What if God is real (when you die)?

[Saturday]

What would you do if the Christian/Muslim/Jewish God is real when you die?

I read the Last Answer by Isaac Asimov many years ago and I still find my mind wandering to it. It's an incredible piece. You can find it here for those that haven't read it yet: http://www.thrivenotes.com/the-last-answer/

So if we die and find that God or a God-like being does in fact exist and we find that he is a rather unsavory fellow that wishes us to praise him for eternity among other things-

What could we do? What will we do?

My first thoughts are in agreement with Asimov. I would probably devote my eternal existence to thinking of a way to destroy him, thereby succeeding or forcing him to destroy me first.

A more interesting question is do you guys think that would be possible with all eternity to ponder on the question? I am thinking that eternal existence is an incredible power, perhaps even a type of omniscience and following that, a type of omnipotence. Off the cuff, I think we'd have a chance in succeeding.

Thoughts?

[Smellyoldgit]

I'm dead.
How do I detect this shitstain?

[Davin]

If I found out I was immortal, after a while I'd start to find a way to kill myself.

[ghoulslime]

It's an interesting hypothetical situation. I would certainly be shoulder to shoulder with Asimov.

[Smellyoldgit]

Dr Who seems to be coping ok, but he's only done about 900 years - he'll be bored shitless after a million or two.

[Saturday]

Yes, if I did find myself in that situation I would be with Asimov as well.

-
Hmmmm finding myself immortal while living in this universe?

I probably wouldn't mind it for a very long time. I can imagine seeing how humans evolve or destroy themselves and subsequently what other life evolves in what forms on this planet. And then eventually gaining enough knowledge from centuries of study, myself, to build a ship or something and extend my senses to explore this universe.

In the words of Battlestar Galactica, I would like to feel the cosmic winds of a supernova wash over me.

I don't think I would be bored on the matter of millions of years but perhaps on the scale of billions. Maybe I would come back after some billion years to this system where my existence started to see the sun expand and engulf Mercury and evaporate the Earth's atmosphere if it wasn't gone already.

I hadn't really thought about it until now but there is already some sort of morbid beauty in natural eschatology even without religion adding to it.

[lostsheep]

Saturday wrote

What would you do if the Christian/Muslim/Jewish God is real when you die?

I read the Last Answer by Isaac Asimov many years ago and I still find my mind wandering to it. It's an incredible piece. You can find it here for those that haven't read it yet: http://www.thrivenotes.com/the-last-answer/

So if we die and find that God or a God-like being does in fact exist and we find that he is a rather unsavory fellow that wishes us to praise him for eternity among other things-

What could we do? What will we do?

My first thoughts are in agreement with Asimov. I would probably devote my eternal existence to thinking of a way to destroy him, thereby succeeding or forcing him to destroy me first.

A more interesting question is do you guys think that would be possible with all eternity to ponder on the question? I am thinking that eternal existence is an incredible power, perhaps even a type of omniscience and following that, a type of omnipotence. Off the cuff, I think we'd have a chance in succeeding.

Thoughts?

My first thought, before reading the story you linked, was that the thought of eternal life/consciousness frightens me as much as the thought of eternal oblivion. So obviously this story spoke to me!

Three other stories come to mind:

"I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream" (http://pub.psi.cc/ihnmaims.txt)
"The Portal" (short story by Steven King)
"The Last Question" (also by Asimov: http://www.scifi-review.net/isaac-as...st-answer.html)

[9opiles]

I would declare myself God.

[Saturday]

9opiles wrote

I would declare myself God.

in relationship to the other thread, you should read "The Last Question" by Asimov from lostsheep's link above if you haven't already. It's superbly written and it has to do with the implications of immortality.

[9opiles]

If I am able to, after death, perceive of a God as separate from me means it is on the same plane of existence as me, thus, would have a definable relationship with God in terms of that existence, which means, if we have an energy-connected relationship, then the laws of Physics apply. If the laws of Physics apply, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only transferred.

The very act of dying and ascending/transcending/transferring/assimilating occurs by some process after death, and I believe myself to be God now, as a living thing, then it is possible that the energy of that would or could be transferred to myself upon Death, simply because religions and science have yet to define God. As strange as it seems, a closer analysis on the references to the actual word God in biblical context is not well-defined. It is referred to, but not defined; there are more instances of lords and satans and devils and demons than any real instance or words of God. This is a subject that requires another topic detailing the inadequacies of the definition of the word God by any religious text. Since I know that, since God is a concept we use as a species to refer to something that even religious texts cease to define and something Physicists may refer to, in secret, to any area or discovery of their work, then it does not exist because it has yet to be accurately defined, as the typical definition of it being in some way the totality of things is yet to be properly perceived and presented, let alone defined and understood.

So thus, because God does not exist, since it would in some way exist within words only, i.e., in any reference to it in any text or religious system, in order for one to be able to properly declare, or in the instance of Asimov, find a way to destroy this concept of God, one would need to first have knowledge of these systems. It is one thing to say that it does not exist if one refers to some concept of Truth that supercedes that of current religious texts, it would need to be conceded that even if it doesn't exist as a universal truth to everyone, people exist in some fashion, their beliefs and thoughts exist in some fashion, and their knowledge of these words exists in some fashion, so I, at least, interpret that the common ground that all faithful and those who keep and know specific words have in common are the words themselves, and their beliefs and definitions of these words themselves. As it is a part of their identity, spiritual label, and existence even if brought in and understood to not exist, that creates a common bond that, if one dies and maintains some level of sentience and unity of the self in death, would be evident to those outside of this system. This may seem like a difficult concept to grasp, but beliefs themselves exist because we ourselves in some way exist. So to destroy the system of this God figure would be to destroy the beliefs of those who in some way believe in this system. This would cause disruption of a developed, established system of belief; consider that even many Atheists, that many people across all spiritual paths have knowledge of the Abrahamic religions, and I can go into detail about how Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are all connected by belief in a somewhat tangible way, but I won't for the simplicity of this topic unless furthur elaboration is desired.

So Asimov's strategy wouldn't work as in order to properly destroy this Godhead, he would have to destroy any and all documents in which this information is contained first, and then would have to maintain sentience in order to destroy the beliefs left over by the people themselves (remember, you are a dead person in this situation), and remembering that energy is transferrable, that energy would go somewhere. To declare oneself as God would then tie oneself into that system by those particular words and that energy, if they still believed in God, would then transfer to whereever that word is located, but even then that would require some assumptions that letters exist. In order to end up in that situation, axioms about what does and does not exist would need to be defined to furthur this definition.

Since I operate under the assumption that this God does not exist, and I believe this and am not defined by those religions, if a scenario such as the one you described in your original post was to take place. In other words, it does not exist because it is yet to be defined; something can and does exist independently of religious definition, and using the word God would limit that definition to anything that uses or refers to that word with any sort of permanence.

In other words, in order for this to be a true scenario, then the soul must exist in some fashion to do things in this manner.

One can also have leeway and say that, in a more complex scenario, assume that each person can define what God is, or is not, for themselves; as this is an Atheist forum, most here believe that God does not exist, which puts God in a state of nonexistence anyway, while others believe it does exist, they're referring to the same thing; as each person's beliefs concerning this concept are different in some way, this brings it to the quantum state of things and is thus reminiscent of the Schrodinger's Cat. I just assume that the word God is a convenient way for existence to sort out who believes what according to how or by what standard one judges the "end" of things, the totality and ultimate fate of things. If I was Life and I wanted to sort humans, using this word would be the way to do it.

We apply religion to space and time because we find it convenient.

So if this entity you describe exists, it would be a moral call about whether to destroy it or declare myself to be God to transfer that energy from them to myself becaus I trust myself more, or destroy their beliefs in the manner Asimov described, thus causing God to exist by some moral basis, rendering Atheism and the idea that morality is independent of God wrong.

See why religion is tricky?

I would declare myself God because I'm an asshole and think that if I was put in that scenario, it should be mathematically defined first. Let them learn math and figure it out.

Making any move in reaction to finding out this information would cause it to exist in the first place, and to define it by the axioms of my own existence.

So upon furthur thinking, my defining myself as being God would only be withn the scenario of it existing, so this is nearly purely hypothetical.

Because this scenario wouldn't happen in the first place. For it to be maintained, I would still be a part of life, causing God to be a life system, which would be redundant. Those religions are redundant, therefore unnecesary, and therefore do not exist outside of life.

The requirements of axiom definitions would require one to have all of thi defined for themselves in some fashion anyway.

In other words, I hate this thread.

Saturday wrote

in relationship to the other thread, you should read "The Last Question" by Asimov from lostsheep's link above if you haven't already. It's superbly written and it has to do with the implications of immortality.

[Saturday]

[Saturday]

Just kidding, I did earnestly read the first few paragraphs then I stopped when I got to this:

9opiles wrote

Since I know that, since God is a concept we use as a species to refer to something that even religious texts cease to define and something Physicists may refer to, in secret, to any area or discovery of their work, then it does not exist because it has yet to be accurately defined...

So thus, because God does not exist, since it would in some way exist within words only,

Are you saying that if nobody defines something properly or if nobody has knowledge of something, then that something doesn't actually exist?

[ghoulslime]

Upon further consideration of this matter, were I to find out that the evil god of Abraham is real, I would spend the rest of my existence finding a way to fuck his ass and cum in his face.

[Smellyoldgit]

If the Africans have it right, it would be great fun getting apeshit drunk and spewing your ring-piece all over the almighty Bumba.

[9opiles]

Saturday wrote

Just kidding, I did earnestly read the first few paragraphs then I stopped when I got to this:



Are you saying that if nobody defines something properly or if nobody has knowledge of something, then that something doesn't actually exist?

God is a concept. Some believe it is an eternal concept, some believe it isn't.

For example, we define the sky as blue. We came up with the word blue to describe the state in which the sky exists in a particular fashion, when the color blue is applicable. Sometimes, however, it is not just blue, sometimes it is other colors. Imagine, for a minute, a sky without defining it as anything. Whether I define the sky as blue, clear, non-existant, a place, thing, a finite thing, no matter what word I use to describe this particular state, blue, of color, not black, etc, it still exists within that state no matter what word or thing or symbol I use to represent it. If you can imagine an entire universe without the need for labels, then you can understand what I said.

However, I also believe that there are things within life and the human imagination that cannot, or do not exist in that state outside of the human imagination. This is where art and expression and creativity come into play.

I am saying that the concept of God is something that we created, and that myth as a whole is used to in some way define the external world. I believe we are able to do so logically, hence our ability to explain existence mathematically. The problem is, there are some religions which use symbol in a systematic way, some of which would not be within the mindscape of the Gods you suppose may or may not be real in your post. Usually, those are the ones that are demonized.

I'm saying that, in reference to me saying they exist in words alone, that it would need to be logically defined in order to exist in any fashion because we created the concept in the first place. The question is, how healthy, or well, does it match the world it claims to speak for and describe?

The Abrahamic god does not exist outside of the system created by man, and with that, you should read the rest of my post.

It's a logic system. Logic systems require definitions for self-consistency.