Poll - If Biblegod was shown to exist, Would you worship or Burn Forever?

[EV]

Biblegod, although depicted as a dick, is after all a perfect being. Which means that by definition he is worthy of worship. Now those who know me will know that I am a great lover of philosophy, and the theory of knowledge. If I can know without a shadow of a doubt that God exists, I will worship Him. However, seeing as that is impossible in this life and reality, then I will not as he has not shown himself to exist.

I push the Red button, because the condition involved knowing for certain that God exists. If he exists, as in this hypothetical situation, he must be worthy of worship due to his perfection, and there must be a reason the world is how it is (i.e. a solution to the problem of Evil)

It is just so unlikely that he does exist, that there is no way that he does. But if it was proved he existed, I'd trust Him to do the right thing for me, and push Red.

[Kimberly]

You guys are so awful! You got my thread moved to the bottomless pit! How hard is it to not debate each other in one[1] thread??? This will ruin my forum reputation forever[2]!

 

I swear asking adults to follow directions is worse than raising two young children! Any ways, yall are free to debate now. Just thought I should make it official and let yall know how thoroughly disappointed I was in your inability to not argue for one thread!

/Sarcasm
<3

1.	There's only like 5 others on this topic that you all were free to debate in!
2.	Being the creator of a bottomless pit thread!

[HAL]

You got my thread moved to the bottomless pit!

Welcome to my world.

I swear asking adults to follow directions is worse than raising two young children!

^^^ See above.

[Kimberly]

Welcome to my world.

I swear asking adults to follow directions is worse than raising two young children!

^^^ See above.

It's not your world any more, you retired! 

[Samothec]

<whining snipped> What baggage did I say it had in the hypothetical? <more whining snipped>
That's not what the hypothetical says. ...

This is the stupidest post you have ever written.

You adamantly refused to detail anything other than "biblegod" was proven to exist. Biblegod has baggage, period, fact. The fact that you refused to present anything other than the massively baggage laden biblegod means you have to accept people's response to that baggage whether you wanted that or not.

I think we are now at the heart of why you can't understand why people who in real life have chosen the blue button continue to choose it in your hypothetical: you don't actually realize what you really presented in your own hypothetical. You think it says one thing when almost everyone else reads it another way. And in spite of several requests for you to clarify that original proposal, you refused. So you have no valid grounds to complain if we read it in a way you don't like and consider the existing baggage. Thus the editorial comments above about whining and stupidity.

Please, get a clue.