That question has no more meaning than "What if God DOES exist".
Lets look at the language used: "What if God did not exist?".
This question assumes that God DOES exist.
Leveller is logically correct- this question has exactly the same meaning if you were to phrase it as, "What if God DOES exist".
This question assumes that God does not exist. Thus, they both have an equal meaning, and in fact cancel each other out because of it.
Logic is not just something to increase postcount, it is a legitimate field of study that is quite enjoyable to some of us.
Perhaps it could be more fairly phrased as "Has God ever existed?".
What if God never existed? What if the construct of God is a complete fabrication designed to encase the boundaries of human speculation. Because the
common argument goes, "we can't prove God exists because the entire point is that you need to have faith". What exact benefit do humans get from
faith? Does faith simply provide a cursory, heuristic explanation of that which we are unable to explain through our own empirical observations?
Are we so naive to think that we have a firm grip on all of the intricacies of the functioning of the universe? Why do we ascribe a humanlike quality
to the creation of the universe? Is the concept of God starting the entire universe merely a logical correlate of the belief that earth/humanity is
the center of the universe?
[Edited on 7-6-2003 by MKULTRA]