Hypothetical scenario for a world without religion

[charlie sc]

Find Yahweh? In English Jehovah, by the way. Why couldn't you find him? What would you expect to find? Science and God are terms that people use in vague and inappropriate ways.

In the hypothetical.

 

[Earthling]

In the hypothetical.

Oh, sorry. You mean strictly in the hypothetical scenario you presented? I usually respond to each post itself, sometimes the OP becomes irrelevant in a thread and I can't keep track of which one is which anyway. Hmmm. I haven't given it much thought, but I don't see how that would be possible. Your scenario involved all references of him being removed, correct? Unless he were to reintroduce himself, I don't see how it would be possible. Just a guess? Not of a specific personality, with a history. It's difficult enough in the mess of theology we have now.

Interestingly enough, there was such a similar period in the history of the Bible itself. They had forgot all about Jehovah and some one, I can't remember who, found a document and presented it to the then king. Someone probably knows what I'm referring to.

 

[charlie sc]

Oh, sorry. You mean strictly in the hypothetical scenario you presented? I usually respond to each post itself, sometimes the OP becomes irrelevant in a thread and I can't keep track of which one is which anyway. Hmmm. I haven't given it much thought, but I don't see how that would be possible. Your scenario involved all references of him being removed, correct? Unless he were to reintroduce himself, I don't see how it would be possible. Just a guess? Not of a specific personality, with a history. It's difficult enough in the mess of theology we have now.

Interestingly enough, there was such a similar period in the history of the Bible itself. They had forgot all about Jehovah and some one, I can't remember who, found a document and presented it to the then king. Someone probably knows what I'm referring to.

Thanks

 

[dianaiad]

Ah, my friend. Let's have at it again.

Your reply looks very grim indeed. You're saying a bunch of religions will be invented, jeez, and you're hoping god will talk about himself again.

Would it be possible to examine, say, your deity other than hoping for someone to express it ?

I think that 'examining *my* deity" is a bit off topic, actually. Remember that I AM a theist, a True Believer. My own opinion is that if something happened to wipe all memory of God or religion from the communal memory/psyche of the human race, God Himself would call a prophet and reintroduce Himself. That's my belief.

But note; even though that is my belief, very firmly held, I also allowed for the possibility that there is no God, and that people made Him(Or Her Or It) up. This is more than any of the atheists I have debated with have done, actually...that is, allow for the possibility that they are wrong about this stuff.

What I WILL say is this: I can't think of a single bit of proof of some sort of supernatural deity more telling than waking up one morning and finding out that all memory of deity or religion is wiped from human memory. I mean...think about it. How in the world would someone explain the vaguaries of human history without bringing religion into it somewhere?

Human sociology, culture, learning, it all would have to be rewritten; a labor of fiction that would make Tolkien look like a first day kindergartener; Russian literature would have nothing on it.

Only a supernatural being could pull it off, come to think of it, and y'know what else? Nobody would be able to prove it.

Huh.

Anyway, I don't have to worry about it, myself, because whether one is a theist or atheist, the above hypothetical situation simply couldn't happen without some sort of deity being involved.

But hey. Let's do it your way. Let us hypothesize, for a moment, that there is no deity and people made up the whole thing. All the different religions, all the different deities, all the different belief systems. What in the name of all that is logical do you think would change about HUMANS that would keep them from doing it all over again? All you are suggesting is a wholesale memory wipe, not a fundamental change of being.

 

[blü 2]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

Before your question can have meaning, we need to know what a real deity is, so that if we find one, we'll know it's a deity.

As far as I can tell, no one has a useful definition, an objective test. All the definitions are for imaginary gods, not real ones.

 

[shunyadragon]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

We would all become robotic cyborgs without the depth of spiritual character that makes us human.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

Another question for a whole new thread, but nonetheless the existence of a deity is an attribute of being human whether a deity exists or not.

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

Science is another attribute of human nature. Humanity spiritually evolves and evolves through the knowledge of science.

 

[MJFlores]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

No scriptures
One morning, all woke up and there were no hint that there were religions.
No statues of Buddha, Hindi gods, Catholic relics, rosaries and so forth
No papers suggesting any kind of religion, the Bible, the Vedas, the book of Mormon vanished.
Building and monuments reflecting religion or belief gone - Churches, Mosques, temples, synagogues gone.
Not a trace of anything about religion exist in this alternate world.

Son: "Dad, where did you come from?"
Dad: "My mother and father, made me."
Son: "Where did your mother and father came from?"
Dad: "From your grandparents..."
Son: "Where did they come from?"
Dad: "From the chimps..."

Son: "Where did the chimps come from?"
Dad: "From the primordial soup..."
Son: "How is that possible Dad?"
Dad: "Son, you need...."

Dad: "...of years"
Son: "And you believe that?"
Dad: "Yes, I do son"
Son: "Wow, you have a religion and have faith even though you have not seen the primordial soup which was a long time ago."
Dad: "Son, you gotta have faith."

 

[Bird123]

I was so surprised when I first heard someone
say "Nobody is really atheist, in their
hearts they know god is real."

Till then, I thought nobody really believes that
nonsense, in their hearts they know "god" is
make believe.

The difference between your view and mine here,
is that I grew up. I accepted that people
can sincerely believe any numbrr of things
that may simply be wrong, opposite to what
I believe, etc.

AND, I do not make up "facts", nor anything
about the mental capacity of those who believe
differently than I.

That last seems somehow especially
important.

I do not think you understand. An atheist can truly believe God does not exist, however when they bump into God again, they will already know Him.

With this in mind, I think deep down everyone knows God exists. Like I said. They might not know that they know. This physical world creates so much sensory input, it is easy to ignore we are spiritual beings in our true natures. God is a Spiritual Being.

As I see it, God is nothing like religion teaches. With that respect, one who ignores much of what religion is teaching might just discover what God is really like quicker.

Still those choices are free for people to make. Believing has never ever been important to God. As I see it, atheists have nothing to fear of God.

 

[Bird123]

Interesting. So you believe we're all theists. I assume you believe we're all born theists too?

Is there anything we can examine today that could direct us to god or a particular deity? It seems like you're hoping that people will reflect what god wants in this event.

If one examines the actions of another, one can discover much about that person.

All the secrets of the universe and God stare us in the face. To understand that which is around us is to discover what God is about.

God is hiding nothing. On the other hand, just like with all knowledge, it must be Discovered. Discovery takes work. It is never served up for us to decide whether to accept or reject it.

 

[Kilk1]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

Well you see, it's somewhat cheating to elimate all the religious literature. I get what you're saying, but some religous literature serves as part of the evidence. For example, take 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. Even most skeptics of Christianity grant that this is a nutshell of the gospel that the original Christians believed. They also grant that the passage isn't guilty of embellishment and that the statement is sincere. Therefore, in the words of Germany’s leading resurrection skeptic, Gerd Lüdemann, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ” (What Really Happened to Jesus, pg. 80).

The question then becomes, "How could the witnesses see Jesus alive after He was crucified?" Most skeptics today, including Lüdemann, believe they merely hallucinated, but that contradicts the fact that people saw Jesus even in groups. Because hallucinations come from a person's mind, a group hallucination would itself be supernatural. If you hallucinate an apple in front of you, no one else will be able to see it. If anyone else does, the apple's really there!

Furthermore, even skeptics like the apostle Paul converted upon seeing Jesus risen. (Again, it's unchallenged even by secular scholarship that Paul was a persecutor-turned Christian who said his radical transformation was because he saw Jesus risen.) How could he hallucinate something happening that he "knew" (at least in his mind) to be false? A modern-day equivalent would be for the likes of Richard Dawkins to suddenly claim he saw Jesus, becoming a Christian.

The best explanation, though controversial for being religious, is that Jesus' claims are actually true. At least, I haven't heard any natural explanation that works without itself becoming supernatural.

 

[Jumi]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The same way as today, experience God and you will know it, regardless of if there's a religion or not. Some religions are actually opposed to experiencing God, because God is not like they want it to be and want their interpreted doctrines to be truth for everyone. So a world without religion (and without opposition to it) is actually not a bad thing, might even be better if you want to know God.

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

In actuality, it becomes very difficult to experiment on something that doesn't already have a theory.

 

[ChristineM]

Bull****

This! is science . . .

So you imagine the post you wrote was magically converted into binary, magically identified and packeted, magically transmitted on the internet through several magic internet servers to end up, by magic on the RF server. It then had its headers stripped, the binary portion that was your text msgically recoded to ascii, then stored in exactly the correct locaton in an sql database so that it could magically appear on a readers screen (i wont go into how it displayed, but needless to say, it also requires vast amounts of great computer god magic.

Food science is based on many years of study. Glad you find looking after yourself to be funny


Edit : oh yes, it was not the food science god that magicked your post to RF, it was most definitely the computer god

 

[Earthling]

Before your question can have meaning, we need to know what a real deity is, so that if we find one, we'll know it's a deity.

As far as I can tell, no one has a useful definition, an objective test. All the definitions are for imaginary gods, not real ones.

Here we go again. Deity is a god. A god can be anything. A person, place or thing. Anything deemed worthy of might greater than the one attributing it, or just venerated. Moses. Tammuz, the Sumerian King. All Sumerian Kings were deified upon their death. The Judges of Israel. Jesus. Eric Clapton. A respected ruler or person with exceptional abilities. According to Paul, ones own belly. Money.

 

[SomeRandom]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

Hmm.
Didn't religions form as a way for people to try to explain the universe around them?

I don't know if you could replicate the scriptures, necessarily. But supposing in your hypothesis, the scientific method appeared around the same time as in our universe, I think religions would still exist. And so would the scriptures for them. Perhaps not as we know them today, but some form of them.
Because not all religions rely on scripture as much as the Abrahamics, well not really.
They exist, but I don't know the lay follower doesn't care as much if they don't read the scripture. Because that's not always the point.

As for demonstrating a certain deity. I dunno. Humans anthropomorphize gods all the time without any real scientific evidence. The Greek Gods, Norse Gods, Hindu Gods etc etc.

Your scenario would have to carry the caveat of all people relying specifically on the scientific method throughout human history.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Meet computer, the science god that allowed you to post that message

Wow, a ' techno god ' I wonder does that mean a technocracy ___________

 

[ChristineM]

Wow, a ' techno god ' I wonder does that mean a technocracy ___________

Whatever you imagine it to mean but for !e i would go for technotheist

 

[Workman]

Imagine for a moment, a hypothetical scenario where everyone's memory of every religion disappeared and all the literature vanished.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

The reason I ask this is because science does not need previous literature to observe a phenomenon, hypothesise, verify, experiment and then create theories. It seems like scientific theories do not need previous literature the same way religion does and there's no way to replicate scripture.

Your request in your hypothetical scenario not only scratches the all evidence of religion as well of its culture, but also requires in removing the revolution we’re living in..in today.
For instance! One is able to live a secure life and in their free-will because of the spiritual warmth religion offers in one to live in and have passed its soil unto the world leaders.
The RULE OF LAW is the law which says that government can only legally use its power in a way the government and the people agree on. It limits the powers a government has, as agreed in a country's constitution. The Rule of Law prevents dictatorship and protects the rights of the people. When leaders enforce the legal code honestly, even on themselves and their friends, this is an example of the rule of law being followed. "The rule of law", wrote the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle in 350 BC, "is better than the rule of any individual."
Culture is usually a major source of the principles behind many laws, and people also tend to trust the ideas based on family and social habits. In many countries throughout history, religion and religious books like the Vedas, Bible or the Koran have been a major source of law...
Without this! what new source would then life could mean and be like for one? For spirituality and its morals and culture is out of question. And what can science offer more than religion in replacing of new laws? And [IF] as well of morals, what can science teach this of one?
Science might be able to tell you if an action may hurt someone; like giving a man cyanide will kill him, but science can’t tell you whether or not you ought to hurt someone. Who said it’s wrong to hurt people? Is one his nature the standard of good? In other words, science is a descriptive discipline, but morality is a prescriptive discipline. Science can describe how things work, but it can never tell us how we ought to behave.

How would one find or demonstrate a certain deity exists?

In this case! IMO..science is the only deity one can and will ever know.

 

[Jumi]

Wow, a ' techno god ' I wonder does that mean a technocracy ___________

Most technocrats don't believe in techno gods. Books that deal with technology aren't scriptures then.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Well you see, it's somewhat cheating to elimate all the religious literature. I get what you're saying, but some religous literature serves as part of the evidence. For example, take 1 Corinthians 15:3-8. Even most skeptics of Christianity grant that this is a nutshell of the gospel that the original Christians believed. They also grant that the passage isn't guilty of embellishment and that the statement is sincere. Therefore, in the words of Germany’s leading resurrection skeptic, Gerd Lüdemann, “It may be taken as historically certain that Peter and the disciples had experiences after Jesus’s death in which Jesus appeared to them as the risen Christ” (What Really Happened to Jesus, pg. 80).
The question then becomes, "How could the witnesses see Jesus alive after He was crucified?" Most skeptics today, including Lüdemann, believe they merely hallucinated, but that contradicts the fact that people saw Jesus even in groups. Because hallucinations come from a person's mind, a group hallucination would itself be supernatural. If you hallucinate an apple in front of you, no one else will be able to see it. If anyone else does, the apple's really there!
Furthermore, even skeptics like the apostle Paul converted upon seeing Jesus risen................

I find the Bible answers how the witnesses see Jesus after he was crucified is via resurrection.
The God of Jesus resurrected the dead Jesus out of the grave according to Acts chapter 2.
Resurrected Jesus, Not back into his physical body, but back into his pre-human spirit heavenly body.
Thus, the resurrected Jesus appeared in his spirit body in the presence of his God as per Hebrews 9:24.
'Flesh and blood' ( physical ) can Not inherit the kingdom according to 1 Corinthians 15:50.
Since the spirit or invisible body of Jesus could Not be seen by his followers is why Jesus used several different materialized bodies to appear to his followers. That is why at first they did Not recognize the resurrected spirit Jesus.
Luke 24:16-44; John 21:14

As for Paul, Acts of the Apostles 9:4-7 lets us know Paul heard the voice of the resurrected spirit Jesus.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Most technocrats don't believe in techno gods. Books that deal with technology aren't scriptures then.

Of course they don't believe in techno gods, but what a person puts first in one's life is their god.