If that was the case hypothetically I would still not respect nor worship him because, I don't agree with most of his rules or his cheap fear and intimidation tactics and if he sends me to hell for it then he's a jerk.

thats one of the things that has always irked me about the christian god. he makes it a point to let us know that we were made to be imperfect and not the brightest. and then he gives u 80 years or so on earth to figure out whether he exists or not. if we get it right we get to go to heaven and if we get it wrong we get eternal damnation. 80 years to make a decision that will affect the rest of eternity doesnt seem like much time imo.

no it's not enough time at all compare to eternity, thats why i try to live for the moment

Come on guys, the OP is only three sentences, just read them all. Hardball is making fun of you

First I like my odds.

Second I look at you folks as having an all powerful Bossman you can't even escape with death. If true, who cares. I pwned anyway, it's not like I'm going follow the rules in heaven. So might as well enjoy my few years of relative freedom (give or take a hurricane here or there). I won't have that chance later.

No, I think that some people have unusual hobbies. But my opinions towards religions (the above was general) is 1000% better now than when I was young. I will never believe, but with the right bunch of you guys, I feel I am with a higher quality of people. I used to hang out with these folk, and still read the Catholic Worker.

You like your odds at what? And who are 'you folks' and 'you guys'? And what does this have to do with the question in the OP?

I think Christianity turning out to be true has as much of a chance as you bumping into Shrek tomorrow.

Oh, and it is not atheists who missed anything. Most of us actually examined the evidence instead of believing in some mythology copied from pagan religions.

OP has nothing to do with how likely you think it is that Christianity is true. This post has nothing to do with OP. Read it again.

It has everything to do with it. If your main premise is false, then anything dereived therefrom must also be false. Your main premise is "if christianity turned out to be true ..."

Again, I don't have to worry about being surprised upon my death as christianity is illogical and only a compilation of pagan myth.

Its a hypothetical question.

I think im going to have to revise my assumption that its only theist who dont like hypotheticals.

It is not a premise, it is a hypothetical. Obviously the question is invalid if the hypothetical is false, but the whole point of a hypothetical is assuming it is true for the sake of asking a question. "If X is true then which explanation is more likely: A or B?" Come on, it is only three sentences, it cannot be that confusing.

After my disappointment at seeing the continued failure of people unable to finish reading all three sentences of the OP before posting a response ITT, I unfortunately have to do the same.

never seen anyone put forth so much effort to have every reply directly answer the OP!

lol, frustrating isn't it.

I do not mind offshoots and derails, but when people are directly responding to my OP and getting confused by something so simple it makes me wonder if any of these atheists actually have examined the claims of theism objectively and understand the rebuttals or if they are just regurgitating standard responses they have read without considering whether or not they make sense.

I just wanted to quote this because of how awesome it is.

Dude, come on. Romans specifies that 'none shall have an excuse' for not believing when it's time to go deady-bye-byes. The whole Abrahamic format virtually hinges on god-gifted libertarian free will. Given that the stipulation is that those claims turn out to be true, how can you still be saying you missed nothing?

LURK MOAR

If you're not interested in answering a hypothetical, why are you in the thread? I mean, you do understand what the construction "What if" denotes, right?

Sorry. What I was trying to say was that when I was young I had a negative opinion of religion, but as I grew as a person that changed 180 degrees. I like people of faith now! Just not my cup of tea. In my Captain Stormfield Visit to Heaven I'm going to both...

Heaven and Hell can be organized. We know that from their long history of war. Fellow workers are being subjected to hellish tortures in God's Guantanamo, others were left behind, and the blacklisting at the Pearly Gate continues. An Injury to one is an injury to all. Solidarity is mightier than any god.

No Gods! No Masters!

You really want to know how much I examined the claims. I attended Bible college. I was a junior minister in a large church. I ran bible classes. Due to my heavy studying of biblical history, I found an inconsistency and followed it to is natural end on a research that took several months to complete.

All I really wish is that theists would be willing to fully examine the evidence of the veracity of the biblical documents themselves. If your beleifs are so fragile that you are unwilling to put them to such a test, then why are they your beliefs?

OMFG

Deorum is not a theist.

this whole thread just makes me sad . where did all of these people come from? and why do they have such awful reading comprehension?

For OP, do you consider this my answer responsive? I'm just curious, and you did ask me to clarify. I promise I will not argue, and such. I am just curious if I addressed your question, or if I missed it entirely.

And for all you people who don't understand imagine X then Y, and start arguing about X -- shame on you!

I did not mean to imply that I had concluded that anyone specific was guilty of this. But understanding why a rebuttal to a claim makes sense involves understanding why it addresses the question. Using the same rebuttal for a similar sounding but unrelated question may very well be a result of not understanding why the rebuttal addresses the question. That said, you may not be guilty of this. It could have been caused by other means. Perhaps you just glossed over the final sentence in the OP, for instance.

I appreciate the response, but do not think this really addresses the question, either. Reworded, the question is as follows. If you found out that Christianity were true when you died, which of the following would you consider to be more likely:

A) The Christians who were right saw something you did not, or

B) The Christians who were right got lucky believing something they had no reason to believe

This does not have to even be the most likely explanation in your mind, just which of these is more likely than the other. Though it is technically a binary question, I am okay if you want to say 'some of both' or 'neither' to stimulate conversation in another direction (I think as a binary question it is a more interesting question, but I understand not everyone will).

OK, I was missing the question.