Everyone goes to hell, right?

[workmx]

It is my believe that the true God is the one described in the Bible. If you want to know why you can read the Bible.

I have read the bible.

Twice.

And I am still not convinced that the christian god is real.

Correct. But how do you explain that a patient can see the shape of the instrument that was operating on her head during coma? I am simply using this example to show that is it very possible that there are after life.

I don't have to.

I never claimed that there is life after death.

That is the claim of religions.

And, as I said: that is a near death experience not an after detah expereince.

 

[workmx]

And how do you know your brain isn't just fooling you?

I am still waiting for someone to give evidence that free will exists.

You all liek to throw it around as if it ddoes exist.

Just just saying something does not make it so.

 

[workmx]

Originally Posted by dcalling

1. Even if it is not real, the concept of heaven/hell only help make the human world better, so there is no harm. However if there is really a heaven and you don't want to go, you lose much more (similar to what Pascal said).

​

Nope. Pascal ruled out the reasonableness of other faiths (calling out Islam specifically) in his masterpiece, the Pensees, of which his famous wager was only one small part. Atheists typically misrepresent his wager as simply "it's better to blindly believe in the Christian god and be wrong than not to believe in the Christian God and be wrong", but that was not his total argument.

It is more correct to represent Pascal's wager as thus:

"Given that it is equally as reasonable to believe in the Christian god (as opposed to other faiths he ruled out for various reasons) or not, it is better to believe in the Christian god and be wrong than not to believe in the Christian god and be wrong."

Again you are talking for atheists.

Give it up.

I don't care about your opinion.

If Pascal proved that the christian god exists, then the wager is reasonable.

As there is no evidence that the christian god exists, it is meaningless.

 

[dcalling]

Again you are talking for atheists.

Give it up.

I don't care about your opinion.

If Pascal proved that the christian god exists, then the wager is reasonable.

As there is no evidence that the christian god exists, it is meaningless.

If you can't prove that God didn't exist, shouldn't you keep the option open?

 

[dcalling]

I have read the bible.
Twice.
And I am still not convinced that the christian god is real.

That is between you and God.

I don't have to.

I never claimed that there is life after death.
That is the claim of religions.

And, as I said: that is a near death experience not an after detah expereince.

OK let's take one step back. Would you agree that a patient can see the shape of the instrument that was operating on her head during coma does open the possibility of supernatural?

 

[Joshua260]

Again you are talking for atheists.

Nope. Only repeating what they have said to me.

I don't care about your opinion.

I only spoke facts in my last post.

If Pascal proved that the christian god exists, then the wager is reasonable.

I did not say that Pascal proved that God existed. You apparently did not understand what I explained. You criticized me for speaking for atheists, which I did not, but only repeated what they have told me. Maybe you should study the Pensees before speaking for Pascal.

As there is no evidence that the christian god exists, it is meaningless.

With all due respect, you obviously don't understand Pascal's argument.

 

[workmx]

If you can't prove that God didn't exist, shouldn't you keep the option open?

No.

That is not my problem.

The burden of proof is on you.

 

[dcalling]

No.

That is not my problem.

the burden of proof is on you.

If you can't prove that there is no God, then "Given that it is equally as reasonable to believe in the Christian god (as opposed to other faiths he ruled out for various reasons) or not, it is better to believe in the Christian god and be wrong than not to believe in the Christian god and be wrong." will be also apply to you.

You are rational right?

 

[workmx]

That is between you and God.

A god that you cannot provide evidence for.

I am not too concerned.

OK let's take one step back. Would you agree that a patient can see the shape of the instrument that was operating on her head during coma does open the possibility of supernatural?

No.

Not without a double-blinded randomised control trial.

Even then, it would be possible evidence of natural, but previously unknown phenomena.

To jump to a supernatural cause is irrational.

The basic problem is: it is fundementally pointless (and irrational) to explain a unknown phenomena by asserting that an untestable thing caused it.

 

[workmx]

If you can't prove that there is no God, then "Given that it is equally as reasonable to believe in the Christian god (as opposed to other faiths he ruled out for various reasons) or not, it is better to believe in the Christian god and be wrong than not to believe in the Christian god and be wrong." will be also apply to you.

You are rational right?

Yes, I am.

Pascal's wager, as I said, only works if we have evidence that the christain god exists.

Here is how this works:

If you can't prove that there is no Allah, then "Given that it is equally as reasonable to believe in Allah (as opposed to the christian god I arbitarily rule out for various reasons) or not, it is better to believe in Allah and be wrong than not to believe in Allah and be wrong."

 

[workmx]

Alternatively: given that in Shinto, Amaterasu is the source of all gods, the only rational and reasonable course of action is to believe in and worship her.

Given that Allah, Yahweh, Jesus and all gods ever worshipped by humans, are simply sub-sets of Amaterasu, she is the only reliable version of Pascal's wager.

 

[workmx]

The other option is that god loves/saves atheists and agnostics.

I like that version of Pascal's wager.

 

[dcalling]

Not without a double-blinded randomised control trial.

Even then, it would be possible evidence of natural, but previously unknown phenomena.

To jump to a supernatural cause is irrational.

The basic problem is: it is fundementally pointless (and irrational) to explain a unknown phenomena by asserting that an untestable thing caused it.

I do respect your scientific methodology. There are many many NDEs that has similar results, it will be great if someone can start to study them in a controlled manner.

 

[workmx]

Nope. Only repeating what they have said to me.

I prefer people to present their own positions.

That way accuracy is more likely.

Second-hand accounts are not trustwoorthy.

I only spoke facts in my last post.

I think we have different defintions of "fact"

Could you tell me your definition?

Mine is justified true belief.

I did not say that Pascal proved that God existed. You apparently did not understand what I explained. You criticized me for speaking for atheists, which I did not, but only repeated what they have told me. Maybe you should study the Pensees before speaking for Pascal.

I have. And as I said, his wager only works if we can prove that the christian god exists.

We now know that millions of gods have been worshipped.

So, we are left with the problem of which one to include in the wager.

The best/quickest way to do this is to provide that one actually exists.

Otherwise, in the current context, the wager is menaingless.

With all due respect, you obviously don't understand Pascal's argument.

With all due respoect, you don't undestand it either.

It is a 2x2 decision matrix.

We now need a millions x two matrix.

 

[dcalling]

Yes, I am.

Pascal's wager, as I said, only works if we have evidence that the christain god exists.

Here is how this works:

If you can't prove that there is no Allah, then "Given that it is equally as reasonable to believe in Allah (as opposed to the christian god I arbitarily rule out for various reasons) or not, it is better to believe in Allah and be wrong than not to believe in Allah and be wrong."

I will have to agree with you that this is a valid variation of Pascal's wager. So your job will be to take on the wager and see which religion is true.

 

[dcalling]

Alternatively: given that in Shinto, Ameterasu is the source of all gods, the only rational and reasonable course of action is to believe in and worship her.

Given that Allah, Yahweh, Jesus and all gods ever worshipped by humans, are simply sub-sets of Ameterasu, she is the only reliable version of Pascal's wager.

I think you know you are trying to tweak Pascal's wager and adding words to it. Your previous one is at least within limits, this one is without evidence as you said.

 

[dcalling]

The other option is that god loves/saves atheists and agnostics.

I like that version of Pascal's wager.

That is true, God does love atheists and agnostics. But they are saved or not are depend on them.

 

[workmx]

I do respect your scientific methodology. There are many many NDEs that has similar results, it will be great if someone can start to study them in a controlled manner.

I agree.

No-one has come back from death.

But it would tell us about near death (the time between the ceasation of cardio-vascular and respiratory function and brain death). And that would be awesome.

I do love to wonder what happens in that time.

But it is just speculation (so, I do not take it seriously).

 

[catholichomeschooler]

Jesus is very clear that he supports the 613 commandments from the Old Testament:



Given this is it clear that everyone who does not uphold every one of the 613 commandments only gets "heaven lite".

And if we do not uphold the 613 commandments and are less righteous than scribes and Pharisees, will go to hell.

This means that the less righteous who have not killed all the descendents of Amalek (Deut. 25:19) go to hell.

The less righteous who have at some stage been rebellious (Deut. 21:18) go to hell.

Same for anyone who failed to return a lost object (Deut. 22).

Or a man who has shaved his beard (Lev. 19:27) or head (Lev. 19:27).

Or failed to say the "Shema Yisrael" prayer twice daily (Deut. 6:7).

So, I am assuming that everyone goes to hell.

Is that correct?

Matt 19:26
Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

 

[workmx]

I will have to agree with you that this is a valid variation of Pascal's wager. So your job will be to take on the wager and see which religion is true.

Well, that may take some time.

I have vistied many places of worship and talked to many faith leaders, including the following traditions:

• Shinto
• Buddhism (Zen and Pure Land variants)
• Islam
• Rusian Orthodox
• Catholic
• Anglican
• Evangelical Christian
• Latin mass Catholic

So, I am working my way through them.

The millions by two decision matrix thing still concerns me.

And add the 'god only saves athesits and agnostics" option into the mix and I think the wager has lost all valifdity.