Thread: Non-religious number growing?
04-14-2012, 05:02 PM #1
Non-religious number growing?
Ran across this article on Yahoo and thought I'd share.
For some reason the author seems to lump atheists and agnostics together. They're obviously quite different but I guess he put the two groups together because they both don't believe in organized religion.
04-14-2012, 05:21 PM #2
These aren't my words, but they are my beliefs. Another words known as Pascals Wager.
I would rather believe in God and Jesus Christ, and after death find out I was wrong, than to not believe in God, and make Jesus Christ Lord of my life, and after death, find out I was wrong!
Simply put: if there is a Heaven, and there is a Hell, and after death you will go to one of those forever, and everything the Bible and those “Christian Fanatics” said was true… finding out after I’m dead is too late to make a change.
I would rather be a Follower of Jesus Christ and be wrong, than to not be, and lose my soul in a Hell that I didn’t believe existed.
04-14-2012, 06:09 PM #3
[QUOTE]I would rather be a Follower of Jesus Christ and be wrong, than to not be, and lose my soul in a Hell that I didn’t believe existed.[QUOTE]
but it don't work that way!!!
it's not a religion of convenience, it's not a back up plan.
i would think most christians realize how bad we are and know are chances are slim to get to heaven, we might burn in hell, but we still believe.
this is shown by the thoughts, acts, and writings of paul. it's not about making to heaven, it's about doing right while your here (very jewish like)Jay Shrewsbury
04-14-2012, 06:40 PM #4
If what drives you to believe in Jesus or God or whatever is the possibility of punishment after death, isn't that just kind of self serving?
04-14-2012, 06:55 PM #5
04-14-2012, 10:25 PM #6
Pascal's Wager is a load of crap.
Fallacy One: It assumes that there is only one god which can be believed in, the Christian one. This is not true, since there are a plethora of gods that have been believed throughout the millennia. This would have to be applied to each and every one of those gods to be true, and this would clearly be impossible, due to the clashing natures of many of the said gods. Better jump on the Allah bandwagon while you're at it. And Vishnu. And Zeus. And the Papua New Guinean mud god, Pikkiwoki, who promises a pig and as many coconuts as you can carry.
Fallacy Two: It assumes that simply wagering on [the Christian] God will buy one entrance into Heaven. While this may be so, the Wager does not instill a belief, it instills an appearance of a belief. Since the god in question is presumed to be all-knowing, he would be able to tell a false from a true belief. Therefore, the belief from the Wager would not qualify should belief be the requirement for entrance into Heaven. Ain't no fooling Yahweh.
Fallacy Three: It creates a moral dilemma. You, by using this, are sending the most dedicated humanitarians, who just happen to not be Christian, to Hell, while you set a place in Heaven for those mass-murders who happen to be Christian. Since [the Christian] God is supposed to be a loving god, how then could he entertain the embodiment of hatred, yet turn away the embodiment of love? Do you believe Gandhi is burning in Hell as we speak? He wasn't Christian.
Fallacy Four: It ignores too many alternate possibilities - some of which are addressed by existing religions, and some which are not. Some examples: A God could reward on criteria which seem meaningless to us - hair colour, taste in clothes, music etc. or a God might not be concerned with humans at all - the universe could be here for hydrogen for all we know. Or God may even reward those who don't believe. I bet if God exists, he loves non-believers. Makes him think he did good with that whole "free will" thing.
Fallacy Five: It assumes any person is overly fearful of death to be worried about it being a conclusion to their life.
Fallacy Six: It assumes that a belief in God is all that is needed, when many Christians would disagree and would suggest that there are "guidelines" that you should live by (and that God requires you to live by if your belief is sincere). If these guidelines require a change on your part (for example: No sex before marriage, no smoking, denying you are a homosexual, not marrying a non-Christian, etc.), then it could be argued that you have lost something if the Christian God turns out to not exist. Granted, that's protestantism in a nutshell: justification by faith alone. At least the Catholics believe in justification by faith shown via works.
(Mostly) taken from http://arc-t.org/arc-tiquities/debates-pascal.html
04-14-2012, 11:06 PM #7
04-16-2012, 01:19 AM #8
sound more like a dictator than a god. The fact that even with leading a life with a lot of meaning and goodness, that going about your life treating others well and with kindness, you will still be blocked from going to heaven just for the simple fact that you don't follow or listen or believe in him is absolute crap and sounds more like the tyrant that people say the devil is
04-16-2012, 09:40 AM #9
I was watching a richard dawkins doccumentary a few years ago and he bought up a point to the christians. What if when you die christanity turns out to be false and the greek god zues was the correct way to go? What if Zues then dams you to hell for following a false religion?
04-16-2012, 10:17 AM #10
I've never really understood Pascal's Wager as a justification to believing in a religion or anything for that matter. It almost seems degrading to that religion you are following, at least from my perspective. It seems to discount it. I also find it to be a rather easy answer as to why one would believe and one could come up with many different things to believe in based off of this theory. One could use Pascal's Wager to justify believing in anything really and I use the term "justify" very loosely as it really justifies nothing whatsoever.