[blackhole]

So, what I want to know is, would you rather pray for a better life, or actually ****ing do something about it?

Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day.
Teach a man to fish, and he'll eat for a lifetime.
Teach a man religion, and he'll die praying for fish.

[TrashMan]

*SNIP*

atheist-community...yeah, I see where this is heading.

1.
The small change that some people give to the church really makes no big difference. Even if I'm devoted to worshiping what doesn't exist, if the consequences of my worship are good and beneficial to others, that's no waste at all.
Persecution happens because there's stupid people on this planet. Organized one - not so much anymore. And if you somehow claim that atheists don't persecute you're living in a dream world.

2. Christian, Jewish, Muslim - they all worship one God, the basics of those faiths are 99,99% the same. Same God, different name, different customs.

3. Point 3 is utter bollocks. I believe in X, therefore I now must believe in anything.

[Ghostavo]

Reason 2: Even if you buy into Pascal's wager and decide you should believe, that doesn't give any basis for choosing which religion to believe in. Fundamentalists often use the wager to prove that you should be a Fundamentalist, but of course, Pascal was Catholic and was using it to prove you should be a Catholic! This just highlights the whole problem of which religion is the right one. Since many Fundamentalists believe that Catholics are going to go to hell, Pascal's not much better off than an unbeliever. We don't know if the Jews are correct, or perhaps the Muslims, or if reincarnation is right... or worse, if there's a perverse God who only lets atheists into heaven! It's not impossible. For all we know, maybe God exists but he doesn't care at all whether people believe in him.

This point has far greater reprecutions than it suggests. It basically means that you have to take into account every religion known and unknown to man which basically skews the wager towards the nonsense it is.

[Aardwolf]

Well actually, it's only the religions that offer infinite reward or infinite punishment.

Still, there's another problem: people have a habit of making people with different religious beliefs' lives miserable. So it's not just 'let me believe in god, it doesn't hurt you', because in a democratic society, which we (most of us) live in, you get to boss us atheists and other non-pascalians around. Which isn't really fair, since you're using false pretenses.

[Janos]

Well actually, it's only the religions that offer infinite reward or infinite punishment.

Still, there's another problem: people have a habit of making people with different religious beliefs' lives miserable. So it's not just 'let me believe in god, it doesn't hurt you', because in a democratic society, which we (most of us) live in, you get to boss us atheists and other non-pascalians around. Which isn't really fair, since you're using false pretenses.

Religion is not nearly as prevalent in most democratic socities as it is in USA (or Poland lol).

[Herra Tohtori]

Why do people make the assumption that if there is a god, he/she would give a damn about whether or not we believe in him/her, and further more, why would that only make a difference in our hypotetic fate in the afterlife? These are completely unsound assumptions, and apart from theological teachings, I'd like to see the arguments on why he would bother to set hoops for us to jump through.

But anyway - The question should not be "is it worthwhile to believe in God because that way I could possibly get in heaven"; the question should be... if there is a God, and if he's hypocritical enough to demand just the right kind of belief[without really providing any viable pointers to His existence other than some scriptures made by bearded men] as a requirement of getting to afterlife (or, if you assume everyone gets an afterlife, requirement of getting a positive afterlife)... do you really want to spend the eternity with such a sadistic prick?

You could have jolly good time with all the other pagans, heathens, atheists and commies and ALIENS who never heard of God and thus could never believe in him and didn't end up in heaven.

[TrashMan]

Still, there's another problem: people have a habit of making people with different religious beliefs' lives miserable. So it's not just 'let me believe in god, it doesn't hurt you', because in a democratic society, which we (most of us) live in, you get to boss us atheists and other non-pascalians around. Which isn't really fair, since you're using false pretenses.

And Atheism is also a belief.. a belief in not believing in god(s)...and as you said, people have a habit of making people with other beliefs miserable. So atheists are making religious people miserable as much as religious people make them, if not more.

[MP-Ryan]

The small change that some people give to the church really makes no big difference.

Do I really have to remind everyone that the Vatican is quite possibly the most affluent country on Earth?  That ain't small change, my friend, and they sure as hell didn't earn it.

Even if I'm devoted to worshiping what doesn't exist, if the consequences of my worship are good and beneficial to others, that's no waste at all.

Assuming the consequences of religious worship are good.  Religion has done far more evil in this world than it has done good, I'm afraid.  Some of the bloodiest and most genocidal wars and policies in history are formulated on religious grounds.  Religious adherence is far from benign... it has very real negative consequences even when in the hands of ordinary people.  The current Middle Eastern situation should more than illustrate that for you.

[Wobble73]

But anyway - The question should not be "is it worthwhile to believe in God because that way I could possibly get in heaven"; the question should be... if there is a God, and if he's hypocritical enough to demand just the right kind of belief[without really providing any viable pointers to His existence other than some scriptures made by bearded men] as a requirement of getting to afterlife (or, if you assume everyone gets an afterlife, requirement of getting a positive afterlife)... do you really want to spend the eternity with such a sadistic prick?

That's the most unchristian part of Christianity if you ask me. It's kinda like saying to god, "if I believe in you what do I get out of it?"

And he'd turn and say "Everlasting life"

Well guess what, I don't want to live forever, and if I did, why would I have to please you to do it! Sounds tyrannical if you ask me.

Yeah live forever in the company of a tyrant, great!!   [/sarcasm]













Excuse me I'm tired........................and full of a cold!  

[karajorma]

And Atheism is also a belief.. a belief in not believing in god(s)...

No it isn't. We had the entire discussion months ago and you lost back then. It hasn't become a belief in the last few months. Give it up.

[Nuke]

atheists annoy me so i became a nihilist

[TrashMan]

Do I really have to remind everyone that the Vatican is quite possibly the most affluent country on Earth?  That ain't small change, my friend, and they sure as hell didn't earn it.

Small change for me. Small change from Joe, small change from Marry. It adds up. The question was how it would affect a single person, and a single person doesn't loose much at all.

Assuming the consequences of religious worship are good.  Religion has done far more evil in this world than it has done good, I'm afraid.  Some of the bloodiest and most genocidal wars and policies in history are formulated on religious grounds.  Religious adherence is far from benign... it has very real negative consequences even when in the hands of ordinary people.  The current Middle Eastern situation should more than illustrate that for you.

Religion has done far more good than evil. Running homeless shelters, supplying humanitarian aid and education, providing hope and comfort. Face it, it done more for the poor than all the states in the world combined.

Wars are fought for power and territory, religion was an excuse, not the driving cause. Thinking that the world would be better without religion is sheer folly.

No it isn't. We had the entire discussion months ago and you lost back then. It hasn't become a belief in the last few months. Give it up.

Your discussion doesn't interest me. Name it whatever you wish - belief, movement, sect, opinion, common interest, whatever... doesn't matter if it's members act like the biggest religious nuts. Whatever you call it, whatever you think it to be, it has the same results.

[karajorma]

Your discussion doesn't interest me. Name it whatever you wish - belief, movement, sect, opinion, common interest, whatever... doesn't matter if it's members act like the biggest religious nuts. Whatever you call it, whatever you think it to be, it has the same results.

You were in the discussion. And you are correct that you acted like a religious nut.

You had your chance then, you failed. You don't get to push the reset button and claim that the discussion didn't happen just because you feel like making the same arguments again. If you want to know why you're wrong search for the previous thread and look at the answers to that particular point back then. If you want to come back with something new after that then all well and good.

If you're simply going to make the same arguments you made last time then you might as well give up. The thread is about pascal's wager and if you think you're going to drag it off-topic to make the exact same argument you made months ago you are VERY much mistaken.

[Kazan]

atheist-community...yeah, I see where this is heading.

1.
The small change that some people give to the church really makes no big difference. Even if I'm devoted to worshiping what doesn't exist, if the consequences of my worship are good and beneficial to others, that's no waste at all.
Persecution happens because there's stupid people on this planet. Organized one - not so much anymore. And if you somehow claim that atheists don't persecute you're living in a dream world.

Christianity didn't reach it's 300th birthday before it start persecuting other faiths, after all it being persecuted by the romans you think they would be different - nope they just started persecuting others and believing they were the persecuted ones anytime someone stands up to them.  And it's not just the money- it's the believing in a lie willingly which is evil, and the consequences it has on your decisions which negatively impact the world around you.

for example: apocalyptic premillennialists tend not to give a rats about pollution, because the apocalypse is coming any day now!

2. Christian, Jewish, Muslim - they all worship one God, the basics of those faiths are 99,99% the same. Same God, different name, different customs.

you're ignoring buddhism, hinduism, confucianism, norse, etc.   

3. Point 3 is utter bollocks. I believe in X, therefore I now must believe in anything.

no, it's not utter bollocks, and you phrased the proposition incorrectly.  The proposition is

"I believe in X without evidence, therefore I must also believe in A,B,C,D,E without evidence because they're equally valid to X".

3 is pointing out your hypocracy - out of all kinds of things with no evidence you're cherrypicking one to believe in, and then applying common sense to the others and dismissing them. 

[edit]
and it does matter what you call something, because words have meaning - that is why you get so many christians trying to redefine atheism as a religion to attempt to put it on equal validity footing with christianity.

atheism is NOT a religion, it is the lack thereof

[Shade]

Back o nthe topic of Pascal's Wager, besides the points already mentioned, it also ignores the fact that believing in god in and of itself is no guarentee of ending up in heaven. There's a lot of things you have to not do (and a lot of them are damn fun things), so if you take the wager and believe, you're giving up on a lot of stuff you could otherwise do if you chose differently.

What's more, it also ignores the possibility that it actually takes belief in something for it to affect you. What if you're immune to hell if you don't believe in hell? Then believing would be a potential disaster. Now that I think about it, perhaps we should take the Discworld approach and shoot priests on sight lest they try to make us believe something that could come back to haunt us - After all,  as the wager says, it's better to play it safe, right?

[BloodEagle]

The problem with Pascal's Wager is that it pushes the idea that all you have to do to wind up in Heaven is go around and proclaim that you believe in God, which isn't true. You have to actually believe that Christ is your savior, and you must be sorry for all of your past transgressions (sins).

:EDIT:
Gah! Beat me to it while I was looking for a verse.
:/EDIT:

------

P.P.S.

Matthew 5:11, N.I.V.
Matthew 7:1-7:5, N.I.V.

2. Christian, Jewish, Muslim - they all worship one God, the basics of those faiths are 99,99% the same. Same God, different name, different customs.

John 14:6, N.I.V.

[Shade]

"Tilt Train". Once again, evidence that reality does indeed have a sense of both irony and humour

[G0atmaster]

Dangit, that's what I hate about these kind of debates on HLP.  I go to sleep like most human beings are required to do, and when I wake up, I can't keep track of the debate because there's a whole page and a half of new posts...  AGH!

I'll just start anew from Shade's post

Back on the topic of Pascal's Wager, besides the points already mentioned, it also ignores the fact that believing in god in and of itself is no guarantee of ending up in heaven. There's a lot of things you have to not do (and a lot of them are damn fun things), so if you take the wager and believe, you're giving up on a lot of stuff you could otherwise do if you chose differently.

  I'd rather give up the finite, in the hope of the infinite, than vice versa.  IDK about you, but I'd rather enjoy an eternity promised to me by God (who has a VERY good credit score, btw.  Take a look at Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, Jeremiah 4, and so many more), which is promised to be very good, the worst pains of which are incomparable to the greatest pleasures in the finite life, than have a little fun now (most of which is likely rather destructive) and have it amount to nothing when I, or even further-reaching, the human race, dies out.

What's more, it also ignores the possibility that it actually takes belief in something for it to affect you. What if you're immune to hell if you don't believe in hell? Then believing would be a potential disaster. Now that I think about it, perhaps we should take the Discworld approach and shoot priests on sight lest they try to make us believe something that could come back to haunt us - After all,  as the wager says, it's better to play it safe, right?

That's not a possibility at all.  Truth is objective.  Reality is objective.  Senses can be tricked, but they exist in a consistent universe.  By arguing that this idea is possible, you cut your own throat.  You say that you think because you think you think.  Well, how did this thought that you think come into being?  If you believe that the only reason for human reasoning is random firings of electricity in the brain, then there's no reason you should reason that.  A proof that there is no such thing as proof is nonsense.

BloodEagle, you are correct.  However, Pascal's Wager is a tool that can be used to cause someone to consider something other than Atheism, which I believe is very much a step in the right direction.

[Flipside]

I didn't force you to be Christian, you chose, I may think you are wrong, but I would never walk around saying Christians had to be 'removed' from the planet, merely that there beliefs should not be imposed on non-Christians, just as you object to Non-Christians who impose their beliefs on Christians.

The simple fact you talk about 'removing' atheism as though it were some kind of infection, rather than simply a personal choice, is worrying to say the least. There have been lots of suggestions to 'remove' things that weren't convenient to the removers' status-quo. None of them ever ended in a positive result.

As for Atheism being a religion, I always felt that part of a religion is a belief in some higher 'force' that you need to account to, and usually some kind of hope of life beyond Death. I don't think Atheism can really be counted as a religion at all, it doesn't meet any of the criteria for a religion meme.

[BloodEagle]

I thought the whole point of Atheism was to believe in yourself and what you are capable of, rather than a deity. Am I misinformed?