If it was proven somehow that not only that there is a god but this god is benevolent (i.e god cares about you and wants the best for you, is more than just a creatory force) what changes would you make in your life?
Would you pray, or would you go about your life in the same fashion? Would it make you a better person? Personally I would be relieved.
What would this mean for the civilised world? Do you think it would make a massive social impact, or would seemingly 'inherently' bad people remain bad?
Lets just say they could somehow prove the exsistance of god, but could not prove whether there was a devil or an afterlife. I think the question im trying to pose is...
What would it mean to you?

That's brilliant.

I know - even as a Christian I can't help thinking that's just so truthfully what he'd say if he could... Gotta love the disclaimer at the end though lol

The guy's a genius though - this one's good too...

To answer the original question - I believe it's true anyway and I don't believe I'd change the way I act - yeah I make mistakes but I'm only human and I do my best which is all any of us can do really...

And anyway as a Christian you'd understand that your deeds and acts are insignificant when compared to your belief. You don't get into heaven by being a good person, you get into heaven by accepting Jesus is the Son of God.

For fucks sake lizard, you are to the left what racists are to the right.

Or by blowing up a bunch of fucking infidels on the tube.

I wouldn't agree with that - I rarely manage to get to church on a Sunday these days but I'm mostly proud of the way I live my life...but hey I guess that's a matter of opinion :-)

You're right if you're talking about being a good human being. But being a good Christian, if you believe the bible, means accepting Jesus. Being nice is a bonus I suppose, but really quite unnecessary as far as God is concerned. And going to church is completely irrelevant.

so, what defines a good human being then Thomas? Our culture is based upon Christian beliefs, and the mojority of our laws correspond to thse of Christians, thus a good human in our culture is a synonymous with a good christian, wouldn't you say? Perhaps some cultures would think a "good human being" is someone who is a devout Muslim, and would be willing ot take their own life, and others', in the name of their religion.
It's all a matter of opinion.

Well it's all very subjective of course, but in our society I suppose someone who is honest, hard working, sympathetic to others. This probably changes from culture to culture, so I can only really comment on what would make a good human being in a culture similar to ours.


Do you think we are more moral than countries that aren't Christian? The christians did not invent "do not kill", "do not steal" or even "do unto others". We are doing our own good nature a disservice by suggesting that we only refrain from doing these things because Christianity tells us not to. We have learned through evolution that these things are conducive to a healthy society and ultimately being good to others in the end helps ourselves.

Many good things are done by Christian charities, but then many good things are done by secular charities. One could even argue that religion clouds a clear, unbiased moral system. Draw your morals from your experience and nature, not from a book or a priest.


It depends on your definition of morality. If you are talking subjectively then I suppose within a certain community you might be right. But I'd argue there's mileage in trying to accept at least a framework for a universal morality. Not killing each other for our own personal gain would probably be one of the least controversial ideas within it I'd imagine.

not at all. In fact, it is you who is coming closer to insinuating that by saying a good person is someone who is This suggests you have fundamentally Christian beliefs, which may or may not be similar to any other religion, and that you believe those beliefs to be more moral than other beliefs.


What do you think of cannibalism for the sake of survival? I believe some cultures in the past have practised this in order to survive.

Game the fuck on i say.

God doesnt exist end of

Sorry, I have no idea why you think honesty, hard work and sympathy are some how the preserve of Christians. These are pretty universally held positive traits. Plus you are completely contradicting yourself:


If they are similar to other religions (or indeed societies without religion) then they are not fundamentally Christian, they are fundamentally human. You are not making sense.


That just shows the absurdity of the commandment "thou shalt not kill". Sometimes killing is necessary to survive. Even in cultures that value sacrifice did so because they believed ultimately the sacrifice would benefit the people in general.

I'm not an advocate of a total undisputed objective morality, because I think we are animals created by evolution and outside out own existence and intelligence morality is meaningless, but I think you can sensibly discuss a practical version of one which might benefit humanity as a whole.

you misunderstand me, Tom. I am not advocating Christianity, I am merely questioning your definition of a "good person". It sounds like your views on this correspond somewhat closely with Christian views, which you seemed to be against. All I was trying to point out, was that one man's (your) "good" is another man's (someone else's) "bad", and that you should realise that your argument was flawed by your statement "good human being", which is entirely opinion. In my opinion, arguments should consider facts more than opinions. (see what I did there?)

and i think to counters that by saying

I know.


You've said it but you haven't supported it in the slightest. Those positive traits are very widely held across many diverse cultures and religions. Even if you demonstrate that there are some obscure cultures, such as cannibalistic tribes, that do not hold to them you have not demonstrated that they are the preserve of Christianity. These are largely globally held "positive" behavioral traits. Demonstrate they are not and I will conceded the point.


Philosophically I agree with you, there can be no objective morality because no morality (that we have any evidence of) exists outside humanity, unless you believe in God of course. However, we can begin to make a base list of practical positive human traits. For example "those acts which are good for the human race" for example. I think I can probably make a decent case for not murdering those around you for no reason as objectively good for the human race. Morality has to be based on something after all, and not just "what I want". That's just desire and really doesn't help us to discuss the concept of morality at all.

If you are a complete moral relativist then you are in danger of declaring that nothing can be good or bad in any sense. I'm saying I agree with you on a philosophical level but practically we need to decide on certain moral absolutes for the sake of society, even if they jar with our more intellectual thoughts on the subject.

I would ask god why he hasn't done anything yet.

What if god explained that it was not as simple as that and it was just as puzzled by it's infinite existance as we are?
What if god explained that the laws of nature are fundamental even in the infinite void before time and space (in our universe for arguments sake)?
What if god's explanation of itself was nothing like had ever been written before...


Maybe god is unsatisfied with what it created - the belief that god must be all all powerful is a throw back from our spiritually dogamtic origins I reckon...

What i mean is this... The word god to me is a theory - alot like scientific theories, they started off as concepts and as time has passed, most are disproven and retheorised - i dont think any human even knows exactly what they mean by god - but as a theory i dont think (A) it should be discounted and (B) we should rely on the ancient texts to guide us.

In short with regards to the religious types " I like where your going with this whole 'god' thing but I think we have a long way to go, we dont even know a millionth of a millionth of 1 percent"

You're right of course, how on earth can you discount something if it hasn't been defined? You can't do ANYTHING with a theory that hasn't been defined. By saying "I believe in God, I'm just not sure what it is" you are saying you like the comfort of some sort of God belief without any of the danger of having to critically analyse it or have others analyse it. The minute you do start to define this God with either infinite power, limited power, benevolence or evil you immediately run into absurdities, contradictions and ethical dilemmas or even worse the realisation that your God has bugger all left to do and is merely filling a gap in our scientific knowledge.