Saying that you didn't admit to using fallacious reasoning because you never said the exact words "I admit that I am using fallacious reasoning" is very fallacious reasoning indeed.
Sorry to burst your bubble and all, but we atheists are not squirming at all. We tend to think it's rather funny, to be honest.No, I admitted that it is not a logical argument for the existence of God. This is a straw man that atheists make and I will not fall for it. If you are about to be hit by a car and I yell out "Watch out!" I would not give you logical arguments why you should watch out. It is just pointing out the ramifications of my being right and you being wrong. I am just pointing out what it means if I am right. You can take it or reject it. This was not intended as evidence that God exists.
However, your reaction should give everyone pause that maybe God does exist. If you do not deep down in your heart believe that maybe there is a God then you would not demand me to prove it. If you said "Believe in Islam or you will go to hell" I would just smile and walk away. If you should say "Believe in Santa Claus or you will go to hell" I would then laugh. But in no way would I demand evidence for such ridiculous warnings. They are ridiculous because I am comfortable with the fact that Islam is a false religion and there is no Santa Clause. But your demand for evidence that IF Christianity is true that you would go to hell betrays there fact that this really scares you.
So as long as it makes you atheists squirm we will keep using it. Its fun to watch you squirm.
Anyway, I would call it Jesus' Wager, not Pascal's Wager. This is what Jesus said:
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
Matthew 25:41-46
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them.
John 3:36
There are many more. Jesus actually spoke more on hell than on heaven. He had warned mankind over 1,500 years before Pascal was born. So as long as there are followers of Jesus on this earth, you will hear these warnings. You can stomp your feet and cry but we will continue to warn you. You can even imprison us and kill us, like the atheist regimes in the twentieth century - such as Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Red China, Khmere Rouge, and Northern Korea. But we will still warn you - not because we love to watch you to squirm (that was a joke) but because we love you and we do not want you to end up there.
There is free will in heaven but spiritual growth changes your will over time and by the time you get to heaven your will is completely changed so that you will never choose evil.
Not sure exactly what you are asking or saying. Evil starts out as possibly a thought maybe brought about by a temptation then you choose whether to act on that thought or temptation.
But that doesn't follow. When does this spiritual growth take place? In the lifetime of a person who is an ardent Christian but still confesses that they struggle with tempation? In the single instant when a person freely turns themself over to Christ and becomes a Christian and then dies a moment later? How many people on this Earth do you think are so spiritually developed that they "would never choose evil"? Anyone? Nobody? Only Jesus?
Evil is not a substance, it's a property of actions, that's where you're already going down a needless rabbit hole of trying to make evil something opposed to good in a material or otherwise more concrete fashion, ala Zoroastrianism or such, moral dualism, practically.
Is this not another assertion without supporting evidence? I thought that assertions without evidence are not allowed on a debating forum!
Sorry. You did it first. That means I am quite right to dismiss what you are saying.
Wrong again.
While it is funny in some situations, I'm not here for laughs. They're just an unintended side benefit.
Sorry, I'm not interested in rereading the thread. Just in the bit I happened to see in which you used irrational arguments and then dug yourself into them.
Yeah. You thought that two wrongs made a right. You were wrong.
No, that wasn't your Pascal's Wager. It was when you said:
Why should I? It's not my job to do your debating for you. Why didn't you?
This be dismissed. That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
The length of time varies for the person. Some people it may take only 13 years another 100 years. And yes often there are very interesting and amazing events along the way. It is not magic, it is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit working with your will that changes your will to only choose good.
There are CAPABLE of doing it, but because spiritually they are new creations, they wont.
I didn't say it was a substance. That would be absurd. I didn't say it was prescriptive either. I also did not say that it is purely an outward influence on us, though there can be temptations from the outside, it primarily has to do with who you are and the status of your human nature.
I am not sure if this post was directed at me, it didn't have my name on it. I never said we are innately evil. We do innately hate and are in rebellion against the King and Judge of the Universe.
In that case, you're saying that people are capable of spiritual development after death. So in that case, we must assume it is possible for people to go to hell from heaven - if they are capable of having the spiritual epiphany there. That makes sense, which is perhaps why it is completely contradictory to Christian teachings.
Sounds like magic
A miraculous transformation which God could, presumably, work upon any human at any time. If they're capable of doing it, then quite possibly they will.
Sorry, that line only works when there actually was no evidence.
You may not be aware of this, but I live in China. I don't know where you live, but I'd guess that we live some time zones apart. I read your post, went to bed, and wake up to find you declaring victory. Goodness me.
I'm sorry you think that. You're quite mistaken, of course. I haven't yet had a chance to answer your post about Pascal's Wager, but will do so in good time. If you don't wish to play, then of course that is up to you.
