Poll: To make a God.

[BiscuitTrouser]

There's a shade of this that isn't hypothetical at all; there's already one God-man. His name is Jesus the Christ.

And as far as the world being freed from disease, crime, suffering, and death - it already has had freedom proclaimed to it. That liberation is something that has already begun, but is not yet finished. It began with His death on the cross, which paid the price of all of our crimes, and was revealed when He walked out of the tomb in which they laid Him three days later, never to die again.

That all takes a long time. And for all we know some of these issues will never be fixed. Can we even cure AIDS? This is a short term fix that could be forever. This would have an odd effect on religion though. Not really wanting to delve into all that. I mean a god that is more personal. That we can talk to, and understand face to another human face. That will come down to our level and speak EVERY DAY and not through a burning bush. And wont go and die 2000 years ago leaving us all a bit confused with a book thats been translated far too many times for me to know if its anything like the original. Would be nicer in my view. Also would be nice to be given first hand modern directions.

 

[Ledan]

How about this:
give godhood to someone i know will give it to me. Like my siblings, or my girlfriend. Or one of my close friends.

 

[zigity12]

There's a shade of this that isn't hypothetical at all; there's already one God-man. His name is Jesus the Christ.

And as far as the world being freed from disease, crime, suffering, and death - it already has had freedom proclaimed to it. That liberation is something that has already begun, but is not yet finished. It began with His death on the cross, which paid the price of all of our crimes, and was revealed when He walked out of the tomb in which they laid Him three days later, never to die again.

That all takes a long time. And for all we know some of these issues will never be fixed. Can we even cure AIDS? This is a short term fix that could be forever. This would have an odd effect on religion though. Not really wanting to delve into all that. I mean a god that is more personal. That we can talk to, and understand face to another human face. That will come down to our level and speak EVERY DAY and not through a burning bush. And wont go and die 2000 years ago leaving us all a bit confused with a book thats been translated far too many times for me to know if its anything like the original. Would be nicer in my view. Also would be nice to be given first hand modern directions.

Just what exactly do you think Jesus Christ is? That describes Him perfectly.

As far as your comment on the Bible - I'd urge you to 1: read it for yourself, and 2: do some research on whether or not what you believe about it is true. I'll give you a spoiler: the Bible is the most trustworthy document that exist from antiquity. More copies and fragments of it exist from antiquity then every single work by the fathers of philosophy (Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, etc) COMBINED. If your vocabulary is particularly high - you could try a book by Bruce Metzger, any of them, or perhaps Dr. Jonathon Pennington.

 

[rutger5000]

I think I would think about it for a micro second (in my godhood that would seem enough to me) and then destroy any trace of humanity, just completly whipe it out leave nothing left. That or I only leave some testoments of our moral accomplisments (sadly for most I must also leave signs of oppresion and the like)

 

[xXAsherahXx]

That person would likely turn evil as a result of his own power. History shows that it would happen. Of course there are genuinely good people, but I'm fairly certain that this new "God" would become selfish.

 

[Jakub324]

Hell yeah! Yes, you might get corrupt, but who cares? Everything would work out in the end, and then the world might not be a shithole.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

There's a shade of this that isn't hypothetical at all; there's already one God-man. His name is Jesus the Christ.

And as far as the world being freed from disease, crime, suffering, and death - it already has had freedom proclaimed to it. That liberation is something that has already begun, but is not yet finished. It began with His death on the cross, which paid the price of all of our crimes, and was revealed when He walked out of the tomb in which they laid Him three days later, never to die again.

That all takes a long time. And for all we know some of these issues will never be fixed. Can we even cure AIDS? This is a short term fix that could be forever. This would have an odd effect on religion though. Not really wanting to delve into all that. I mean a god that is more personal. That we can talk to, and understand face to another human face. That will come down to our level and speak EVERY DAY and not through a burning bush. And wont go and die 2000 years ago leaving us all a bit confused with a book thats been translated far too many times for me to know if its anything like the original. Would be nicer in my view. Also would be nice to be given first hand modern directions.

Just what exactly do you think Jesus Christ is? That describes Him perfectly.

As far as your comment on the Bible - I'd urge you to 1: read it for yourself, and 2: do some research on whether or not what you believe about it is true. I'll give you a spoiler: the Bible is the most trustworthy document that exist from antiquity. More copies and fragments of it exist from antiquity then every single work by the fathers of philosophy (Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, etc) COMBINED. If your vocabulary is particularly high - you could try a book by Bruce Metzger, any of them, or perhaps Dr. Jonathon Pennington.

That was 2000 years ago. Hes dead now. And i dont plan on digging him up to talk to his skull. I mean a face i can go talk to today and will speak back on another living human being. Im not saying its UNtrustworthy, by all means its been FANTASTICALLY preserved for the time its been around. But thats relative to other documents. And even then SO many translations must have lost the meaning of more than a few sub stories considering the sheer size of an unabridged bible.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

But there have been good dictators, plenty of them. Many of the Kings and Queens of europe could be considered to be dictators plenty of them took care of their citizen. I think Napoleon might have been a dictator (not quiet sure) too. And he took proper care of his people too (granted only his people and not).
Before you say things like power corrupts look at people like Ghandi and Nelson Mandela. They were / are incredibly powerfull they could easily rally 500 milion people each. That's some great power there, much more as say Hitler who could barely control 50 milion. Honestly I think arguments like power corrupts are used for the weak who just couldn't handle the power and let the power handle them. I like to think there are still people on this earth who could stay pure and take the role of a God. Accepting the alternative is too depressing for me.

Yeah, it is about the weak being incapable of using powerful correctly. However, the strong willed are also likely to become corrupt and would be far worse for the world than the weak. It might not be pleasant, but even as an optimist, you can't trust one person alone to have all the power.

Monarchs were all cunts to their people. They'd appoint people to look after their land and people and so long as the people didn't revolt, there wasn't a war and they had money they were happy. The people who worked on the land couldn't move without their lord's permission to leave their land and would pay their people shit wages and generally not give a shit about their quality of life.

Tribes are the only society that is generally nice to each other. That's only because they each rely on one another to get specific jobs done well. When you have a country to run, there are thousands or millions of people doing the same job, as long as it gets done at that point the people don't matter.

As Winston Churchill said "democracy is the worst form of government, except all the other forms that have been tried."

 

[Circusfreak]

i would probably go nuts after a while if i became god. therefore i cant trust anyone else eighter with that power.

 

[Jackhorse]

Uh... Could I ask the God a favour? He'd kind of owe me considering I saw to his omnipotence and omniscience. If so then yes, if he's omnibenevolent he won't interfere too much in my personal life and I'd just like a little afterlife. Maybe something with a little justice, or jelly kittens, either is good really.

 

[zigity12]

That was 2000 years ago. Hes dead now. And i dont plan on digging him up to talk to his skull. I mean a face i can go talk to today and will speak back on another living human being. Im not saying its UNtrustworthy, by all means its been FANTASTICALLY preserved for the time its been around. But thats relative to other documents. And even then SO many translations must have lost the meaning of more than a few sub stories considering the sheer size of an unabridged bible.

You'd have an awfully hard time finding His bones - because they're currently covered by His skin. He is not dead, He is alive. And the Bible is His voice.

The preponderance of translations you see on bookshelves are, mostly, translated from one greek text. you have, I think, in your mind this picture:
greek text -> translation -> translation -> ad infinitum -> what we have today.

In actuality, the picture is:

Greek text -> translation
Greek Text -> translation
greek text -> latin -> translation
greek text -> translation


There are certainly some horrible translations out there, but there are also some very very faithful ones. The ESV, NASB, and HCSB just to name a few of the faithful ones.

 

[rutger5000]

First off, interesting scenario

For argument's sake, I'll agree that we should do it. As to who, would that really matter? Anyone, child or elder, saint or crook, no matter their personality or creed would be utterly changed just by having omniscience thrust upon them. (I'm assuming belief in causality from here on) They would know every event and every cause and effect from each and every action. The person would be infinity empathetic to every other living organism and would be in complete understanding of all physical and metaphysical phenomenon. If someone did know that, wouldn't you trust them to do the right thing? A single individual's suffering would be their own; now multiply that by the number of organisms in the given universe and that's a pretty heavy incentive to play nice.

In fact, would they really have any freedom to act as they chose? Wouldn't they know what they would do as soon as obtained omniscience? If nothing else, they could create an alternate universe and create another sandbox with which to exercise his or her will. (This is also assuming that, at the bestowal of their godhood, they weren't the original deity who created the universe in the first place, but this gets into perceptions of time that would really extend this question.)

Sorry for rambling, but, again, interesting question.

I think this is covered when the OP said but he/she would retain their personality and thoughts. They'll have the knowledge to understand anything, but wether or not they would become empathetic with it or not. Besides how people refelct on facts is different from person to person. For example
I consider myself to be evil (no joke), I would be corrupted the moment I obtain all the power.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

That was 2000 years ago. Hes dead now. And i dont plan on digging him up to talk to his skull. I mean a face i can go talk to today and will speak back on another living human being. Im not saying its UNtrustworthy, by all means its been FANTASTICALLY preserved for the time its been around. But thats relative to other documents. And even then SO many translations must have lost the meaning of more than a few sub stories considering the sheer size of an unabridged bible.

You'd have an awfully hard time finding His bones - because they're currently covered by His skin. He is not dead, He is alive. And the Bible is His voice.

Sweet where is he? Is he just hiding out somewhere? Everyone wants to hear stuff thats newer than the bible. The bible says that to wear two different materials of clothes and plant two different crops in one field is a sin. Id like to ask him some stuff. Why so quiet?

 

[souper soup guy]

I do not believe that if we had the ability to that we should make a god. The simple reason being it would remove the purpose of life for the rest of us.
Having an all powerful, all knowing god, regardless of the person, would lead to an inevitable loss of freedom and choice for the rest of us. A cruel man who became a god would inevitable set up an evil empire and control everything, from actions to thoughts, to probability. Obviously, people would be essential slaves to his system.
On the flip side, a good person who becomes a god would inevitably force their morals and ideas on everyone else. They might remove all the blights of the world, but without conflict, humanity would inevitable stagnate.
No matter who you pick, the only way that an active God may exist, eg Dr. Manhatten, is if they were apathetic and did not care about the world. Otherwise, none of us would have a choice, and what made humanity special in all the known universe would fade away.

 

[Azriel637]

Something given has no value, if you take away the suffering of the world you take away any reason for people to strive to be better and to overcome their darker impulses. You wouldn't have a bored god. You'd have a god constantly trying to correct the misdeeds of a populous whose actions are now without consequence. I think any sane being, no matter how good or moral, would eventually give up and abandon mankind entirely, or destroy us. Think of the people of the world today, there is hope and suffering. But if you eliminate suffering you haven't replaced it with more hope, you've just left a void. If we want to increase the hope we NEED the suffering to struggle against and overcome....In retrospect this turned out to be more about people then the question. But my answer stands at no. Not that the person chosen wouldn't be/do good, but that we as people don't need or want such help.

 

[HalfTangible]

Not sure if this belongs in religion and politics. Fairly sure it does not.

Pretty much your standard ethical conundrum here. Imagine by some means (technology, ritual, alien tech assistance ect... think Dr Manhattan) we could turn ONE human being into a god. A real God with all the perks of infinite power and knowledge. However they would retain their personality and thoughts. This would mean that disease would be instantly wiped out, hunger solves, disasters fixed instantly and prevented and the world would cease to suffer. However after this we would be left with a very human thinking very bored God who would, for all intents and purposes, have nothing left to do. Now remember this person is a god, they cannot be controlled or won over easily, they have infinite power with no boundaries on what they can do.

For some reason you are chosen to decide if this should be done, and if so, who on (don't need a specific name, just an idea, also cant be you - you are chosen as an impartial judge). Perhaps a way to select one person? Would it be worth risking the gift of absolute cosmic power for eternal peace and no more strife? Maybe the chosen person might end this. Perhaps they would make everyone immortal, or make poor short sighted decisions with their God hood. Maybe not. Is it worth it? Would you say yes to this happening?

Another question. Many say "why not me"? Good question.

Would you abuse the power? No? Then why do you assume someone else would. Are you the only non corrupt person in the world? Would you expect others to see yourself as you do?

My thoughts:

Those who would want it the least would use it the best, but to force it on someone would be wrong, and they would be bitter because of it, doing right but living a cursed and miserable life. Its a paradox.

I think that if a god is omniscient, as in 'he knows everything' that means that whoever you choose will become the same person after the process: a person who is everyone at the same time. It doesnt matter if you choose a thief or a genius in the end he or she will be the same person with the same knowledge and way of thinking, Imagine that a bad person is the left part of a half and a good person is the right half. Omniscience will mean that you are 'both halves' at the same time, or should I say 'every half that exists' at the same time!

I found this a very interesting view point. Does omniscience cause your personality to be swallowed in what has to be the largest extrapolation of logic, faith, facts, fiction and the way the universe is all at once to determine the true and right nature of everything. Would this sudden burst of knowledge make everyone the same? Give them objectiveness on a level that spans an entire world leaving no room for corruption?

While an interesting viewpoint your scenario requires the person retain their personality and thoughts. So it's irrelevant.

I say 'nonononononono A TRILLION TIMES NO' because absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

[Nemesis729]

If I couldn't choose myself then no, I don't trust anyone else with that kind of power

 

[Biosophilogical]

Why not pick your best friend and make a deal. He becomes omnipotent/omniscient, and gives you that same power, then you both use your omnipotence to fix a few things (not people, or societies, just some base conditions like the availability of resources, natural disasters, and other stuff like that[footnote]Being omniscient, you could create the most beneficial base conditions without the risk of screwing things up by being naively idealistic.[/footnote]. Then, both of you use your omnipotence to remove your omniscience and limit your own power. You know, make yourself an immortal human with unlimited power except put some ethical restraints on it, like "No altering other people without their permission", "Only use your powers against another sentient creature to stop them from killing/harming another sentient being", "Never remove any restrictions you have created or create conditions in which it is possible"

This way, you and your best friend have super-powers that can't be used for evil (with no way to undo the no evil rule) that you can give to someone else (with their permission), you don't have to deal with the responsibility of being an omniscient being, you've already fixed some systemic flaws and you can choose to live your life without everyone knowing what you are (and if after a few thousand years, humanity has evolved, you can just change your own body to mimic them, meaning the 'you don't evolve' aspect of immortality is nicely averted).

The only down-side is that you can't be sure that after your friend is omniscient, that s/he'll go through with the plan, so your friend has to be completely trustworthy first.

 

[Robert Ewing]

Yes, having a god would be good. I'm sure it'd sort out a lot of problems in the world. But as to deciding who becomes a god. I guess it will just have to be a lottery of some sort. Complete random. It would have to be put under extreme strain to get a fair result, that is unrigged.

But despite being a raging athiest, a god would be good. If it were possible. It would help change a great many things, help humanity in ways we can't even imagine. But this depends if the person bestowed with omnipotence isn't an asshole.

 

[dimensional]

Yes I would agree its a good idea in one way but it depends on how much power you give them if you mean a way to give someone completely unlimited power unfettered by laws logic reason and all physical and mental restraints basically being a god to gods then yes no problem gets my vote but if your power would be limited in anyway i.e pretty much any god in supposed existence (regardless of what some people particularly religious types say) then definitely no.
Basically if you had unlimited power you could make yourself/would be the perfect being and beyond the scope of our comprehension in any way (beyond good and evil etc) but if your power was limited then I believe you would be corrupted by it due to greed and fear i.e scared of losing it and still wanting more power.

On a side note I do believe that unlimited power is incomprehensible to the human mind like any infinite or the concept of nothingness we may picture it in our minds as colours or vague pictures or tastes, smells, sounds but never be able to truly understand it, of course that dosent mean we dont have concepts for these things.