What different would it make (to you or to the planet Earth) if God didn’t exist? As in, God had never existed.
I would guess that your question’s answer would depend directly on what exactly one would believe. According to many religious beliefs, if God didn’t exist, neither would we. To me, however, it seems a matter of what one believes in. If the Christian God did not exist, and the world were to be independent of that specific entity, the Bible would never have been written. Thus, thousands of humans would not have died in the Crusades…but on the other hand, much good would never have been accomplished in the name of God. Music, the arts, the sciences…none of these would exist today as they do were it not for the influence of Christians.
In short, I believe your question to be far too broad to answer in a single try. Can you be more specific?
I think we can’t talk about the non-existence of God as such, because we don’t know the implications. We can only ask what the difference would be if human beings were not religious, which is really what ‘Socratic_Miasma’ has answered.
Being a Mystic Christian, I believe that my being religious is the in-built yearning for purpose in an otherwise apparently impersonal universe. If there were no answer to this yearning, I would assume there would be no yearning. We would probably have our senses directed to more carnal desires and may not stand up, but have our nose closer to the ground.
I believe that Religion is one of the reasons why man ‘stands above’ animals and has a different perception, his yearning has directed his senses away from the material. He has gained a ‘meta-physical’ perception, above the physical, by being religious, which gave him an abstraction or an overview and prepared the ground for further enquiry. This would all be missing, if there were no answer to the yearning.
The Bible has been torn from it’s context and consequently misinterpreted, therefore it is really a misleading question whether something similar to a ‘crusade’ could have occurred without the Bible. I could imagine that the rawness of life may have not been overcome and consequently the survival of the fittest could have remained as the rule of life, which in turn means that the crusades may be the lesser evil, as bad as they were, in comparison to underdeveloped culture.
Shalom
Bob
Oops! I forgot to add an important stipulation to my question
What different would it make (to you or to the planet Earth) if God didn’t exist? As in, God had never existed and everything else that exists now is still exactly the same.
So its not a question of what would change in history, because I am assuming that history would be just the same.
Bob,
What if this yearning for purpose is entirely human and has nothing to do with any metaphysical agency. What if metaphysics is not something from outside of us but something born completely within us? The foundational striving that makes human beings what we are. It is unmatched in the entire world. Not all people have this inclination to the same degree. By temperament and by character one either some of us have a stronger desire to be more. These are people such as you, who have a greater awareness of our shared humanity.
Such people act as guides to our greater potential for innate development. They point to the possibility for human growth instead of mere technological growth. This is the potential development of our own humanity. Those who go seeking greatness find a sense of it within. It is part of us.
Could closeness to God be a metaphor for the process of getting closer to ideal humanity? It would be becoming the great man, an individual of wisdom, depth, insight, and compassion. This would be someone with a profound grasp of the human condition.
Men such as Jesus and Siddhartha can be read as the pinnacle of humanity. Their achievement becomes entangled in mythic language to emphasis their greatness. Eventually the myth buries the man completely. So we are cut off from the man. The image of greatness is put on a high pedestal. Every Idol is doomed to fall.
Instead of trying to be like Jesus or be like Siddhartha, merely worshiping these figures is then supposed to be enough. Instead of emulating their achievements we become mere fans.
Hi zanderman,
I don’t mean to butt in, but your reply to Bob’s post raised a question or two.
Whether internal or external, how would we know?, and what would you suggest is the purpose of this internally generated awareness?
Physically, we have no need for such a thing. The body simply dictate’s need and the mind is employed to find ways to satisfy those needs, the same as all other animals. Why sentience? What is the rationale that dictate’s the imperative of “I”, or “me”? Other than species recognition, as an animal, why would I need to have any concept of “humanity”?
JT
But that is exactly the ambivalence of Religion. In the Bible you can read both - because, as JT points out, it is very difficult to differentiate. All of my ‘spiritual experiences’ have had this ambivalence and I don’t believe that it is at all helpful to use all of my psychological knowledge to try and find out. Rather, I ask myself what is helpful. What tells me something I need to know? What furthers my existence, my understanding, my empathy - what makes me more like the archetype of humanity that my community and I have chosen?
Shalom
Bob
below
If I knew for certain there was actually no God (although I can’t imagine ever accepting such knowledge as certain) it would only reinforce my secular humanist ideals. I am currently living as if there is no God, and consequently, I am one of the kindest, most unconditionally generous and accepting persons you’d ever care to meet. I behave this way for FUN. Kindness feels good because I empathize with the receiver. Empathy is a social Darwinian trait to help survival, and it happens to run strong in me, and has been nurtured along by societal and personal happenstance. So that’s why it feels good to be benevolent. God is a concept we’ve created and has in turn created us in large part over the eons. It is a concept with great utility, but I see no reason to believe it’s nothing more than a human-generated concept. There are very grand and sublime things in the universe. The universe itself is such. If someone chose to put the label God on the Universe, you’d get no argument from me. But in terms of personal or sentient, the only sentient beings I know of are creatures of Earth. It is to them I owe my allegiance. Not to a concept, or to an impersonal universe. If I could, I would invent a machine that can go back in time and collect every living creature ever generated by nature and deposit them, if they choose, into a man-made heaven matrix where they will live forever, creating, loving and integrating. I would also invent a device to prevent the death of the universe via big crunch or expansion and darkening. There is no reason to believe in a deity. There is no reason to die. There is no reason to settle for anything less than what our hearts and minds seek. I assign no authority to my position of compassion and reason, love and gentility. The harsh and ignorant, the base and malevolent have equal authority to pursue their hearts and minds. But it is with the first group I stand, with all my strength, till my last breath, and this is a combination of who I am and what I came from. Acknowledging the truth of your religious creed, be it buddhist, christian, whatever, at the very least you’re acknowledging a way the world SHOULD be. Rather than hope it IS that way, that some God has it all taken care of for us, rather than bicker about proofs and hit our head against the wall with persuasive romantic poetry about emotions and religion and longing, why not just take this vision of a God created world and make it ourselves, as best we can. That’s what I’m doing, in my small way, and so to answer your question…I’d revel in my new friends.
Hi Gamer,
in what way do you use the word ‘authority’?
- authority - the power or right to give orders or make decisions; “he has the authority to issue warrants”; “deputies are given authorization to make arrests”
- authority - (usually plural) persons who exercise (administrative) control over others; “the authorities have issued a curfew”
- authority - an expert whose views are taken as definitive; “he is an authority on corporate law”
- authority - freedom from doubt; belief in yourself and your abilities; “his assurance in his superiority did not make him popular”; “after that failure he lost his confidence”; “she spoke with authority”
- authority - an administrative unit of government; “the Central Intelligence Agency”; “the Census Bureau”; “Office of Management and Budget”; “Tennessee Valley Authority”
- authority - official permission or approval; “authority for the program was renewed several times”
- authority - an authoritative written work; “this book is the final authority on the life of Milton”
Surely we have to ‘assign authority’ when we have someone or something that we want to protect? As long as the world is indifferent to us, it wouldn’t be necessary. But can we love and be indifferent?
And if we are ‘good’ because it pleases us, what happens if it pleases us to be ‘harsh and ignorant, base and malevolent’? Is there something that tells us at that point that we are doing wrong?
The assignment of authority is more than just a whim and indifference is the strongest support of all tyranny.
Shalom
Bob
Gamer,
I’m glad that you have chosen to avoid the dark side of the force, but I can’t help but ask, is it possible that a personal God has directed your thinking, emotions, and experiences to bring you to where you are? If that remain’s a possibility, the how is it possible to live as if there is no god? Just curious.
JT
Bob, i think i meant number three the definitions you provided. Or maybe authority is the wrong word. My way of saying I don’t believe in absolute morals, which again is a way of saying I don’t believe in the standard definitions of God or Gods that set the standards for what is right conduct. My choice to be a do-gooder is based primarily on aesthetics, secondarily on reason. The criterial make-up of my aesthetics radar is dictated by my dna and to some degree my experiences since birth. I have a completely naturalistic view of these things. If someone else arrives at a different way of conduct, its my guess that their personal system of aesthetic and reason, combined with their DNA and upbringing since birth, brought them to such ways of conduct.
Ultimately I’m not so concerned anymore about who’s wrong and who’s right. That would be hypocritical. What I am saying is that I will fight for the survival of what I desire, which is peace, harmony and understanding. That is simply the case. I take the stance that this is the path of the reasonable human, until given strong evidence to the contrary. And I assume the ignorant, angry, intolerant and violent folks will do what they have to do. I think it is philosophy’s highest purpose to convert these people, by way of teaching them how to know thyself and critcally examine what they hold true without pursuing a pre-conceived end goal.
Tentative, Im not sure I catch the gravity of your question. The fact that it’s possible that God could be directing my thoughts does not exclude the possiblility of me holding the ideas in these posts. For one thing, if you’ll say that’s possible, you may as well say anything’s possible, and then, by your standard, you’d be hard pressed to believe anything or do anything; unless you’re suggesting that it’s quite possible God’s directing my thoughts, in which case, I’m sorry, I’d need just a smidge of evidence.
Bob, i think i meant number three the definitions you provided. Or maybe authority is the wrong word. My way of saying I don’t believe in absolute morals, which again is a way of saying I don’t believe in the standard definitions of God or Gods that set the standards for what is right conduct. My choice to be a do-gooder is based primarily on aesthetics, secondarily on reason. The criterial make-up of my aesthetics radar is dictated by my dna and to some degree my experiences since birth. I have a completely naturalistic view of these things. If someone else arrives at a different way of conduct, its my guess that their personal system of aesthetic and reason, combined with their DNA and upbringing since birth, brought them to such ways of conduct.
Ultimately I’m not so concerned anymore about who’s wrong and who’s right. That would be hypocritical. What I am saying is that I will fight for the survival of what I desire, which is peace, harmony and understanding. That is simply the case. I take the stance that this is the path of the reasonable human, until given strong evidence to the contrary. And I assume the ignorant, angry, intolerant and violent folks will do what they have to do. I think it is philosophy’s highest purpose to convert these people, by way of teaching them how to know thyself and critcally examine what they hold true without pursuing a pre-conceived end goal.
Tentative, Im not sure I catch the gravity of your question. The fact that it’s possible that God could be directing my thoughts does not exclude the possiblility of me holding the ideas in these posts. For one thing, if you’ll say that’s possible, you may as well say anything’s possible, and then, by your standard, you’d be hard pressed to believe anything or do anything; unless you’re suggesting that it’s quite possible God’s directing my thoughts, in which case, I’m sorry, I’d need just a smidge of evidence.
Hey Gamer,
My questions concerned the ‘living as if there were no God’. As for your approach to pragmatic living, we could probably co-author “Living for Dummies”. Although your explanation and thinking is much better organized than my collection of scattered thoughts, we end up in much the same place. The only real difference I can see is the issue of is/is not a creator. You choose to live as if there weren’t and I choose to live as if there were. I don’t believe either of us would try to asign any particular description to the concept, or to suggest that there is anything ‘knowable’.
Still, I’m curious as to how you deal with that core awareness of the possibility that there is something beyond yourself. For me, that awareness is the mystery and I find both strength and even comfort in the not knowing and yet being aware. I suppose this all sound’s rather mystical, sometimes the words simply fail me, but the suspension of judgement about is/isn’t give’s my choosing it’s own credibility. I can take responsibility for my own life without fear or anxiety that I may have misinterpreted that awareness, that mystery.
If none of this make’s sense, ask Bob. He’s untangled several of my rambles before.
JT
Hi Gamer,
So it’s all down to DNA? You really are making things very simple, and all the more I must ask: ‘And if we are ‘good’ because it pleases us, what happens if it pleases us to be ‘harsh and ignorant, base and malevolent’? Is there something that tells us at that point that we are doing wrong?’ Or do we just say to the judge: ‘it was my DNA your honour, I couldn’t do anything against it’?
But can you convert DNA? Can you teach an animal not to observe its instincts after it has lived in the wild? I think your arguments backfire on you here. And if it is true one way, then we can’t argue diferently the other way.
Shalom
Bob
Gamer,
Is not your chosen lifestyle the presence of a God? Now, I am not using the term God as a human-like figure who holds the world in his palms, but using the term more as reason or purpose.
You have this ideal. This ideal is wonderful. You want to spread and protect harmony, peace, etc… You have chosen to utilize your life for this. You have assigned yourself a God.
According to you, you will not break from this path, and so it has become an authoritative principle in your life. You will pursue this with all of your strength until your last breath. You have claimed an allegiance to concepts whose importance you could never hope to explain in their entirety.
This is faith. This is religion. This is virtuous. Compassion, reason, love, and gentility, are what you have chosen as powers greater than yourself, that will forever have sway over your inclinations towards murkier desires.
Now while I am in no position to claim that God is an idea fashioned by humans or either an omnipotent/benevolent being in whose grandiosity we thrive, I don’t see how either would detract from the potency of the ideas, beliefs, and ultimately faith.
God, whether omnipotent or human crafted, is alive and well in the hearts of good men worldwide. The idea exists and presents great utility, as you stated, and will only exist if we teach the wonders of a compassionate existence. This has been best accomplished by the followers of the many religions of our world, such as Christians, Buddhists, Hindis, Sufis, Wiccan practitioners, and all the philosphers in and outside of these sects.
So, I suppose I see the existence of God as obvious, but the defintion is seemingly impossible to grasp. Maybe that’s because I’m just a humble homo-sapien, but anywho/what/why/where/when/how, God is exclusively a positive force in my life because I help make it so.
Oh, and to address the original question…
I would have to become a warlord. Then, I would collect beautiful women and various shiny objects. Pinching babies, urinating in public, and binge drinking would be scheduled daily along with numerous other activities ranging from annoying to savage.
Tentative – I don’t have this same sense of the mysterious God out there, so i don’t have to deal with it. There is no doubt mystery in the Universe, but I spend no time believing that an intelligence separate from mine or yours is dictating the order of things. If it is there, fine, but it has no bearing because I have no more evidence for that than I do that Yoda is God. I do love the mystery, and the best way to honor this mystery is allow it to be mysterious until you can pursue direct appreciation of it the way it really is, rather than what some ancient poet decided to characterize it as, blindly.
Bob – Seems like you read only half my post. I would never say my desire for doing good is simply genetic. It is a mix of nurture and nature…i think that’s fairly obvious. What I don’t ascribe to is that it’s God’s will manifesting itself in our benevolent deeds. That’s a bunch of hooey in my book, mainly because it’s so patently unnecessary, but also because it’s a position that has yet to yield cogent arguments in favor of it, at least in what I’ve heard. I’m constantly reminded by the bodysnatcher evangelist mentality of religious enthusiasts that humans have to be very careful that our desires don’t masquerade as knowledge. And as I’ve said before, we musn’t soil the precious gaps in our knowledge with romantic drivel and primative heart-longings that have nothing more to do with reality than a wing’s distant memory of breastfeeding and laying in a warm crib watching a dazzling mobile. Myths and religion are an indirect, filtered appreciation of nature. Why not just appreciate it directly, or at least more directly, by taking it for what it is, not for what old men centuries ago decided to dress it up as, as beautiful as that dress might be. It belongs in the Smithsonian.
i-zach…
i haven’t chosen powers greater than myself. I make no war with murkier desires. I want and desire only peace, only growth, only honesty, only balance, only kindness, only connections, only the hedonistic stroking and stoking of that part in me that prefers cerebral contemplations over swilling beer and watching football, but I make no value judgement saying that the former is better or higher than the latter. One might say my desires for peace are every bit as hedonistic and indulgent, animal and base, as anything else. I just happen to like the stuff. just like someone prefers strawberry to chocolate. how did I get this way? The answer to me is clear. Genetics and upbringing. A component of a social organism programmed for peace, driven just as much by survival and thrival as a lowly spider monkey. Liking peace is no different than liking to eat the head of a praying mantis after mating with it. It is, I believe, good for me and humanity.
Accidental Double-Post
See Below…
Hello Gamer,
Just want to say that however you have arrived at your lifestyle, and however you manage to stay true to it, is something I can admire greatly.
This theist is glad to have you around.
If you are living in the U.S. and have access to PBS there is a great show on Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis and their journey through theistic and atheistic beliefs. It started last night @ 8:00 pm central time and I believe it will have another 2 hours @ 8 pm tonight (Thursday).
Between historical accounts of their early and developing lives, there is discussion between Dr. Armand Nicholi, Margaret Klenck, Louis Massiah, Doug Holladay, Michael Shermer, Jeremy Fraiberg, Frederick Lee, and Winifred Gallagher. Now there are more theists present than atheists which I see as unfortunate and unfair for the debate, but I know not the reason why it has been set up this way.
Anyways, if you can catch it, you’d probably enjoy it. And don’t worry, they don’t come to some “happily ever after” conclusion where everyone has communed and agreed. It is very much left to the observer.
Much peace,
Zachariah
P.S. If you can’t catch the show, check out:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/index.html