If God were proven....

[FrankDK]

>  I think anybody who says they'd rather go to hell hasn't really thought through how bad eternal torture would be or hasn't had much experience of excruciating pain and suffering.

[youtube:3pih8ctm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxKJ-REbUlI[/youtube:3pih8ctm]

Frank

[taikina]

if you hold a gun to my head and tell me to eat shit, i will eat shit. i wouldn't go to hell just because i needed to worship an asshole to avoid it.

[barbarian]

I would have to ask myself if a god that would present themselves to me to be worthy of me worshiping. Taking in to account of everything that I have seen in my life thus far I would have to say no, unless he would like to explain himself. He may end up having to worship me first to show me that he is as humble as he would like for me to be to him. Either way in the end I don't think that we could have an ongoing relationship, that is if there was a god as most people have tried to explain what a god would be. Still in the end I would most likely say fuck off. Anyway, how is to say that "god" wouldn't be a submissive instead of a master.

[Solitary]

>  I think anybody who says they'd rather go to hell hasn't really thought through how bad eternal torture would be or hasn't had much experience of excruciating pain and suffering.

Writer posted a YouTube video

Frank

I'd say that anyone who wants to go to heaven for eternity hasn't really thought it through.    Solitary

[gomtuu77]

One of the most common things I hear atheist speakers say is that if God were proven, they would believe in him. Reasonable, but I'm more interested in whether or not you would worship him. This is a question that is fundamental to my identity as an atheist, and it was the first real one I asked myself. And my answer was no. I would never worship any God, regardless of the dogma associated with it. Religion and gods go against everything I stand for, and if my punishment for standing up for morality is eternal torture, so be it.
Whoa, that got heavy there for a bit. Sorry. Anyways, I wanted to know how the people of the forums responded to the question, so.....Good people of the atheist forums! If God existed, would you worship him(or her, or it)?

What "morality" would you be standing up for, and what do you mean by "morality"???  And are you saying that if you actually met your absolutely perfect and just Creator, you would not be compelled to worship the very ground of reality and reason for the existence of all that ever came into existence, including yourself?  This seems odd, but I think it also seems far more honest than what I typically hear from atheists.  Fascinating...

[stromboli]

What "morality" would you be standing up for, and what do you mean by "morality"??? And are you saying that if you actually met your absolutely perfect and just Creator, you would not be compelled to worship the very ground of reality and reason for the existence of all that ever came into existence, including yourself? This seems odd, but I think it also seems far more honest than what I typically hear from atheists. Fascinating...

By the same token, what do you mean by morality? I'm assuming from this and other posts you are a Christian. The supposition is that god revealed himself. I'm assuming by default you mean a Christian God. Uh, ahem, there are thousands of religions and likewise thousands of gods, all different in one aspect or another. Morality is highly subjective in application. If a god arrives and very clearly makes his existence believable, but espouses a different set of moral guidelines than your religion, would you believe? If this god says incest, pedophilia and homosexuality are all okay, would you believe?

Absolutely perfect and just? No such animal. Better study your Bible a little more closely. Your god has very hypocritically  proclaimed universal love and forgiveness then turned around and slaughtered by the thousands. When it comes to gods, perfection is highly fluid in definition.

[gomtuu77]

By the same token, what do you mean by morality? I'm assuming from this and other posts you are a Christian. The supposition is that god revealed himself. I'm assuming by default you mean a Christian God. Uh, ahem, there are thousands of religions and likewise thousands of gods, all different in one aspect or another. Morality is highly subjective in application. If a god arrives and very clearly makes his existence believable, but espouses a different set of moral guidelines than your religion, would you believe? If this god says incest, pedophilia and homosexuality are all okay, would you believe?

Absolutely perfect and just? No such animal. Better study your Bible a little more closely. Your god has very hypocritically  proclaimed universal love and forgiveness then turned around and slaughtered by the thousands. When it comes to gods, perfection is highly fluid in definition.

Well, this is actually off topic, but since you raised it, I will answer.  I was asking a question of someone else, so I wasn't trying to imbue the word "morality" with particular meaning.  I was attempting to elicit a response of the author, so that I could know more about what he/she meant by the word.  Yes, I am a Christian.  The fact that there are thousands of gods that differ doesn't have anything to do with what I've said, and doesn't really have a great deal of bearing on the particulars of Christianity.  If humanity is in rebellion against their creator, it makes sense that they would create for themselves false religion as a rationalization for continuing to participate in their rebellion.  If basic aspects or reality are truly self-evident, then it also makes sense that there would be some though not anything like total or complete uniformity.  This is what makes sense of things like murder, theft, etc... being essentially universal moral values.  Also, because their is subjective or varying application or understanding of how the moral law applies, says nothing about the nature of the moral law itself.  If there is a speed limit law that is unevenly enforced for whatever reason(s), it would not mean that the law somehow doesn't exist or "shouldn't" be equally applicable.  The fact value distinction here is important.  The fact of the moral law's existence is not the same as the human's understanding (i.e. the moral value) of how it should be applied and willingness to rightly apply it.  Those are two different things.  In addition, the fact that human beings have various understandings for all kinds of reasons (e.g. sin nature/rebellion, false religion, social dysfunction, etc...) doesn't mean that God is espousing different or subjective moralities.  Regarding your question, I would believe the true words of God, the creator of the universe, but asking the question in the way you have would be like asking if I'd believe God if He told me He doesn't exist.  It doesn't make any sense.  It's a category error.  Would I believe God if He told me that the immoral was moral?  As far as I can tell, Gold both couldn't and wouldn't do that because he does and says things that are in harmony with His own nature & character, which is the source and ground of morality itself.  It would not be possible for God to lie or violate His own nature, so asking if I'd believe Him if He told me the kinds of things you've stated just doesn't make sense.  With regard to perfection and justice, I wasn't speaking of an animal, and if you are coming at this from the position of an a priori denial, then why bother with the discussion?  The fact that you think his actions were hypocritical only points out that you have some significant misunderstandings.  God has made it pretty clear that what He would like to see happen, will not happen because human beings are free creatures.  Most human beings will not take Him up on His offer.  And since he is the author of life, it is his prerogative to end it at a time and by a means of His own choosing.  There is no hypocrisy involved, as He is under no obligation to either give or sustain any life.  Life is a gift from God, not something He is obliged to give.

[gomtuu77]

[quote="stromboli"By the same token, what do you mean by morality? I'm assuming from this and other posts you are a Christian. The supposition is that god revealed himself. I'm assuming by default you mean a Christian God. Uh, ahem, there are thousands of religions and likewise thousands of gods, all different in one aspect or another. Morality is highly subjective in application. If a god arrives and very clearly makes his existence believable, but espouses a different set of moral guidelines than your religion, would you believe? If this god says incest, pedophilia and homosexuality are all okay, would you believe?

Absolutely perfect and just? No such animal. Better study your Bible a little more closely. Your god has very hypocritically  proclaimed universal love and forgiveness then turned around and slaughtered by the thousands. When it comes to gods, perfection is highly fluid in definition.[/quote]Well, this is actually off topic, but since you raised it, I will answer.  I was asking a question of someone else, so I wasn't trying to imbue the word "morality" with particular meaning.  I was attempting to elicit a response of the author, so that I could know more about what he/she meant by the word.  Yes, I am a Christian.  The fact that there are thousands of gods that differ doesn't have anything to do with what I've said, and doesn't really have a great deal of bearing on the particulars of Christianity.  If humanity is in rebellion against their creator, it makes sense that they would create for themselves false religion as a rationalization for continuing to participate in their rebellion.  If basic aspects or reality are truly self-evident, then it also makes sense that there would be some though not anything like total or complete uniformity.  This is what makes sense of things like murder, theft, etc... being essentially universal moral values.  Also, because their is subjective or varying application or understanding of how the moral law applies, says nothing about the nature of the moral law itself.  If there is a speed limit law that is unevenly enforced for whatever reason(s), it would not mean that the law somehow doesn't exist or "shouldn't" be equally applicable.  The fact value distinction here is important.  The fact of the moral law's existence is not the same as the human's understanding (i.e. the moral value) of how it should be applied and willingness to rightly apply it.  Those are two different things.  In addition, the fact that human beings have various understandings for all kinds of reasons (e.g. sin nature/rebellion, false religion, social dysfunction, etc...) doesn't mean that God is espousing different or subjective moralities.  Regarding your question, I would believe the true words of God, the creator of the universe, but asking the question in the way you have would be like asking if I'd believe God if He told me He doesn't exist.  It doesn't make any sense.  It's a category error.  Would I believe God if He told me that the immoral was moral?  As far as I can tell, Gold both couldn't and wouldn't do that because he does and says things that are in harmony with His own nature & character, which is the source and ground of morality itself.  It would not be possible for God to lie or violate His own nature, so asking if I'd believe Him if He told me the kinds of things you've stated just doesn't make sense.  With regard to perfection and justice, I wasn't speaking of an animal, and if you are coming at this from the position of an a priori denial, then why bother with the discussion?  The fact that you think his actions were hypocritical only points out that you have some significant misunderstandings.  God has made it pretty clear that what He would like to see happen, will not happen because human beings are free creatures.  Most human beings will not take Him up on His offer.  And since he is the author of life, it is his prerogative to end it at a time and by a means of His own choosing.  There is no hypocrisy involved, as He is under no obligation to either give or sustain any life.  Life is a gift from God, not something He is obliged to give.

[stromboli]

I can kill your entire argument with three words: god doesn't exist.

[PickelledEggs]

One of the most common things I hear atheist speakers say is that if God were proven, they would believe in him. Reasonable, but I'm more interested in whether or not you would worship him. This is a question that is fundamental to my identity as an atheist, and it was the first real one I asked myself. And my answer was no. I would never worship any God, regardless of the dogma associated with it. Religion and gods go against everything I stand for, and if my punishment for standing up for morality is eternal torture, so be it.
Whoa, that got heavy there for a bit. Sorry. Anyways, I wanted to know how the people of the forums responded to the question, so.....Good people of the atheist forums! If God existed, would you worship him(or her, or it)?

What "morality" would you be standing up for, and what do you mean by "morality"???  And are you saying that if you actually met your absolutely perfect and just Creator, you would not be compelled to worship the very ground of reality and reason for the existence of all that ever came into existence, including yourself?  This seems odd, but I think it also seems far more honest than what I typically hear from atheists.  Fascinating...

Gomtuu, I don't think you understand the difference between worshiping and submitting.

God, as described in the bible, is very malicious and condones VERY violent acts. And even a good percentage of fundamental christians are moral enough to say that they don't agree with those violent things.
I think if a god were proven real (and that is VERY hypothetically saying that) I don't doubt that most people, (at least the sane ones) would submit to his demands.
The real world example of submitting to a higher power is like if a thug on the street holds a gun to your head and says "punch your friend in the face or I shoot".
I hardly think anyone with morals would actually worship a god unless all it did was help humanity with zero harm to anyone.

The question still stands though. What IS a god?

[Plu]

Gomtuu you're failing to understand the real question being asked, which is not "could your god suddenly turn around and decree currently immoral things as moral" (this is the question you answered) but the question "if it turns out you've been believing in the wrong god your whole life and the real god is completely different from yours and demands things you currently find immoral, would you worship him anyway?"

Claiming that you can't be believing in the wrong god is both incredibly arrogant and dodging the question.

[randompattern]

Which gods /deities would this be? All of them? If so, I propose a celebrity god cage match, last deity standing wins!
I'd put my money on zeus, he looks like a badass.
I still wouldn't worship though.

[DigitalBot]

If God were proven, I would worship him, but not for a long time, cause I would go to some war against infidels and try to die there instantly and go to haven.

Or, if god were proven I would be proven to be a sinner, and because of that I would start to kill babies so they go directly to haven without stop on earth.

[Shiranu]

>  I think anybody who says they'd rather go to hell hasn't really thought through how bad eternal torture would be or hasn't had much experience of excruciating pain and suffering.

Writer posted a YouTube video

Frank

That is assuming we can trust the source that says hell is a terrible place.

Lets look at it logically...

A. The devil hates god, the devil rebelled against god and no longer follows his rules... yet he tortures for eternity any enemy god might have? That seems a bit sketchy.
B. God has been proven to be a liar time and time again; he lied to Adam and Eve about the effects of the fruit, he forced people against their will to be deluded ("For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." - 2 Thessalonians 2:11) and there are several instances where he had his prophets lie. Given this, how are we to trust his word about his arch-nemesis' nature?
C. Hell is never actually described in the bible besides the pit of fire, gnashing of teeth line. The rest of the time it just mentions returning to dust. If that is hell, hell sounds swell because that's more-or-less what atheists believe anyways. The concept of hell wasn't developed until Christianity really took flight in Christianity and Europeans mixed their own folk-lore into the mix.

So given this, I can reasonably say I wouldn't mind going to hell because I both don't believe it exists and don't believe the Bible ever describes it as a terrible place. The "pit of fire" bit isn't even necessarily hell... he could have just been an asshole and wished they had been thrown into a pit of fire (which sounds far more plausible).

---------------------

As for worshiping him, no I wouldn't. I would kiss his ass and ask for forgiveness, but I would not worship him. Just like I would kiss Kim Jong Il's ass if I was a North Korean but wouldn't like the guy... I would only do it because I don't want to be publicly executed (sent to hell [assuming it's as bad as they say]) and not because I like the guy.

[josephpalazzo]

God can kill, maim, torture, and also demands obedience to his will. And if the almighty God orders you to fly planes into buildings, then you better do it. God's morality is God's will, and don't you forget it.