Can God commit suicide?

[navarre]

Question for all the Christians/Jews/Muslims/Hindus/Sikhs/Bahais on this forum.

Could God, if he so chooses, commit suicide? I mean, if he could then he wouldn't be immortal. But if he couldn't, then he isn't omnipotent.

I'm just interested to know.

[Gizmo]

This is a pretty rubbish anti-omnipotency argument. Worse even than the "immovable object" theory.

[Wesley]

Suicide is illegal he'd get arrested.

[EchoDesiato]

Nah, he'd chicken out eventually.

[navarre]

This is a pretty rubbish anti-omnipotency argument. Worse even than the "immovable object" theory.

Actually, it's a pretty strong argument. If God can do anything, then why can't he kill himself? Surely that defeats the meaning of being omnipotent?

[Dan Dare]

but omnipotence also implies indestructibility, ergo his inability to kill himself would also prove omnipotence.

[Gizmo]

Who is to say that "God" is a creature that has a life/death cycle?

[DomJcg]

Think about it, omnipotent, can do anything, thus an omnipotent being can commit suicide

[Caris]

Who is to say that "God" is a creature that has a life/death cycle?

/Thread.....

[Daft]

Define "God".

[navarre]

Who is to say that "God" is a creature that has a life/death cycle?

That is the sort of argument I was looking for.

But doesn't it say, or at least imply, that in the holy books God is a living thing? He's almost always referred to as 'He' and Christians call him the Father.

Of course, God could be an entity that is not part of any religion- ie any religion that we know right now hasn't actually got across the true message of God or know God.

[McMad]

Define "Can".

[Mr_Odwin]

This thread is likely to be locked. Try not to descend into crazy religion bashing, or go totally off-topic and it will not.

[Gizmo]

That is the sort of argument I was looking for.

But doesn't it say, or at least imply, that in the holy books God is a living thing? He's almost always referred to as 'He' and Christians call him the Father.

Of course, God could be an entity that is not part of any religion- ie any religion that we know right now has actually got across the true message of God.

Just because he is the "Father" doesn't mean he can die. In fact, probably the contrary: he is called the "holy spirit", and isn't the whole point of Christianity that after death our spirit lives on? Hence, spirits do not die, and God cannot then commit suicide.

Wow, I think this is the first time I've ever argued for the religion.

[nightwolf]

Suicide is illegal he'd get arrested.

Or end up in Hell, how ironic.

I could imagine if I were the cause of everything in this world I'd like the ability to kill myself hah!

[EEVILMURRAY]

Who is to say that "God" is a creature that has a life/death cycle?
And changes his appearance Doctor Who style each time.

[McPhee]

He could potentially could commit suicide but he'd just be reincarnated as himself again anyway rendering it pointless.

[MoogleViper]

Who is to say that God exists?

[navarre]

This thread is likely to be locked. Try not to descend into crazy religion bashing, or go totally off-topic and it will not.

I think everyone here is both perfectly aware and compliant with the rules, thank you.

Just because he is the "Father" doesn't mean he can die. In fact, probably the contrary: he is called the "holy spirit", and isn't the whole point of Christianity that after death our spirit lives on? Hence, spirits do not die, and God cannot then commit suicide.

Being a parent, such as a father, is a biological term applied to living things. By definition, living things die, so as such it is possible God could commit suicide.

Yes, but God isn't a spirit surely? And if is, he's allegedly omnipotent- so and omnipotent spirit that can't kill itself? Well, it isn't omnipotent then, is it?

[Kirkatronics]

What if he doesnt want to?
Theres a difference between cant and not wanting to.

[navarre]

Who is to say that God exists?

This is under the assumption that he does exist.

[MoogleViper]

That is the sort of argument I was looking for.

But doesn't it say, or at least imply, that in the holy books God is a living thing? He's almost always referred to as 'He' and Christians call him the Father.

Of course, God could be an entity that is not part of any religion- ie any religion that we know right now hasn't actually got across the true message of God or know God.

In the Bible it says that god created man in his own image. Therefore he at least looks like us.

To me this implies he is an actual being rather than something like a force or energy.

[EEVILMURRAY]

Well they say when you die and shit you live forever in the afterlife, so unless bustin' makes you feel good, can a ghost commit suicide also?

[Gizmo]

I think everyone here is both perfectly aware and compliant with the rules, thank you.



Being a parent, such as a father, is a biological term applied to living things. By definition, living things die, so as such it is possible God could commit suicide.

Yes, but God isn't a spirit surely? And if is, he's allegedly omnipotent- so and omnipotent spirit that can't kill itself? Well, it isn't omnipotent then, is it?

I'm pretty sure the modern day definition of "Father" derivates slightly from the one 2000 years ago. I don't think you can use it as a counter argument; also, translation discrepancies.

How do we know what he is? A spirit seems just as likely as anything else. And being omnipotent means beign able to do anything, but thats anything in the world. Death may not physically exist as something that is possible to his "species". In the same way that he can only make a massive rock because mass exists, or walk on water because buoyancy exists. In the same way that the human brain cannot comprehend colour beyond what they know - we couldn't describe any other colours, because all we can use to describe a colour is another colour - who are we to say that "death" is a physical thing that could affect such a being?

I am atheist / agnostic, depending on your definition. I do not believe in God, or any other similar thing. I am a Physicist, essentially. Give me evidence for a God, and I will believe you, in the same way that I believe in gravity even though I can't see it.

[Daft]

God, if he/she did exist, exists beyond human understanding; that is why he/she is God.

You then applying a human idea to God; suicide. Durkheim says suicide is a social fact and since God is above society why would God ever want to do it.

Which brings us to another point, if God is perfect then he does not progress he just is and so it would be impossible for him to change his state, commit suicide, unless he was fallible.

[nightwolf]

I believe Daft wins the argument.

[Shino]

The question takes assumption our rules apply to gods or that he is even a living being. If we knew how god works it wouldn't be faith.

Edit: Daft and Gizmo explained way better than what I did.

[Gizmo]

God, if he/she did exist, exists beyond human understanding; that is why he/she is God.

You then applying a human idea to God; suicide. Durkheim says suicide is a social fact and since God is above society why would God ever want to do it.

Which brings us to another point, if God is perfect then he does not progress he just is and so it would be impossible for him to change his state, commit suicide, unless he was fallible.

This is essentially what I'm trying to say.

[arab_freak]

Isn't this another variation of that stupid "If God is all powerful, can He create a rock so heavy that He himself cannot lift it?" question?

[EEVILMURRAY]

God, if he/she did exist, exists beyond human understanding; that is why he/she is God.
Didn't stop the bugger from teasing us with his presence.
if God is perfect then he does not progress he just is and so it would be impossible for him to change his state, commit suicide, unless he was fallible.
I have it on good authority the Big G changes his look every coupla hundred years. To keep himself Fresh.

[chairdriver]

The fact of the matter is that the Bible is complete shite, and if there is a higher being then it's 99.999999% likely that she is nothing like she is described in the Bible.

[EEVILMURRAY]

One of God's favourite forms.

http://www.hecklerspray.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/350601174_1424999879.jpg

I actually used to think this was what God might've looked like in the olden days.

[chairdriver]

Why does everyone portray God as an old man?

Presumably if God is perfect, (s)he'd look like a perfectly formed young adult (of, say, 25 years).

[McPhee]

Well they say when you die and shit you live forever in the afterlife, so unless bustin' makes you feel good, can a ghost commit suicide also?

Think this could be it to be honest, maybe he's already dead? Dead people go to Heaven or Hell, right? God is in Heaven. He's dead. Something that's dead can't die. If he can't die then he can't commit suicide (without resurrecting himself and comitting suicide, but then he'd go to hell, battle it out with the Devil and the whole of existance would cease to exist).

[navarre]

I'm pretty sure the modern day definition of "Father" derivates slightly from the one 2000 years ago. I don't think you can use it as a counter argument; also, translation discrepancies.

How do we know what he is? A spirit seems just as likely as anything else. And being omnipotent means beign able to do anything, but thats anything in the world. Death may not physically exist as something that is possible to his "species". In the same way that he can only make a massive rock because mass exists, or walk on water because buoyancy exists. In the same way that the human brain cannot comprehend colour beyond what they know - we couldn't describe any other colours, because all we can use to describe a colour is another colour - who are we to say that "death" is a physical thing that could affect such a being?

I am atheist / agnostic, depending on your definition. I do not believe in God, or any other similar thing. I am a Physicist, essentially. Give me evidence for a God, and I will believe you, in the same way that I believe in gravity even though I can't see it.

You're still missing the point. If God is omnipotent, he could make his species die, because he has the power to do anything. If he was another species, or not a living thing, is beyond the question. Fact is, he could kill himself because he is all powerful. He is either eternal or omnipotent; he cannot be both.
Gravity may not be seen, but at least we can measure gravity:- such an ability does not exist for God.

Isn't this another variation of that stupid "If God is all powerful, can He create a rock so heavy that He himself cannot lift it?" question?

Struck a (theists) nerve, have I?

The fact of the matter is that the Bible is complete shite, and if there is a higher being then it's 99.999999% likely that she is nothing like she is described in the Bible.

Actually, that is complete shite. The Bible is a fantastic book, irregardless of religious beliefs. I've found myself turning to it despite being an atheist more and more over the past few years for moral guidance. And the history in the Bible is fantastic, and some of the books provide some the best historical records of their time around.

[MoogleViper]

Why does everyone portray God as an old man?

Presumably if God is perfect, (s)he'd look like a perfectly formed young adult (of, say, 25 years).

Because his image is copied from Zeus.

[EEVILMURRAY]

Think this could be it to be honest, maybe he's already dead? Dead people go to Heaven or Hell, right? God is in Heaven. He's dead. Something that's dead can't die. If he can't die then he can't commit suicide (without resurrecting himself and comitting suicide, but then he'd go to hell, battle it out with the Devil and the whole of existance would cease to exist).
Actually, that being said about my previous comment. When the ghosts in Ghostbusters were caught they weren't "killed", just imprisoned. Y'know, until dickless released them.
Why does everyone portray God as an old man?

Presumably if God is perfect, (s)he'd look like a perfectly formed young adult (of, say, 25 years).
Probably the wise angle. They made the Devil old in Reaper.

[Supergrunch]

This is just discussion of an obvious paradox, and isn't really going to get anywhere.

"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent."

Edit: This is basically a Wittgensteinian reiteration of Daft's argument.

[Shino]

The fact of the matter is that the Bible is complete shite, and if there is a higher being then it's 99.999999% likely that she is nothing like she is described in the Bible.


A woman? That cannot be! Surely you jest, no man's rib has ever created anything of importance!

[MoogleViper]

One of God's favourite forms.

http://www.hecklerspray.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/350601174_1424999879.jpg

I actually used to think this was what God might've looked like in the olden days.

Yeah but this one is his all time fave.

http://photos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v2490/90/11/1301344745/n1301344745_30164981_2347.jpg

[EEVILMURRAY]

"No wonder he kept out of sight" :p

[Chris the great]

the real question isnt "could god kill himself?" but could I kill god? or failing that, who honestly cares? its like arguing if superman could beat up batman. its never going to happen in real life so start thinkin about real things

[Pestneb]

Question for all the Christians/Jews/Muslims/Hindus/Sikhs/Bahais on this forum.

Could God, if he so chooses, commit suicide? I mean, if he could then he wouldn't be immortal. But if he couldn't, then he isn't omnipotent.

I'm just interested to know.

there is a difference between could and would.

if he is omnipotent, then he is able to make himself mortal. Infact, One could say In Christian belief thats exactly what he did - ie Jesus.

Also, death is a different event depending on your view point.
If you believe in an after life it is merely passing to a new stage, if not its destruction. if you mean passing to a new stage, you could argue, from the point of view of Christianity, in a way Jesus was God passing from stage to stage, so I suppose Jesus' Birth and resurrection, being initiated by him, would count as such. suicide seems to be the wrong word though.


We have the same issue. There are plenty of things we are physically capable to do, but are mentally unwilling to do, which we interpret as "can't do".

Really, to answer this question would require a deep understanding of and knowledge concerning God, which, for various reasons, is something neither religious nor atheists believe to be possible.

but my answer could, but wouldn't.

[Ganepark32]

It's an interesting question. Could God kill himself?

Well, right off of the bat I'll just say I don't believe in him. But if he/she was to exist, he/she is beyond to realm of our physical self and beyond the realm of our understanding and thought. We as people cannot and will never be able to comprehend what God is, what he/she is like, how he/she goes about things, etc. because we have no way of defining what God is, no true definition that would do him/her justice, and we have no way of finding it out. See, something like gravity: we can't see if but we know it is there because we can measure it through various methods and calculations. With God, there is no way of finding out whether it's there because there is no conceivable way of finding out due to the fact God is beyond our realm of thought and understanding.

To answer the question would be to confirm that God exists, which is impossible to do. It would also commit him/her to a physical state akin to us or some other being but then that begs the question of how can he/she be in a physical state in a spiritual world, as heaven is, according to religious scriptures, where a person's spirit goes to live for eternity.

How I see it is that God, should one exist, would be of a ethereal form and in that case couldn't and wouldn't be able to kill himself. But, as I said, I don't believe in God so I see it that God is this omnipotent being placed as the figurehead for a religion to help guide its believers; something that doesn't exist in any true form outside of the book his name is written in.

[The fish]

Or end up in Hell, how ironic.

Hell is often defined by the more modern, C of E type Christians (I use this definition as it is the one I am most familiar with) as "existence without God" - not only would this instantly cease to be hell with God there, but I exist without God, and I'm pretty damn happy.

Back on topic, if there was an all-powerful all-knowing all-loving ever-existing super being (by definition impossible) then, both yes and no - he, she, or it would be, as an all powerful being, be able to commit suicide, but as they existed permanently, they'd contradict that.

As (IIRC) Dan Dare said, it's a stupid (not to mention totally pointless) idea, even more so than that of the "immovable object".

[Gizmo]

You're still missing the point. If God is omnipotent, he could make his species die, because he has the power to do anything. If he was another species, or not a living thing, is beyond the question. Fact is, he could kill himself because he is all powerful. He is either eternal or omnipotent; he cannot be both.
Gravity may not be seen, but at least we can measure gravity:- such an ability does not exist for God.

No, I get your point. Your missing mine: death may not be something that exists in the "God" realm in the way that it exists here. Death is a human concept, and therefore so is suicide; so to suggest that God must be able to achieve it because "he can do anything" is silly. He may well be able to do anything, create any object, any species, whatever. But death may not exist. And if he were to "create" death, it wouldn't work in the same way, because it could not, because it doesn't exist.

[The fish]

Actually, that is complete shite. The Bible is a fantastic book, irregardless of religious beliefs. I've found myself turning to it despite being an atheist more and more over the past few years for moral guidance. And the history in the Bible is fantastic, and some of the books provide some the best historical records of their time around.

This is one of the few times "lol" has been an accurate representation of my reaction.

In terms of morality, it frequently contradicts itself and the old testament is pretty damn repulsive - I believe that taking your son and preparing to kill him because an invisible indemonstrable "thing" told you to is a little immoral, and is the first recorded use of the Nuremberg defence - "I was just following orders".

As for history, a few things spring to mind off the top of my head - almost everything in the old testament, for a start, and for the new testament, the whole thing about the census is completely rubbish and unsupported anywhere else, and there is nothing I have found that isn't highly suspect and likely to be doctored by more recent Christian scholars that suggests the Jesus ever existed.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

God can commit suicide. But it would also KILL US AAAAAAAALLLLLLLL

[Maase]

First of all, I don't believe in God.

But I find this argument pretty stupid.

If he's god, he can kill himself, then, once he feels like being alive, he will reborn immediatly.

Thus, your argument is pointless.

[Gizmo]

First of all, I don't believe in God.

But I find this argument pretty stupid.

If he's god, he can kill himself, then, once he feels like being alive, he will reborn immediatly.

Thus, your argument is pointless.

But if he can come back to life "when he feels like being alive", surely he is not dead?

[Maase]

Nop, he is dead, but being the god he is, he can go beyond death, and reborn when feeling like it.
He's the fucking god, he was the one who made "Death", if he wanted, there would be no death, and everyone would be immortal forever.
He's omnipotent, so even though he's dead, the death is a term he created, thus he would destroy the term for him, and come back to life.

[JonSt]

Don't be silly, God isn't real.

[Gizmo]

Nop, he is dead, but being the god he is, he can go beyond death, and reborn when feeling like it.
He's the fucking god, he was the one who made "Death", if he wanted, there would be no death, and everyone would be immortal forever.
He's omnipotent, so even though he's dead, the death is a term he created, thus he would destroy the term for him, and come back to life.

Surely death is when your conciousness stops functioning, and so, if there is still a part of God that is concious and able to decide when to come back, then he is not dead, but merely has turned off a part of his conciousness. Being "dead" is an end - what you are suggesting is more like "sleep".

[Maase]

Being dead is an end for us, humans (and we don't even know that, but whatever)

God created the term "Death", he can undo the term at any time, even while Dead himself.
You are seeing this by our understanding of these meanings, but god created all that, so he knows a lot more about them then us

[Jonnas]

@Maase: I believe what the OP meant was "Can God destroy himself completely?", because if there is an afterlife, the point is moot (like you just said)

My opinion on the subject?

God being omnipotent and immortal is an assumption made by Man.
If God exists, he may, in fact, only be nearly-omnipotent and/or nearly-immortal.
Considering omnipotence is impossible to achieve, I conclude that he must be nigh-omnipotent. This allows for two options:
1-Kill himself in case he's mortal;
2-In case he's immortal, he's powerless to commit suicide.

[Zell]

If there is a God, he's probably laughing at us right now.

[Rick Dangerous]

I like this question it made me think. This depends how you define what god or death is.

I would say the problem is your question involves time. Life by human definition involves time.

God in the 'everything' definition would be out of space and time therefore: 'She' (yes she, unless you want male love) maybe able to experience it on one level. However for 'she' to be able to experience it as 'death', she would need anouther 'part' to percieve her as being dead by definition (thus cancelling out the first part in the process).

[navarre]

This is one of the few times "lol" has been an accurate representation of my reaction.

In terms of morality, it frequently contradicts itself and the old testament is pretty damn repulsive - I believe that taking your son and preparing to kill him because an invisible indemonstrable "thing" told you to is a little immoral, and is the first recorded use of the Nuremberg defence - "I was just following orders".

As for history, a few things spring to mind off the top of my head - almost everything in the old testament, for a start, and for the new testament, the whole thing about the census is completely rubbish and unsupported anywhere else, and there is nothing I have found that isn't highly suspect and likely to be doctored by more recent Christian scholars that suggests the Jesus ever existed.

Hate to quote the Bible to you, but hey, any strong argument needs sources:

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[g] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. 41If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. 42Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor[h] and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.


"A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead with no clothes. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, and he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, he too passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and looked after him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.' "Which of these three do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Then Peter came up and said to him, "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?"
Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.
"Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants.
When he began the reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents;
and as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made.
So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, 'Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.'
And out of pity for him the lord of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.
But that same servant, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat he said, 'Pay what you owe.'
So his fellow servant fell down and besought him, 'Have patience with me, and I will pay you.'
He refused and went and put him in prison till he should pay the debt.
When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place.
Then his lord summoned him and said to him, 'You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me;
and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?'
And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart

Those three stories led me to respect Jesus, not as the Son of God, but as the greatest moral teacher in history. In my opinion, if we were to consider those stories and to abide by their meaning, the world would be a better place. The Good Samaritan especially is an excellent story for combating racism. I seldom if ever read the Old testament- I understand some of the stories in it are pretty repulsive- and the homophobic tones of the epistles are unattractive. The Gospels, however, are unbeatable in terms of morality.

As for history, Luke was an historian ahead of his time- he accurately names tens of historical events, places and people. But the Old testament Books provide any historian a 'reliable' (to all those who did GCSE history) insight as to what life was like in Israel thousands of years ago and helps describe Judaisms early days.

I believe Jesus existed. I believe Mohammed existed. I believe the Buddha existed. Why? Because religions don't just start by themselves. To suggest otherwise would be ignorant.

I'll reply to the other responses later, can't be arsed right now.

[Emasher]

Or end up in Hell, how ironic.

The belief that those who commit suicide go to hell completely contradicts most of the gospel if you think about it, and was probably edited into the bible by the clergy during the middle ages to stop all the peasants who had such sad lives from committing suicide. Just thought I'd mention that.

I also think the "God created us in his own image" thing isn't about physical image, but something else entirely. So its probably irrelevant to this.

[Paj!]

God in the biblical sense isn't real. I'm a pretty spiritual person, but not in spirits. Just in like...energy. But there is no single person who did this then told someone to write it in a book.

Let's not lie here.

[EEVILMURRAY]

If there is a God, he's probably laughing at us right now.
My money is on he's having a wank.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

Hate to quote the Bible to you, but hey, any strong argument needs sources:








Those three stories led me to respect Jesus, not as the Son of God, but as the greatest moral teacher in history. In my opinion, if we were to consider those stories and to abide by their meaning, the world would be a better place. The Good Samaritan especially is an excellent story for combating racism. I seldom if ever read the Old testament- I understand some of the stories in it are pretty repulsive- and the homophobic tones of the epistles are unattractive. The Gospels, however, are unbeatable in terms of morality.

As for history, Luke was an historian ahead of his time- he accurately names tens of historical events, places and people. But the Old testament Books provide any historian a 'reliable' (to all those who did GCSE history) insight as to what life was like in Israel thousands of years ago and helps describe Judaisms early days.

I believe Jesus existed. I believe Mohammed existed. I believe the Buddha existed. Why? Because religions don't just start by themselves. To suggest otherwise would be ignorant.

I'll reply to the other responses later, can't be arsed right now.
I love these stories as well, just as I love the message of Jesus. In that sense, you could probably call me "Christian". I'm not Christian in the strict sense that I "believe in God" - my beliefs about metaphysics and the spiritual are ... nuanced and complicated (meaning I'm not sure of them myself :heh: ) ... but they are also entirely irrelevant. Much of the stuff in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, is quite fucked up and terribly immoral, but the view on love and morals that Jesus shows is one that I agree completely with.

Also, on the purely historical aspect of things, other historical sources than the Bible speaks of this Jesus fella calling himself the son of God. Whether he is that or not, I think it's fairly certain that he existed as a person.

[Shorty]

God could kill himself, just to see what it's like, but then he'd like totally be reborn instantly and just go 'right, fair enough'.*



*disclamer: not really, God is not real.

[MoogleViper]

Hell is often defined by the more modern, C of E type Christians (I use this definition as it is the one I am most familiar with) as "existence without God" - not only would this instantly cease to be hell with God there, but I exist without God, and I'm pretty damn happy.

I'm sorry but not only is this some typical anti-Christian bollocks it also makes absolutely no sense. The Christian's say that as they believe that God exists. So if we assume that he does exist then you don't exist without God, you just don't believe in him.

And if we assume that God doesn't exist, then their definition/idea of hell is false.

But you used their definition of hell and then tried to disprove it by saying that you exist without God and you are happy. But for hell to exist you exist with God.

So all you've shown is that you can't even have a decent hypothetical conversation without instantly jumping down everyone's throats screaming "THERE IS NO GOD! YOU'RE ALL WRONG AND STUPID!"

[EEVILMURRAY]

I'm sorry but not only is this some typical anti-Christian bollocks it also makes absolutely no sense. The Christian's say that as they believe that God exists. So if we assume that he does exist then you don't exist without God, you just don't believe in him.
I thought what he was getting at was hell for some Christians is existence without God... Wouldn't be nice for them.


His concept on being happy without God doesn't matter

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

I find this discussion pointless. If God exists or not is irrelevant, as we will have to assume that he does to be able to answer the question. That being said, we cannot answer the question anyway, as it is a paradox: God is omnipotent, ergo he can do anything, including not being omnipotent. He can be dead and alive at the same time without problems - or neither at all - just as he can have any, all or no gender. The explanation for this is that God exists outside our realm of understanding and thus outside our laws of logic, making his paradoxical state of being omnipotent possible.

[Paj!]

I find this discussion pointless. If God exists or not is irrelevant, as we will have to assume that he does to be able to answer the question. That being said, we cannot answer the question anyway, as it is a paradox: God is omnipotent, ergo he can do anything, including not being omnipotent. He can be dead and alive at the same time without problems - or neither at all - just as he can have any, all or no gender. The explanation for this is that God exists outside our realm of understanding and thus outside our laws of logic, making his paradoxical state of being omnipotent possible.

A.K.A Made up.

I think I'd have a better time respecting the idea of god if he wasn't so specifically described.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

A.K.A Made up.

I think I'd have a better time respecting the idea of god if he wasn't so specifically described.
Please don't go there. This thread isn't about whether God exists or not, and if we go there - no matter how proper we try to keep the discussion - it will go wrong. Mud will be thrown, people will be offended, warnings will be issued and threads will be locked. I only joined in on this debate because it wasn't about the existence of God.

[navarre]

Also, on the purely historical aspect of things, other historical sources than the Bible speaks of this Jesus fella calling himself the son of God. Whether he is that or not, I think it's fairly certain that he existed as a person.


The historical accounts of Jesus are overwhelming. To question his existence would be like questioning whether or not Julius Ceasar existed, because they've both got around the same amount of historical sources.

[Dannyboy-the-Dane]

The historical accounts of Jesus are overwhelming. To question his existence would be like questioning whether or not Julius Ceasar existed, because they've both got around the same amount of historical sources.
I thought so, but I wasn't entirely sure exactly how well-grounded his existence was in the historical accounts, so I was careful with my words.

[EEVILMURRAY]

My R.E teacher always said there was no doubt Jesus lived, as said the historical documents are plentiful. Whether he was the Son of God is another matter.
I think I'd have a better time respecting the idea of god if he wasn't so specifically described.
How was he described?

[Paj!]

Just everything that is mentioned about him. When it's obvious he has no form/face/voice/whatever.

If anything, it's an amorphous, indescribable mass of sparkling energy that exists on the astral plane beyond human imagining. How dare anyone presume to know god?

They do so it becomes easy and understandable. I'm not allowed the ease of understanding the universe, why is anyone else allowed that luxury?

[Rick Dangerous]

Surely it doesnt matter if Jesus existed or not if the ideas are good. Somebody somewhere wrote it.

[navarre]

Surely it doesnt matter if Jesus existed or not if the ideas are good. Somebody somewhere wrote it.


Exactly. Jesus could be fictional or factual, it makes no difference to the underlying morals of his ministry.

[Paj!]

Why do we have to refer to him for moral guidance? He didn't invent them all. And even if he did, they're all ingrained in society.

[EEVILMURRAY]

Why do we have to refer to him for moral guidance? He didn't invent them all. And even if he did, they're all ingrained in society.
They hope for "divine intervention".

[Paj!]

Well so do I.

[The fish]

I thought what he was getting at was hell for some Christians is existence without God... Wouldn't be nice for them.


His concept on being happy without God doesn't matter

Moogle totally missed my point - what I was saying is that a commonly held view amongst many Christians I've encountered is that hell is not all fire and brimstone, but simply existence without god. By this common definition, god couldn't ever be in hell, as he couldn't be separated from himself.


The historical accounts of Jesus are overwhelming. To question his existence would be like questioning whether or not Julius Ceasar existed, because they've both got around the same amount of historical sources.

Oh Great. The old "there's more evidence for Jesus than there is for Caesar" line. This is Christians trying to use the fact that people are too lazy to look it up for themselves. There are many, many contemporary accounts of Caesar, yet none of Jesus. Contemporary accounts are the best source for working out if someone existed or not. For Caesar, these range from letters and notes to official records at the time to sculptures done whilst he was alive - for Jesus, by comparison, there is not one iota of contemporary evidence.

Hell, Cicero and his letters to Caesar alone pretty much seal his existence. For Jesus, the best anyone has come up with is either references to early Christians, looked at evidence and said "this could be him!", and, in some cases, simply lied or falsified evidence - look at Josephus' writings. This last point begs the question: if there is much evidence for Jesus (or Noah's flood, or Moses and the Jewish Exodus) then where the hell is it, and why has more evidence had to be fabricated?

Exactly. Jesus could be fictional or factual, it makes no difference to the underlying morals of his ministry.

Not really - Jesus (or more specifically, Paul the Apostle when writing about Jesus) was one of the big proponents of "original sin" - an idea which is, to me, and most people I've mentioned it to, so abhorrent it makes what few good ideas that are simultaneously put forward (nicked from what is now known as Humanism) look somewhat tarnished.

[chairdriver]

Just because it can be proved that Jesus existed doesn't prove he actually told those stories.

[The fish]

I believe Jesus existed. I believe Mohammed existed. I believe the Buddha existed. Why? Because religions don't just start by themselves. To suggest otherwise would be ignorant.

There are contemporary accounts of Mohammed and Buddha, but not Jesus. Oh, and as for "they must exist because religions don't just start themselves", ever heard of Scientology?

Of course, if you're talking more about the founder, then for Christianity you should probably be talking about Paul. I personally don't know enough about Paul, and what contemporary accounts there are of him, but, at present, if pressed, I'd say he existed.

[navarre]

Why do we have to refer to him for moral guidance? He didn't invent them all. And even if he did, they're all ingrained in society.

No, that's true. But for the time, they were revolutionary. They're ingrained into society now because of Christendoms expansion ie we were once a Christian nation, therefore those morals became ingrained, so when we became secular those morals were a part of everybodies lives, even if religion wasn't.

Oh Great. The old "there's more evidence for Jesus than there is for Caesar" line. This is Christians trying to use the fact that people are too lazy to look it up for themselves. There are many, many contemporary accounts of Caesar, yet none of Jesus. Contemporary accounts are the best source for working out if someone existed or not. For Caesar, these range from letters and notes to official records at the time to sculptures done whilst he was alive - for Jesus, by comparison, there is not one iota of contemporary evidence.

Correction: there are no known (or proven) contemporary accounts Some may argue that the canonical gospels were contemporary accounts, as tradition would have you believe. Even though I doubt they are, their material is strikingly similar, and they most probably did use contemporary sources, like the (hypothetical) Gospel Q.

Paul, although never meeting Jesus, did, on numerous occasions, meet contemporary apostles, such as Peter, upon whose teachings he based his epistles on.

Scientology is, in my opinion, a cult. Nevertheless, the point stands; why would people who supposedly knew Jesus or knew people who knew Jesus face the outstanding oppression and persecution in the Roman Empire for someone who never existed?

The historicity of Jesus is accepted by almost all Biblical scholars and classical historians. Theologian James Dunn describes the mythical Jesus theory (ie the theory you assumedly believe) a 'thoroughly dead thesis.'

For the record, I'm not a Christian.

Just because it can be proved that Jesus existed doesn't prove he actually told those stories

It doesn't matter a great deal, because that does not render those stories any less relevant or morally righteous.

[EEVILMURRAY]

Moogle totally missed my point - what I was saying is that a commonly held view amongst many Christians I've encountered is that hell is not all fire and brimstone, but simply existence without god. By this common definition, god couldn't ever be in hell, as he couldn't be separated from himself.
So was what I said alright, or did I miss the point too :(