Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Christian Forums Welcome Center
Introduce Yourself
Hi - nice atheist here
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Occams Barber" data-source="post: 76837145" data-attributes="member: 313365"><p>Hi [USER=445057]@SavedZeroPointEnergy[/USER]</p><p></p><p>As you can see from [USER=628]@Michie[/USER]'s post above, the thread you've replied to hasn't been used since 2017. Looking at the posting record of the OP ( [USER=293692]@grahamsnumber[/USER] ) he hasn't posted anything in CF since Sept 2017.</p><p></p><p>Since you went to all the effort of putting together a long post I thought I'd reply.</p><p></p><p>As you've already pointed out, one good reason for not accepting Pascal's wager is the problem of 'which god?'. This is a legitimate argument. I have yet to hear a rational rebuttal.</p><p></p><p>The second issue is that of a 'belief'. Assuming I wanted to go with the Wager, how do I make myself believe in something I did not previously accept? Pascal's Wager implicitly assumes that acquiring a belief is simply a matter of will. If this were the case you would presumably have no difficulty convincing yourself of the existence of Thor or Anubis or any one of thousands of gods or other supernatural entities. Spend a little time reflecting on this and you will come to realise that belief is not simply a matter of wanting to believe. If you still think that Pascal's Wager is a reasonable bet try convincing yourself that fairies exist.</p><p></p><p>The third issue is a little more personal. From my point of view there is no evidence for a (G)god. This means that, for me, the risk associated with not accepting the Wager is negligible. On the other hand were I to accept the Wager and be wrong, I would be committing myself to following a set of rules that were not only incorrect and unnecessary but also (from my point of view) morally unjustified.</p><p></p><p>I'm not sure why you threw the zero point issue into a discussion about God.</p><p></p><p>OB</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Occams Barber, post: 76837145, member: 313365"] Hi [USER=445057]@SavedZeroPointEnergy[/USER] As you can see from [USER=628]@Michie[/USER]'s post above, the thread you've replied to hasn't been used since 2017. Looking at the posting record of the OP ( [USER=293692]@grahamsnumber[/USER] ) he hasn't posted anything in CF since Sept 2017. Since you went to all the effort of putting together a long post I thought I'd reply. As you've already pointed out, one good reason for not accepting Pascal's wager is the problem of 'which god?'. This is a legitimate argument. I have yet to hear a rational rebuttal. The second issue is that of a 'belief'. Assuming I wanted to go with the Wager, how do I make myself believe in something I did not previously accept? Pascal's Wager implicitly assumes that acquiring a belief is simply a matter of will. If this were the case you would presumably have no difficulty convincing yourself of the existence of Thor or Anubis or any one of thousands of gods or other supernatural entities. Spend a little time reflecting on this and you will come to realise that belief is not simply a matter of wanting to believe. If you still think that Pascal's Wager is a reasonable bet try convincing yourself that fairies exist. The third issue is a little more personal. From my point of view there is no evidence for a (G)god. This means that, for me, the risk associated with not accepting the Wager is negligible. On the other hand were I to accept the Wager and be wrong, I would be committing myself to following a set of rules that were not only incorrect and unnecessary but also (from my point of view) morally unjustified. I'm not sure why you threw the zero point issue into a discussion about God. OB [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Christian Forums Welcome Center
Introduce Yourself
Hi - nice atheist here
Top
Bottom