It’d be nice if it turned out this “classy” “lady” is actually a sock that got banned. Nobody is that stupid.
(like what happened recently with that other pitting [I forget who it was])
Err… maybe I misspoke. Even given a finite number of religions, there are an infinite number of possible gods. What’s funny about this is that probability states that we will almost certainly never find the right religion. And again, it’s not just 1/x, where X is huge, it’s 1/x, where x is infinite. And that’s of course ignoring gods that would reward skepticism.
No, but it’s a requirement built in to the faith. If you’re a christian, you’re expected to tithe. Maybe you don’t have to to get in to heaven, but it goes beyond that. Far beyond that.
Though I am a Christian, I, like Mark Twain, have never seen the appeal in much of the popular stereotypical imaginations of Heaven.
Who does he pay his rent to?
Did you not get that the title was sarcasm?
Hey, the guy’s just pitched up out of nowhere to school us all out of our ignorance - give him one break at least.
Just like in the last thread, where someone did a minor hijack over a pet peeve of incorrect usage (copywrite vs. copyright), I’m going to throw one into this thread:
It’s tenets, damn it, not tenants! A tenet is a doctrine or basic statement of some system. A tenant is the occupant of an apartment or other leasehold.
Carry on…
[/peeved hijack]
But the hypothetical Real God ™ could hand out no particular penalty for not believing in anything, and eternal sploogeboarding for worshipping the wrong guy. Or maybe the Real God ™ is an angry engineer who gets pissed that you don’t use all the features of the marvellous logic engine it gave you and instead chose to run the first 3rd party hackjob, spaghetti-mythed fableware you came across.
In both cases the wager strictly *increases *your chances of getting a bum deal.
+1 to the OP’s response to Pascal’s Wager.
At some point that statement will have to be false …
The best thing about the OP was the cold clear vulcan-like emotionless remorseless logic.
Point, BlackKnight.
From the other thread:
I guess she’s not up for defending her link, that’s such a shame given above example of her debate skillz.
I have read Nietzsche, with a hammer.
How can you claim that our limited minds can’t discover eternal truths when you state there is no such thing as an eternal truth?
You meant to say doucheBag, right? And not doucheFAG, surely.
Almost assured of going to hell? You aren’t getting it at all. You (like Pascal, I suspect) are so steeped in Xtian ideas that you don’t appear able to even begin to perceive the array of possibilities. You don’t appear to have broken out of the stupid, parochial, egocentric, ethnocentric, foundationless false dichotomy which Pascal falls into; a dichotomy that assumes the possibilities are basically limited to there being no god or there being a god that has some resemblence to the god imagined by the religion with which you (and Pascal) happen to be familiar.
There is no knowledge of what happens to you after you die so - assuming there is an afterlife at all - there is an essentially infinite array of things that could happen to you. The chance that you go to a place conforming to the Xtian idea of “Hell” is near infinitely low.
I’d like to believe that even Kreeft knows this isn’t a real argument and was just being cute, but given the piss-poor arguments in the rest of the list it’s hard to tell.
I mean, I really like the music of Bach too and can understand why some people think of it as an expression of the Divine but in logic terms this is plain woo-woo.
Why is there no edit button? I’d really like to be able to update the OP. My reasoning against argument 11 is apparently flawed, but I can’t edit and revise it.
You can edit your posts for 5 or 10 minutes. It may be inconvenient to lack the ability to change anything you’ve written forever, but it does encourage a bit of thought before posting. Try it!
I’ll bite. To steal from Dawkins, Pascal’s wager is a fallacy because any truly omnipotent god would be well aware of the fact that I factored in Pascal’s wager when choosing my faith. He would know that I have no true belief in him, his son or his holy poltergeist and that I’m merely choosing to believe in order to get out of eternal damnation. This omnipotent god would thus see my faith as disingenuous, and condemn me to hell whatever the case.
So I may as well enjoy the booze, hookers and blackjack while I can.
It’s the old “What? It was… a joke! Ya, that’s it, I was just joking around!” ploy. Works every time.
I think I’ll call her a frazzled old douchebag, and then when she’s offended, say,
"You don’t seriously fucking believe that I mean you are a literal bag that contains a liquid to go up a vagina. You take things waaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyy too literally. Go take your meds now. Some people can’t take a fucking joke. "