If it was proven that god does not exist, what would you do?

[DMann]

If it was proven that god does not exist, what would you do?




1.continue to believe
2.commit suicide
3.become a criminal
4.try to 'counter-prove' that GOD DOES exist
5.live life to the max, even if it means being a complete criminal
6.ignore the subject and continue living your regular life
7.go poo poo in my pants
8. begin a carrer as a broadway dancer

[Fasdf]

woah woah woah, #7 isn't in the poll at all.

[ukangel]

Become a humanist is the obivous choice. Though to prove God doesnt exist we would have to have such knowledge of the universe that we might find a new spirituality.

[DNCAttackDog]

That depends.

Would there be proof that existence is purely due to random chance, or would there be proof of "something else" that simply doesn't fit the traditional definition of God?

[cpwill]

i know that God does exist; therefore upon being presented with a case that God does not exist i would simply explain why it is insuffecient.

[crawfish]

I'd go slap the prof who told me "you can't prove a negative"...

[DeathMonkey]

Since the non-existence of God HAS been proven to me, I would change nothing.

[Duo_Maxwell]

Whether or not God exists has little bearing on my life. If he does exist, I seriously doubt he's anything like organized religion states. If he doesn't...well, he doesn't. It's not a big deall.

Obviously i picked #6.

[cpwill]

deathmonkey; you haven't seen the non existance of God proven, all you've seen is lack of evidence for the existance of God.

[TomAZ]

"If it was proven that god does not exist, what would you do?"

This question needs to be more explicate. There are perhaps thousands of gods and goddesses, all equally valid, (or invalid). Which one are we talking about?
When I was a working stiff I always liked the goddess, Fria, whom the day Friday is recognized by. T.G.I.F. Yaaaay!!

[ukangel]

Since the non-existence of God HAS been proven to me, I would change nothing.

How has it been proven?

[marv]

It doesn't really matter to me, except in case someone wants to kill me in the name of god.

[Madrigalian]

Set up shop in the vacancy.

I mean if noone else wants the job...

[cpwill]

LOL, mad, i wish the rep system was still here just so i could give you a point for that.:lol:

[Aletheia]

This is crazy but funny!!! If God didn't exist, I'd go around al depressed and "swear off cheese." No, when I put that I was kidding cuz the choice I wanted wasn't on the quiz.

[Aletheia]

LOL, mad, i wish the rep system was still here just so i could give you a point for that.:lol:
Where did the rep system go? Aaaaaah!!

[DeathMonkey]

deathmonkey; you haven't seen the non existance of God proven, all you've seen is lack of evidence for the existance of God.

Not so, my little chickadee. Based on the physical laws of the Universe it is impossible for God to exist. Its that simple. I believe in the laws that govern science (the positive I believe in), and since the physical occurances neccesary to sustain a being such as this God construct, or any analogous figure, such as Odin, Satan, Zeus, etc etc dont exist, indeed CANNOT exist, I can safely believe in a rational Universe.

The whole "you cant believe in a negative" argument is spurious at best. If you want to use the "hot and cold" paradigm, God is the abscence of knowlege, not the existence of anything. I believe that it has been proven that the scientific laws that govern us do NOT allow for the supernatural. In fact, that whole section of thought is merely a blanket explanation for that which we dont understand.

I believe there is a rational, concrete explanation for everything, and that the explanation for this God stuff is that the construct fills a need, hence its evolution over the years. How can you look at religion over the years and not see the similarites? And the one constant is Man's need to explain what goes bump in the night of our minds.

I have more faith in the natural laws of the Universe than some made up head ghost. I can prove gravity, inertia, centipedal force, electricity, etc etc. It can proven, for instance, that there is not enough water in our section of the galaxy to completely flood the Earth. Sorry, Noah. Theres a rational explanation for your wee boat ride. Not to mention the impossibility of repopulating the Earth even with the prescribed seven of each animal, or whatever the numbers are for that (I know it isnt merely two of each but my Bibles in the other room and I'm feelin lazy :))

Then there is this whole "God talks to me" notion. There are apparently three or four people here who speak to God, so consider me the Atheist analogue. I certainly have more evidence on my side. Evolution. The speed of light. The age of the Earth. The age of the Universe. Nothing in any religious text leads me to disavow the laws of nature that are right in front of my face.

Well, the Universe has spoken to me, and in her glorious silence I hear the comfort of order, chaos, and the rational idea that she is ruled soley by the Laws that guide her.

[cpwill]

Not so, my little chickadee. Based on the physical laws of the Universe it is impossible for God to exist.

:raises eyebrow: and how so.

furthermore, of course the natural laws would descrive a universe without a descrption of God (which isn't evidence against, just a lack of evidence for), God exists independant of the Universe.

The whole "you cant believe in a negative" argument is spurious at best.

i'm not saying you can't believe in a negative, i'm saying that on a larger-than-unversal scale it is impossible for you to prove the negative, or even show anything other than a lack of evidence for the positive without yourself becoming God.

If you want to use the "hot and cold" paradigm, God is the abscence of knowlege, not the existence of anything.

? this makes no sense whatsoever.

I believe that it has been proven that the scientific laws that govern us do NOT allow for the supernatural.

ah, so what do they say when it happens?

I believe there is a rational, concrete explanation for everything,

ah, good, so do I.

I have more faith in the natural laws of the Universe than some made up head ghost. I can prove gravity, inertia, centipedal force, electricity, etc etc. It can proven, for instance, that there is not enough water in our section of the galaxy to completely flood the Earth. Sorry, Noah. Theres a rational explanation for your wee boat ride. Not to mention the impossibility of repopulating the Earth even with the prescribed seven of each animal, or whatever the numbers are for that (I know it isnt merely two of each but my Bibles in the other room and I'm feelin lazy :))

lol, i think you are confusing "the bible" with "God".;)

Then there is this whole "God talks to me" notion. There are apparently three or four people here who speak to God, so consider me the Atheist analogue.

and you consider us?

I certainly have more evidence on my side. Evolution. The speed of light. The age of the Earth. The age of the Universe. Nothing in any religious text leads me to disavow the laws of nature that are right in front of my face.

how are any of these in any way evidence against the existance of God???

Well, the Universe has spoken to me, and in her glorious silence I hear the comfort of order, chaos, and the rational idea that she is ruled soley by the Laws that guide her.

who the heck do you think it was that set up the rules??

[Fasdf]

who the heck do you think it was that set up the rules??

Why do the rules need to be setup by someone?

[DeathMonkey]

(Take the following as rhetorical rebuttal, not directed at any one person or faith.)

That really just proves my point. Unwillingness to look rationally at what is essentially a collection of superstitious interpretations of history. Yet I am supposed to just accept that God talks to someone else and not me, that for reasons unknown He reveals Himself to a chosen few... I mean, honestly, look at this critically. Does He call them on the phone? Leave them notes in their lunch? Write in letters of fire a thousand feet tall when no one else is looking? Yet I have thousands of examples of people "hearing voices", and they are all locked up. In any scientific inquiry, one would have to rule that this doesnt point to the existence of God, it points to the existence of mental illness.

I have stated before that the constant revalations of things we as a species once believed were the work of ghosts, gods or magic point to a trend of learning of superstition. Again I ask, at what point does the overwhelming evidence of a Godless, logical Universe sink in? When will people suppose that maybe 2000+ year old prejudices and attitudes are not the best way to run ones life? From the Upanishads, the Baghavadgita, the Book of the Dead to the Talmud, the Bible, the Koran, shouldnt we take this as "moral philosophy", and apply to it the same strict analysis we use on Kant, Hegel, Hobbes, etc?

Things proven to be the work of God(or A God, or Gods): 0
Things proven by science that were once the bailiwick of God(s): X <---what does that number have to be to make you look at your beliefs critically? From lightning to fire, medicine, physics, quantum mechanics, to cloning and genetic research, that number gets bigger every day. Tell me when that number is big enough.

For those unaware of the "hot and cold" paradigm, it is that cold does not exist as a force. Cold is merely a description of the abscence of heat. Cold is not an energy in and of itself like heat is. In the religious parable that relates to it, atheism is the abscence of the "heat" of "Gods Love".
Therefore I say that the positive is the "heat" of knowlege vs. the "cold" of LACK of knowlege, i.e. superstition and religious explanations.

Truth is, you prove it to yourself and I prove it to myself. If you argue with my logic, yours must be equally suspect. It is by its nature, an equal and opposite argument. These are mere mirror games. Any argument FOR can be used AGAINST. I am just tired of this whole supposition of moral authority by people who seek to control others by Divine Mandate. Whatever someone believe, NOTHING gives people the right to impose that on me, or anyone else.

When it is you and I, cpwill, debating personal faiths, it is one thing. And we are, as I said above, equal and opposite. We can make the same claims, but we may never know. You and I are very similar, and though I argue with you, I respect your faith, and seek not to destroy or impune it (as if I could, lol), I really just try to illustrate the opposing viewpoint, and you happen to be the person who usually pokes their head up :)

When a group decides that their religion claims Divine Mandate, however, and seeks to enforce its viewpoint and mores on others, without logic, without critical thinking, without rational interpretation, with no regard for the rights of others, I am going to get upset. For example:
"Someone told you 3500+ years ago that God hated Gay people? And you believed him? Are you HIGH?" or perhaps "so, some desert chieftan guy said that when you die, there are "eternal virgins" that serve your every need? Are you HIGH?"

[Thermopylae]

It's a hypothetical situation and still, the Knights of Templar have failed.. Their response is similar to the reaction to another question, 'If it was proven that the earth were round, what would you do?' and then they would all vote, 'Try to counter-prove that the Earth IS flat'.

I'm actually kind of embarassed, it's hard to hold hope for humanity whem people are so intent on one thing, to the point where when it is proven to be wrong, we will still destroy ourselves over false information.. and that's exactly what is going to happen, the books themselves created the armageddon they spoke of, whether the microcosm, that American soldier killed for being a 'Christian invader' or on the much larger scale, an entire public brainwashed into following a massacre of Jews, or, the big thing, which, I believe now, is inevitable.

[J2828]

I picked choice #6 because believing in God is part of my normal life.

[cpwill]

Truth is, you prove it to yourself and I prove it to myself. If you argue with my logic, yours must be equally suspect. It is by its nature, an equal and opposite argument. These are mere mirror games. Any argument FOR can be used AGAINST. I am just tired of this whole supposition of moral authority by people who seek to control others by Divine Mandate. Whatever someone believe, NOTHING gives people the right to impose that on me, or anyone else.

with the exception of government which is freely chosen and representative of the people, yes.

When it is you and I, cpwill, debating personal faiths, it is one thing. And we are, as I said above, equal and opposite. We can make the same claims, but we may never know. You and I are very similar, and though I argue with you, I respect your faith, and seek not to destroy or impune it (as if I could, lol), I really just try to illustrate the opposing viewpoint, and you happen to be the person who usually pokes their head up :)

:bows: indeed, i should be amiss if i did not point out that these discussions of ours seem to be benificial to us both; they do require us to at least clarify what we believe and sharpen our wits.

For example:
"Someone told you 3500+ years ago that God hated Gay people? And you believed him? Are you HIGH?"

LOL, it does sound funny that way, doesn't it?

however, i would point out to you that it was only 2,000 years ago, and he actually said God loved gay people.;):)

[Achilles]

God or gods have only existed in the mind of the human animal. Science and discovery have existed in the reality outside of the mind.

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. (So the old bamboozles tend to persist as the new bamboozles rise.) ~ Carl Sagan

Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men. ~ Martin Luther King Jr.

[MikeD4o7]

It's impossible to prove that God doesn't exist... because his believers can, and sometimes do, claim that God only exists on a different plain of existence. To that, we can only shrug our shoulders and say "whatever" there is no proof one way or another of that. Occam's razor tells us we should reject that notion, but there's certainly no way to PROVE it... all we can really do is attempt to disprove claims where believers say that God has acted in THIS world, in THIS timeframe... not try to discount his existence in another. We can ask for a miracle to be demonstrated... or for definitive proof that a miracle WAS demonstrated (a miracle being something that in no way could ever be possibly explained by anything other than the supernatural).

Trying to prove God doesn't exist is like trying to prove that there's not a 6 legged rat in a house that you're never allowed to enter and inspect...

[Fasdf]

however, i would point out to you that it was only 2,000 years ago, and he actually said God loved gay people.

He loved them so much that he supposedly destroyed their village?

[DeathMonkey]

Uh, I was talking about Leviticus, btw... you may want to consult your Church leaders before saying God loves Gay people. At least, in public.

[Fasdf]

commit suicide 1 4.76%
hahahahaahahahhahahhahahhahahhahhahahhahahhahahahh ahhahhahahhahhahahahhahhahahhahahahaha

[cpwill]

Uh, I was talking about Leviticus, btw... you may want to consult your Church leaders before saying God loves Gay people. At least, in public.

;)you want me to pull up the methodist church's policy on homosexuality?

[DeathMonkey]

please refrain from using the phrase "pull up" and "homosexuality" in the same sentence.

Also, refrain from using "Methodist" and "Church" in the same sentence.

Either is likely to get some of our more conservative members strokes! :devil:

[Countium]

I would deem myself Judge, Jury and executioner, I would rouse a rabble of like minded people and go from town to town, city to city and country to country and Destroy all people hell bent on starting wars over relgion.

I would then become a Criminal and rip off all the major money lending companies with my own brand of reverse Debt collection.

[udenjoe]

I would commit the rest of my life to institutionalizing all those who think "God" is talking to them. Actually it wouldn't change much for me. I can have morality without god. You don't need god to have morality. This is based on the premise of emotions. I'd also still have love. Which is the most important. Yes, I still love conservatives. Most importantly my wife and dog.

[cpwill]

please refrain from using the phrase "pull up" and "homosexuality" in the same sentence.

Also, refrain from using "Methodist" and "Church" in the same sentence.

Either is likely to get some of our more conservative members strokes! :devil:

why good, sir, speaking as you are, to a conservative member of the methodist church, whatever do you mean?:)


udenjoe;I would commit the rest of my life to institutionalizing all those who think "God" is talking to them. do you think that perhaps comments like this are the reason that gun advocates continue to hold such sway in america today?