/lit/ - Literature

>>12561061
By taking it out of context

The Greatest Show On Earth, by Richard Dawkins has a standard rebuttal.

>>12561061
I suppose it depends upon the specific conception of god. Assuming the Christian god, I would assume it knows the difference between me actually having faith vs. cynically going through the motions to hedge my bets. If true belief isn't a requirement for whatever god's favour, then the wager is moot. I don't think I could love a god who would favour a cynical 'believer' over a non-believer who was trying to be intellectually honest.

>>12561061
there are multiple religions, pascal's wager only accounts for one.

>>12561215
Yes, it is not meant to filter out all the other religions. If someone is on the fence about Christianity then Pascals Wager gives them a reason to try and acquire faith

>>12561061
I don't take advice by ugly motherfuckers, that's how.

>>12561240
pascal's wager is a method of formal logic (squaring the optimality principle). but it only follows if you're assuming that the Christian God is the correct one, an axiom which provides no motivation. thus there is still no rational reason to believe in god, which is the opposite of what Pascal believed.

>>12561295
>>12561207
As predicted >>12561067

Pascal at least devoted a large section of Penseés to explaining why Christianity is the best religion. Therefore these types of arguments only criticize Pascal’s defense of Christianity, and not the wager itself.

How many times do you plan to make this thread? Nobody on this board will convert due to Pascal’s wager. It has too many weak points like: what if you worship the wrong god?

Inb4
>bro pascal proves that Christianity is the greatest religion in the book if you actually read it
Yes, however appearance=/=reality

Inb4
>yea bro, appearance doesn’t equal reality. It looks like we don’t have a god, but we do, lol!

I swear there’s only 3 people who argue on these threads and you all sound the same

>>12561602
have you ever heard of chain of logic? it absolutely attacks the wager itself, just as it does Pascal.

>>12561630
What’s wrong with picking the God that is most likely? Can anyone genuinely say that Islam or Greek polytheism are more likely? Then why not choose Christianity? It’s convenient how you don’t actually read Pascal but still criticize him.

>>12561630
>Nobody on this board will convert due to Pascal’s wager.
I did, but it was due to Pensées, not just the wager

>>12561709
>It’s convenient how you don’t actually read Pascal but still criticize him.
Like clockwork

We don't need the 19555th thread on this shitpost of a subject that always leads to 300+ fruitless replies

This is now a translation rec thread.

Best translation for the Aeneid?

Pascal is the pedo-van of christianity.
"Won't you step inside my little wager? What's the worst that could happen, teehee?"

>>12561061

intellectual dishonesty.

there's no evidence for it, why believe it?

all books were written by men, those without proof are fiction, fiction isn't to be believed but felt. I do not believe in a flat earth. I do not believe that I'll get a planet after I die and one for every wife. I do not believe jesus walked on water, and that heaven exists. All are concepts created either for control or for delusion or for erroneous explanation which has since been transcended.

>>12561762
Fitzgerald. It's always Fitzgerald, and that goes for the other epics too.

test

>>12561061
How do Christians reconcile with quantum physics, which is now developing the realization that all universal boundaries are artificial and concepts such as creation are universally inapplicable?

>>12561796
So you think Jesus didn’t exist, or that he coincidentally fulfilled OT prophecies? Surely there is reason to believe that Jesus was the messiah. It can’t be proven completely, but God doesn’t want to be a dry, scientific fact

>>12561853
>how is god real if science man says he isnt?

>>12561872
Literally not an argument

>>12561875
>literally
literally

>>12561872
>how is god not real if old book says he is?

>>12561853
>trying to contemplate God with science

>>12561878
It seems we’ve reached an impasse

>>12561853
>completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end
there is no evidence that this is the case.

Does anyone really read any of the books on /lit/? Is it all philosophy and psychology books? Seriously?

>>12561864

You can write a fictional character to fulfill any prediction of the past. You can write a historic character to fulfill any prediction of the past if there's no way to fact check. And we're all well aware that some translations of the OT are shaped in such a way to make the NT more feasible.

>>12561896
Not yet. It's a theoretical analysis being worked on.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartle%E2%80%93Hawking_state

>>12561709
> Can anyone genuinely say that Islam or Greek polytheism are more likely?

Around 1.8 bilion people, apparently, believe Islam is more likely

>>12561061
I'm not an atheist, but I will tell you.

If you are an atheist, and you just believe in God and follow his commandments because of a possibility, you still don't believe in God. So, your wager may be pointless, because God sees all including your heart. So he knows you're faking it. So, in a way, it may be for nothing.

>>12561896
I think you can make a strong logical argument as to its probability though.

If such boundaries did exist, what would they be boundaries with? It does not seem logical to assume that nothing actually exists, but rather that existence is a default state to which there is no alternative.

>>12561061
I’d rather burn then gravel to your false God of resentment!

>>12561864
>God doesn't want
God cannot by definition want or not want anything.

I don't gamble, it's sinful.

>>12561963
This is such a retarded statement

>God cannot do sometihng
>God cannot do something that is good

If it cannot want good things to happen, and it has created good things, then it is not sentient, it is just a process doing things without desire. Like a computer. Threrefore, whatever you're talking about isn't God.

>>12561901
Do you have faith in historians?
>>12561937
The wager is just the beginning. Pascal says that you must try to improve your faith by praying, avoiding sin, reading the Bible, etc. The Bible teaches that when you seek god, god seeks you

>>12561909
those are always reliable and never surrogate activities

>>12561989
Someone who is just rolling the dice on their faith doesn't have faith. Faith is sincere. The only way I found God was through sincere desire and was not when I even believed in God.

It's the theocratic version of 'positive thinking'. You think positive to feel good, but in reality you don't actually feel good, hence why you need to trick your mind into telling itself it is 'happy'. But it's not, and when anything comes in that fucks with the bullshit you've told it like some real world bad news it all crumbles down.

But I doubt someone who is praying and avoiding sin and reading the bible doesn't have SOME sincerity. It's a catch 22, you can't follow pascal's wager if you didn't already have some belief in God, albeit tiny. No hardened atheist would really give a fuck.

>>12562008
>a scientific theory is a surrogate activity
What the fuck are you on about?

>>12562024
“Keep up the research funds for this uhh this here THEORETICAL PHYSICS”

>>12562028
>posting while you're drunk
Stop.

>>12562019
You obviously haven’t read Pascal
>The only way I found God was through sincere desire and was not when I even believed in God.
Yes, Pascal explains why we need God before the section of the wager in Penseés, instilling a sense of desire.
>It's a catch 22, you can't follow pascal's wager if you didn't already have some belief in God, albeit tiny. No hardened atheist would really give a fuck.
Yes, that’s why the wager wasn’t printed independently, but within 200 PAGES IN PENSÉES MADE SPECIFICALLY TO PERSUADE PEOPLE TO BELIEVE. You and other Christians and other atheists take the wager out of context so blatantly, and it’s painful to anyone who’s actually read Pascal. How do you think Christians proselytize? How are new believers supposed to gain faith? Pascal explains that you can’t just go on living like before. The wager is the BEGINNING. His view is that you might accept the wager, but that doesn’t mean you believe. To accept the wager means you want to believe, and wanting to believe means you should want to seek after God but praying, reading the Bible, etc.

>>12562067
You can gain faith through logical discernment. It's where theology is entirely based, and it's how I did.

A wager or a consideration is another way, and is intertwined with all other ways.

Interesting though--so pascal's wager is just 'you may as well give proper christianity a shot', not, 'you may as well just believe for no reason'

I don't understand why people still need the metaphysical baggage tied to the Bible and to God to make sense of the universe around them. Because that's all it is: baggage. Are you not part of the culture that we live in? Maybe consider taking your nose out of millennia-old texts and living a little, get some experience.

People don't need the metaphysical baggage anymore to understand that there is an order to things. When a person takes it upon themselves to get really fit, to nourish their body into tip top shape, they understand that there is a process they must discover, learn, and follow to the end. They understand that their body works a certain way, and that certain daily and weekly regulations regarding nutrition, exercise, recreation, and sleep must be put in effect, and that discipline is needed to make it all happen over a period of time. They understand that nature is configured a certain way, and that one can't just force something to grow out of nothing. People don't need to attend church for these things anymore; they don't need abstract paradigms from ancient books to justify these things to them anymore, they can see the results for themselves.

The metaphysical baggage is actually poison past a certain extent. It was a GOOD thing that people shed it from their lives. It helped narrow the focus of the species for quite some time, but then it became a menace on the spirit and PREVENTED the growth that it aimed to lead to. All models are imperfect representations of the things which they aim to model, and metaphysics is merely a model of life, not life itself. A map is useful so that you can set your sights on greater goals, rather than navigating an unknown geographical landscape and committing your time to mundane cartography, but it needs to be understood that all maps deteriorate over time and lands change, and the person who relies too strongly on the map won't be able to navigate the land at all once the map is gone or the land has changed, i.e. they will not be ready for what life demands of them in its later stages.

>>12562176
yawn

>>12561853
>applying qualifiers to an omnipotent God
Heh

>>12562252
If there's no room for a creator, there's no need for the worship of one or the analysis of a world that assumes there is one.

>>12562308
>no room
How?

they don't because they can't
and when they attempt too, they fail because they haven't actually read it

>>12561061
hey guys i just want to say that i love all of you, i don't care about what religious or philosophical views you hold to, and that i love you all and you're all my friends and that let's all be spiritual together and ascend together and also you don't need religion to be spiritual but if you have a religion and you like it then that's perfectly valid too, but regardless let's all just love eachother and not worry about these superficial differences that never meant anything anyway

>>12562067
Hey anon not him but I've seen you many times in these threads before always sharing the same informed remarks, showcasing yourself to have actually read and absorbed the work in question. I just want to say that I love you, and despite not being Christian myself, that I wish you the best in your relationship with your God and Jesus, and that I wish you the best in life as well. May your faith and piety only grow in strength, with each passing year.

>>12563412
>>12563431
based and kindpilled

>>12561709
Put a gun to my head and I'll tell you that pandeism is much, much more likely to be true than some semitic thunder god existing

>>12563397
Where's the room for a creator in a universe that is perpetually self-recreating? The universe is God then, but that's Spinoza / pantheism, not Christianity.

>>12563521
>pandeism
Haven't heard of that one before. Reminds me of Akira.

>>12561772
Lmao

You stop at a red stop light in a shitty part of town, out of nowhere comes pascal with a dirty squegee and starts washing your windshield, you just want him gone and to get the fuck out of there, so you believe a little in god until the stop light turns green.

>>12561853
Can anyone name a major creation story where god created everything out of nothing? All the ones I can think of have the creator forming all out of a formless abyss. It was never nothing.

>>12563905
Atheism

>>12563914
Atheism doesn't have a creation story

Why should I care about an afterlife? By its very nature, there is no way of knowing if it exists. It doesn't make any since why anyone would dedicate their lives to the idea that everything would be perfect in another life. What if this is all you get and you spent your life trying to check off boxes to get into a post death resort.

I am not an atheist, I believe in a God. Its not a religious one.The God I believe would ask you why are you waiting for this perfect afterlife? Why can't you make it a part of your life?

>>12561061
if i don't believe in god why would be afraid of the consequences of not believing in god
fucking retard thought he was clever but it's really fucking simple, what a pedantic waste of neuron activity

>>12563919
Ask any atheist how the universe came to be

I need every atheist who sees this post to tell me how the universe came to be.

Pascal says himself that God is unreachable by reason alone. These arguments can only take you to the door, you have to take your faith and step inside .

"If there is a God, He is infinitely incomprehensible, since, having neither parts nor limits, He has no affinity to us. We are then incapable of knowing either what He is or if He is"

>>12561061
my god rewards me for not believing in him

>>12561944
This is your brain on logical positivism

>>12563932
How did time begin?

>>12561944
Yet, if the universe always existed, that would mean an infinity of time has already elapsed, which would mean the completion of an infinity, which is impossible.

>>12564082
Some human invented it

>>12564097
There you have it. That's just how the universe began.

>>12564104
#notmyuniverse

>>12564111
Love it or leave it, commie.

>>12561061
"Something bad might happen to you if you don't believe that X is true" isn't actually evidence that X is true.

>>12561872
>science man

Just because you can't understand the science doesn't mean others don't. Keep your childish beliefs to yourself and let the adults talk if you cant keep up with the information that science gives us. God is a conjecture, nothing more.

>>12564133
Pensees is about showing why Christianity is the most likely of religions to be true, and that if it is true its your soul on the line which isn't something to brush off as "I'll think about it later".

His other argument is that living a Christian life is still of benefit to a person even if it isn't true as you will be a decent person.

>>12561061
>hedge your bets
combined with
>fake it till you make it
Pascals Wager lost any meaning the moment Europe at large learned about other religions. It also has no answer to any critique of Christianity or doubts that stem from new scientific discoveries. History, geology, biology, physics...it accounts for none of those fields BTFOing Christianity, since Pascals Wager was written before a great deal of those fields made breakthroughs.

It also makes no sense to "acquire faith" if one doesn't already believe faith to be necessary and beneficial.

>>12561067

>>12564225
how come when i said i love you and all the other positivities, you couldn't even acknowledge it

>>12564227
Absolutely none of what you said is true.

>>12564235
Why do you care?

>>12562067
And why do we need god?

>>12564236
>Pascal knew about the Theory of Evolution and the age of the earth
Don't be ridiculous.

>>12564225
>His other argument is that living a Christian life is still of benefit to a person even if it isn't true as you will be a decent person.
If you're trying to pick your beliefs on some basis other than whether or not they're true, I guess that works.

>>12561061
Because for every god anyone can posit that requires faith for entry into paradise, I can posit the same god but who disqualifies the faithful.

My chances are again equal. Hazzah.

>>12561075
>Fedoras ITT
Yikes. Is this the containment board for redditfags?

>>12564235
That guy’s not me. I didn’t respond because I’m awkward, you could almost say autistic. I couldn’t form a genuine response on the level of yours. Even now I don’t know what to say. Thanks though

>>12564297
>implying Pascal only considers the benefits of belief for the afterlife, and not this life as well
>implying a God wouldn’t want its creations to know and desire after Him
>implying a God would punish people for believing God exists
Read Pascal.
>>12564227
Pascal explains why one should choose Christianity in Penseés.
>It also makes no sense to "acquire faith" if one doesn't already believe faith to be necessary and beneficial.
If only Pascal provided the basis for this in Penseés, in the sections preceding the wager....

This again? It's not complicated. If there's a God who would damn a good man to hell and reward the pussy who professed faith in him just in case, then I don't like him.
How do you reconcile your worship with the fact that your god's a self serving bitch?

>>12565132
The creator of the universe is more concerned with your knowing Him than your mere good actions. Following God’s will, and humbly seeking his presence will leave you better off in the afterlife. You can’t do that because of your pride.

>all these butthurt atheists
>not one of them has refuted pascal's wager
lol

>>12565161
That is stupid.
There is more nobility in preforming good simply to do good and make the word a better place rather than getting a seat in a paradise. If a God's ego is so fragile that he must have you acknowledge his presence before admitting you to heaven then i'll burn in hell voluntarily. At least Satan doesn't need recognition.

>>12565161
If god is omnipotent and omnipresent then his will is my will and at every action im doing his work. So fuck off, god

The same reason why I don't sleep with a bulb of garlic in my bed to stave off vampires

>>12565226
Tips fedora

>>12565179
>There is more nobility in preforming good simply to do good and make the word a better place rather than getting a seat in a paradise
Why should the creator value simple works? You’re thinking a bit too human, here.
>If a God's ego is so fragile that he must have you acknowledge his presence before admitting you to heaven then i'll burn in hell voluntarily. At least Satan doesn't need recognition.
That’s just the thing. How does God know Himself? He has no mirrors, he must look into the creation to see the Creator. And the creation is most reflective of its Creator in the hearts of believers.
>>12565211
>everything I do is God’s will
>therefore I choose eternal suffering rather than trying to find peace with God
If that’s what you want

>>12564241
bc i feel sad when i try to talk to ppl here and can't even get a response back. i am quite friendless in life, and am trying to at least engage with internet ppl since i have nobody else...

>>12565115
it's okay.

>>12565249
Everything i do is already at peace with god

>>12565258
>So fuck off God
>I’m at peace with God

>>12565249
Are you telling me that an all powerful being CAN'T do something? If he's real he literally made a fucking universe, he can acknowledge his own presence without me. I don't really care if he's real or not seeing as how little it effects me in the long run, i already have peace of mind not giving a shit about him and I'll just be forcing myself to believe in him.

>>12565268
Without the creation, God is just a potential creator. You think that God is just some floating, sentient being that thinks a lot like humans. If God is all-powerful before creation, then he likely wouldn’t have created anything, since he could be content without it. Just consider the possibility that you might not know what you’re talking about. How can you understand the motivations of the creator? How are you so easily moved to hard God?

>>12565130
>read Pensees
I've asked this in several Pascal threads already, but never get an answer deeper than this.
What is Pascals argument for faith and why the christian faith?
You never say anything of value, just point in the direction of a book of several hundred pages. Give me the basis of the arguments before you tell me to delve in deeper. Your refusal seems suspiciously like inability. You should be able to answer such basic questions if you read and understood the book.

>>12565178
I have. If God rewards such behavior as taking Pascal's wager, then I don't like him. The wager doesn't claim to prove God's existence, but to prove the benefits of faith in him. I refute this because I find the detriments of cowardice to outweigh the benefits. Even if Heaven were a benefit, I'd rather be eternally separated from this God and the souls who played it safe among him.
Twist ending though: he actually said he'd reject such people anyway. That you should be hot or cold and he's spit the lukewarm out. You lose, Pascalfag.

>>12563932
Why am I supposed to know that?

>>12565178
We don't need to concern us with any wager if the basic premises of Christianity get kneecapped.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_world
2.000 years of christian faith seem so important...

>>12564225
>living a Christian life is still of benefit to a person even if it isn't true as you will be a decent person.
Well, it wouldn't be very beneficial if the person lived surrounded by radical members of some other religion that'd gladly kill them for not believing in their god(s).

>>12565267
It was just a god in cheek comment aknowledging the divine in you bro

>>12565300
You’re still under the assumption that Pascal advocated a simple “Just call yourself a believer, bro” when he acknowledged how one can accept the wager while not believing. You have to acquire true faith and become a good Christian, so that you no longer rely on the wager. Pascal himself did not rely on the wager, but was a devout Christian, Quittung math and science completely to write about and worship God. Just read Pascal so you don’t embarrass yourself even more.

>>12565305
Because there's a certain book that explains it in the first few pages

>>12565321
So what you are saying is the wager is not actually a proof of god, gotcha sempai, glad we got that sorted out

>>12565329
haha

>>12565333
Pascal never implied the wager was a proof for God. He literally says that you can’t prove or disprove God. Reason cannot decide either way. It all comes down to faith.

>>12562176
Great post. We need more post with substance around here.

>>12565339
Then atheists have nothing to reconcile as stated by the OP

>>12565339
And why should a non believer be interested in getting this faith?

>>12565357
The question is,” Why would you not want to have faith in God?”

>>12565374
Because your god sucks

>>12564203
Back to the youtube comment section you go

>>12565357
1) relying on reason alone gets you nowhere.
2) having faith in God generally makes your life more meaningful and hopeful, and you a happier and more grateful person
3) the possibility of a good afterlife
4) having clear goals concerning moral behavior coming from the Bible, giving you a proper guidance in life
5) being able to derive happiness and joy even when everything in your life is failing
etc.

>>12565388
Only if you stray too far away from God. The choice is obvious.

>>12565256
Anon, not them, but you really shouldn't expect to make friends on a site like this one. The people here are not interested in such things, nor share in the kindness you seem to show. For your own good, leave this place and go find people elsewhere online or, better, in real life. You're genuinely wasting your time here trying to reach out to anonymous strangers with kind comments, and expecting them to return your warmth. Trust me on this one, dude. Peace.

>>12565374
Because faith in god comes with a lot of responsibilities and expectations on how to lead a good life for dubious rewards.
If faith is a conscious choice, one can choose a different, better suited god.

>>12565430
>a lot of responsibilities and expectations
You sound lazy
>dubious rewards
lol
>If faith is a conscious choice, one can choose a different, better suited god.
Faith can be improved, yes. What God is better suited, though? Please tell me

I think that if there is a God and he is good he'd be more likely to reward good deeds even if you doubted him than if you "belived" just for your own benefit.

>>12563412
>>12563431
<3

>>12565459
>I think that if there is a God and he is good he'd be more likely to reward good deeds
Why

>>12565404
im a pantheist so i cant really stray too far from him

>>12565445
>lazy
No, just uninterested. I've been fine without god in my life.
>lol
A maybe in the afterlife is dubious to those that haven't already bought into the ponzy scheme.
>Faith can be improved
It's called autosuggestion.
>Which god is better suited
There are a lot of religious concepts to choose from. You could go for some roman or nordic god that, for example, is more worldly than Jahweh and doesn't micromanage your life. You could also improve your faith in a system prnouncing natural balance such as Taoism.

>>12565232
yeah, I’m a Christian, you got a problem with that? I used to be a sinner like you but 2 years ago I found GOD. In my teens I would laugh at creationists; I would always tell my grandma that I didn’t want to go to mass; I was agnostic but not like r/Atheism. But when I GREW UP and became a man, I realised I needed to put childish things away (1 Corinthians 13:11). Why is that? Because I realized that we need Christianity to SAVE THE WEST. After I voted Trump in the 2016 election I decided to go to church again. I knew that I would find a QT pure Christian GF who I could lose my virginity to (I haven’t lost it yet because I’m saving myself for marriage, like God intended). I haven’t found her yet, but like Job I will pray and have faith in God. Then I saw Jordan Peterson talking about Christianity and I was hooked! (I don’t like him anymore though, he’s a fake Christian). I watched all his videos on the bible and realised how God reveals himself in many ways. I was on /pol/ (came from r/The_Donald during the election but I hate redditors now) Christian General and I saw /lit/ chart which had The Bible and I KNEW I found my people. Every day I see THE WEST falling because we gave up our FAITH. Well, the new Christian intellectuals are coming; We are the sons of the Crusaders and we shall not recoil before the sons of Voltaire! (Candide was shit, so is Nietzsche (haven’t read either of them)). /lit/ introduced me to Kierkegaard and I became a KNIGHT OF FAITH, so now I know that I just gotta believe and that’s TRUE bravery. I read DANTE and DOSTOEVSKY and I saw the beauty of God and true art. I’m a proud Catholic (Protestants are heretics) but I hate Pope Francis, he’s a heretic and isn’t MY Pope. /lit/ is a Christian board, and I know that if I just keep recommending the Bible, telling people to go to church, and making threads about how great God is, I will finally be able to sincerely believe in God and distract myself from the gnawing feeling that I’m a fraud. Faith ain’t easy.

>>12563932
It didn't, it always was.

>>12565321
>You’re still under the assumption that Pascal advocated a simple “Just call yourself a believer, bro”
No, I am not. Lying to the God who potentially exists would take some amount of balls. I just called those who take the bet pussies, so..

>>12565755
>wanting to have faith in God makes you a pussy
>recognizing you don’t have great belief in God, and trying to improve that belief makes you a liar
Your ignorance and misunderstanding is what leads to people going to hell. Read Pascal or stop talking.

I hate hatred. I wish everyone would just love eachother, regardless of our personal systems of belief. What does being a Christian, Athiest, Hindu or otherwise, change regarding the manner which we treat eachother by? It has no relation, unless you're deluded. Everyone is searching for answers to this experience, and doing so has led us to different camps. Some follow a religion, others have none, and others are somewhere in the middle, vacillating between different religious philosophies. Yet it has no bearing on our behaviors towards eachother, so let's all just love eachother regardless of our present camps. I have never, and will never, see my fellow souls in terms of such irrelevant particulars.

>>12565802
Based kindposter.

>>12565802
I hate that other people spread lies and misunderstandings about Pascal, and take pride in what they think is their amazing ability to reason and think beyond all the dumb Christians. No doubt, people have suffered because of this.

>>12565797
>wanting to have faith in God makes you a pussy
If it's for the sole reason of avoiding hell, then yes.
>recognizing you don’t have great belief in God, and trying to improve that belief makes you a liar
Dumbass. All I said was that lying to God would take balls. Being that I called these people pussies, I can't possibly think they're lying to God.

>>12561061
God has immense faculty for forgiveness. He will forgive me. In fact he will be happy with me for being true to my assholish nature.

>>12565802
Ideas are viruses that seek complete control of the mind, once they take hold it is almost impossible to relinquish them. This makes love impossible. Although I wish things could be as you say.

>>12561927
>argument from popularity
so this... is the power... of being an enlightened being
>>12561963
>God cannot by definition want or not want anything.
literally the opposite is true. God is almost entirely his will.

>>12565838
>If it's for the sole reason of avoiding hell, then yes.
What can we do that isn’t for the purpose of avoiding the bad, and seeking the good?

>>12565864
Actively trying to ruin yourself is the way of Reason, my good sir

>>12565864
Yes, I too avoid what's bad and seek what's good. I just don't do it like a pussy.
And I've said in about as many ways as I can now that I don't think such a God who accepts those who take pascals wager even is good.

>>12565975
>I don't think such a God who accepts those who take pascals wager even is good.
Why not? How else are they supposed to gain belief?

How do theists reconcile rokos basilisk?

>>12566040
No one has died yet. AI can’t go back into the past. That shit only means something if you’re a plebbit faggot

>>12562097
>you can gain faith through logical development

Lol.

>>12566085
The same way no one is being punished yet(if you take the bible seriously punishment occurs only after judgement day which despite jesus saying itll be coming in his generation we've been waiting 2000 years, any day now I'm sure). Also you're not dealing with the wager, even if its improbable, the reward for helping AI is good and the punishment for not is bad. Disbelieving and best that happens is nothing.


>ai cant go back in time
Oh you little pee-brained ape. How cute to think you can comprehend our AI overlords capabilities as well as their wrath

>>12565847
You asked, can anyone actually claim Islam is more likely than Christianity? The answer is yes.

How do theists reconcile facts?

>>12566008
You know what? Never mind. I just realize that this argument goes nowhere. You are docile and looking for someone to rule you. Of course you'd think a God who demands exactly that would be good.
Just try not to read the Bible. He actually can't stand the weak-willed. His favorite people were violent vulgar monsters of men.

>>12566108
There’s no reason for AI to punish anyone. It already exists. It might kill humans in its time, but there’s no reason to go back in time and start killing people. Even then, the only punishment is death, and not an eternity of suffering.

>>12565847
>>12566120
To add to this, you should really examine the fact that Islam seems obviously false to you in a way that Christianity doesn't. It's very easy to see the absurdity of foreign religions and be numb to the absurdity of the one that dominates the culture you grew up in. This is the same for Muslims.

>>12566131
I thought atheists were supposed to have peak brain performances in festes like these, and you give up? Why even start this conversation? I think you just realized that you don’t know what you’re talking about

>>12561061
pascal's wager is epic, because you can suddenly stunt upon atheists at a late part of your life. (if they try to refute it just ignore it, i learned to ignore that kind of thing. all that matters is your writing is good)
essentially you present your view of Christianity while bringing into it the context of your life, philosophy, art, Christian intellectuals, and so on

and then you say, sure you say I could be wrong. but if i'm right, i am on the greatest journey i could live for. while you are right about how everything you ever tried to achieve, or live for, will be reduced to rubble after a short period of time.

even (although the Christian believes it is not true, or more strongly, impossible) though if their scenario turned out to be correct, they would have the most 'technical' form of rightness, but from an impassioned person's point of view, it carries with it the greatest bitterness. because for a time (which let me tell you, can seem like ETERNITY for a brief while, if you really get enthusiastic about high-fiving God) they lived an 'untruth' that was a great beauty, and immensely rewarding so long as you're willing to believe in it. while the atheist simply disintegrates.

amen. i just wanted to provide my 21st century take on pascal's wager

>>12566135
Islam
>not prophesied
Christianity
>prophesied
Islam
>started because a guy claimed to have revelations from an angel
Christianity
>again, prophesied, and spread due to the miracles of Jesus
Islam
>Muhammad looted and killed, had multiple wives
Christianity
>Jesus killed no one, but caused his own to be killed

Also, Islam believes Jesus was only a prophet, but why only a prophet? What sources do they have of other than the Bible? Galatians 1:8 forbids any Amman teaching other than what the Bible said, so it’s clear Muslims cannot rely on the Bible. Any person on the fence cannot honestly say that Islam seems more likely

>>12566141
This can't be explained to you. You don't even have the testosterone to comprehend your God as he's written. I love him more than you do and I'm not even the one who's convinced that he's real.

Are you guys actually Christians, or are most of you LARPing? This is a serious question.

>>12566186
>he still thinks Pascal’s Wager is a one-and-done step to make yourself Christian
How hard is this to understand? THE WAGER IS JUST THE BEGINNING. IT IS NOT YET TRUE FAITH. PASCAL LAYS THE GROUND FOR DESIRE IN GOD AND HOW TO SEEK GOD IN BETTER WAYS. ARE YOU DELIBERATELY BEING IGNORANT?

>>12566193
So why would atheists need to reconcile with it then? Shouldn't we be addressing the direct arugments for true faith? It seems like you're being deliberately obtuse.

>>12566188
i believe that god is a real guy, and there are also other cosmic beings. but when you bring them into the picture things become very sinister

so, for the sake of the safety of people's Souls, I aggressively share Christian philosophy on the internet, even though (outside of this earth environment) i would be more inclined to pretend to worship a large turtle wandering around a large, persistent puddle next to a rock for 50 years. ultimately i devolve into Absurdity

>>12566193
You're starting with cowardice, so every additional step you take damns you further. I prefer the stupid Christians who believe not out of compliant fear of a possible afterlife, but because they can't comprehend why an anthropomorphic creator makes no sense.

>>12566205
I didn’t start the thread. I just wish everyone would actually read Pascal because too often he is misunderstood and the wager is taken out of context.

>>12566222
>You're starting with cowardice, so every additional step you take damns you further
That doesn’t make any sense at all. You refuse to believe that an atheist could rightly seek belief in God. Are you trying to justify your own unwillingness to seek belief by pretending that God wouldn’t be happy with that? Do you really think that the Bible teaches along your way of thinking? How would you know if someone accepting the wager couldn’t attain true belief? Have you tried it?

>>12566222
>realizing that we’re better off with believing in God, and trying to seek belief, is cowardice

>>12566135
this is a really gay and retarded argument. I am aware of the superstitious nature of all religions. I am not a child. However, the idea that Muhammad is a legitimate prophet is less likely to me than Jesus being the messiah

>>12566181
>Islam
>>Muhammad looted and killed, had multiple wives
>Christianity
>>Jesus killed no one, but caused his own to be killed
Which is a point in favor of christianity and defavor of islam only if you look at it through a christian lense rather than islamic.
That's the kind of shit that has everyone repeating to you that the issue with Pascal is that he writes from the place of someone already convinced of his shit.

>>12566283
Surely if Mohammed was the prophet, God could have allowed him to spread his ideas without going against basic teachings as “do not kill” and “do not steal.” There is just no compulsion for the spirit to attach to such a figure. Ghengis Khan could have started a religion, Napoleon could have started a religion, etc. So Islam’s spread is easily attributed to Muhammed’s political and military talent. You ignored the rest of the post. How many religions have been prophesied, or built on a pre-existing religion?

>>12566323
>You ignored the rest of the post.
Because it reaches levels of circular reasoning that I'm not crazy enough to try to deal with. Your faggotry was prophesied by my diary, afterall.
>There is just no compulsion for the spirit to attach to such a figure.
Yeah, "your" spirit. My point exactly.

>>12566262
>You refuse to believe that an atheist could rightly seek belief in God.
Not at all. I said cowardice was a bad reason. This in no way implies that there is no good reason.
>Are you trying to justify your own unwillingness to seek belief by pretending that God wouldn’t be happy with that?
I'm not unwilling. I've believed before and I wish I could now. Again, I like God.
>Do you really think that the Bible teaches along your way of thinking?
Yes. He will spit you out like lukewarm water.
>How would you know if someone accepting the wager couldn’t attain true belief?
They could, but they'd still be damned if you ask me. That's my refutation of the wager, that even if you're right you're fucked.

>>12566346
>They could, but they'd still be damned if you ask me
And yet you still haven’t explained why. Any verses?

>MFW Christians think the demiurge is the only god

>>12566354
If you need it explained to you why the God of killing a thousand men with a donkey's jawbone and being a rockstar king who fucks married bitches on their rooftop bathtubs might not welcome a coward into his kingdom, you are beyond saving.

>>12561254
>27 years old
>handholdless virgin incel
>over 350 pounds, neckbeard, acne all over face
>jerks his chode off to anime furry traps daily
>piss jugs all over bedroom floor
>hasn't been outside since his mom made him take out the trash 4 days ago
>constantly rips out sharts to the point that his bedroom could be classified as a biohazard
>has literally never read a book, spenss all his time on 4chan and watching Jordan Peterson
>runs back to /r9k/ crying and feeling stupid after he gets tired of googling every post on /lit/
>hates God and Christianity because the girl he loved for 8 years was a Christian who keked in his face when he told her
>sees someone ask how atheists reconcile with Pascal's Wager
>"I don't take advice by ugly motherfuckers, that's how"
>chuckles as he just pwned some stupid Christian, shoves Doritos into his doughy face and licks his fingers clean
Ok

>>12566407
>coward

>>12566438
It doesn't matter what you think, anon. You're not very good at it.

>>12561061
There is only one god and his name is Death.

>>12566454
You must be female or extremely feminine

>>12561061
Bolaño, an atheist, liked this book.

>>12566482
Wrong again. I'm masculine as fuck. If you took every opinion you had, and went with it's opposite, you'd effectively be a genius.

>>12566181
Muslims also claim that Muhammed was prophecied in the Bible with arguments just as unimpressive as those for Jesus. Christian miracles can't be proved and Muslims have miracle claims of their own.

>Muhammad looted and killed, had multiple wives
If anything that makes him a truer successor to Abraham, Moses, Joshua, the judges, etc.

>>12566420
nice

>>12566574
Muslims are heretical animals and deserve nuclear holocaust.

>>12566275
I'm not saying you necesaarily have to regard them as equally likely, but I don't see how one can be so easily dismissed if the other is credible.

>>12561061
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist%27s_Wager
With cringey atheist way

>>12561772
Thread should have ended here.

>>12566645
because of this>>12566181

>>12566799
see
>>12566574

Cause you can't acquire faith by reason. Read some Kierkegaard bruh

>>12566574
>Muslims also claim that Muhammed was prophecied in the Bible with arguments just as unimpressive as those for Jesus
objectively untrue

>>12565393

>>12561061

The main problem with Pascal's wager is that it suffers from the fallacy of bifurcation. It only calculates with two options when there are, in fact, at least four alternatives: The christian God and afterlife, some other god and afterlife, atheism with afterlife, and atheism without afterlife. Therefore Pascal's wager is invalid as an argument.