What If "they" Are Right?

[Jackie Childs 0]

Let's just look at 2 possibilities: Atheism vs. Christianity Understanding that neither can be entirely proven correct nor wrong at least until death and then can't be reported back to those still alive assuming that anything or something happens after death.Atheist refers to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. When referring to life after death and sitting with God and possibly the son of God, Jesus, this justy isn't going to happen to an atheist. Christians believe that Jesus is the son of God and the only way to heaven is by accepting that Jesus is the messiah and all who believe in him will have eternal life.Let's say atheist are right. After death...nothing but black. You don't even know you're dead. Just complete nothing. Well...those silly Christians wasted their life believing in something that didn't exist. Oooops.Now... let's say Christians are right and there is actually life after death. Those who believed in Jesus get door number 1. The others... door number 2. Ooooops.I'm not advocating that this should persuade either side to change their beliefs... just a thought I had the other day. What if "they" were right.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

What an original thought.I was also thinking of making a big triangle pointing upwards with rows of numbers and the number of columns increases as you go down the triangle. And each entry in the triangle would be the sum of the two entires directly above it. Man, that'd be sweet.

[simo_8ball 0]

If you believe in my deity, you get a donut when you die.Sooooo....you may as well believe in Him. Worst case scenario, you don't get a donut.

[CaneBrain 95]

Let's just look at 2 possibilities: Atheism vs. Christianity Understanding that neither can be entirely proven correct nor wrong at least until death and then can't be reported back to those still alive assuming that anything or something happens after death.Atheist refers to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. When referring to life after death and sitting with God and possibly the son of God, Jesus, this justy isn't going to happen to an atheist. Christians believe that Jesus is the son of God and the only way to heaven is by accepting that Jesus is the messiah and all who believe in him will have eternal life.Let's say atheist are right. After death...nothing but black. You don't even know you're dead. Just complete nothing. Well...those silly Christians wasted their life believing in something that didn't exist. Oooops.Now... let's say Christians are right and there is actually life after death. Those who believed in Jesus get door number 1. The others... door number 2. Ooooops.I'm not advocating that this should persuade either side to change their beliefs... just a thought I had the other day. What if "they" were right.

In the course of your meditations on life and religion, you seem to have stumbled across something called Pascal's Wager. Congratulations.

[crowTrobot 2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

[Balloon guy 158]

The Pascal's Wager you brought up is a good point.Unfortunately some years ago some guy tried to replace the point with an argument that this means 'you can believe anything with this logic' as an argument.It stuck.Even thought there is no flying spagetti monster, or any demand you believe in one.It's really sad that they are so quick to suspend thinking when it comes to their eternal soul.

[Sal Paradise 57]

hey! that was at randolph macon! I TOTALLY got wasted there with a bunch of chicks (lesbians).

[crowTrobot 2]

The Pascal's Wager you brought up is a good point.Unfortunately some years ago some guy tried to replace the point with an argument that this means 'you can believe anything with this logic' as an argument.

actually the primary argument against pascal's wager is that it assumes there is no cost for belief, and it doesn't have to be vengeance in the afterlife from another god. for a lot of people pascal's wager intrinsically would have huge costs in this life. i was miserable as a christian and have been a much happier, more fulfilled person without it. how sad would it be if this life is all there is, and i wasted my time in utter misery forcing myself to believe something that happened to be false?

Even thought there is no flying spagetti monster, or any demand you believe in one.

irrelevant - there are plenty of other gods that people actually believe or believed in, many of which do/did demand exclusive worship and/or obedience. if "god" exists and has a reward/punishment system based on what happens in this life, you have no way to be 100% confident what his requirements are. that should be obvious since christians can't even agree among themselves about that.

It's really sad that they are so quick to suspend thinking when it comes to their eternal soul.

wouldn't someone who, based on their view of objective evidence, doesn't believe the bible is true have to suspend thinking and either fake belief or become self-brainwashed to take advantage of pascal's wager? what kind of god would reward what is actually insincere or forced-false belief, and punish someone who is acting sincerely?

[Piddle Duck 0]

I'm torn.I believe in God. But I don't have a clue why. Maybe upbringing? Maybe I am just conceding the point that someone or something created all of this. But I don't really care about what happens when I die. I'm dead. Why do I need to sit with God on a cloud and talk about raindrops and unicorns? So what if it is black? So what if it all just ends in a split second and that's it. In my opinion, so what, I am dead, my life has ended. This topic does raise and interesting point that I just never really thought about. Obviously I am behind the times on this but really, what a bummer if you spend your whole life praying and believing and getting into arguments about all of this only to die and that be it. Ouch! ( I think this is where that guy here Ouch88 or whatever comes and says something clever)But yeah, what if you go through like not believing and fighting with believers and it turns out there is a life after death and you don't get to play. Ouch. But what about the people in between? I don't know, it's just funny to me how I can believe in God without questioning it for the most part but all this other mumbo jumbo about talking to god and eternal souls and heaven and hell and sinning I just can't logically believe in. Weird.

[CaneBrain 95]

actually the primary argument against pascal's wager is that it assumes there is no cost for belief, and it doesn't have to be vengeance in the afterlife from another god. for a lot of people pascal's wager intrinsically would have huge costs in this life. i was miserable as a christian and have been a much happier, more fulfilled person without it. how sad would it be if this life is all there is, and i wasted my time in utter misery forcing myself to believe something that happened to be false?irrelevant - there are plenty of other gods that people actually believe or believed in, many of which do/did demand exclusive worship and/or obedience. if "god" exists and has a reward/punishment system based on what happens in this life, you have no way to be 100% confident what his requirements are. that should be obvious since christians can't even agree among themselves about that.wouldn't someone who, based on their view of objective evidence, doesn't believe the bible is true have to suspend thinking and either fake belief or become self-brainwashed to take advantage of pascal's wager? what kind of god would reward what is actually insincere or forced-false belief, and punish someone who is acting sincerely?

I have no idea why you continue to bang your head against a wall and bring logic and reasoning into these debates.But I am glad you do.Personally, I feel like giving up my Sunday mornings 40-52 weeks a year would be quite a cost. But I worship at the altar of football like a savage heathen. (Also, imo, this explains why the west coast is so hippiesque.....if football started at 10am going to church on sunday really really blows 5 months a year.)

[brvheart 1,751]

I have no idea why you continue to bang your head against a wall and bring logic and reasoning into these debates.But I am glad you do.Personally, I feel like giving up my Sunday mornings 40-52 weeks a year would be quite a cost. But I worship at the altar of football like a savage heathen. (Also, imo, this explains why the west coast is so hippiesque.....if football started at 10am going to church on sunday really really blows 5 months a year.)

I've never thought about this, but that WOULD suck! I would just find a church like mine that has many services, including one or two on Saturday night.

[brvheart 1,751]

actually the primary argument against pascal's wager is that it assumes there is no cost for belief, and it doesn't have to be vengeance in the afterlife from another god. for a lot of people pascal's wager intrinsically would have huge costs in this life. i was miserable as a christian and have been a much happier, more fulfilled person without it. how sad would it be if this life is all there is, and i wasted my time in utter misery forcing myself to believe something that happened to be false?irrelevant - there are plenty of other gods that people actually believe or believed in, many of which do/did demand exclusive worship and/or obedience. if "god" exists and has a reward/punishment system based on what happens in this life, you have no way to be 100% confident what his requirements are. that should be obvious since christians can't even agree among themselves about that.wouldn't someone who, based on their view of objective evidence, doesn't believe the bible is true have to suspend thinking and either fake belief or become self-brainwashed to take advantage of pascal's wager? what kind of god would reward what is actually insincere or forced-false belief, and punish someone who is acting sincerely?

please list these, thank you.

[CaneBrain 95]

I've never thought about this, but that WOULD suck! I would just find a church like mine that has many services, including one or two on Saturday night.

I actually like that a lot. Kudos to your church. Asking people to come in on Sunday morning is so demanding......why not have an early sat. night service.....you are not infringing on the Sabbath AND people could come get their absolvance on before going out on the town and sinning up a storm.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

I've never thought about this, but that WOULD suck! I would just find a church like mine that has many services, including one or two on Saturday night.

No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and Rodger Goodell

Personally, I feel like giving up my Sunday mornings 40-52 weeks a year would be quite a cost.

Don't forget Christianity's 10 percent vig.

[brvheart 1,751]

Don't forget Christianity's 10 percent vig.

This is 100% Jewish, 0% Christianity.

[brvheart 1,751]

I actually like that a lot. Kudos to your church. Asking people to come in on Sunday morning is so demanding......why not have an early sat. night service.....you are not infringing on the Sabbath AND people could come get their absolvance on before going out on the town and sinning up a storm.

I'm going to make some comments even though this post was generally tongue and cheek.1) Protecting the sabbath is a Jewish thing, not a Christian thing.2) The people that only care about honoring God while at church are not the type of people that go to my church. (in the general sense) Obviously there can people that are hypocrites, but the whole point of loving God and desiring to honor him is to do so when your "church friends" ARE NOT around.

[CaneBrain 95]

I'm going to make some comments even though this post was generally tongue and cheek.1) Protecting the sabbath is a Jewish thing, not a Christian thing.2) The people that only care about honoring God while at church are not the type of people that go to my church. (in the general sense) Obviously there can people that are hypocrites, but the whole point of loving God and desiring to honor him is to do so when your "church friends" ARE NOT around.

I just meant you should not bn infringing on our holy time. As far as number 2, well obviously this is what SHOULD be true but I think even your church probably has some people who are only pious when their church friends are around.And I am not sure why you described tithing as a Jewish concept. I have never encountered it in all my years and I was Bar Mitzvahed and everything.

[BigDMcGee 3,352]

And I am not sure why you described tithing as a Jewish concept. I have never encountered it in all my years and I was Bar Mitzvahed and everything.

No, he said the keeping of a sabbath was a jewish thing, not tithing. Unless I missed something.

[CaneBrain 95]

No, he said the keeping of a sabbath was a jewish thing, not tithing. Unless I missed something.

looking above, it seems he said the 10% vig you joked about was a 100% jewish concept. at least that is how I interpreted it. I get lost sometimes.

[HollywoodAFD 0]

I have no idea why you continue to bang your head against a wall and bring logic and reasoning into these debates.But I am glad you do.Personally, I feel like giving up my Sunday mornings 40-52 weeks a year would be quite a cost. But I worship at the altar of football like a savage heathen. (Also, imo, this explains why the west coast is so hippiesque.....if football started at 10am going to church on sunday really really blows 5 months a year.)

Then you turn Catholic and go on Saturday night.

[vbnautilus 48]

I also reject the entire line of reasoning because its goal is to believe whatever is most favorable to us rather than to believe what we can determine to be objectively true by the best of our abilities. If we really want to give up on the whole idea of using our faculties to uncover what is true, then there are a myriad of fun ways to choose from among the available beliefs.

[IamStewie 0]

To hell with it all... I'm joining the Church of the Fonz.Aeeeyyyyyyyyy!

[SBriand 4]

To hell with it all... I'm joining the Church of the Fonz.Aeeeyyyyyyyyy!

I love worshiping at the altar of Pinky Tuscadero!(I say my prayers and then slap both hands on my thighs twice and then make my hands look like guns)

[Balloon guy 158]

actually the primary argument against pascal's wager is that it assumes there is no cost for belief, and it doesn't have to be vengeance in the afterlife from another god. for a lot of people pascal's wager intrinsically would have huge costs in this life. i was miserable as a christian and have been a much happier, more fulfilled person without it. how sad would it be if this life is all there is, and i wasted my time in utter misery forcing myself to believe something that happened to be false?

So you are using experience as a basis for your rightness? I am pretty sure that is my exclusive right in this forum,. please recant your use of it now or I will be forced to mock you for it..

irrelevant - there are plenty of other gods that people actually believe or believed in, many of which do/did demand exclusive worship and/or obedience. if "god" exists and has a reward/punishment system based on what happens in this life, you have no way to be 100% confident what his requirements are. that should be obvious since christians can't even agree among themselves about that.

Says you, I am pretty sure most Chrisitans are very much in agreement. Arguing about dancing or clothes is just stuff to keep us busy, it's not salvation level important.

wouldn't someone who, based on their view of objective evidence, doesn't believe the bible is true have to suspend thinking and either fake belief or become self-brainwashed to take advantage of pascal's wager? what kind of god would reward what is actually insincere or forced-false belief, and punish someone who is acting sincerely?

So what you are saying, with loaded words, is: Wouldn't someone who believes that there is no God, be forced to lie to himself in order to comply with PW?Just because you use the words objective evidence, it's still just a belief system, seeing as how you're trapped in time/space and fixed on one small planet and haven't really even grasped Unifying theory yet, so to say you have enough data to determine the reason/method for existance or have concluded that there is no God really isn't anything more worthy of respect than saying Jamie Gold is the best poker player in the world because he won the ME once.

[brvheart 1,751]

I just meant you should not bn infringing on our holy time. As far as number 2, well obviously this is what SHOULD be true but I think even your church probably has some people who are only pious when their church friends are around.And I am not sure why you described tithing as a Jewish concept. I have never encountered it in all my years and I was Bar Mitzvahed and everything.

No, he said the keeping of a sabbath was a jewish thing, not tithing. Unless I missed something.

I'm saying that both of these are 100% Jewish. Tithing is only spoken about in the covenant with Abraham in the OLD TESTAMENT, there is not a set amount spoken about in the New Testament. Keeping the Sabbath is not mentioned as a requirement in the NEW Testament, it was just an Old testament (e.g. Jewish) requirement.