Go back

"Why Do Men Reject God?"

Spirituality

twhitehead

Cape Town

Joined
14 Apr 05
Moves
52945
Clock
02 Dec 13

Originally posted by Suzianne
And no, just because another religion could use Pascal's Wager is not a good enough reason to discount it for Christianity.
It is a good reason because if the argument is valid, and does work for other religions, then you would be compelled to become a member of those other religions. If you are not so compelled then either:
1. You are not convinced by the argument in general.
or
2. You do not think the argument works for other religions but does for Christianity.

Ro

Joined
11 Oct 04
Moves
5344
Clock
02 Dec 13
2 edits

Originally posted by Suzianne
No. I reject Woden because I do not believe in him.

I've never heard an atheist cop to this reason yet, though. All they can say is "I'm not rejecting him, I just don't believe in him." Which is not the same thing at all.
That depends.

When you say 'I reject Woden because I do not believe in him', do you mean anything more than 'I do not worship Woden because I do not believe he exists'?

If not, then I think I can find you plenty of atheists that would be prepared to say this without hesitation about your particular God.

If you do mean something beyond this, what?

Soothfast
0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,

☯️

Joined
04 Mar 04
Moves
2709
Clock
02 Dec 13
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by rwingett
I would dispute your claim when you say, "I think we can agree that as far as we can tell, people have pretty much always had supernatural beliefs about the world including the existence of powerful anthropomorphic
beings including beings we would currently class as gods."


Homo sapiens sapiens have been around for about 200,000 years. The first ...[text shortened]... that they spent, if not most of their existence that way, then certainly a large portion of it.
"In the beginning, man was busy hunting and surviving, and had no luxury of time to conjure imaginary friends."

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
Clock
02 Dec 13

Originally posted by Suzianne
It is my belief that Pascal's Wager should have been withdrawn and never spoken of again ages ago, and by Christians, at that.

Can you think of ONE reason why Christians should not believe Pascal's Wager to be a valid argument? One is all you need, really.
When one considers that Pascal's (three-part) Wager was more directed at self-preservation than anything else, I'd say he pretty much hit it out of the park.

Only those who view his declarations in the light of a different lamp can really poo-poo his intentions.

P

Joined
26 Feb 09
Moves
1637
Clock
03 Dec 13

Originally posted by Rank outsider
Well, do me the favour of reading up on Woden briefly.

Then tell me this. Will you accept Woden into your life and worship him, or will you reject him?

If, as I assume, you will reject him, why so?

Is it because you find him inconvenient and doesn't fit with your lifestyle?

If not, why do you assume that people reject your version of God for these reasons?
Sorry to be away, at home all weekend, and I prefer to be with my family than spar words here with us characters. ha ha.

Ok I haven't had time to read up on Woden.

As far as God goes, I realize I do have a an advantage. In my personal relationship with God, I talk to Him and He talks to me. And I hear Him.

Often in these posts I make comments about the work I do in God, or the work He has me doing. A friend of mine, a priest, couldn't understand how I could hear God. He never had the experience. I tried to explain, and teach him to sense the peace of God in his heart. He didn't get it, until one day he was sort of musing to himself, "why would you God choose a guy like Bill to do your work". He told me before he finished the sentence, he heard a voice speak to him with no uncertain terms, "What is it to you who I choose to do my work."

When he told me that I had to laugh.

You see, it isn't a matter of rejecting Woden. Maybe Woden has some good points to ponder. As for me, I worship my God because I love Him. I know Him in my heart.

I know this doesn't totally answer your question.

It isn't a matter of convienience or inconvienience fitting into a lifestyle for me. Infact God makes my service to Him very inconvienient for me. He doesn't allow me simple pleasures. Example. No chocolate, no coffee, no pop, no ice in any drink, no hamburgers, no whole milk, and there are a ton of other things. But I understand, and willingly give it up. Also the times in which I work for Him takes from my sleep. But if I stay awake for a few hours to do this work, the time I do sleep is as if I slept a full night.

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
03 Dec 13
1 edit

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
... Christianity isn't a religion; it's a relationship
This from the man who thinks atheism is areligion!

🙄

wolfgang59
Quiz Master

RHP Arms

Joined
09 Jun 07
Moves
48794
Clock
03 Dec 13

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
When one considers that Pascal's (three-part) Wager was more directed at self-preservation than anything else, I'd say he pretty much hit it out of the park.

Only those who view his declarations in the light of a different lamp can really poo-poo his intentions.
The discussion is about the validity of his (Pascal) argument and not his intention.

Keep up!

Grampy Bobby
Boston Lad

USA

Joined
14 Jul 07
Moves
43012
Clock
03 Dec 13

Originally posted by wolfgang59
This from the man who thinks atheism is areligion!

🙄
"I always admired atheists. I think it takes a lot of faith."

(Diane Frolov and Andrew Schneider, Northern Exposure, Seoul Mates, 1991)

😉

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
Clock
03 Dec 13
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by wolfgang59
The discussion is about the validity of his (Pascal) argument and not his intention.

Keep up!
How does this have anything to do with what I've said?

L

Joined
24 Apr 05
Moves
3061
Clock
04 Dec 13

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
When one considers that Pascal's (three-part) Wager was more directed at self-preservation than anything else, I'd say he pretty much hit it out of the park.

Only those who view his declarations in the light of a different lamp can really poo-poo his intentions.
Only the third part is considered the main argument. And what does his "intentions" have to do with delineation of reasons for/against the idea that his argument is valid? We would be talking about the argument as it stands (or not) on its own merits.

For a quick overview, I like the treatment of the argument as presented here:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/

You'll notice that the largest section by far is the section that cursorily covers objections to the argument....

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
Clock
04 Dec 13

Originally posted by LemonJello
Only the third part is considered the main argument. And what does his "intentions" have to do with delineation of reasons for/against the idea that his argument is valid? We would be talking about the argument as it stands (or not) on its own merits.

For a quick overview, I like the treatment of the argument as presented here:

http://plato.stanf ...[text shortened]... t the largest section by far is the section that cursorily covers objections to the argument....
I've been reading that same site.

His intentions have everything to do with what was posited! 'What was he trying to answer' is a very important part of understanding what the argument was all about. Although there is a certain level of comfort derived from formulating every nuance to life, assigning value to the various outcomes, your heart/soul/mind is more than binary 1's and 0's.

Anyone who thinks less has lost any reason to continue living.

L

Joined
24 Apr 05
Moves
3061
Clock
04 Dec 13
1 edit

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I've been reading that same site.

His intentions have everything to do with what was posited! 'What was he trying to answer' is a very important part of understanding what the argument was all about. Although there is a certain level of comfort derived from formulating every nuance to life, assigning value to the various outcomes, your heart/soul/mind ...[text shortened]... more than binary 1's and 0's.

Anyone who thinks less has lost any reason to continue living.
No. Again, the question at issue is the validity of his argument. That is a question that just concerns the argument as it is, as it stands alone. Clearly, you're not the best to consult on this question, since you apparently do not understand what are the relevant considerations.

vistesd

Hmmm . . .

Joined
19 Jan 04
Moves
22131
Clock
04 Dec 13

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I've been reading that same site.

His intentions have everything to do with what was posited! 'What was he trying to answer' is a very important part of understanding what the argument was all about. Although there is a certain level of comfort derived from formulating every nuance to life, assigning value to the various outcomes, your heart/soul/mind ...[text shortened]... more than binary 1's and 0's.

Anyone who thinks less has lost any reason to continue living.
Anyone who thinks less has lost any reason to continue living.

Oh, my. I think not. 🙂

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
Clock
04 Dec 13

Originally posted by LemonJello
No. Again, the question at issue is the validity of his argument. That is a question that just concerns the argument as it is, as it stands alone. Clearly, you're not the best to consult on this question, since you apparently do not understand what are the relevant considerations.
Again, the question at issue is the validity of his argument.
Well, I contend that you cannot understand his argument sans the background in which he presented it, minus his intended audience.
He wasn't presenting the argument to a calculator; he was speaking with specific language, with specific values to a specific group of people in a specific space in time.
To attempt to lift it out of all those factors and not make the necessary correlations is simply foolish.

Clearly, you're not the best to consult on this question, since you apparently do not understand what are the relevant considerations.
What have I missed?

F

Unknown Territories

Joined
05 Dec 05
Moves
20408
Clock
04 Dec 13
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by vistesd
[b]Anyone who thinks less has lost any reason to continue living.

Oh, my. I think not. 🙂[/b]
I thought you were hiking?

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.