Thread: If God Were To Be Proved

Ask him what his role in the creation and day-to-day operations of the universe are, especially Earth.

Would you worship him

No. And any god that would care if I did is rather pathetic really.

I'd wear a mask.

It would entirely depend on what the nature of the god was, and others specifics concerning his existence and ours.

I would ask

if it would like to go out for coffee.

I'd lead a rebellion against him and take his place.

If it was a choice between oblivion versus an eternal party in the sky, hell yes, of course I'd worship whoever was the bouncer at that door. It's a kinda strange turn on, but hey, whatever. If you don't make the same call you are simply one of life's losers, get a grip.

i wouldn't worship him because i think a ''good'' god shouldn't ask us wasting time on prayers, so i would just go on and pretend nothing happend.
also why should we worship him? and if god is scientifically proven it wouldn't mean that hell or heaven is scientifically proven so why does god need prayers?
because we are being punished otherwise? i think we would already have noticed that god doesn't exist if he would punish all of us for every ''bad'' thing we do/did.

it's god, so what we think about good and bad is irrelevant. this thread is revealing

It doesn't matter because I already believe in God; and I pray and talk to him/her everyday.

^ But what if it tuns out not to be *that* god? What if it's Shiva the Destroyer? Or some god the likes of which we've never imagined? Then you're as screwed as any atheist. Maybe worse, if it's a jealous god..

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

it's god, so what we think about good and bad is irrelevant. this thread is revealing

What I think of morality is far more important. Should I admit to being a witch because it's the only way to avoid the stake? Should I admit to being a heretic because it's the only way to avoid the Iron Maiden? Only a weak mind allows morality to be dictated to him from an "authority figure"

Define "God" - Based on most people's definition of god, it's basically impossible to prove or disprove either way. Timeless, spaceless, omniscient, omnipotent (and somehow omnibenevolent, which is a non-sequitur).

But if there were some kind of undeniable proof that there is a god that set things into motion, then that is a deist god. It's an interesting thought, and it would revolutionize science (because then god becomes a proven, observable fact). But our lifestyle wouldn't change. I mean, god set things into motion, and then went away. Who cares? It's just a deist god.

Now, if, on the other hand, it were proven that the christian god of the bible is true... well, that would be very, very bad news for EVERYONE (christians and otherwise alike). I'm GLAD to live in a world where there's no reason to believe in that tyrant.

I would ask

how I could convince Abra to ask me instead.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

Only a weak mind allows morality to be dictated to him from an "authority figure"

and only a fool believes his understanding of morality matters in the presence of god

I would have a serious conversation with God about what happens after death, and whether or not we have a say in the direction we go thereafter (or if everyone ends up in the same place regardless of what occurs in life... that place may even be non-existence.)

Might as well find out if it's all worth it.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

and only a fool believes his understanding of morality matters in the presence of god

God, King, whatever it doesn't make a difference to me who's trying to intimidate me. I'd rather die standing than live on my knees.

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

God, King, whatever it doesn't make a difference to me who's trying to intimidate me. I'd rather die standing than live on my knees.

that's easy for you to say because this thread isn't real

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

that's easy for you to say because this thread isn't real

I'm talking about Absolute Authority, here. That's what God is, right? Absolute Authority? Throughout history people has been forced to choose between torturous death and bowing down to an absolute authority figure. Change occurs when enough people choose the former.

you're a badass

I must humbly praise my own God, and my God is Truth and Justice, not authority for the sake of it. Show me a god that does not require I pledge to him for the sake of it but rather stands for honor and compassion and I'll show you a god worthy of my pledge.

Originally Posted by ThePreserver

I would have a serious conversation with God about what happens after death, and whether or not we have a say in the direction we go thereafter (or if everyone ends up in the same place regardless of what occurs in life... that place may even be non-existence.)

Might as well find out if it's all worth it.

Mayhaps you'll enjoy this:

Spoiler for The Seeker and the Sage:

In Philosophical Explanations, Nozick says the question of life’s meaning is so important to us and leaves us feeling so vulnerable that,

we camouflage our vulnerability with jokes about seeking for the meaning or purpose of life: A person travels for many days to the Himalayas to seek the word of an Indian holy man meditating in an isolated cave. Tired from his journey, but eager and expectant that his quest is about to reach fulfillment, he asks the sage, “What is the meaning of life?” After a long pause, the sage opens his eyes and says, “Life is a fountain.” “What do you mean life is a fountain?” barks the questioner. “I have just traveled thousands of miles to hear your words, and all you have to tell me is that? That’s ridiculous.” The sage then looks up from the floor of the cave and says, “You mean it’s not a fountain?” In a variant of the story, he replies, "So it's not a fountain."

In a variant of the story, he replies, “So it’s not a fountain.” The sage feels none of the angst that led the seeker to the cave. So, who’s missing something: sage or seeker? The story suggests a contrast of attitudes. I’ll call them Existentialist and Zen, meaning only to gesture at the traditions these names evoke. The Existentialist attitude is that life’s meaning, or lack thereof, is of momentous import. We seek meaning. If we don’t get it, we choose between stoicism and despair. The Zen attitude is that meaning isn’t something to be sought. Meaning comes to us, or not. If it comes, we accept it. If not, we accept that too. To some degree, we choose how much meaning we need. Perhaps the sage achieves peace by learning not to need meaning. Perhaps that’s what we’re meant to learn from the sage’s seemingly meaningless remark that life is a fountain.

The Existentialist insight, in part, is that meaning is something we give to life. We do not find meaning so much as throw ourselves at it. The Zen insight, in part, is that worrying about meaning may itself make life less meaningful than it might have been. Part of the virtue of the Zen attitude lies in learning to not need to be busy: learning there is joy and meaning and peace in simply being mindful, not needing to change or be changed. Let the moment mean what it will.

Nozick concludes the section with another story.

A man goes to India, consults a sage in a cave and asks him the meaning of life. In three sentences, the sage tells him, the man thanks him and leaves. There are several variants of this story also: In the first, the man lives meaningfully ever after; in the second he makes the sentences public so that everyone then knows the meaning of life; in the third, he sets the sentences to rock music, making his fortune and enabling everyone to whistle the meaning of life; and in the fourth variant, his plane crashes as he is flying off from his meeting with the sage. In the fifth version, the person listening to me tell this story eagerly asks what sentences the sage spoke. And in the sixth version, I tell him.

Another joke? What are we meant to imagine happening next? What does Nozick the fictional character say? Nozick the author never tells us...

Spoiler for source:

p. 94-95 ( books.google.com/books?id=09weczeYoEsC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=what+the +sage+new+about+the+limits+of+meaning+fountain&sou rce=bl&ots=1ZZjnUqI8D&sig=m3n-uObmJk9e8V8nZez17c2Adbs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=trQbT7ftB6al 2AXq4MDZCw&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=what%20the% 20sage%20new%20about%20the%20limits%20of%20meaning %20fountain&f=false )

Originally Posted by Omnis Dei

I'm talking about Absolute Authority, here. That's what God is, right? Absolute Authority? Throughout history people has been forced to choose between torturous death and bowing down to an absolute authority figure. Change occurs when enough people choose the former.

Then again, there is a particular, infallible, personified affair in which one and two are the same... It brings about a bit of change, as well...

Like a House of Leaves. I suppose there is one authority figure I'll have to bow down to eventually. But he'll take me fighting.

If the existence of a god implies the existence of heaven, then yes. But if it was a just a god and no heaven, then I'd have to think about it.