Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The problem with the wager is Pascal assumes we lose nothing if we believe in God and God doesn't exist.
Suppose we have Universe. Its time is continuous, because otherwise we have not the universe, but large collection of tiny parallel universes. Each one has zero volume.
Therefore, it is infinite number of time moments, in which pen on my desk will be taken. Therefore, number of Many Worlds is actual infinity. Latter can not be linked to physical objects. Therefore, the many worlds interpretation (MWI) of Quantum Mechanics is not real.
Secondly, the wormhole connects different universes. Thus, the MWI is in conflict with No-Clone theorem.
As you see, many things can be proved with mind application. See: we are 100 pro certain, what Bible is true. Therefore Jesus's Revelation is the 100 pro proof.
The problem with the wager is Pascal assumes we lose nothing if we believe in God and God doesn't exist. If the conception of God in question causes us to give up any value for this world (which probably wasn't what Pascal had in mind, but a whole lot of religious people do), and this world is it, no afterlife at all, then we do in fact come close to losing "everything" if we believe in God and he doesn't exist.
That's one of many problems. There are others, such as the impossibility of betting on a multitude of mutually contradictory ideas of gods. And that only includes the various brands of Christianity - there are also other religious views up to and including ones which claim that the very concept of gods is distracting from the real way to find the maximum other-worldly reward.
Then, you are saying, what I am crazy. All issue is in the mind. The one, who has problem with it, is crazy. I am not crazy: my achievements! I have not violated or lied in my mind. Therefore, the God is Eastern Orthodox!I can say the same about my non-Eastern Orthodox faith.
Then, you are saying, what I am crazy. All issue is in the mind. The one, who has problem with it, is crazy. I am not crazy: my achievements! I have not violated or lied in my mind. Therefore, the God is Eastern Orthodox!
Then, you are saying, what I am crazy. All issue is in the mind. The one, who has problem with it, is crazy. I am not crazy: my achievements! I have not violated or lied in my mind. Therefore, the God is Eastern Orthodox!
No, I am not saying that you are crazy. I am stating that your logic is faulty.Then, you are saying, what I am crazy. All issue is in the mind. The one, who has problem with it, is crazy. I am not crazy: my achievements! I have not violated or lied in my mind. Therefore, the God is Eastern Orthodox!
Each time I get to the bottom of the barrel of a god conception, all I find is wishful thinking.Sort of. If you stretch it out and apply it to daily life, he's not really making a special argument at all. Should I ask this girl out? Well, I'll gain everything if I do and she says yes and only lose just a little bit if I ask and she says no, whereas I gain nothing if I don't ask her out. He's just applying this pragmatic reasoning to God. You could apply it to anything.
Yeah, why not? I think there's a lot more at stake than just intellectual integrity, btw, if you get the bottom of the barrel with God conceptions.
The Bible seems to tackle Pascal's Wager head on, funny enough. Almost as if it was a looming elephant in the time of the Apostles really.
There is a teaching of faith alongside a declaration of God being self-evident, harmonized by the notion that man falls so short that faith is still actually needed to suffice for what one already knows. We live in a world that is fundamentally adversarial to God, and so people are taken in by deception and end up rejecting their Maker nonetheless.
It is only self-evident to those that already believe.How is the god of the Bible self-evident?
indeed,
the wager was mainly having to do with the fact that,
fire insurance is fire insurance.
you are insuring your future against the damage of fire as in any fire insurance claim of today,
he merely is stating that if an athiest is wrong, they have a real fire to contend to, if we are wrong, we are simply mistaken.
so in the classic case of the idea that Christianity is not fireinsurance,
in it's raw basic gospel element, it is actually fire insurance.
and if I am not mistaken that is really what the gist of what he was saying was all about.
to pull little quotes of one or two words out of main stream thought and use it as proof text for something opposite, is at very best, shoddy research.
but then again we all do that at some point,
I do it with some evolutionists as they question their evolution,
while some may use the above quotes to question pascals wager.
but again the wager was as follows, if we lose, we still win,
if an athiest loses, they have some damages to contend with.
thus the need to be insured against, and hedge against such a volititle time as judgement day.
Christ blood is our hedge.
We live in a world that is fundamentally adversarial to God, and so people are taken in by deception and end up rejecting their Maker nonetheless.
I don't think a lack of evidence is deception. I can't believe in a supernatural being without evidence. Could you believe in Santa Claus?
I can prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist:
http://www.christianforums.com/threads/and-what-about-christmas.7912656/page-2#post-68736520
That isn't a proof that Santa Claus doesn't exist. No more so than a similar post would be proof that Jesus Christ doesn't exist.
It is proof that Santa doesn't exist. What, are we moving on to Solipsism now? Santa Claus is a blatant merger of two things that was never intended to even be true. It's no different then writing a fiction. How are you going to say that something which was purposefully intended to be fictitious is something I can't prove?
It is proof that Santa doesn't exist.
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 have not violated or lied in my mind" does not equal "therefore my beliefs must be true".
Good one, brother. Same is with Spaghetti Monster or with theHow are you going to say that something which was purposefully intended to be fictitious is something I can't prove?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?