New thought about Pascal's Wager

[Dmitri Martila]

How is the god of the Bible self-evident?

He lefts us here no excuse to go to hell. That is simple.

 

[Dmitri Martila]

I, myself, do not believe in the Many Worlds theory.

Now you know, what MWI is wrong, because of me. You can lie around, what you have no such knowledge, just a blind faith. Then you get used to that, and will not study a false religion, in which you might be in.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Good one, brother. Same is with Spaghetti Monster or with the
Russell's teapot. The atheists have invented these objects to kill the True God. To kill God is needed another god. Therefore, the atheists are pagans. Proof ends.

Your logic is so poor it's painful. Are you seriously a physicist?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

Russell's teapot isn't a god. It's a teapot. Just a teapot.

And he's not asking for belief, even pretend belief. Here is one quote:

I ought to call myself an agnostic; but, for all practical purposes, I am an atheist. I do not think the existence of the Christian God any more probable than the existence of the Gods of Olympus or Valhalla. To take another illustration: nobody can prove that there is not between the Earth and Mars a china teapot revolving in an elliptical orbit, but nobody thinks this sufficiently likely to be taken into account in practice. I think the Christian God just as unlikely.
-- Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell isn't "killing" your God with another god. He's not even disproving God with this disclosure. He's only explaining in what sense he's an atheist.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Dmitri Martila]

Bertrand Russell isn't "killing" your God with another god. He's not even disproving God with this disclosure. He's only explaining in what sense he's an atheist.

I bet many theists are in hell, killed by Russell's heavy teapot. The madness is contagious. Many dead theists have not become the Eastern Orthodox because of teapot. So, they are killed.
Therefore: Holy Spirit was killed in them. Recall: "God is dead" (the Friedrich N., starter of Nihilism).

 

[bhsmte]

Define the Truth then. I am happy with my mind, and I am constantly using it. So why my mind is wrong? Just because you have closed an eye on some thing in your false religion? I am not crazy - thus, my mind is true to God.

Are people who disagree with you, mindless fools?

 

[Dmitri Martila]

Are people who disagree with you, mindless fools?

So it is now wise to reject God and go to hell? No.

 

[bhsmte]

So it is now wise to reject God and go to hell? No.

If you can not demonstrate that this God and this hell exists, this rings hollow.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Now you know, what MWI is wrong, because of me. You can lie around, what you have no such knowledge, just a blind faith. Then you get used to that, and will not study a false religion, in which you might be in.

Brother Dmitri,

I can see that you are a scientifically educated fellow, but.....please do not be disrespectful to other Christians by assuming that they are: 1) Lost because they are not Eastern Orthodox, or 2) Ignorant because they do not have a degree in Physics.

I count you as a Christian brother. Why can you not respect me as a Christian brother?

Respectfully,
2PhiloVoid

 

[KCfromNC]

Pascal already takes into account the fact that other religions exist...........

Whether we agree with his assessments of those other religions can be questioned, however.

Addendum: Here is an interesting article I found which treats the subject of what and how Pascal 'addressed' the issue of other World Religions. (Look at pages 4 and on, specifically....)

http://www.ibri.org/Tracts/pwager.pdf

I can't tell if the link you posted is supposed to be a parody or not.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I can't tell if the link you posted is supposed to be a parody or not.

Hey KC,

As far as I can tell, the link I posted is not a parody. Maybe it isn't as clear an example as I'd like for it to have been, particularly since it apparently tries to pigeon-hole the whole argument in the favor of 'evangelical Christianity.'

HOWEVER, at bottom level, the article in the link still brings up the fact that Pascal was already taking into account the idea that other world religions, when scrutinized from his analytical vantage point, are deficient. In sum, the Wager is given by Pascal as an exercise which assumes that the other world religions have already been analytically 'set aside.'

Sure, the link I gave probably isn't as 'general' as I'd like, being that I simply want to support Christian belief, not evangelicalism specifically.

 

[KCfromNC]

HOWEVER, at bottom level, the article in the link still brings up the fact that Pascal was already taking into account the idea that other world religions, when scrutinized from his analytical vantage point, are deficient.

In the sense that they aren't Christian enough, in the opinion of a Christian.

 

[ecco]

I bet many theists are in hell, killed by Russell's heavy teapot. The madness is contagious. Many dead theists have not become the Eastern Orthodox because of teapot. So, they are killed.
Therefore: Holy Spirit was killed in them. Recall: "God is dead" (the Friedrich N., starter of Nihilism).

Ah Ha. Now we know that only Christians of the Eastern Orthodox sect go to heaven.

How very, very arrogant.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

In the sense that they aren't Christian enough, in the opinion of a Christian.

Just to clarify what Pascal meant, he was saying that Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Paganism, etc., were deficient, and that only Christianity was sufficient. (see article by Kreeft, below):

http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2008/pkreeft_pascaltoday_feb08.asp

 

[bhsmte]

Ah Ha. Now we know that only Christians of the Eastern Orthodox sect go to heaven.

How very, very arrogant.

Which would mean, the vast majority of the world's population, is doomed according to this guy.

 

[ecco]

Which would mean, the vast majority of the world's population, is doomed according to this guy.

Right. We atheist will have e a lot of company in hell. Of course that is also the case if the Sunnis are right. Of course that is also the case if Shaivism is right. Of course that is also the case ... ad nauseam.

 

[Dmitri Martila]

Which would mean, the vast majority of the world's population, is doomed according to this guy.

Wrong modern Majority is false argument: The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit were the only ones before the Universe came. And they were happy.

 

[bhsmte]

Wrong modern Majority is false argument: The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit were the only ones before the Universe came. And they were happy.

Your belief is then, others who disagree with your religious views, are not doomed to hell?

 

[ananda]

Define the Truth then. I am happy with my mind, and I am constantly using it. So why my mind is wrong? Just because you have closed an eye on some thing in your false religion? I am not crazy - thus, my mind is true to God.

I can use the same argument: "I am happy with my mind, and I am constantly using it. So why my mind is wrong? Just because you have closed an eye on some thing in your false religion? I am not crazy - thus, my mind is true to Buddha."

 

[ananda]

The nature of most world religions is that they are mostly grounded in allegedly external (outside-of-one's self) absolutes (e.g. deity supposedly did this in the external world, supposedly transmitted that holy text in the external world, supposedly anointed these other people in the external world, etc.) As a consequence, external "proof"-based religions require individuals to possess blind faith (lack of personal first-hand self-knowledge).

If there is a true deity, I don't believe that it worked that way. All such external "absolutes" are subject to re-interpretation by every group or individual man or woman, and elevates some men or women over others. Why are some anointed to experience god firsthand, but others must only believe that only the "anointed" heard and experienced god? Why must I believe in this god who cannot reveal itself to me directly? Why must I conform to this "anointed group's" interpretations of their god's non-personally-verified external absolutes?

Instead, if there is a true deity/All/Source/etc., I believe that it's "religion" is grounded in internal absolutes personally verifiable and accessible by each and every earnestly seeking individual. For example, universal laws (e.g. cause and effect, etc.). The innate nature of such a religion compels individuals to come to personal first-hand self-knowledge (by personally exploring and understanding these universal laws), to adhere (to those laws), and become.

 

[Black Dog]

Ah Ha. Now we know that only Christians of the Eastern Orthodox sect go to heaven.

How very, very arrogant.

To be fair, I've never heard one Christian claim that everybody get's to go to heaven. They all exclude someone, what would be the point of joining the club otherwise.