• Welcome to The Cave of Dragonflies forums, where the smallest bugs live alongside the strongest dragons.

    Guests are not able to post messages or even read certain areas of the forums. Now, that's boring, don't you think? Registration, on the other hand, is simple, completely free of charge, and does not require you to give out any personal information at all. As soon as you register, you can take part in some of the happy fun things at the forums such as posting messages, voting in polls, sending private messages to people and being told that this is where we drink tea and eat cod.

    Of course I'm not forcing you to do anything if you don't want to, but seriously, what have you got to lose? Five seconds of your life?

If you had proof of God would you show the world?

Dark Tyranitar

Dark Tyranitar

Is it progress if a cannibal uses knife and fork?
Basically what the title says; an alternate view to the "If you had proof of no god..." thread.
 
No. Why would I encourage the crazy ones? (No, I don't think every Christian/Jew/Muslim is crazy, just the ones that take it to the extreme.)
 
I'd do the same as I would with proof of the non-existence of god - hand it to scientists and let them deal with it.

After all, just because I was wrong, doesn't mean I would be a jerk about it and deny the truth to everyone else. The whole basis of science is finding out the truth via evidence, after all.
 
GalladeMaster said:
Yes, yes I will.
Click to expand...
I like the 'will' instead of the 'would'. Good luck there buddy.

If I ever found definitive evidence of God, sure I would. I'd probably pass it on to someone else so as not to get attacked (by some extremist atheist retard or something) but I think people would deserve to know the truth.
Same thing with 'If you had proof of no God' really. Just replace 'extremist atheist retard' with 'extremist religious retard.'
 
Proving God, by definition, makes him/her/it not God, so like the other thread, this would be impossible.

But, speaking purely hypothetically, yes. Truth matters.
 
While I would love to know for sure for myself, I'm not sure how many people I'd tell. Who would believe me?
 
Evoli said:
While I would love to know for sure for myself, I'm not sure how many people I'd tell. Who would believe me?
Click to expand...
If you have written proof, it wouldn't really be possible for people not to "believe" you, would it?

I would show the world.
 
opaltiger said:
Proving God, by definition, makes him/her/it not God, so like the other thread, this would be impossible.
Click to expand...

The definition of 'God' is just a deity, so how does this work? I've never met a Christian who thinks the existence of God couldn't be proven, so their definition doesn't count either...

Is this proof of the monotheistic god only? Because I probably wouldn't then either. Maybe to scientists, but it would be leaked eventually, and people have the right to believe whatever they want to believe.

Hmm... it's tricky. I believe knowing the truth is important, but...
 
I wouldn't. Just because i'm that sort of person and need to think i'm right.
 
The definition of 'God' is just a deity, so how does this work? I've never met a Christian who thinks the existence of God couldn't be proven, so their definition doesn't count either...
Click to expand...

Well, this is rather an agnostic point of view, but I think it holds merit.

As Butterfree said in the other thread, the God hypothesis is specifically designed to be unfalsifiable. On the flip side, this means it is impossible to prove the existence of God - which is where faith comes in.

If it were possible to prove the existence of a being like God - ie. created life somehow, perhaps even the universe, capable of resurrection, that sort of thing - then the being would not be God, because the supernatural element, that is the element which is responsible for the above mentioned unfalsifiability, would be lacking.
 
Cirrus said:
The definition of 'God' is just a deity, so how does this work? I've never met a Christian who thinks the existence of God couldn't be proven, so their definition doesn't count either...

Is this proof of the monotheistic god only? Because I probably wouldn't then either. Maybe to scientists, but it would be leaked eventually, and people have the right to believe whatever they want to believe.

Hmm... it's tricky. I believe knowing the truth is important, but...
Click to expand...

Cirrus, people believe things that have been proven otherwise anyway. The Earth isn't flat - tell that to the Flat Earth Society; lots of Christians don't believe in evolution, some native Americans believe that they didn't cross and landbridge and were ~created~ in America and so on.

People will still have the right to believe what they want to believe - nobody's disputing that - and the only difference will be that more people than currently will know they're wrong.

We wouldn't be infringing on anyone's rights.
 
opaltiger said:
Well, this is rather an agnostic point of view, but I think it holds merit.

As Butterfree said in the other thread, the God hypothesis is specifically designed to be unfalsifiable. On the flip side, this means it is impossible to prove the existence of God - which is where faith comes in.

If it were possible to prove the existence of a being like God - ie. created life somehow, perhaps even the universe, capable of resurrection, that sort of thing - then the being would not be God, because the supernatural element, that is the element which is responsible for the above mentioned unfalsifiability, would be lacking.
Click to expand...

I still don't understand. Couldn't - if God exists - the god-like being just come down from the sky one day and show himself to the world?

I must sound so unintelligent, but I honestly don't get it.

Harlequin said:
Cirrus, people believe things that have been proven otherwise anyway. The Earth isn't flat - tell that to the Flat Earth Society; lots of Christians don't believe in evolution, some native Americans believe that they didn't cross and landbridge and were ~created~ in America and so on.

People will still have the right to believe what they want to believe - nobody's disputing that - and the only difference will be that more people than currently will know they're wrong.

We wouldn't be infringing on anyone's rights.
Click to expand...

But if you went up and gave a child proof Father Christmas didn't exist, I still think that would be unfair to the child if it made the kid happy.

I get what you're saying though. If there was hypothetically absolute proof of a god, you could no longer believe there was no god any more than you could believe there was a god, so the belief would be obsolete... because it would be the truth. I think.
 
When a child is gullible that's fine - it elicits "aww cute"-esque replies. When an adult is gullible ... that's another matter. For someone who is supposedly emotionally mature, clinging to the imaginary friends of childhood is ... dangerous.

The only reason religious people are seen as normal is because the delusion is wide-spread.
 
yes, of course.

really, I don't know how there could be multiple answers to these questions. :\
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom