Has anyone here every thought about what if there happened to be a god. It doesn't really matter what god or what religion just if there is one. When you die what do you think they/him/her would say and how you would react? If they were a god that passed judgment, do you think that they would understand your reasons for not believing and forgive you or would they punish you without question?

I was raised Christian and while I don't believe anything they say, the above still crosses my mind quite often. I'm a musician and I get a lot of gigs playing for church services, especially around Christmas and Easter. It's hard not to listen to the sermon and try to understand their way of thinking during these times and these questions always pop into my mind during and after the service.

Views: 4117

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Hi Danny ,one more thing i wanna add is that we are living lives of humans ;with a sense of humanity, and don't worry that if people don't believe in god ,still then there wont be any barbarism in the world ,till humanity is alive ...which is the an important thing which is running the reaction(life on earth and nature's balance). ..........go to my discussion...why do we exist ? it will answer a few of your questions.
Religions were developed only to stop people from becoming barbaric in pursue of materiality.A fear of unknown.
Bibo, ergo sum! I DRINK, therefore I am! [chuckle!]
Ummmm ... so you could stop BEING?!? DUDE!!!
Check your mirror
I would take H.L. Mencken's approach when asked this question and was standing before god. Mencken said he would say, "Sir, I was wrong."

That said, the probability is so low, that the question is hardly worth consideration. I would prefer to turn the question around and ask, "why do you waste even a small portion of your precious life contemplating such a pointless and meaningless question?" I certainly wasted enough time on this question years ago. No longer.

I am a strong agnostic using the Dawkins 7 point scale (about 6.7). Yes, there is always some degree of uncertainty, but some things are more certain than others. As Stephen J. Gould said, "I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms."

I apologize for any repetition in this post. I haven't read all the comments, so it is likely that others have already said much the same thing.
You are so right Larry.
On Dawkins' 7-point scale I said at once, when I first read Dawkins' comment, that I am a 7.0 even if Richard Dawkins is not.
Terry, if some of us nasty scientists and engineers hedge a tenth or so, it's because we don't know it all and we know we don't. I wrote on another board some time back that I could even tolerate miracles ... IF THERE WERE SUBJECT TO SOME PROVABLE SCIENTIFIC PRINCIPLE. Maybe we ain't discovered that principle yet ... and maybe I'm worried about something that simply won't happen. Point is I don't know and I won't assume.

Barring THAT possibility, yeah, I'm a 7.
Despite your cautious comments,
hedging a tenth or so below 7 is simply too much for me.
The farthest that I would shift from a 7 in accepting the highly remote possibility that there is something supernatural behind it all would be to plump for
Good grief! Someone break out the scientific notation! [grin]
Hi Loren
Here's why I see that the possibility of something supernatural being out there somewhere is so remote:

On another thread--which I'll look up and add below--were discussions about pre-Big Bang possibilities that make use of known physics.

The consequence of using quantum theoretical physics to explain the postulated timeless quantum void which is an alternative to the present universe could intimate that a universe is always present because of the implied instability of any pre-Big Bang void or empty universe.
For this see the discussions at

This includes a video film by Lawrence Kraus about a possible theoretical origin for the universe.

The short of it is that the present Universe could have come from a kind of “unstable quantum void” via a purely natural mechanism for the transition 'empty Universe' to 'non-empty Universe'.
That is to say, the Universe was self-created, instantaneously and uncaused, from an unstable timeless void or false vacuum having the property that incipient, virtual particles were omnipresent.

Hence there are two possibilities: either one has an unstable void or one has its alter ego the Universe.

But this logic means that universes in real time are all there can be, because their absence would imply an unstable state of the void that cannot exist in time.

Thus, our Universe simply is . . . because at least one universe is necessarily always present. If not, there would be a void instead—but a void being truly unstable, a universe would instantly replace it. By this reasoning, a Universe–or universes—must be, and always were, and always will be.
So these theoretical cosmologists conclude that because time cannot exist prior to universes, universes cannot have any first cause.
Without a first cause, there is no origin, no creation.
Therefore postulations of the supernatural are superfluous—needless, worthless...

... and what I say next is something I have written very many times:

Atheism is the natural condition of the Universe into which we are all born and where we innocently live unless cerebrally raped by indoctrination into some ‘faith’ by intellectually-challenged persuaders who prey mostly on children. People’s gods exist only as fictions inside their heads. Religion is a sham.
So I'm a not-quite-recovered victim of rape. Bloody lovely. I'd sue someone, but somehow, I don't see that working too well.

That religion is a sham ain't news and maybe all I'm doing is a scientifically induced ass-covering that (I HOPE!) doesn't equate to Pascal's Wager. I am neither a cosmologist nor a trained debater. I'm just a troubleshooter who relies on what he knows and what he's seen and has never presumed to know it all ... 'cuz sure as he does, the machine comes up with a failure mode neither you nor I ever thought of!
Addendum: the ONLY absolute I see in this relative world is the constant state of CHANGE. Since nothing stays the same, you might postulate that something that NEVER CHANGES (i.e.: some deity) isn't bloody likely to exist, or so I suppose....



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2017   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service