• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Truth: either God exists or He don't.

PureX

Veteran Member
But! What if He does?
What if Jesus really was in that spaceship, hiding behind the Hale-Bop Comet, awaiting our suicide, so he could take us with him to the promised land?

That's the thing about the "what if's"; there's really no end to the possibilities that can be asserted. So where is the discernment? Where do we stop speculating, and find another course of reasoning that's closer to probability?

What do you think?
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Truth: either God exists or He don't.

I don't really accept that statement. Something akin to the traditional God concept can exist. God is a pretty tricky thing to think about.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Truth: either God exists or He don't.

I don't really accept that statement. Something akin to the traditional God concept can exist. God is a pretty tricky thing to think about.
I agree. The idea of "existence" in relation to God (the mystery source, sustenance, and purpose of all that is) becomes incoherent.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
But! What if He does?
Well it depends which God, first.
I agree with Rival.

The OP is asking the implications of the assumption that God exists. Some people believe that God is only Love. Some people believe that God is more than Love.

If a person believes that God is only Love then their reaction to the assumption that this God exists will be different than a person who believes that God is more than Love.

For example, if a person believes that God is only Love, and they assume this God exists, then this person may believe that the feeling of Love is the divine ordained purpose of life. The person seeks love and exherts their love on others. This would be a different reaction than someone who believes God is more than Love and assumes that this God exists. The reaction in this case would be more balanced and seeking the feeling of emotional love would be less likely to be the dominant motivation in their lives.
 

Dave Watchman

Active Member
But! What if He does?

It would mean that there is a Creator.

And that there are "wheat", growing with the "tares".

Antimatter particles share the same mass as their matter counterparts, but qualities such as electric charge are opposite. The positively charged positron, for example, is the antiparticle to the negatively charged electron.

Matter and antimatter particles are always produced as a pair and, if they come in contact, annihilate one another, leaving behind pure energy. During the first fractions of a second of the Big Bang, the hot and dense universe was buzzing with particle-antiparticle pairs popping in and out of existence. If matter and antimatter are created and destroyed together, it seems the universe should contain nothing but leftover energy.

Some unknown entity intervening in this process in the early universe could have caused these "oscillating" particles to decay as matter more often than they decayed as antimatter.
The matter-antimatter asymmetry problem | CERN

How would the Atheist deal with his annihilation?

Because if God does exist, He is quoted as saying that "the soul that sinneth, it shall surely die.

The real question isn't does God exist, it's that do we have to do what He tells us to?

The answer appears to be no.

"Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’ ”​

 

firedragon

Veteran Member
But! What if He does?

For this, you will get several types of answers to watch for.

1. Spaghetti monster, tea cup, or something similar.
2. Zeus, Superman, Thor. Which one?
3. But! What if he doesn't.

These people are not here to have any decent discussion. They will use the same rhetoric everyday, and they intend to mock theism and get some pleasure out of it. ;)

Cheers.
 

Samael_Khan

Goosebender
For this, you will get several types of answers to watch for.

1. Spaghetti monster, tea cup, or something similar.
2. Zeus, Superman, Thor. Which one?
3. But! What if he doesn't.

These people are not here to have any decent discussion. They will use the same rhetoric everyday, and they intend to mock theism and get some pleasure out of it. ;)

Cheers.

Well there isn't anything to discuss. If God does exist, and the biblical God from what I am assuming the OP is referring to, then obviously things would play out the same as how the bible says it would. No brainer. Therefore it isn't a constructive question.

We get this from Christians all the time.

In my experience, when asking people who would ask these types of questions whether a "pagan" god actually exists, they don't want to play the hypothetical game and say "but they dont exist" and go on a self righteous scriptural parade, basically avoiding to participate. It is a rhetorical tactic used by certain theists to proselytize, and I would only genuinely reply to such a person if they have shown to be willing to play the hypothetical game with other relgions.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Well there isn't anything to discuss. If God does exist, and the biblical God from what I am assuming the OP is referring to, then obviously things would play out the same as how the bible says it would. No brainer. Therefore it isn't a constructive question.

We get this from Christians all the time.

In my experience, when asking people who would ask these types of questions whether a "pagan" god actually exists, they don't want to play the hypothetical game and say "but they dont exist" and go on a self righteous scriptural parade, basically avoiding to participate. It is a rhetorical tactic used by certain theists to proselytize, and I would only genuinely reply to such a person if they have shown to be willing to play the hypothetical game with other relgions.

I agree.

I just dont think talking about "Thor", "Superman" or the "Spaghetti monster" are of any value, though repeating it makes some people feel like an important person like Dawkins.

The thing is this brother. The OP is not specifying which religion the writer comes from. Thus, either one could clarify "which one". But not quote something like "Zeus" or "Thor" which are the same thing some people repeat every day. When you are clarifying the meaning of an OP, you should just ask. Simple.

Trust me, if people did not see this response of mine, they will eventually bring these incoherent questions. Its inevitable.

Peace.
 

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Truth: either God exists or He don't.
While we're stating true things:

Truth: In order to be considered proper use of the English language, the last word of this thread's title should be "doesn't"

There now, the truth is out. Where does this get us? In your case, your statement of truth is obvious. In my case, my statement hopefully taught you something. It appears that I have one-upped you.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
While we're stating true things:

Truth: In order to be considered proper use of the English language, the last word of this thread's title should be "doesn't"

There now, the truth is out. Where does this get us? In your case, your statement of truth is obvious. In my case, my statement hopefully taught you something. It appears that I have one-upped you.

Difference is in who has something to teach
and who don't.:D
 
Top