prove to me that god existed, it does not mean i would have to actually like the prick.

Bannasidhe

magicbastarder wrote: »

if someone was able to prove to me that god existed, it does not mean i would have to actually like the prick.

I have a list of questions I'd quite like answers to, apart from that if a God or Gods were to exist then I will let Granny Weatherwax be my guide

“I don’t hold with paddlin’ with the occult,” said Granny firmly. “Once you start paddlin’ with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you’re believing in gods. And then you’re in trouble.”

“But all them things exist,” said Nanny Ogg.

“That’s no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages ’em.”

bnt

Poll also needs an option along the lines of "my parents were Catholic, which therefore made me a Catholic, but then I grew up". I was taken to church, but I probably wasn't a very good Catholic - after all, what do kids really understand about anything? I made the right noises, then I stopped making them, and that was all it took. I didn't leave as a reaction to anything the Vatican or clergy did, I left because there was nothing there, and I still don't see anything there.

fitz0

newmug wrote: »

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

No. Or at least I'd like to think I wouldn't. I would place myself in the bracket of anatheism, a delightful term I heard from Scofflaw on A&A. Supplication and worship is a disgusting concept to me, especially on pain of eternal torture. Any deity that demands that is a narcissistic, megalomaniacal and that deity can f*ck right off.

Lucy8080

Corkfeen wrote: »

The options give far too much credence to the existence of a deity and even the third option seems to veer towards posters being a doubting Thomas who is simply annoyed at the church. So I suspect that's the reason why number 4 is particularly popular.

I don't doubt ya corkfeen.

Nevertheless, an option was given , and was taken.

It reminds me slightly of the census. With the roles reversed, on a very small scale to be fair .

Do we just click options because they are available!

I think we do, what ever offends us least , that's the boy for me!

Lucy8080

newmug wrote: »

Well what options would you like? And what other groups would you add? I cant see the athiestic POV, so I just thought those options covered most bases. What poll options would you put to the poll question?

What options could i add to a suppositional question?

For what it's worth, i think your "poll" highlighted that atheists can be just as irrational as they claim theists to be!

Doctor DooM

Lucy8080 wrote: »

What options could i add to a suppositional question?

For what it's worth, i think your "poll" highlighted that atheists can be just as irrational as they claim theists to be!

How exactly does it do that?

Not that atheists think atheists are actually special and by default rational. An atheist can still be racist, believe in aliens, believe in fairies, etc.

Sulla Felix

newmug wrote: »

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

I think there would be a very large, pervasive research effort undertaken on how to kill the fúcker and I'd want to be part of it. I think humanity generally is too used to being able to pay lip service to these kinds of ideals that confronted with the real thing it'd be viewed negatively.

Lucy8080

dr. doom,

corkfeen has already pointed out the holes in the poll!

maybe ya missed it, maybe ya didnt.

go figure for yourself!

ShooterSF

I'd guess I'd do the bare minimum in order to join whatever family and friends that escaped eternal torture just to be around them but I'd be scarily depressed if it were true. I don't want to experience eternity and I don't want to experience it knowing some people are experiencing eternal punishment for not believing and I don't want to experience eternal life "gifted" to me by an asshole that demands worship because I can't imagine they'd get any more tolerable in heaven. Actually even thinking about the idea upsets me. Reincarnation if promised first world human with no severe illness might be better but I like the one go thing even if at times the idea of ceasing to be scares me. It's the least scary though.

Richie15

newmug wrote: »

If all religions were blended into one, universal acknowlegement of even the possibility of a supernatural diety, would you consider paying homage?

Just skimmed throught the thread, so sorry if I'm repeating.

The existence of a deity is not my problem with organised religion. Even before I stopped believing, I was considering joining a religion other than Catholicism due to Papal Infallibility. It's not just that I disagreed with particular policies of the Catholic Church. It was more the fact that disagreeing wasn't an option. Then I found out they were all the same.

Take any scientific community, whether it be engineering, physics, medicine, whatever; and any religion. I'll use medicine and Catholicism as an example. Lets say I'm a practising Catholic and a first-year Medicine student. In mass one Sunday, the priest is saying how abortion is always immoral and I'd go to Hell for performing one. Then in college I'm taught the medical effects of an abortion and that it's not part of my scope of practice (which I think is the case in Ireland, if not we'll assume it is). But I disagree with both and think I should be allowed perform one if it's necessary for my patient.

In theory, I could argue my point with the Lecturer, the Medicines Board and the RCPI and get them to change their policies. In practice, I don't know how one would begin, but in theory it's possible.

With the religious side, though, it's always going to be wrong because the priest says so. And he says so because the Pope says so. And he says so because... Why?

To me, religions are like parents. They don't want their followers (children) to know certain things, so they lie and use any form of power-holding tactics they can to discourage them from questioning their authority. And quite often these "certain things" are simply that the parent/religion doesn't have an answer and refuses to admit "I don't know." Admitting to a lack of knowledge doesn't hold power very well!

Parent: "You can't go out now, it's dark."
5-year-old: "Why not?"
Real Answer: "Because I'm not going, and it's illegal to leave a child unsupervised. It's a form of neglect and I could be arrested for it."
Parent's Answer: "The bogeyman'll get you," or "Santa'll know you were being bold and won't bring you presents," or the dreaded "because I said so."

Or...

5-year-old: "Why is it illegal?"
Real Answer: "You'd be vulnerable to muggers, child-molesters and other such people who'd want to hurt you," or "I don't know."

Doctor DooM

Lucy8080 wrote: »

dr. doom,

corkfeen has already pointed out the holes in the poll!

maybe ya missed it, maybe ya didnt.

go figure for yourself!

No, you made the statement, you back it up.

Why does a poll, which most people here have disagreed with, show atheists are irrational?

newmug

IRLConor wrote: »

Why would the deity have to be a violent egomaniac? If we're dealing with hypothetical situations, couldn't the deity just be cool and a kind of live-and-let-live kinda dude? Wouldn't that be so much nicer? (Possibly even worth worshipping? )

Well ok then, if he was cool, then would you worship him?

MagicMarker wrote: »

Exactly what are you trying to determine by asking such stupid ****ing questions?

See below. And it costs nothing to be nice, so, you know, be nice!

newmug wrote: »

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

Dades wrote: »

newmug - you've performed the thought experiment - now it's time for the results.

So what of it?

I'm not revealing anything yet! So now this "god" is cool. Would you?

Sulla Felix

newmug wrote: »

Well ok then, if he was cool, then would you worship him?

I'm comfortable claiming on behalf of all atheists worldwide, without exception, that if it turned out the Fonz had ascended to godhood, we'd tug the forelock.

Penn

newmug wrote: »

Well ok then, if he was cool, then would you worship him?

See below. And it costs nothing to be nice, so, you know, be nice!

I'm not revealing anything yet! So now this "god" is cool. Would you?

With respect, newmug, it seems like you are constantly moving the goalposts, and would continue to do so, until we agreed with the premise.

How about you outline in as much detail as you can the exact premise, we could perhaps reset the poll with clearer options, and you could get a better and more accurate response.

eviltwin

I would never go back to the Church or any religion for that matter. Its not just that I don't believe in God its more the idea of living my life according to a set of rules and the way the church treats certain groups of people. But even with that if they suddenly became pro-choice and welcomed same sex relationships I can't see myself ever going back. I've lived more of my life outside the church than in it now and I like the freedom that its given me.