Social Question

Charles's avatar

Would you continue to worship your god if another religion's god provided indisputable proof of its existence?

Asked by Charles (4791 points ) May 21st, 2012

Say for example, you are a Muslim, would you continue to worship the Muslim god if Jesus (or the Christian god) finally made himself available and no doubt real such that even all atheists acknowledged him?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

43 Answers

zensky's avatar

Sure. Maybe mine is shy.

Charles's avatar

Sure. Maybe mine is shy.

So there can be more than one god?

zensky's avatar

Why not?

I’m sorry – is this in General? Is this a serious question?

kess's avatar

in this world nothing is undisputable….yeah I know it an question, but it just a wasted if.

digitalimpression's avatar

If it is truly indisputable, what could be your dispute with it?

Charles's avatar

If it is truly indisputable, what could be your dispute with it?

It didn’t do what I asked it to.

Patton's avatar

Jews, Christians, and Muslims all have the same God. They just have different interpretations of how God has affected history. If Vishnu showed up, then the Abrahamic faiths would have some major changes to make. If Yahweh showed up, all we’d find out is whether or not Jesus was really the savior and whether Isaac or Ishmael was the rightful heir to Abraham.

Lightlyseared's avatar

Sure. The whole point of religion is faith and belief not proof. That’s why we have religion in the first place and why atheists tend to replace it with something simmilar (scientologists, naturalists and the worst of the lot dawkinsists).

tedd's avatar

@Patton Agreed… its kind of undermining the point of the question since it was just an example the OP gave… But Jews, Christians, and Muslims all worship the same god.

But going with the idea of the OP (rather than his example).... I’m not really a “worshiper” per say right now… so all it would really do is give me some kind of evidence to actually back up a faith.

@Lightlyseared Scientology is not a religion. At best it’s a cult… at worst (and more realistically) it is a criminal organization bent on robbing it’s “followers” blind via methods typically reserved for more mainstream criminal organizations.

NostalgicChills's avatar

Well I’m an atheist, so…
But yeah, if it was proven I’d believe in it.

the100thmonkey's avatar

@Charles“It didn’t do what I asked it to”.

So?

Bill1939's avatar

Since I do not believe in an anthropomorphized cause for creation, believing that creation exists is all the proof I need.

King_Pariah's avatar

Prove the existence of a higher being and I’ll see it as an obstacle that needs to be overcome.

kess's avatar

To disprove anything is merely a matter of saying I do not believe, when someone agrees it is then established.

cazzie's avatar

@Lightlyseared Atheists don’t ‘replace’ religion. They delete it.

Lightlyseared's avatar

@tedd one mans religion is another mans cult. Christianity is a cult as far as I am concerned, brainwashing and robbing its followers blind.

@cazzie you just have to google “atheist church” to see that’s not the case. They just swap one focus of belief for another. I know of several in London where people gather and read the word according to Dawkins. Which is sad as I have met Dawkins and know that he would be the first to tell them to fuck off and spend there time and money on something more meaningful.

Charles's avatar

“But yeah, if it was proven I’d believe in it.”

If it was proven, then you wouldn’t have to believe in it. Belief is for those things that aren’t proven.

Charles's avatar

“To disprove anything is merely a matter of saying I do not believe.”

Just because someone doesn’t believe something doesn’t mean that something hasn’t been proven.

flutherother's avatar

I can imagine indisputable proof of existence but not of being God. I think that would be impossible to prove. For example advanced aliens could impersonate God very easily.

Patton's avatar

@Lightlyseared Maybe some atheists do things that are ritualistic or religion-like, but they don’t have religions. We abuse the word “religion” when we try to make it apply to things just because we dislike them or want to discredit other people.

ragingloli's avatar

I am pretty sure a lot of superstitionists would simply go the “He is a demon trying to deceive us.”, or the “It is a test of our faith.” route.

Lightlyseared's avatar

@Patton a religion is defined as a collection of cultural systems, beliefs and worldviews. Just because something hasn’t been around for a 2 thousand years doesn’t mean it isn’t a religion.

ragingloli's avatar

@Lightlyseared
Atheism is not a belief. Atheism is a lack of belief, and this lack of belief is the only attribute of atheism, just as not collecting stamps is the only attribute of not-collecting-stampsism. Atheism does not contain cultural systems or world views. Any world view that different atheist subscribe to have nothing to do with atheism.

dabbler's avatar

@Charles “It didn’t do what I asked it to.” What do you expect your God to be, a vending machine?

What kind of definition of God is worth a hoot, i.e. what kind of God is worth a hoot, if it’s existence were “provable” (presumably a rational/mental process) to tiny human minds (obviously limited)?
Plenty of accepted/working definitions of God include being beyond comprehension.

If you want a rational religion get yourself hooked up with the Church of the Flying Shaghetti Monster whose philosophy boils down to :
Truth is what’s obvious, right in front of us, can be agreed on indisputably.

kess's avatar

Proof belongs to the taker not the maker…you can have all the proof you want I will accept non of it, therefore I do not believe…because of contrary but acceptable proof to me.

Charles's avatar

Proof belongs to the taker not the maker…you can have all the proof you want I will accept non of it, therefore I do not believe…because of contrary but acceptable proof to me.

All your base are belong to us.

josie's avatar

No need to be concerned. Jews, Christians, Muslims worship the Same God.
See @Patton

Bill1939's avatar

If I had an atheist’s faith in the nonexistence of God, I would have no doubts about God’s existence.

ragingloli's avatar

@Bill1939
Atheists do not have “faith” in the nonexistence of gods. We just do not accept the theistic claims of gods because there absolutely no evidence to support these claims.
Someone who does not belief in fairies does not have “faith” that fairies do not exist.

ETpro's avatar

@josie So then what if it was Vishnu that appeared to us?

As an agnostic, I would certainly believe a creator who revealed to me the truth of her presence. Any diety capable of creating and bring order to this entire Universe would certainly be powerful enough to reveal themselves in a way that leaves no shadow of turning. I’m not holding my breath waiting for that to happen, though.

ETpro's avatar

@ragingloli Too late to edit. I got cataract surgery today, and it has my eyes watering. That’s my excuse.

tedd's avatar

@lightlyseared Research scientology.. it is not a religion, and doesn’t meet the qualifications even… I understand the point you are trying to make, it simply doesn’t apply here. They attained “religious” tax status some decades ago to scam the government out of money . That status is being challenged in court now if I’m not mistaken.

Paradox25's avatar

Well I would be sceptical about this figure being Jesus, whom I’m not even entirely sure even existed. Even if Jesus did exist I would highly doubt that he was any more divine than another person. I have mixed messages about the Bible, and there are many verses that I vividly just do not agree with so no, out of my own ‘ignorance’ and ‘pride’ I would still deny another religion’s ‘god’.

Religion can’t prove anything, so if some type of godlike figure does exist then science, not religion would prove this. Nothing is outside of science, and I mean nothing.

cazzie's avatar

Well, @Lightlyseared, I think you generalise too much, because I am an atheist of the non-rabid sort. Of my husband, I can not say the same. I do tease him, when I hear him listening to his ‘sermons’ by Hitchens and Dawkins that he is attending ‘church’. But he is looking to understand something and he obsesses because of his ASD.

cazzie's avatar

I would say atheism isn’t a lack of belief. I believe in plenty, just not a god. So, I would say it is an absence of faith in a deity. Dawkins hasn’t replaced god and he would be sick to think so, but people are stupid, so I can only speak for myself.

But, speaking to the subject at hand, as a scientist and lover of all things empirical, I would, of course, change my mind in the face of new, real evidence, because that is what scientists do. Then, I would seek to understand more, because that is also what scientists do.

Bill1939's avatar

@King_Pariah and @cazzie, I was referring specifically to those atheists who fervently deny the possibility that a God or Gods exist. I think that doubting such existence makes one an agnostic, not an atheist. Sorry if I was unclear.

King_Pariah's avatar

@Bill1939 I strongly believe that gods don’t exist and if a being came forward declaring itself as a god or whatnot, I’d see it as merely an obstacle to overcome/to crush/to topple/etc., not a god. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.

cazzie's avatar

@Bill1939 I am an atheist. I do not froth at the mouth or care too much about other people’s beliefs and waste time arguing with them about it. I am not agnostic. I do not doubt. Sorry if I was unclear. Also, I wasn’t replying to any of your answers because I do not understand them.

mattbrowne's avatar

Indisputable proofs of such an existence are hoaxes. Such proofs do not exist.

ETpro's avatar

@mattbrowne Indisputbble proofs don’t exist for anything. The best we can get is the preponderance of the evidence—beyond a reasonable doubt.

mattbrowne's avatar

@ETpro – Okay, then let me rephrase:

We cannot claim the existence of any deity beyond a reasonable doubt no matter what religion we are talking about – therefore this competition about truth between religions claiming to be the only true religion is ridiculous and dangerous. All we can talk about is “my belief” and “your belief” and respect each other and try to get along with each other.

Equally we cannot claim the non-existence of any deity beyond a reasonable doubt no matter what world view we are talking about – therefore any aggressive clashes between theists and atheists claiming to support the only true world view is ridiculous and dangerous. All we can talk about is “my world view” and “your world view” and respect each other and try to get along with each other.

Patton's avatar

@Lightlyseared If you’re going to plagiarize Wikipedia, at least do it right:

“Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values.”

In any case, that’s not supposed to be a definition. And that’s good because it’s not a definition. Not just any collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews (which is the part you quoted) counts as a religion—nor even any such collection that relates humanity to spirituality and moral values. A science department has a culture, a belief system, and a general worldview, and it may differ from the culture, belief system, and general worldview of a different science department. That doesn’t mean there are two new religions to take account of.

And by the way, atheism has been around for longer than two thousand years. In fact, it has probably been around for longer than any religion currently in existence.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther