If "God" exists?

Des Carter · 27-10-2010 08:19PM #1

Ok just curious if it turns out that a "God" does exist, what do you think "he" would be like?

Note*: when I use the word "God" I am not just referring to the Christian image of a giant man in the sky. The word can be interpreted in a general sense and can deal with any aspect of life, death, faith, creation etc etc.

Sam Vimes · 27-10-2010 08:35PM

Well the idea of an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being is completely incompatible with the reality of this universe and if something doesn't possess those characteristics, to quote Epicurus, then why call it god?

If it turned out that there was a god, it would have a lot of explaining to do before I would stop referring to it as "that sadistic bastard"

Or are you asking what we would like to think a god would be like?

strobe · 27-10-2010 08:37PM

Impossible to hazard any kind of educated guess for me. There is no reason to believe it would be in any way similar to any life that evolved on Earth, or even anything in the universe that exists, in terms of appearance or behaviour. I doubt any human language would even be adequate to describe it.

I read a quote once discussing quantum mechanics, I can't remember it word for word, but it went something like.

"The problem with quantum mechanics, is that we are trying to describe it using a language originally developed to tell other monkeys where the best fruit is"

Swap out quantum mechanics for 'god' and I think it sums things up nicely.

amacachi · 27-10-2010 08:46PM

He would be someone who could impregnate a human with offspring that was also him.

I realise that's an absolutely ridiculous idea to try and get your head around, it came to me during an acid trip.

Des Carter · 27-10-2010 08:49PM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Well the idea of an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being is completely incompatible with the reality of this universe and if something doesn't possess those characteristics, to quote Epicurus, then why call it god?

If it turned out that there was a god, it would have a lot of explaining to do before I would stop referring to it as "that sadistic bastard"

Or are you asking what we would like to think a god would be like?

You can interpret the word God any way you want even if it doesnt have all the characteristics that you listed above. As to why call it God, it is the simplest word to describe it.

For example you can believe in a creator God who just created the world and then left it there to run its course without any further interference.

For the last question no. Im asking more that if it was proven that a God does in fact exists what would you rationally think/believe hes like.

liamw · 27-10-2010 08:49PM

An energy, a force, a quantum flucuation, a spark.. something that perhaps the human species may never understand, something that our physical and mathematical laws cannot represent.

Certainly there is no reason to anthropomorphize this. The universe appears to operate as blind and indifferent to all, including us.

liamw · 27-10-2010 08:50PM

Des Carter wrote: »

For example you can believe in a creator God who just created the world and then left it there to run its course without any further interference.

Again, that's anthropomorphizing. A natural, yet illogical, tendancy for us all to do.

Sam Vimes · 27-10-2010 09:06PM

Des Carter wrote: »

You can interpret the word God any way you want even if it doesnt have all the characteristics that you listed above. As to why call it God, it is the simplest word to describe it.

For example you can believe in a creator God who just created the world and then left it there to run its course without any further interference.

For the last question no. Im asking more that if it was proven that a God does in fact exists what would you rationally think/believe hes like.

The thing is that in order to be called a god something must possess certain characteristics and just having created the universe doesn't cut it. It could have been created by some kind of gravitational anomaly and no one would call such a thing a god.

If it was rationally proven that there was a god, it would have to be either a deistic god that has no interest in its creation or the metaphysical equivalent of a child with an ant farm and a magnifying glass.

eblistic · 27-10-2010 09:14PM

Des Carter wrote: »

You can interpret the word God any way you want

If that's the case then the rest of this thread is going to be totally pointless isn't it?

Des Carter · 27-10-2010 09:31PM

eblistic wrote: »

If that's the case then the rest of this thread is going to be totally pointless isn't it?

Possibly, but it would be even more pointless if I asked "if an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being did actuall exist, what would he be like?" as he would have to be all powerful, all loving and inteligent.

The biggest problem people face when arguing/discussing God is what the word God actually means - Iv heard everthing from a man in the sky to a type of force to the smile on a babies face, and so I am just curious as to what you think God would be if he did exist.

Gregor Samsa · 27-10-2010 09:45PM

What would a Yeti be if it did exist? We wouldn't know until we could confirm its existence. Same for your hypothetical god.

The only way to really answer your question would be to change it to "if god had to exist, what would you like it to be?"

My answer would be like Bender from Futurama, when he had that civilisation growing on him.

eblistic · 27-10-2010 09:47PM

Des Carter wrote: »

Possibly, but it would be even more pointless if I asked "if an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being did actuall exist, what would he be like?" as he would have to be all powerful, all loving and inteligent.

The biggest problem people face when arguing/discussing God is what the word God actually means - Iv heard everthing from a man in the sky to a type of force to the smile on a babies face, and so I am just curious as to what you think God would be if he did exist.

Fair enough. "what constitutes a god?" is an interesting question alright. To that I'd say there must be some kind of supernatural element to it. And no-one here is likely to admit that any such thing is plausible.

Essentially any entity that an atheist agrees could plausibly exist is not going to be an entity that they would concede is a god.

Is your question for agnostics mainly?

Sam Vimes · 27-10-2010 09:58PM

Des Carter wrote: »

Possibly, but it would be even more pointless if I asked "if an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being did actuall exist, what would he be like?" as he would have to be all powerful, all loving and inteligent.

The biggest problem people face when arguing/discussing God is what the word God actually means - Iv heard everthing from a man in the sky to a type of force to the smile on a babies face, and so I am just curious as to what you think God would be if he did exist.

My answer to your question: if it was proven that a god existed I think it would be some kind of gravitational anomaly, because that's the type of thing that I imagine caused the universe to be created, but I would never call a gravitational anomaly god.

If we don't just make up whatever definition we want for the word god, making the word completely meaningless, and instead use a somewhat accepted definition, I think that if a god was proven to exist it would be an all powerful, all knowing and all loving intelligent being, because those characteristics are the bare minimum something must possess before I would give it the label god

Goduznt Xzst · 27-10-2010 10:04PM

Des Carter wrote: »

Ok just curious if it turns out that a "God" does exist, what do you think "he" would be like?

In my mind, humans add a lot of pomp and ceremony to the idea of "God" to back up the claims that it can make you, and your loved ones, live forever.

"Oh you doubt he can end your suffering, he created those stars right, so ending your suffering is easy... fact!"

The religious really don't care if it made the Universe or any of that jazz, they only seem to care about it as it reassures them this entity is powerful enough to make them exist for eternity.

So, when you boil it down, for a being to be considered a God by humans all it really needs to be able to do is offer you a technology that will allow you to live young and healthy for as long as you choose.

mikhail · 27-10-2010 10:05PM

A thing which would find the idea that our minds are superior to that of a squirrel in any meaningful way to be amusing, which would find us utterly uninteresting. A thing perhaps forever beyond our ken.

ShooterSF · 27-10-2010 11:08PM

phutyle wrote: »

What would a Yeti be if it did exist? We wouldn't know until we could confirm its existence. Same for your hypothetical god.

The only way to really answer your question would be to change it to "if god had to exist, what would you like it to be?"

My answer would be like Bender from Futurama, when he had that civilisation growing on him.

One of my favourite episodes:

Bender: It was awful. I tried helping them, I tried not helping them but in the end I couldn't do them any good. Do you think what I did was wrong?

"God": Right and wrong are just words. What matters is what you do.

Bender: Yeah I know, that's why I asked if what I did-- Forget it.

"God": Bender, being God isn't easy. If you do too much, people get dependent on you. And if you do nothing, they lose hope. You have to use a light touch like a safecracker or a pickpocket.

Bender: Or a guy who burns down the bar for the insurance money.

"God": Yes, if you make it look like an electrical thing. When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.

______

Assuming God must at least be self aware to be considered god (and thats being loose with the terms), I would say the most likely type is like Lisa in the Halloween special where she accidentally creates life but has no magical powers to make an impact on their life! It would explain a lot (other than how god came into existence in the first place of course

).

robindch · 27-10-2010 11:34PM

Des Carter wrote: »

if it turns out that a "God" does exist, what do you think "he" would be like? [...] The word can be interpreted in a general sense and can deal with any aspect of life, death, faith, creation [...]

It's not really all that fair to ask people to speculate on what something might be like, when you explicitly say that the something can be just about anything.

For myself, I think I'd feel that this god character might be a little bit nurdlesquipulated.

Wouldn't you?

Galvasean · 28-10-2010 12:33AM

He looks like this:

Zombrex · 28-10-2010 12:42AM

Des Carter wrote: »

Ok just curious if it turns out that a "God" does exist, what do you think "he" would be like?

Note*: when I use the word "God" I am not just referring to the Christian image of a giant man in the sky. The word can be interpreted in a general sense and can deal with any aspect of life, death, faith, creation etc etc.

A issue with such a question is that the term God implies something already. You can see this when you consider god a just an alien. Doesn't have quite the same connotations. The concept of god is more about ticking off human needs than the thing itself. If it fulfills particular human needs we consider it a god, if it doesn't we don't. That doesn't have much to do with the thing itself

If we simply mean intelligence that created the universe (which may not tick enough of these boxes for some people to consider such an alien being a god) then it is very difficult to speculate what such a being would be like as we have no frame of reference. Appeals to the idea that it would be "loving" or "benevolent" seem redundant as these are evolved emotional instincts that fit peticular evolutionary needs we as humans have. This would again be simply an response to what we need a god to be, and would have no baring on what such a creator alien would be like.

One would imagine that such an alien would understand it's creation and be interested in it but it is rather illogical to assume we are an important part of said creation when we occupy such a tiny part of it. So it would seem unlikely that life on Earth would be of any great interest to this creator. This again may not tick the boxes one requires to consider such an alien a god.

It is also possible that such an alien creator doesn't understand it's creation, or doesn't possess the ability to interact with it's creation, and must sit back and just observe what it has started.

Improbable · 28-10-2010 04:30AM

Galvasean wrote: »

He looks like this:

LIES!!!!

You are hereby corrected.

MrPudding · 28-10-2010 08:47AM

I will call him multivax.

Any excuse and i will trot this one out:

http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html

MrP

antiskeptic · 28-10-2010 09:11AM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If it turned out that there was a god, it would have a lot of explaining to do before I would stop referring to it as "that sadistic bastard"

Er.. if God exists then he would directly or indirectly be responsible for the good as well as the bad. You could thank him for your ability to enjoy, to love, to relate. He would be the one responsible for beauty (or your ability to consider something beautiful given that you'd likely have a nothing-is-objectively-the-case mindset).

It seems to me that IF this is but a preliminary to another existance AND we get to choose from the available options when it comes to the nature of that other existance THEN it is only sensible that we be exposed to something of what those existances have to offer.

I mean, if the wrath of God is to be one of those options then it doesn't make sense to wish away exposure to it at this preliminary time.

Sam Vimes · 28-10-2010 09:20AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Er.. if God exists then he would directly or indirectly be responsible for the good as well as the bad. You could thank him for your ability to enjoy, to love, to relate. He would be the one responsible for beauty (or your ability to consider something beautiful given that you'd likely have a nothing-is-objectively-the-case mindset).

It seems to me that IF this is but a preliminary to another existance AND we get to choose from the available options when it comes to the nature of that other existance THEN it is only sensible that we be exposed to something of what those existances have to offer.

I mean, if the wrath of God is to be one of those options then it doesn't make sense to wish away exposure to it at this preliminary time.

If god as you understand it exists then he is all powerful, yet chooses to allow millions of people to die in tragic and agonising circumstances that are totally out of their control (but within his control). Thanking god for the good in the midst of all the bad is like thanking your kidnapper for letting you watch a bit of telly and making you a nice dinner before he rapes and murders you.

antiskeptic · 28-10-2010 09:35AM

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If god as you understand it exists then he is all powerful, yet chooses to allow millions of people to die in tragic and agonising circumstances that are totally out of their control (but within his control). Thanking god for the good in the midst of all the bad is like thanking your kidnapper for letting you watch a bit of telly and making you a nice dinner before he rapes and murders you.

So if someone lives a contented, happy and fulfilling life and dies in pain that renders all the good relatively irrelevant? Or perhaps you're talking about a life of the kind that you yourself are unlikely to experience (in which case I'd ask you to include the millions who live happy fulfilling lives in your assessment)?

Would you describe the people who choose to allow millions of people to die in tragic circumstances that are totally out of their control (but over which we could exercise huge amounts of control) as sadistic too?

Beruthiel · 28-10-2010 09:36AM

I will repeat, until it becomes truth.
His name is Q

gbee · 28-10-2010 09:37AM

Des Carter wrote: »

Note*: when I use the word "God" I am not just referring to the Christian image of a giant man in the sky. The word can be interpreted in a general sense and can deal with any aspect of life, death, faith, creation etc etc.

See, there's a basic problem, as I was brought up a Roman CC my vision of what God should be is pathologically ingrained in me.

If this had not happened, I might be more disposed to accept the concept of a God, but so much has been proven wrong, I just dismiss the whole thing.

I used to consider energy as God, but even now we know there are at least three different energies running the universe, explosive, gravity, dark matter. But all end up working together, even if it means the total Annihilation of vast reacts of the universe in order for the universe to survive overall.

See, every religious story ever told ... just substitute ......

antiskeptic · 28-10-2010 09:43AM

Wicknight wrote: »

One would imagine that such an alien would understand it's creation and be interested in it but it is rather illogical to assume we are an important part of said creation when we occupy such a tiny part of it.

I don't see how logic would bring you to that conclusion. The size of a thing relative to it's surroundings isn't necessarily a indicator of it's value (compare diamonds and sludge

). Indeed, something might be completely immaterial yet be valued highly (love, respect, beauty, etc)

Dades · 28-10-2010 09:46AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

Er.. if God exists then he would directly or indirectly be responsible for the good as well as the bad. You could thank him for your ability to enjoy, to love, to relate. He would be the one responsible for beauty (or your ability to consider something beautiful given that you'd likely have a nothing-is-objectively-the-case mindset).

It takes a human to love, but it takes a god to send a wave to kill 230,000 people. :pac:

Although I think this kind of thinking is redundant for this thread. I believe don't anyone here entertains for a moment the idea of a loving/hating interventionist god. That idea is just so at odds with reality.

IF something existed that in theory we could call a god I think it would be far beyond our understanding anyway. The idea that it would be some sort of being we could relate to or chat with is just loopy.

Dades · 28-10-2010 09:49AM

antiskeptic wrote: »

The size of a thing relative to it's surroundings isn't necessarily a indicator of it's value (compare diamonds and sludge ).

Diamonds, like humans, are plentiful and their value is only given to them by humans (particularly the ones in cartels).

antiskeptic · 28-10-2010 10:04AM

Dades wrote: »

Although I think this kind of thinking is redundant for this thread. I believe don't anyone here entertains for a moment the idea of a loving/hating interventionist god. That idea is just so at odds with reality.

How so, love and hate are the cornerstones of our world.

IF something existed that in theory we could call a god I think it would be far beyond our understanding anyway. The idea that it would be some sort of being we could relate to or chat with is just loopy.

II don't see the problem if we are a derivation of God. It would mean there'd be like-units shared between us. Thus relation possible

antiskeptic · 28-10-2010 10:06AM

Dades wrote: »

Diamonds, like humans, are plentiful and their value is only given to them by humans (particularly the ones in cartels).

Granted they are far more plentiful than the cartels will let on. But not on a par with sludge. Point being, the relative scarcity of humans (on a universal scale) doesn't prevent value being assigned by a creator

If "God" exists?

Comments