NationStates Jolt Archive

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

I'd certainly question whether it was the god I wanted to follow... or the religion.

If the precepts of the religion still contained moral guidelines for living one's life... then probably I would continue to follow those moral guidelines rather than venerating something that was clearly evil.

I'd accept the God's existance. I wouldn't worship such a God though. Hell, I wouldn't worship any God. I would however, ask this God what his/hers favourite Zeppelin song is.

I already said there are worse divine entities.

I already said there are worse divine entities.

Sorry, the first shot was censored.

I'd overthrow it/him/her and take over. To be a deity, one has to earn it.

Sorry, the first shot was censored.
Not so much "censored" as "closed down because it was flamebaiting".

Not so much "censored" as "closed down because it was flamebaiting".

Yeah, maybe a little, but with no real intention at all.

I'm not saying that someone his or her god or gods is looking like my scientific proven god. I wanted to make clear that this scientific proven god is no good at all.

Pedophile, all kinds of evil? Looks like you just re-invented the wheel, er I mean Devil. So to loosely rephrase the question, would I worship the Devil just because he *unquestionably* exists?

No. Just because you can prove the existence of a demi-God scientifically doesn't mean that you have to worship it. And just because you can't prove the existence of God scientifically doesn't mean you shouldn't worship him/her/it.

Rather than allow atheists to bait, trap and flame my beliefs without defining and considering their own I'll ask a simple question. What is your image of God? By this I mean, define *what it is* that you do not believe in?

Pedophile, all kinds of evil? Looks like you just re-invented the wheel, er I mean Devil. So to loosely rephrase the question, would I worship the Devil just because he *unquestionably* exists?

No. Just because you can prove the existence of a demi-God scientifically doesn't mean that you have to worship it. And just because you can't prove the existence of God scientifically doesn't mean you shouldn't worship him/her/it.

Rather than allow atheists to bait, trap and flame my beliefs without defining and considering their own I'll ask a simple question. What is your image of God? By this I mean, define *what it is* that you do not believe in?

The clouds are my gods.

i think everyone has a god in him with other ideas of living but you can't put people in groups of religion you know i dont believe everything in the bible either

I'd accept the God's existance. I wouldn't worship such a God though. Hell, I wouldn't worship any God. I would however, ask this God what his/hers favourite Zeppelin song is.

yeah can you tell me his answer then :D

Pedophile, all kinds of evil? Looks like you just re-invented the wheel, er I mean Devil. So to loosely rephrase the question, would I worship the Devil just because he *unquestionably* exists?

No. Just because you can prove the existence of a demi-God scientifically doesn't mean that you have to worship it. And just because you can't prove the existence of God scientifically doesn't mean you shouldn't worship him/her/it.

Rather than allow atheists to bait, trap and flame my beliefs without defining and considering their own I'll ask a simple question. What is your image of God? By this I mean, define *what it is* that you do not believe in?

The point is that this isn't a demi-god. This is the big one. The one who made the universe, and all of us in it. The one who created everything you have ever known.

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?
it depends on the ramifications.

if i would suffer an eternity of torment if i didnt id suck it up and do the worship thing.

if its just giving thanks and looking on in awe, nah.

What's the afterlife like?

This is standard "Can God make good bad and bad good?" territory here anyway.

i think everyone has a god in him with other ideas of living but you can put people in groups of religion you know i dont believe everything in the bible either

The bible is a very hard read. It's shocking how many people claim to believe that the bible is the word of God without actually reading *and understanding* it. Or the counter example how people will denigrate Christianity without reading the new-testament.

As for myself I take the bible very seriously but I do not take it literally. The bible is just a book and it was written by people. I think some parts of it are a lot more enlightened than others. I would certainly say it guides my beliefs but one still must interpret it.

The point is that this isn't a demi-god. This is the big one. The one who made the universe, and all of us in it. The one who created everything you have ever known.

The Cathars (a group of Gnostics) call this deity Rex Mundi or Magister Mundi. The idea being that the physical world is evil, and that we must transcend matter (creation) to join with (the real) god.

As for the OP, I already know that god exists, and I don't worship god.

The bible is a very hard read. It's shocking how many people claim to believe that the bible is the word of God without actually reading *and understanding* it. Or the counter example how people will denigrate Christianity without reading the new-testament.

As for myself I take the bible very seriously but I do not take it literally. The bible is just a book and it was written by people. I think some parts of it are a lot more enlightened than others. I would certainly say it guides my beliefs but one still must interpret it.


I like the parts where is asked to be nice for our slaves.

I wouldn't worship it, but I would be quite happy to know that my suspicions were correct.

Sounds like Slaanesh to me. And quite honestly, I don't like it. So, nope.

Sounds like Slaanesh to me. And quite honestly, I don't like it. So, nope.

Slaanesh is good.

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

The point is that this isn't a demi-god. This is the big one. The one who made the universe, and all of us in it. The one who created everything you have ever known.

No, the point is that this is NSG not reality. The god defined above does not fit within the parameters of what God should be in the real world. Therefore I refer to this god of possible NSG worlds as a demi-God.

In a possible world where good is bad and bad is good then you can define god as whatever you like - but that avoid the more interesting question about the true nature of God. By avoiding that question yourselves it's easy to paint God as some kind of cartoon super-villain.

It's harder to do the same thing if you take the question seriously. Is it reasonable to believe god is a cartoon super villain??? What do you believe? Define it, as best as you can.

No, the point is that this is NSG not reality. The god defined above does not fit within the parameters of what God should be in the real world. Therefore I refer to this god of possible NSG worlds as a demi-God.

In a possible world where good is bad and bad is good then you can define god as whatever you like - but that avoid the more interesting question about the true nature of God. By avoiding that question yourselves it's easy to paint God as some kind of cartoon super-villain.

It's harder to do the same thing if you take the question seriously. Is it reasonable to believe god is a cartoon super villain??? What do you believe? Define it, as best as you can.


This thread is about thé god, thé one and only. Not about a god, your god, my god or god his god. No demigod, no Santa Claus, but a scientific proven god. The details doesn’t matter, just accept the concept.


They search me in 26 states for killing witness of jehovah people.

they search me in 26 states for killing witness of jehovah people.
?
?!?!
!
...
?
That's a bit of a non sequitur, there.

... the physical world is evil, and ... we must transcend matter (creation) to join with (the real) god.


Yes, I would agree. Satan is the king of this world. IMHO God is something spiritual, non corporal, which is all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful and transcends both time and space. And if you ask me I think we are all part of it and it is a part of us.


As for the OP, I already know that god exists, and I don't worship god.


Fair enough.

Yes, I would agree. Satan is the king of this world.

Hardly, considering that people in general are kinda nice and well meaning.

Assume they really did, but…

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

No way I'm adoring any god. I would not adore the christian god, even if I believed it existed (which I don't) - least of all I would worship a junkie with a penchant for sadism.

Though the part about naked rock'n'roll might make it a bit nicer.

No way I'm adoring any god. I would not adore the christian god, even if I believed it existed - least of all I would worship a paedophile with a penchant for sadism.

Though the part about naked rock'n'roll might make it a bit nicer.

I had to show his nice parts as well ;)

Yes, I would agree. Satan is the king of this world. IMHO God is something spiritual, non corporal, which is all-knowing, all-seeing, all-powerful and transcends both time and space. And if you ask me I think we are all part of it and it is a part of us.

If god is a part of us and we are a part of it, then god must be somewhat corporeal.

This thread is about thé god, thé one and only. Not about a god, your god, my god or god his god. No demigod, no Santa Claus, but a scientific proven god. The details doesn’t matter, just accept the concept.


They search me in 26 states for killing witness of jehovah people.

So the scientifically proven God is the evil god defined in this thread?

Don't you think it's a little bit fascist to impose your image of God on me even for the purpose of a little debate? Besides, I think I have answered the question. No - I would never worship the scientifically proven "God" of NSG.

Does that make me a heretic in the World of NSG.

If god is a part of us and we are a part of it, then god must be somewhat corporeal.

Not at all. If you accept the idea that mankind has a non-corporeal spirit then God need not have a physical form.

Don't you think it's a little bit fascist to impose your image of God on me even for the purpose of a little debate?
Oho! A reductio ad hitlerum!

Does that make me a heretic in the World of NSG. Yes. We have a lot of firewood and a sturdy pole ready.:D

Not at all. If you accept the idea that mankind has a non-corporeal spirit then God need not have a physical form.

So, our soul or non-corporeal self is one with the non-corporeal god. Okay. That's consistent.

No way I'm adoring any god. I would not adore the christian god, even if I believed it existed (which I don't) - least of all I would worship a junkie with a penchant for sadism.

Though the part about naked rock'n'roll might make it a bit nicer.

You would not even adore a god that was in perfect alignment with your beliefs? Well... it seems a bit unreasonable to make such ridiculous blanket statements, but their yours to make.

In regards to the OP, what proof would we have exactly? I'm not asking you to prove right now that said loony god exists, merely what proof we would have in that situation.

You would not even adore a god that was in perfect alignment with your beliefs? Well... it seems a bit unreasonable to make such ridiculous blanket statements, but their yours to make.

In regards to the OP, what proof would we have exactly? I'm not asking you to prove right now that said loony god exists, merely what proof we would have in that situation.

A video, presented by C. Powell.

So the scientifically proven God is the evil god defined in this thread?

Don't you think it's a little bit fascist to impose your image of God on me even for the purpose of a little debate? Besides, I think I have answered the question. No - I would never worship the scientifically proven "God" of NSG.

Does that make me a heretic in the World of NSG.

You've completely missed the point of the thread. It was a hypothetical, asking what YOU would do if the described God turned out to exist, and be the God everyone has been ranting about for all those years. It was not imposing an image of God on you, it was asking a hypothetical. Simple as that.

A video, presented by C. Powell.

A video? Pardon for remaining a skeptic.

You would not even adore a god that was in perfect alignment with your beliefs? Well... it seems a bit unreasonable to make such ridiculous blanket statements, but their yours to make.

No, I would not adore him. I would be friendly to a god in perfect alignment with my ideas, but not adore him. Even if he created me I would not adore him - just as I don't adore my parents. I like them and I love them, but not because they made me: I like and love them because they cared for me and because they are nice people.

Btw, why should gods need any adoring?

Oho! A reductio ad hitlerum!


I just thought it was an unreasonable restriction to make. I shouln't need to agree with a premise before I engage in a debate :o


Yes. We have a lot of firewood and a sturdy pole ready.:D


Good you'll need it.
Somehow, I knew this thread was a set up to flame me :P

No, I would not adore him. I would be friendly to a god in perfect alignment with my ideas, but not adore him. Even if he created me I would not adore him - just as I don't adore my parents. I like them and I love them, but not because they made me: I like and love them because they cared for me and because they are nice people.

Btw, why should gods need any adoring?

Because Rock n' Roll music is unfulfilling. This god just needs someone to love him, ere he wander down the wrong path in his... er... life....

ps. Sorry for the reliance on a male-based deity, English defaults to male, so there you have it.

I just thought it was an unreasonable restriction to make.
Then maybe calling that restriction "fascist" was a bit of an hyperbole...

Somehow, I knew this thread was a set up to flame me :P

Literally, my boy. Literally.:D:D

A video? Pardon for remaining a skeptic.

You’re missing the whole point. It's not about my-god-is-real, your-god-is-unreal.

Just accept that scientists found unquestionable evidence that some god exists.
Something like I described.

What would it do with you and with your belief (or lack of any)?

Would you keep your belief? Would you remain atheist or whatever?

Or would you accept the fact and follow your new lord?

What would it do with you and with your belief (or lack of any)?

Would you keep your belief? Would you remain atheist or whatever?

Or would you accept the fact and follow your new lord?I think I've mentioned this earlier in a different thread: If God were like you describe him, or a similar tyrant, I'd find a subtle knife.

Because Rock n' Roll music is unfulfilling. This god just needs someone to love him, ere he wander down the wrong path in his... er... life....
I call this god a blasphemer for saying that R'n'R is unfulfilling! AIEEE!!! ;)
Anyway, if he needs me to love him, well, I suppose that he could turn himself into a gorgeous HER of suitable age, with a passion for nerdy things, heavy metal, Rolemaster, beer, wine, cuisine, and hot sex. :D

ps. Sorry for the reliance on a male-based deity, English defaults to male, so there you have it.
No problem, italian defaults to male, so it's my forma mentis too.

You've completely missed the point of the thread. It was a hypothetical, asking what YOU would do if the described God turned out to exist, and be the God everyone has been ranting about for all those years. It was not imposing an image of God on you, it was asking a hypothetical. Simple as that.

A hypothetical I already answered. That answer is No. No I would not worship the 'God' of NSG postulated in the aforementioned hypothetical. Even if you somehow videotaped him and Santa Claus raping little boys I would not worship him. Even if it meant I would be burned at the steak in NSG world and go to NSG hell forever where my skin would be ripped off and then sown back on again only to be ripped off again forever and ever. No. Is it clear enough?

Would you keep your belief? Would you remain atheist or whatever?

I would obviously not be an atheist anymore (I would accept that his existance would be a solid fact), but I would still refusing to worship him.

And if he strikes me with lightning for not worshipping him, well, that's another proof of him being evil; which would prove that he doesn't deserve any kind of worship in the first instance. (hm... somewhat of a loop, but hey...) I could feign worship to save my hide, though.

Would you remain atheist or whatever?
By definition, it would be impossible to remain an atheist if you knew there was a god. Many people would probably adopt some sort of conscientious objector status.

You’re missing the whole point. It's not about my-god-is-real, your-god-is-unreal.

Just accept that scientists found unquestionable evidence that some god exists.
Something like I described.

What would it do with you and with your belief (or lack of any)?

Would you keep your belief? Would you remain atheist or whatever?

Or would you accept the fact and follow your new lord?

I understand that... but because I understand that actual proof for anything is impossible to attain, it is hard for me to put my frame of mind around a proof with so many conditions completely met... and proven.

My apologies for having no real opinion to comtribute.

I would obviously not be an atheist anymore (I would accept that his existance would be a solid fact), but I would still refusing to worship him.

And if he strikes me with lightning for not worshipping him, well, that's another proof of him being evil; which would prove that he doesn't deserve any kind of worship in the first instance. (hm... somewhat of a loop, but hey...) I could feign worship to save my hide, though.

Lightning strike?

No way. You will hear, permanently and in your head, the sound of a bunch of drunken Japanese who sing Eros Ramazzotti his songs.

Something as:

"ik kan niet kakken voor de tweede keer"

Even if it meant I would be burned at the steak in NSG world ...

Apart that it is "being burned at the stake" ("burned at the steak" is quite hilarious, though, reminds me of St.Lawrence)... I suspect that you REALLY think that this thread was set up as a flamebait for you.
Really, I don't think that this is the case - and my previous reference to burning you at the stake was totally ironical (also, if you read my previous posts, you'll see that I wouldn't adore him either, so the stake would be ready for me also).

Religion and atheism are always hot topics here on NSG.

By definition, it would be impossible to remain an atheist if you knew there was a god. Many people would probably adopt some sort of conscientious objector status.

Nope... I'd do it. I'd become an athiest (something I currently am not) despite proof.

As to how I'd do it... I'd retreat to my secret lab (which may or may not exist....), and conduct research until I have discovered the secret of "Athiesus Totalitus".

Sorry for the ridiculousness... couldn't help it... mostly.

Lightning strike?

No way. You will hear, permanently and in your head, the sound of a bunch of drunken Japanese who sing Eros Ramazzotti his songs.

AIIEEEEE!!! Eros Ramazzotti is one of the MOST EVIL things one could imagine. My resolution begins to falter... ;)

AIIEEEEE!!! Eros Ramazzotti is one of the MOST EVIL things one could imagine. My resolution begins to falter... ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHMHEXHOkFc

...I suspect that you REALLY think that this thread was set up as a flamebait for you.


Not specifically for me. But I engage in this discussion knowing full well that it *will* happen. So far y'all haven't resorted to name calling so it's still civilized. :p

AIIEEEEE!!! Eros Ramazzotti is one of the MOST EVIL things one could imagine. My resolution begins to falter... ;)

That nasal voice... *shudders*

Once I hear one of his songs, I cannot get it out of my head.

AIIEEEEE!!! Eros Ramazzotti is one of the MOST EVIL things one could imagine. My resolution begins to falter... ;)

You may not be able to define god but you sure can imagine a pretty convincing hell.

Whats this Rubbish of science proving anything? Science just makes a very convincing argument in favour of theories due to observations lining up with theoretical predictions.

This Science god cannot stop Athiest Fundamentalists rejecting it as a Science God cannot be proven.

Not specifically for me. But I engage in this discussion knowing full well that it *will* happen. So far y'all haven't resorted to name calling so it's still civilized. :p

Seeing that you're under 100 posts, I'll assure you that namecalling based on nickname is quite unusual here... even for those with nicks who might look as provocation (unless it's a nazi provocation).

(Anyway in NSG we DO start up everytime there's the suspect of trollish behaviour, so I suggest you never to give anyone the most remote chance of yelling "troll!"). (edit: see the post immediately above this one as an example of no-no-no!)

Whats this Rubbish of science proving anything? Science just makes a very convincing argument in favour of theories due to observations lining up with theoretical predictions.
And allows you to use a computer, the internet and this forum. Things proven by science work. Confutation 101.

This Science god cannot stop Athiest Fundamentalists rejecting it as a Science God cannot be proven.
Reread the OP. This isn't about a "Science god". It's about "suppose that it has been proven that some kind of deity exists, but that it isn't anything like what you expected: what would you do?"

Also, it's: "what's" and "atheist"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHMHEXHOkFc

I'm not clicking on that. NO WAY!

Nope... I'd do it. I'd become an athiest (something I currently am not) despite proof.

...I think we could name that position "antitheism".

I was referring more generally to *other forums* I've been in. I'd actually say NSG is better than most, but as you pointed out I'm still relatively new here.

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

Who're you calling ugly?!? :mad:

Who're you calling ugly?!? :mad:

You aren't incomprehensible. So it't not about you. Also there was no "and he plays with mud".

Since our illustrious thread's progenitor isn't here to enforce his vision i'll ask my question to all who want to answer. And since just about everyone here atheist or not seems to reject the notion of an evil NSG god, what about a good one.

Suppose there is an NSG god of this thread, of undefined nature. How would you define him/her/it?

Since our illustrious thread's progenitor isn't here to enforce his vision i'll ask my question to all who want to answer. And since just about everyone here atheist or not seems to reject the notion of an evil NSG god, what about a good one.

Suppose there is an NSG god of this thread, of undefined nature. How would you define him/her/it?

Two words for you: Lunatic Goofballs.

A hypothetical I already answered. That answer is No. No I would not worship the 'God' of NSG postulated in the aforementioned hypothetical. Even if you somehow videotaped him and Santa Claus raping little boys I would not worship him. Even if it meant I would be burned at the steak in NSG world and go to NSG hell forever where my skin would be ripped off and then sown back on again only to be ripped off again forever and ever. No. Is it clear enough?

Do you always debate this dishonestly? He didn't say it was a NationStates god, he was positing a real God whose existence is proven by science. If you can't answer the question as posed, you're spamming.

To answer this myself, whether I chose to worship such a God depends greatly on whether there are consequences for not doing so. Now, throughout human religious history only a handful of deities have offered eternal punishment to human beings who have refused to worship them. So it's quite possible this one wouldn't bother. That being the case, no, I would not worship him.

Now, if it was worship him or suffer horrible torments after death, OK, I would try. At least the part about him liking rock music would appeal. :) But I'd have a hard time of it otherwise because I find it tremendously difficult to adore someone who enjoys hurting people. I'd likely go through the motions of any worship he required (assuming it didn't require something like torture or murder) and hope it was good enough.

I know it's a hypothetical question, though, but it's based on the same old tired atheist fallacy: "While atheists understand that the Bible is a compilation of writings by human beings and has likely been edited over the millenia--not to mention all the human-engendered political decisions about what would go into the Bible and what would be left out--nevertheless, atheists reject God precisely because of the way Christians describe Him."

...What???

Hey, if it seems logical to you, knock yourself out. I guess.

As for Mr. Outraged Christian Man, this is what your people get for violating the prohibition against graven images. All these centuries y'all have been portraying God as a man, and Jesus as God in man-form, and you really expected people to not become confused about God? That passage about humanity being made in God's image? That was *allegory.*

I suppose the name of my nation-state gives it away somewhat, but I rather like Islam's take on the nature of God. I'm not Muslim, not sure if I will ever revert, but the more I read of theology from their point of view, the more fascinated I am. And I've had one long, strange trip through religion over the years--started out nondenominational Protestant with strong Baptist leanings, coming out of a Catholic family (but not raised in it), then went into Neopaganism for over a decade, then woke up to the several thea/ological inconsistencies therein--not to mention all the cultural appropriation, sexual impropriety, arrogance, immaturity, et al--and now I'm looking at this and wondering why I couldn't have found it two decades ago. It's interesting. It might even be, dare I say it, closer to a description of what God actually is than anything else I've seen. I think it is still filtered through human bias, but what wouldn't be? We can only ever see God through human eyes. At least, in this life.

Even if I stay agnostic, though, I think religion is as much about metaphor and relationship as it is about whether a God exists or what nature that God possesses. And I think atheists miss that point. And it's a shame because I can't really see any overarching metaphor in atheism aside from "nothing really matters and there's no meaning in anything." I don't want to live in that kind of world. If the atheists are right, anyway, it's not like it ultimately matters because I face no consequences in the afterlife for not giving up some kind of belief in God. *shrug*

You aren't incomprehensible. So it't not about you. Also there was no "and he plays with mud".

I also don't hold traditional war in particularly high regard.

The God I believe in is perfect. Man's science/man's laws are not perfect. Man can prove all it wants, but it does not affect my belief in Him. True science matches true religion. Take this for example. Man can prove all he wants that the ruins and stones and tombs in Jerusalem are in complete accordance with the Holy Bible. That does not affect my testimony of the Bible. I know the Bible is true by the power of the Holy Ghost, not Discovery Channel's most recent special on proving the Bible is true. The same goes for this theoretical God. Man can say that God is a hamster, and can use all sorts of tried and tested methods to prove that true. I don't care. It's the Holy Ghost that tells me he's there.

By the way
"God created man in His image" is not an allegory.

That's literal.

By the way
"God created man in His image" is not an allegory.

That's literal.

I'm not seeing much proof for this statement, seeing as to prove it would require an undisputed image of god for us to compare man with.

my god only uses two fingers, while most gods use three.

hes a compassionate god...

Do you always debate this dishonestly? He didn't say it was a NationStates god, he was positing a real God whose existence is proven by science. If you can't answer the question as posed, you're spamming.

Dishonest? I don't think you understand me. Hairless kitty does not have the right to define the conditions under which god may or may not exist *in the real world*. However, this thread might be considered a *possible world* in which Hairless kitty has such power. Therefore, I refer to the god which Hairless kitty has defined in this thread as the god of NSG.


To answer this myself, whether I chose to worship such a God depends greatly on whether there are consequences for not doing so.


Well this god is evil. I assume you do get punished for not worshiping him. But then isn't this 'god' really exactly the same thing as some-peoples vision of the devil? Would you really worship the Devil?


I know it's a hypothetical question, though, but it's based on the same old tired atheist fallacy: "While atheists understand that the Bible is a compilation of writings by human beings and has likely been edited over the millenia--not to mention all the human-engendered political decisions about what would go into the Bible and what would be left out--nevertheless, atheists reject God precisely because of the way Christians describe Him."

...What???


I think that this is where Hairless kitty was going with this but then Hairless kitty didn't explicitly say so. Thats sort of where I was going with my question: How do you define god? Because weather it's reasonable to believe in it depends a lot on how you define it.


As for Mr. Outraged Christian Man, this is what your people get for violating the prohibition against graven images.


What do I get? Is it a present :) Wait... What?


All these centuries y'all have been portraying God as a man, and Jesus as God in man-form, and you really expected people to not become confused about God?


I never said I didn't expect people the get confused. I will stick to my guns and believe what I believe. The point I was trying to make is pretty much the same one which I think you were.

Whether it's reasonable to believe in God depends a lot on how you define it. If you define god as an evil super villain and then say 'I worship god' then your saying you worship an evil super villain.


That passage about humanity being made in God's image? That was *allegory.*


I agree that it's not meant to be taken literally. But if it is an allegory then what does it mean? At the very least I think it means that there is *something* which we share in common with God. I would argue that that *somthing* is spiritual.


I suppose the name of my nation-state gives it away somewhat, but I rather like Islam's take on the nature of God. I'm not Muslim, not sure if I will ever revert, but the more I read of theology from their point of view, the more fascinated I am. And I've had one long, strange trip through religion over the years


Faith is a journey. My beliefs have also changed over the years. I also *like* Islam but I think that there are even more cultural trappings associated with it than with even Christianity. That being said I respect Islam -- Muslims do worship the same god as Christians. Muslims consider Christians and jews both to be 'people of the book'. Personally I think Islam is too harsh and unforgiving and there are some parts of it which I totally disagree with! but most people I know who are Muslims are good people.


... We can only ever see God through human eyes. At least, in this life.


Thats precisely why its so hard to answer my question.


Even if I stay agnostic, though, I think religion is as much about metaphor and relationship as it is about whether a God exists or what nature that God possesses.


I am probably in the minority of Christians here but I think it's everyones duty to question whether God does exist and what is his/her/it's nature. Personally I think he/she/it does but it's not as though I just read it in a book somewhere and believed it. It took a lot sunsets to solidify my faith in God.



(atheists) ... I can't really see any overarching metaphor in atheism aside from "nothing really matters and there's no meaning in anything." I don't want to live in that kind of world. If the atheists are right, anyway, it's not like it ultimately matters because I face no consequences in the afterlife for not giving up some kind of belief in God. *shrug*

Yes I also refuse to believe that there is not purpose or meaning to life. Perhaps we're doomed to not really *get it* in this life but I personally won't give up trying. I don't think the journey ends with a conversion to Christianity like some... and perhaps there are many roads to the same place.

I am have been reading the Koran as well btw. But I have no intention of converting ...

The God I believe in is perfect. Man's science/man's laws are not perfect. Man can prove all it wants, but it does not affect my belief in Him. True science matches true religion. Take this for example. Man can prove all he wants that the ruins and stones and tombs in Jerusalem are in complete accordance with the Holy Bible. That does not affect my testimony of the Bible. I know the Bible is true by the power of the Holy Ghost, not Discovery Channel's most recent special on proving the Bible is true. The same goes for this theoretical God. Man can say that God is a hamster, and can use all sorts of tried and tested methods to prove that true. I don't care. It's the Holy Ghost that tells me he's there.

It's Loki in disguise. ;)

By the way
"God created man in His image" is not an allegory.

That's literal.

http://www.boston.com/ae/theater_arts/exhibitionist/chang--eng.gif


:eek:

AIEEE!!!!

By the way
"God created man in His image" is not an allegory.

That's literal.So he's literally a hermaphrodite?

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

Id party with this God.

Not worship it though. Just get plastered and strung out with it while listening to heavy metal and having an orgy.

I think I've mentioned this earlier in a different thread: If God were like you describe him, or a similar tyrant, I'd find a subtle knife.
Loving the Pullman reference. :) But then, wouldn't the god described actually NOT be god, but an angel who wanted to fool all humanity?

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

No, but I will refer to him as "sexy shoeless god of war".

Nope... I'd do it. I'd become an athiest (something I currently am not) despite proof.


So you'd hold a principle merely on blind faith in that principle, despite there being clear and objective evidence that said principle is false, or at least highly improbable? Remind you of anyone?

So you'd hold a principle merely on blind faith in that principle, despite there being clear and objective evidence that said principle is false, or at least highly improbable?

I assume the evidence your referring to is Colin Powell's video tape of God and Santa sodomizing a little boy.


Remind you of anyone?


You wouldn't be trying to apply possible word semantics from this thread to the real world would you? :eek: Thus, implying that atheism in-spite of clear evidence is like believing in God.

Anyone see any clear evidence either way?

unquestionable scientific proven

Great understanding of science there.

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

I consider the idea of a "God" that fits your definition contradictory. It sounds more like the Devil. Or just a stupid, nasty alien. I consider benevolence and wisdom a more important defining charicteristic of a God than power.

Anyways, the existing religions would probably dismiss the science like they do now. So not much change from that quarter.

I consider the idea of a "God" that fits your definition contradictory. It sounds more like the Devil. Or just a stupid, nasty alien. I consider benevolence and wisdom a more important defining charicteristic of a God than power.

Why ? The majority of gods throughout history were not really known for their benevolence. Nor is being benevolent a requirement to be the Creator.

I consider the idea of a "God" that fits your definition contradictory. It sounds more like the Devil. Or just a stupid, nasty alien. I consider benevolence and wisdom a more important defining charicteristic of a God than power.

Anyways, the existing religions would probably dismiss the science like they do now. So not much change from that quarter.


Most gods used in the around 4000 religions worldwide, are not that different compared to this 'scientific' proven god.

Once they said, the world was about 6000 years old and created in 6 days. Now we know for sure it's not. The major religions (and creationism is not a major one, it's not even a religion but a sect) accepted this fact.

Once they said, that all and everything was flying around the Earth, we were the middle of the universe. Science proved it's not and after some (long) time the major religions accepted this fact.

So it seems that the major religions are capable of adapting their style.

I'd tell him that he will never be as cool as the flying spaghetti monster

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?

I'd headbang with him, steal his drugs, and then beat his ass.

Sounds like Slaanesh to me. And quite honestly, I don't like it. So, nope.

Why not worship Tzeentch instead?

Well, if it turned out he was directly responsible for fucking things up...

Id openly oppose and attempt to undermine his control...

REBEL MY BRETHREN!! lol

Why not worship Tzeentch instead?

Psh..Gork an Mork 'd smash em ter Bitz!!!

Assume they really did, but…

…it’s not looking like your god. No, this god is an alien, ugly, incomprehensible creature, taking drugs and listening to rock and roll music –naked- all the time. He created humans just for his own entertainment and he likes disasters, wars and all kind of evil.

Would you drop your religion and adore this unquestionable scientific proven god?
If there is a god, I pick her and would vote for her over Sarah Palin anyday!

Psh..Gork an Mork 'd smash em ter Bitz!!!

If you want to go with smashing entities then you'd best stick with a C'Tan, perhaps the Nightbringer?