If Gods existence was proven...

Dades

Zillah wrote: »

Ergh, not really sure what this has to do with the conversation.

You could leave it before you say something you regret?

Leprachaun

Galvasean wrote: »

I would never bow down to such a tyrant! :mad:

I say that now...

I for one welcome our new overlord.

Sam Vimes

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

To be honest, if the christian god as described in the bible was absolutely proven I would kiss his ass. Principles are one thing but if I knew I was going to burn for all eternity and never see my loved ones again for holding to them, they'd be out the window, not least because if god was actually proven and his morals were different to mine, it'd be safe to say it was me who was wrong

MrPudding

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

To be honest, if the christian god as described in the bible was absolutely proven I would kiss his ass. Principles are one thing but if I knew I was going to burn for all eternity and never see my loved ones again for holding to them, they'd be out the window, not least because if god was actually proven and his morals were different to mine, it'd be safe to say it was me who was wrong

I find this interesting. I understand what you are saying. But would it be enough? I know he seems to like getting his ass kissed, but he also seems to need people to love him and believe that he is good. Are you saying that everything you think would change?

This is where I think there is a big problem though. I reckon a lot of atheists would be screwed. This god is supposed to know everything. I reckon there would be a large number of atheist that may pay lip service but deep down think this god is a cnut.

At the moment I don't really hate god, how can one hate something that does not exist? But if it were to suddenly appear and go "hey guys" How's it goin'. Miss me?" I really would hate it.

MrP

missingtime

Galvasean wrote: »

If God was proved to be real, I'd punch Him for allowing that god awful movie to be made.

Mickeroo

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

faceman wrote: »

Its a very ideallic question and one that would never come to fruition IMO. Nor would i want it to (as a Christian) as it undermines the premise of faith.

Why would you prefer to worship something that might not exist as opposed to something that definitley does? Why is faith more important than knowing? This makes no sense.

Valmont

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

Hypothetical as the question is, I find it funny that some people are so entrenched in their beliefs that even if God himself came down and said "HA I'm real, I did make the universe and this is how etc", they would still be atheists. Does that mentality ring a bell? Ironic or what.

Coriolanus

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

Valmont wrote: »

Hypothetical as the question is, I find it funny that some people are so entrenched in their beliefs that even if God himself came down and said "HA I'm real, I did make the universe and this is how etc", they would still be atheists. Does that mentality ring a bell? Ironic or what.

The question isn't whether or not thye'd be an atheist, but would they worship. Not the same thing. The prime condition of the little thought experiment is presuming that Gods existence is proven.

Meh. :pac:

MrPudding

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

Valmont wrote: »

Hypothetical as the question is, I find it funny that some people are so entrenched in their beliefs that even if God himself came down and said "HA I'm real, I did make the universe and this is how etc", they would still be atheists. Does that mentality ring a bell? Ironic or what.

Not sure if that is a fair comment... I picked atheist and nothing would change, but that is not strictly true, just the closest option.

If there was undeniable proof that god existed I would not be an atheist anymore, but that does not mean I would worship it. I presume that is what other who voted the same as me meant also.

MrP

robindch

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

Gentlefolks and people, all:

This is yet another good thread, and yet another reason why this forum is fun to be around. Briefly donning the mod's hat, I would, however, like to ask everybody who missed the joint "Be Nice!" post exactly four weeks ago this afternoon, to reacquaint themselves with it briefly:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=60021068

Just for clarity, that means you don't write that other people are brainwashed, morally inept, destined for hell, hilariously illogical and so on. By all means, you can call the ideas whatever you like, but slagging people -- not around here.

Thanks

- robin (removing mod's hat again and chucking it behind the sofa).

Mickeroo

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

robindch wrote: »

- robin (removing mod's hat again and chucking it behind the sofa).

But it's such a pretty hat.

Mena

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

I don't understand all this worship talk to be honest. There's nothing real or imagined that is in any way worthy of worship.

Sure, if it turned out god (which one ) was real, there'd be no more atheists. But there's not a chance in hell (probably then my future home) that I would even for a second consider worshiping it. The very thought is ridiculuous to me.

Hell, even if I tried this all seeing all knowing earthquake making monstrosity would see through it so there'd be little point.

bnt

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

None of the answers fit my viewpoint. If "God" was proved to exist ... it would lead to more questions, it would only be the start of the investigation. Questions such as "what is it?" and "what is it good for?" I'm not convinced that any real "God" would know or care that we are here, never mind expect us to worship him/her. Or, if "God" has needs, what would mere words do to help it?

Tar.Aldarion

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

As an alatrist I don't believe in god and if a god was proven, I would not worship it. Especially the christian god, sounds like a scumbag to me.

Sam Vimes

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

MrPudding wrote: »

I find this interesting. I understand what you are saying. But would it be enough? I know he seems to like getting his ass kissed, but he also seems to need people to love him and believe that he is good. Are you saying that everything you think would change?

This is where I think there is a big problem though. I reckon a lot of atheists would be screwed. This god is supposed to know everything. I reckon there would be a large number of atheist that may pay lip service but deep down think this god is a cnut.

At the moment I don't really hate god, how can one hate something that does not exist? But if it were to suddenly appear and go "hey guys" How's it goin'. Miss me?" I really would hate it.

MrP

Well let's put it this way: currently I believe in evolution but if a scientist came along tomorrow with another theory which could be absolutely proven, I would accept it with open arms and buy all new science books with this theory included. I would not resent the fact that what I had believed was wrong

Now, the god of the bible claims to have a monopoly on morality, everything he does is infinitely good because he is perfect. If this particular god was absolutely proven, I'd have to be pretty arrogant to say that he's wrong and my morality is better. So I wouldn't be paying lip service, I would accept that I had been wrong all these years and accept his morality whether it fits with what I think or not. After all he's the perfect being

All the above assumes that it's the god of the bible being proven and therefore the bible being proven. If it was a generic creator type god that was proven I'd wait to find out what it actually wanted before accepting one particular dogma over another

Galvasean

To be perfectly honest I don't know if anything would convince me of God's existence. I'd be more inclined to think it was an elaborate trick by a race of evil super-intelligent aliens* who want to lure us into a false sense of security and steal our precious bodily fluids!

*that or drunken hyper-intelligent alien frat boys who want to play a prank on a planet of dumbdumbs**

**dumbdumbs referring to the human race, not anyone in particular

Galvasean

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Well let's put it this way: currently I believe in evolution but if a scientist came along tomorrow with another theory which could be absolutely proven, I would accept it with open arms and buy all new science books with this theory included. I would not resent the fact that what I had believed was wrong

I would be a bit annoyed with myself for spending so much time/energy/money pursuing and defending something which turned out to be wrong. I'd still accept it though.

Black Swan

Nevore wrote: »

If his existence was proven, by whatever means, would you worship him?

Your poll is prefaced with a "worship" statement?

If he/she/it were in fact God, why would they want or otherwise require worship?

Teutorix

The poll is flawed completely.


If his existence was proven, by whatever means, would you worship him?
I'm a Christian and of course I would!
I'm a Christian and just to be perverse, I'd stop...
I'm an atheist/agnostic but that would convert me.
I'm an atheist/agnostic and it wouldn't change a thing.
I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and I'd convert.
I'm non-Christian but otherwise religious and would remain so.


Ok it says "im an atheist" you cannot be "atheist" if god is proven.
An atheist by definition is somebody who does not believe in a god. Just because I do not worship god does not make me an athiest.
If god was demonstrably real then I would in fact "believe" in him, although belief goes out the window when proof comes into play because i would "know" he is real.
The problem is the ignorance to the differences between belief and worship, like the kids at my primary school and even today at the age of 16/17 still cant tell the difference between belief and worship.

actual conversation.

Me: I dont believe in god

Friend: of so you must believe in the devil

/facepalm

The truth of the matter is HE was the one that "believes" in the devil as he is the catholic. I, being an atheist believe in no such supernatural things.


My short answer is, I would no longer be an atheist, but no i would not worship god.

Zillah

Mena wrote: »

Sure, if it turned out god (which one ) was real, there'd be no more atheists. But there's not a chance in hell (probably then my future home) that I would even for a second consider worshiping it. The very thought is ridiculuous to me.

Really? Really?

Let's just clarify the situation:
You must worship this entity or you will endure flaming agony for eternity.

Forever. Like, a hundred billion years of torment is nothing compared to eternity. You can't honestly said you'd choose that over bowing before God? Even if you'd be so unwise as to say yes, I think you'd come to regret your decision in moments, and if not moments then perhaps after fifty quintillion years of torture.

Micky Dolenz

If God was proven to exist byond doubt, Atheists and other non beliver types would poo in their pants.

MrPudding

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Now, the god of the bible claims to have a monopoly on morality, everything he does is infinitely good because he is perfect. If this particular god was absolutely proven, I'd have to be pretty arrogant to say that he's wrong and my morality is better. So I wouldn't be paying lip service, I would accept that I had been wrong all these years and accept his morality whether it fits with what I think or not. After all he's the perfect being

Ah, I see. I was not working from the "it exists and everything that everyone believes about it is true" but more from the "wow, it actually does exist. What an asshole" point of view.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

If God was proven to exist byond doubt, Atheists and other non beliver types would poo in their pants.

In fairness, so would a lot of the believers.

MrP

Micky Dolenz

MrPudding wrote: »

In fairness, so would a lot of the believers.

MrP

Amen(:o) to that.

Mena

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

Zillah wrote: »

Really? Really?

Let's just clarify the situation:
You must worship this entity or you will endure flaming agony for eternity.

Forever. Like, a hundred billion years of torment is nothing compared to eternity. You can't honestly said you'd choose that over bowing before God? Even if you'd be so unwise as to say yes, I think you'd come to regret your decision in moments, and if not moments then perhaps after fifty quintillion years of torture.

Ah now come on Zillah, you're selectivly reading/quoting my posts. That may fly with "the others" mentality but I expected more from yourself. Here, I'll quote the bit you left out.

Mena wrote: »

Hell, even if I tried this all seeing all knowing earthquake making monstrosity would see through it so there'd be little point.

I could and would never worship anything, so it would be a fake gesture, and if this abomination they call god is as all knowing and all seeing as they made him up to be, then he'd see straight through it no?

Besides, the whole situation is too ridiculous to even imagine, and this from someone with an active imagination.

Flamed Diving

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

I would obviously accept that he exists, but I couldn't worship a child-murderer.

Sorry if I'm being stubborn, but I have my principles.

Sam Vimes

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I would obviously accept that he exists, but I couldn't worship a child-murderer.

Sorry if I'm being stubborn, but I have my principles.

But would you not say to yourself "he probably knows better than me, what with being the omnipotent creator of the universe"?

Dades

Mena wrote: »

I could and would never worship anything, so it would be a fake gesture, and if this abomination they call god is as all knowing and all seeing as they made him up to be, then he'd see straight through it no?

I dunno. Any 'being' that demands worship on pain of eternal torture isn't overly concerned about how genuine that worship is. The only thing they are interested in is seeing the top of your head.

faceman

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

No it's hilarious because your brain is so illogical. To analogize for you

We surveyed 100 people and asked them would they rather be given 10 million euro, or play the lotto in the hope of winning 10 million euro.

You answered, play the lotto

Our survey says... EH EHHHHHHH

WTF? No you havent. But now people's spiritual beliefs is similar to doing a €4 quick pick on a saturday night?

By the same analogy, if I pray more does that increase the likelihood the a god exists?

toiletduck

I don't see why an omnipotent being would want or need to be worshiped. Seems rather bizarre tbh.

Flamed Diving

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

But would you not say to yourself "he probably knows better than me, what with being the omnipotent creator of the universe"?

Perhaps I am feeble-minded. But I cannot reconcile how killing children can be moral. Obviously God can, but that is why I would not want to be associated with him.

Zombrex

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Perhaps I am feeble-minded. But I cannot reconcile how killing children can be moral. Obviously God can, but that is why I would not want to be associated with him.

The problem is that God should be more moral than us.

The idea that he would appear less moral than us but for some special unknown reason that we trust he has makes little sense to me.

The idea that a good omnipotent deity would do what is in the Old Testament is illogical. If it is determined that said deity exists the only conclusion left is that he isn't good, and therefore I would not worship him.

TheInquisitor

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

Wouldn't change a thing for me. I don't believe in god and even if it was proven there was one i don't don't accept that there is any need to worship anything. Is your god really that vain that he/she /it needs to be worshipped?

MrPudding

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

toiletduck wrote: »

I don't see why an omnipotent being would want or need to be worshiped. Seems rather bizarre tbh.

I know, it is almost as it its existence was made up and the people that made it up applied human traits and needs to it. Weird.

MrP

MrPudding

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Perhaps I am feeble-minded. But I cannot reconcile how killing children can be moral. Obviously God can, but that is why I would not want to be associated with him.

I guess that is why it is a god and you are a feeble minded puny human, it knows why, amongst other things a decent human being can't reconcile, it is ok to murder children.

MrP

Sam Vimes

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

Perhaps I am feeble-minded. But I cannot reconcile how killing children can be moral. Obviously God can, but that is why I would not want to be associated with him.

So even if the creator and source of all morality told you that it was moral, you wouldn't think that maybe you'd got the wrong idea?

If someone designed and built a machine of some kind would you come along and tell him you knew more about it and the way he thought it designed was wrong?

We're operating on the assumption that all of the claims of the bible are true remember.

Tar.Aldarion

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So even if the creator and source of all morality told you that it was moral, you wouldn't think that maybe you'd got the wrong idea?

If someone designed and built a machine of some kind would you come along and tell him you knew more about it and the way he thought it designed was wrong?

We're operating on the assumption that all of the claims of the bible are true remember.

They can't be true, it makes no sense that he is the 'source of morals', just a powerful being that created us.


It only makes sense to somebody that believes in objective morality and believes that whatever that being says goes, which makes no sense to me.

Flamed Diving

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So even if the creator and source of all morality told you that it was moral, you wouldn't think that maybe you'd got the wrong idea?

If killing children is moral, then call me immoral, Yahweh.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

If someone designed and built a machine of some kind would you come along and tell him you knew more about it and the way he thought it designed was wrong?

If he built that machine with the ability to perform life-saving surgery, and then told it to go on a killing spree, I would have a problem with that, yeah.

Flamed Diving

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

So even if the creator and source of all morality told you that it was moral, you wouldn't think that maybe you'd got the wrong idea?

If someone designed and built a machine of some kind would you come along and tell him you knew more about it and the way he thought it designed was wrong?

We're operating on the assumption that all of the claims of the bible are true remember.

Assuming the claims of the bible being true, doesn't mean you have to agree with them.

Sam Vimes

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

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

They can't be true, it makes no sense that he is the 'source of morals', just a powerful being that created us.


It only makes sense to somebody that believes in objective morality and believes that whatever that being says goes, which makes no sense to me.

The title of thread is "If Gods existence was proven" so saying it can't be true is missing the point. Assume it is true for the sake of the thread

Flamed Diving wrote: »

If killing children is moral, then call me immoral, Yahweh.

If he built that machine with the ability to perform life-saving surgery, and then told it to go on a killing spree, I would have a problem with that, yeah.

What if he was an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, timeless supernatural creator of everything that exists, including morality? Are you saying you know better than such a being?

Mena

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

Are you saying you know better than such a being?

Simply, yes.

Sam Vimes

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

Mena wrote: »

Simply, yes.

You know better than someone who by definition knows everything because he is omniscient? do you know everything +1?

Mena

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You know better than someone who by definition knows everything because he is omniscient? do you know everything +1?

It's not about knowing everything +1. It's about knowing right from wrong, something the god of the christian bible quite obviously does not.

Flamed Diving

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You know better than someone who by definition knows everything because he is omniscient? do you know everything +1?

If knowing less than him means not killing children, then call me ignorant.

Sam Vimes

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

Mena wrote: »

It's not about knowing everything +1. It's about knowing right from wrong, something the god of the christian bible quite obviously does not.

You're kind of missing the point of the thread though. We're assuming that the christian god is proven and therefore that the bible is proven. The bible quite clearly states that god is the source of all morality so that claim is taken as proven. If that claim is proven and your version of right and wrong is different to his, your version is therefore wrong, no?

Tar.Aldarion

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

The title of thread is "If Gods existence was proven" so saying it can't be true is missing the point. Assume it is true for the sake of the thread

This gods existence is a paradox to me, because of the attributed characteristics. Therfore I can't 'accept' it's true.

Dades

Mena wrote: »

It's not about knowing everything +1. It's about knowing right from wrong, something the god of the christian bible quite obviously does not.

But if he made everything - including right AND wrong - surely he'd know better than you?

Flamed Diving

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You're kind of missing the point of the thread though. We're assuming that the christian god is proven and therefore that the bible is proven. The bible quite clearly states that god is the source of all morality so that claim is taken as proven. If that claim is proven and your version of right and wrong is different to his, your version is therefore wrong, no?

I'm quite happy to be wrong. If it means that killing children is still wrong, in my mind.

Sam Vimes

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I
If he built that machine with the ability to perform life-saving surgery, and then told it to go on a killing spree, I would have a problem with that, yeah.

And on this point again, I'm not asking whether he uses it to do wrong, I'm asking would you come along and tell him that you knew how it worked better than he did? Who are you to tell the creator of the surgery machine that you know how it works better than him?

Mena

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

Sam Vimes wrote: »

You're kind of missing the point of the thread though. We're assuming that the christian god is proven and therefore that the bible is proven. The bible quite clearly states that god is the source of all morality so that claim is taken as proven. If that claim is proven and your version of right and wrong is different to his, your version is therefore wrong, no?

Dades wrote: »

But if he made everything - including right AND wrong - surely he'd know better than you?

Yes, I would be wrong. I'd be very happy about it, in fact I'd tattoo it across my chest (may hide my man boobs ).

Are you telling me that you'd revise your stance should all this be proven?

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And on this point again, I'm not asking whether he uses it to do wrong, I'm asking would you come along and tell him that you knew how it worked better than he did? Who are you to tell the creator of the surgery machine that you know how it works better than him?

Ah now, if he can't take a little constructive feedback he needs to loosen up a bit.

Sam Vimes

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

Flamed Diving wrote: »

I'm quite happy to be wrong. If it means that killing children is still wrong, in my mind.

So you will hold onto a belief even after it is absolutely and totally proven to be wrong? Sounds almost religious to me tbh