Why can't we wait till we get to heaven

[benjaburns]

"Why can't we wait till we get to heaven to worship God?"

 

I'm sure you all have heard this before. I just heard it on freethought radio a few minutes ago and it made me think of this:

 

A lot of non-believers say "Why can't God prove his existence to me?". I say, why should God prove his existence to anyone? If he never told a single person of his existence or revealed any holy scriptures then, of course, no one would know that he exists or that they should follow him. Then, they'd just go about their daily lives without worrying about sin and pleasing God. That way, when they died and were judged by God he could judge them on their actions which they performed with no promise of eternal punishment or reward. Under this system, only the real sinners would be weeded out and only the truly moral would recieve heaven.

 

What do you guys think? Seems a little more fair to me.

[Gnosis of Disbelief]

It would depend a lot on how fair you'd think this god would be. If your god

were the crazed, psychotic despot of xtianity, then your chances of getting a

fair shake from him would be diminishingly small, whether you knew of his

existence or not. But I find the idea of a god judging people's lives to be a

bit....bronze age....to say the least. You'd think that a supreme being would

have better things to do than piddle around with the picayune details of our

lives.

 

By the way, I've never heard of "freethought radio." Where do I learn more

about it?

[DanInPA]

Here you go.

 

Freethought Radio

[benjaburns]

It would depend a lot on how fair you'd think this god would be. If your god

were the crazed, psychotic despot of xtianity, then your chances of getting a

fair shake from him would be diminishingly small, whether you knew of his

existence or not. But I find the idea of a god judging people's lives to be a

bit....bronze age....to say the least. You'd think that a supreme being would

have better things to do than piddle around with the picayune details of our

lives.

 

Well, just assume that this god is fair, not psychotic, and interested in human lives.

[Mythra]

Here you go.

Freethought Radio

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

very, very cool. Thanks, Dan.

[Gnosis of Disbelief]

If you assume that a god exists, and you assume that this god is "fair," and you

assume that this god conceals his identity until after death, at which point he

"judges" you for your life, then:

 

1) For those people who do not believe in god now, there would be

no change in behavior, since these people are already behaving

as if god did not exist;

 

2) For those people who do believe in god now, there would be a

change in behavior - i.e., it would be more "natural." Some

believers would not adopt the aggressive, fanatical, self-righteous

stance towards other people that they adopt now. Others would

"sin" openly.

 

You could argue that this would be more fair, as people's behavior would reveal

who they truly are on the inside. However, others would argue that this wouldn't

be fair at all, since they would be judged on the basis of rules that they weren't

made aware of. And there are others who would argue that this "judging" business

would be implicitly unfair, as this god would have no basis for judging humanity

(i.e., "Who made you judge, god?"). If you respond to this by assuming that

this god created humanity, thus giving him this right, they would respond by saying

that this god created humanity to be imperfect, so therefore he ought to be

judging himself, not his creation. So....it's all a matter of perspective....

 

BTW, DanInPA, thanks for the link to Freethought Radio!