The above post shows exactly why the OP needs to be very specific as to which sect’s version on “God” is being referred to.
Well, the OT does refer to other gods, but current orthodox Jews don’t believe that they are real gods. So, if they’re right, and you aren’t a Jew, you just have to follow some basic rules like not murdering and you can indulge in as much lobster as you want.
OTOH, if Judeans from 700 BC or so were right, there are many gods to choose from, YHWH being only theirs, and you can probably find one more or less to your liking. Some will even provide sacred prostitutes.
In both cases, you’re better of than if fundamentalist christians are right.
(If you unfortunately happen to be Jewish, too bad for you, I guess. But Jews are always screwed up, anyway, so you should already be accustomed to it)
well you’re still a non-believer because a believer generally means someone who believes in things they can never know
To quote the OP:
Therefore for the purposes of this thread, any “nice” interpretation of God doesn’t count. It’s assholes all the way down.
Which given the rampant homophobia among fundamentalists manages to amuse me mightily.
Yeah, I’m easily amused. 
Fitting:
You realize, of course, that “Submission” is a common English translation of “Islam”, right? On that very count, I think I would have to tell god what orifice “it” belongs in.
As an atheist, I find most of the responses in this thread disappointing. If I had good reasons to believe God exists, I would believe. It’s the absence of such which drives my present world view, not some deep-seated need to believe God doesn’t exist. And, you know, God could exist without being an asshole. Just saying.
Now we hunt Him down and kill Him.
Fair enough, and probably the best answer.
Some of us are just stubborn. We’d say, “But he had no business to exist.” And “If he existed, he ought to have said so earlier.” It’s a pride thing. It would take some of us a damn long time to come to terms with so big a change in our world. Think of those poor kids who learn they were switched at the hospital when babies: “I’m not my mother’s child? My father is a total stranger? Huh?” Now add a few orders of magnitude.
Anyway, it would give me some nasty pleasure to know that all the priests, ministers, imams, rabbis, and whatnot have also been wrong all this time…
Assuming irrefutable proof and the option is an eternity of torment how fucking stupid would you have to be to not bow down?
I’d simply rock off to the nearest catholic church, do confession so all my past sins were gone and all good.
Rock on back every month or so to confess again, just to keep ahead of the curve.
No massive change of lifestyle really, as long as I don’t genuinely have to feel it.
Not very easily. And at any rate, in this scenario, he is; so the question is moot.
First, what makes you assume this is a Catholic god? Second, what makes you assume you can fool a god? And third, what makes you think he won’t just throw everyone into Hell for the fun of it?
This is the nightmare scenario; the universe is controlled by an all powerful, all seeing evil god, and he’s actually paying attention to us.
Agnostic here. I would submit – I’m not stupid.
Given that such a god can read minds, I have no choice in the matter unless I can be convinced of this god’s worthiness. The Bible claims that this entity knows what’s in your heart so outward submission probably won’t work.
That seems like a wasted effort, given the subject line you quoted: “You just found out God existed …” – past tense. Why bother to hunt down and kill something that no longer exists?
Hell (oops) yeah I’ll submit. I pretty much submit to the capricious whims of my boss five days a week and he isn’t all that powerful. He is kind of an ass though. If this God of yours can show me tangible evidence that he can fuck me over if I do him wrong then I’ll bow down and kiss his ass. I got my knee pads from my last evaluation right here in my desk. God just needs to be clear what he wants and not send a bunch of human representatives with bad haircuts and obvious agendas to explain the plan.
Um… The use of the past tense does not exclude the present existence of a subject. England existed in A.D. 1550. It’s a true statement, and doesn’t mean that England doesn’t exist now.
Seems awfully risky to assume that the Catholics have been the ones who’ve had it right all along.
Without a modifier, “existed” implies “no longer exists”. It was not “has existed” or “existed, and still does”, it was an unmodified past tense, which, in English, is typically exclusive of present/future.
Hm… Edited 'cause I was wrong…
I think the subjunctive implied in the language of the OP serves as a sufficient modifier.
I’d probably say, “Well, you certainly had me fooled, mate. I could have sworn there was nothing in it.”