I have no idea of what you just said. Could you possibly explain in your own words how this Pensees that you speak of, is different than the Pascal's Wager I listed back on post #843?
Upvote
0
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.
I have no idea of what you just said. Could you possibly explain in your own words how this Pensees that you speak of, is different than the Pascal's Wager I listed back on post #843?Basically, just as described in the definition below, although there is more than one arrangement or version of the Pensees, making it so that Pascal's written fragments are arranged in a different order and this could affect the sense and flow when read. Pascal's Wager is just one of the many fragments within that collection.
Pensées - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pensées
The Pensées ("Thoughts") is a collection of fragments on theology and philosophy written by 17th-century philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal.
I am sorry please run that by us again. I am a bit slow. Please explain your argument once more.Good, by replying you just confirmed that credibility outweighs intensity and therefore Pascal’s wager is not a good reason to believe. I understand you’re eager not to have to face this anymore, so by all means skitter away now. Everyone just witnessed you admit Pascal’s wager doesn’t work on atheists.
well I provide a perfect logical case for the existence of eternal hell in another thread, by all means feel free to debate there. Eternal Conscious Hell Fire is completely Justified But don't try to make God out to be a better God if hell didn't exist. A flimsy God no one respects.I find that, for myself, attempting to believe in (let alone worship) a “god” that has devised a “Hell”, where souls are tormented forever and ever causes me to conclude that this Entity is not interested in “Justice” but rather just in getting Its own way.
If I, as a fallible human being, (“sinful”, if you like), have moral qualms over this sort of afterlife scheme, then I must conclude that this “god” isn’t worthy of my belief/worship.
You're the one saying that a person can survive forever while also being engulfed in unending fire. Care to tell me how that's logical?
Wow. You literally made this up from supposition and mumbo jumbo, and yet you claim it is logical? HA!
Although I could be at fault for coming across at times in the same caustic way that gradyll does, I think gradyll gets a large heaping of attention because his disposition and framework reminds so many former Christians (especially those in the U.S.) of what it is that made them feel like they just wanted to pack up their bags and leave the Christian life behind. In some ways, I don't blame them. However, as I briefly mentioned, I'm not here on CF with the main purpose of corralling my fellow Christians. I figure the atheists and skeptics already have that job well in hand.
I went to your other thread "Eternal ConsciousHell fire is Justified" and voiced my disagreement there. Perhaps you would like to respond.well I provide a perfect logical case for the existence of eternal hell in another thread, by all means feel free to debate there. Eternal Conscious Hell Fire is completely Justified But don't try to make God out to be a better God if hell didn't exist. A flimsy God no one respects.
no, just post the number where you posted it. For some reason you don't pop up in my forum as a user. I think it's a glitch. It says someone posted to the forum, but it doesn't give a name. Also I replied to your hell post.I went to your other thread "Eternal ConsciousHell fire is Justified" and voiced my disagreement there. Perhaps you would like to respond.
Also on Post #840 you said you would be willing to debate me on Pascal's Wager. I posted the flaws of the wager and I haven't heard from you since even though you seem to be replying to everybody else. Are you ignoring me?
yes being in eternity simply means that one is outside of time, if you have no mass you have no time. Do you agree with this part, if you do, then I can go on to the next point. But if I lost you here, then I need to explain it further.
so you don't believe in the theory of relativity? Time varies with mass. See three things need to exist in the universe, space, time, and mass. If you have mass but no space, where will you put the mass? And if you have mass but no time, when will you put the mass? So like I said eternal hell is eternal because it's a spiritual domain, spirit meaning non mass. Normal mass placed in a fire for ever would burn up, so it's a glorified mass, if it can be called mass at all at that point. It would not be the same mass we know. if you see a video called "flatlander by Dr quantum" you can see how beings in higher dimensions can penetrate the physical universe in various places that would defy all laws of physics we know. Simply from being in a higher dimension. If they can have mass, yet not act according to our known laws, but possibly quantum laws, then why can't the soul once it dies? Nothing I have said it not possible due to logical error. So when you say it's illogical, you really have to say why it's illogical.This is meaningless technobabble. You have made a claim, yet you have not demonstrated that it is true in any way whatsoever. If you want me to agree with it, you will have to demonstrate it.
Pascal’s wager, as you presented it, states that because the promise of Heaven is so great and the threat of Hell so terrible, there is greater risk in not believing in God and being wrong than there is in believing in God and being wrong. You conclude that it is therefore only logical and rational to believe in God, in order to avoid the greatest risk.I am sorry please run that by us again. I am a bit slow. Please explain your argument once more.
I have no idea of what you just said. Could you possibly explain in your own words how this Pensees that you speak of, is different than the Pascal's Wager I listed back on post #843?
gossip is a sin you know. (see bottom for verses on gossip). If you have a problem with way someone debates, the brave thing to do is message them and try to sort it out. I don't mind using scripture to defend everyone of my propositions. But most of the people who find me offensive don't even believe in a literal Bible. Do you?
Proverbs 20:19
He that goes about as a talebearer reveals secrets: therefore meddle not with him that flatters with his lips.
Topicalbible.org
Leviticus 19:16
You shall not go up and down as a talebearer among your people: neither shall you stand against the blood of your neighbor; I am the LORD.
Topicalbible.org
Proverbs 16:28
A fraudulent man sows strife: and a whisperer separates chief friends.
Topicalbible.org
1 Timothy 5:13
And with they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.
Topicalbible.org
Proverbs 11:13
A talebearer reveals secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit conceals the matter.
Topicalbible.org
Luke 6:31
And as you would that men should do to you, do you also to them likewise.
Topicalbible.org
Proverbs 18:8
The words of a talebearer are as wounds, and they go down into the innermost parts of the belly.
Topicalbible.org
James 4:11
Speak not evil one of another, brothers. He that speaks evil of his brother, and judges his brother, speaks evil of the law, and judges the law: but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law, but a judge.
Topicalbible.org
Proverbs 26:20
Where no wood is, there the fire goes out: so where there is no talebearer, the strife ceases.
Topicalbible.org
Exodus 20:16
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Topicalbible.org
Again; Post #726no, just post the number where you posted it. For some reason you don't pop up in my forum as a user. I think it's a glitch. It says someone posted to the forum, but it doesn't give a name. Also I replied to your hell post.
Actually you are not the one claiming Pascals Wager was air tight, you said Pascals Wager does not convert the atheist. So I don't disagree with you, my disagreement was with the other guy who claimed the wager to be air tightThe Pensees is the title of the collection of all known religious and philosophical writings made by Pascal. Pascal's Wager is, itself, just one of the the many "little writings" found within that same collection.
I hope I've made this somewhat clearer?
45 pages and you claim it has gone nowhere fast? I think not.I don't believe I've ever seen an argument that was going nowhere as fast as this one is.
It depends on how you view progress.Is any progress being made on either side?
It depends on how you view progress.
I view exposure to different points of views, as progress.
I view the ability to have my views challenged possibly altered, and strengthened, due to challenges as progress.
I view the possibility that I might do for my opponents what they do for me as progress.
From my point of view, there has been a lot of progress on both sides. How do you view progress?
If converting someone to a different point of view is your only measure for success, I doubt you will ever find success in a debate forumOne side actually becoming more receptive to the other side's points.
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?