Pascal's Wager - Any Way to Live a Life

I am quite sure the someone (I don't know who he/she is thou) will have to choose between Islam and Christianity.To make Pascal's wager even more interesting, here's the questions;If God does exist and you do have an afterlife, and as a non-believer, where do you want God to put you to?1) Heaven
2) Hell
3) A place full of freedom but God virtually dosn't exist
4) ? any other choices?Since you didn't choose God, is it reasonable that you'll be put to 3) a place free and void of God?If so, let me tell you this, wherever void of God will be turned to Hell by its inhabitants, that is, YOU.That's Pascal's wager.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.Edited by Hawkins, : No reason given.

I think Pascal's Wager fails for three reasons:1) Humans cannot choose what they believe.2) An omniscient God would know you're only betting for your own good; rather than truely believing.3) The fact that betting on God is smart, doesn't say anything about the question if He exists, or not.

The Agnostic,re: “I think Pascal's Wager fails for three reasons:1) Humans cannot choose what they believe...”It’s been 27 days since you posted that comment and no one has disagreed with you. Apparently they have come to see that that is the truth of the issue.

Actually i think pascal's wager fails because it is inconceivable that the creator of the material universe would play a game requiring what is in essence a blind bet - for what reason would God hide behind obscure, incomplete and questionable evidence?Here is paraphrase of something I heard a while back (not sure of the source) that puts a bit humor into the bizarre notion..."God doesn't play dice.... no no.... he plays poker, in a dark room with blank cards, and he doesn't explain the rules" Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

Welcome to the fray, rstrats type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:

quote:

---

quotes are easy

---

You can also type [qs=TheAgnostic]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes: Just some tips to turn you into an old-timer ... Another reason it fails is that to fully implement it you would need to believe every single religion that ever existed, which could get rather interesting with the sacrifices ...Enjoy.

---

Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

The Agnostic,re: “I think Pascal's Wager fails for three reasons: 1) Humans cannot choose what they believe...”It’s now been 58 days since you posted that comment and still no one has disagreed with you. Apparently everyone continues to see that that is the truth of the issue.

This is true . but be careful to understand the nature of “belief.”Despite the insistence of some, we are not born nor pre-destined to be Christian, Moslem, Hindu or atheist.Belief begins as acculturation from family and community. Then life experience, training, personality, intellectual ability and information will affirm, challenge, change or discard those beliefs.You do have some control, through study and experience, over whether the beliefs you were raised in are still appropriate for you or if there is some alternate belief (or lack thereof) with which you find more comfort.

The Agnostic,re: “I think Pascal's Wager fails for three reasons: 1) Humans cannot choose what they believe...”It’s now been 185 days since you posted that comment and still no one has disagreed with you. Apparently everyone continues to see that that is the truth of the issue.

Duplicate post.Edited by rstrats, : No reason given.

The Agnostic,re: “I think Pascal's Wager fails for three reasons: 1) Humans cannot choose what they believe...”It’s now been 232 days since you posted that comment and still no one has disagreed with you. Apparently everyone continues to see that that is the truth of the issue.

Actually, I think humans can and do choose what they believe...to some extent. We always prefer to believe things that we understand and have some manner of control over...which is why God is an unpopular option.

He is?I thought the vast majority of people believed in one deity or another. Am I mistaken, Phat, or was that comment of yours complete bullshit?I agree that people life to believe in what they think they understand or have some control over - which is exactly why so many believe in God. "Goddidit," while completely lacking in any real explanatory function, is incredibly easy for the intellectually lazy. Relying on teh Bible for any and all significant answers is also easier, even though it's less effective than actually thinking through a problem yourself.And of course people feel like their faith in God gives them control - for all the Christian bluster about how "Jesus has the wheel" and such, Christians honestly believe they can affect reality through prayer. In fact, prayer is almost invariably the last resort of the individual who intellectually realizes that he has no control over the situation and is reaching out to anything in an attempt to influence the outcome.But saying "God is an unpopular option" is utterly ridiculous when the vast majority of the world's population believes in God. In fact, that statement would reflect the polar opposite of reality.

Perhaps Phat was actually referring to his personal concept of God, which pretty much sums up what anyone has and is a definite minority opinion. Indeed it is conceptually an army of one.However, I'm sure that like Mrs. Slocum, Phat is "unanimous in that opinion."

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

I don't think Christians use Pascal's Wager for their own benefit. I think they use it for the benefit of those who claim to have all kinds of logical reasons why they should not accept God in Christ.C.S. Lewis was a athiest before he became a disciple of Jesus. Very thoughtful people like Lewis come up with things like Pascal's Wager to challenge those who have supposedly many reasoned arguments why they should not accept God in Christ as Lord and Savior.I am a Christian and I guess the closest I have come to something like Pascal's Wager is to assure people that I will have no regrets whatsoever if I find out that I was duped about Jesus.I honestly believe that believing in Christ was the best possible life I could have lived. If I had 100 lives to live, I can't see me wasting one on a Christless existence.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

jaywill writes:

quote:

---

I am a Christian and I guess the closest I have come to something like Pascal's Wager is to assure people that I will have no regrets whatsoever if I find out that I was duped about Jesus.

---

Then why won't you extend that courtesy to atheists? You do realize that Pascal's Wager threatens eternal damnation and hellfire, yes?

quote:

---

I honestly believe that believing in Christ was the best possible life I could have lived. If I had 100 lives to live, I can't see me wasting one on a Christless existence.

---

Why can't you extend that concept to others? If you can handle it with regard to your life, what makes you think others don't feel the same way about their lives?That's one of the many fallacies of the wager.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.