# Was It All An Accident...Or Did An Intelligent **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 19, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721 "2013-01-19T17:18:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 36
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/701 "2013-02-18T05:05:41Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > In any event, you are contradicting yourself arguing from an atheist point of view and claiming to be “Christian”. Talk about poorly formed arguments! This is silly. Actually, many Christians will work extra hard to point out the errors of others calling themselves Christian so as to demonstrate that Christianity, itself, is not really an impediment to logic (as some non-believers like to assert). If you wander in and make illogical statements supported poorly by a lack of evidence, we really don’t want you on “our side.” ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/702 "2013-02-18T05:08:18Z")
Yes Bob I am a new poster. I happen to be occupied at the moment on this thread and so researching 10 years of your posts, while potentially interesting and enlightening is really not in the cards right now. But you did say in one of your replies that you were Christian and then you are arguing from the point of a nonbeliever. That doesn’t come across too logical either. But anyhow, we respectfully disagree on the strength of Pascal’s Wager in terms of its solid support of Christian theology. Also, you say it can only influence the agnostic to come to faith. I disagree that a person without any belief could not encounter any influence (such as P’sW) that could turn them 180 degrees. ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/703 "2013-02-18T05:11:39Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > This is silly. Actually, many Christians will work extra hard to point out the errors of others calling themselves Christian so as to demonstrate that Christianity, itself, is not really an impediment to logic (as some non-believers like to assert). > > If you wander in and make illogical statements supported poorly by a lack of evidence, we really don’t want you on “our side.” It doesn’t appear that is what was happening. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/704 "2013-02-18T05:11:50Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Abob if you are going to try and assail my points, then please do not make multiple pronouncements with no backup and then just say that “I” need to read history. You cannot say that a Christian has everything to lose if it is not a correct religion. The whole point is that Pascal’s wager fails only when it is applied to religions OUTSIDE Christian theology. It is flawless from within Christianity. And it provides a basis for an atheist to consider Christian theology. The main problem with Pascal’s Wager is that it works for just about _any_ religion if all other religions are excluded from the wager. The Wager only works within the framework of the religion, and which religion doesn’t really matter. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/705 "2013-02-18T05:14:42Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > But anyhow, we respectfully disagree on the strength of Pascal’s Wager in terms of its solid support of Christian theology. Also, you say it can only influence the agnostic to come to faith. I disagree that a person without any belief could not encounter any influence (such as P’sW) that could turn them 180 degrees. Pascal’s wager is a joke of an argument that can only work if someone is mostly already a believer in that particular religion. It’s trivially easy to poke full of holes, especially for someone who doesn’t buy the underlying assumptions that it’s based on. ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/706 "2013-02-18T05:17:57Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > Then we are in almost complete agreement; the only difference between us is that I am ruling out one more god than you. Truly sorry to hear that. Re-read Pascal’s Wager and maybe the gospel of John? ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/707 "2013-02-18T05:20:14Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Pascal’s wager is a joke of an argument that can only work if someone is mostly already a believer in that particular religion. It’s trivially easy to poke full of holes, especially for someone who doesn’t buy the underlying assumptions that it’s based on. I disagree. Religions outside of Christianity muddy the waters, but it is a powerful argument differentiating atheism and Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/708 "2013-02-18T05:22:25Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Truly sorry to hear that. Re-read Pascal’s Wager and maybe the gospel of John? You clearly don’t get the reference: [QUOTE=Steven Roberts] “I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you’ll understand why I dismiss yours.” [/QUOTE] You deny all gods but yours; **Fear Itself** denies them all. That’s just one god’s worth of difference. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/709 "2013-02-18T05:25:23Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Truly sorry to hear that. Re-read Pascal’s Wager and maybe the gospel of John? How many religions did you seriously look into before you settled on your particular sect of Christianity? ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/710 "2013-02-18T05:25:41Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The main problem with Pascal’s Wager is that it works for just about _any_ religion if all other religions are excluded from the wager. The Wager only works within the framework of the religion, and which religion doesn’t really matter. No. I don’t think so, Czar. Other religions have a series of tennets and rules. Christianity delivers a message that God requires one’s faith in him to avoid oblivion. Do you have solid evidence any other religion has that as its basis? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/711 "2013-02-18T05:25:55Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > I disagree. Religions outside of Christianity muddy the waters, but it is a powerful argument differentiating atheism and Christianity. No, it’s a worthless argument. One can use it just as effectively to argue for any religion, or for atheism for that matter. After all, if the One True God of the universe admired skepticism, perhaps he sends believers to Hell and atheists to Heaven; therefore disbelieving in him costs you nothing while getting you into Heaven if it’s true. That “logic” is just as good as that for the standard wager. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/712 "2013-02-18T05:28:46Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > It doesn’t appear that is what was happening. A key part of logical reasoning is being able to start from some set of assumptions and proceed from there. When dealing with emotionally charged topics, such as religion, some degree of empathy is required to understand not only one’s own assumptions (faith, in this case) but also the starting assumptions of other people. Most, if not all, Christians would agree empathy is a virtue. I suggest employing some more empathy. You are beginning with YOUR assumptions and asking others to come to YOUR conclusions by ignoring THEIR assumptions. That makes no sense. You argue as though you are reasoning logically but fall back on “of course you should accept it - it’s what I believe”. Again, it’s what Intelligent Design proponents do, and it’s frustrating that many don’t understand just how poor an argument it is. > [@NormalDude](#): > > No. I don’t think so, Czar. Other religions have a series of tennets and rules. Christianity delivers a message that God requires one’s faith in him to avoid oblivion. Do you have solid evidence any other religion has that as its basis? That doesn’t even describe all of Christianity. Certainly, Roman Cathoilcs have a series of tenets (I hate spelling Nazis, but this one stood out) and rules. As do Episcopals (otherwise, why the tension between them and the Church of England) and Southern Baptists (homosexuality is a hot button with them, regardless of faith in God). That’s just off the top of my head. In short, what **tomndebb** said above about some Christians and logic. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/713 "2013-02-18T05:30:05Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > No. I don’t think so, Czar. Other religions have a series of tennets and rules. Christianity delivers a message that God requires one’s faith in him to avoid oblivion. Do you have solid evidence any other religion has that as its basis? The old “Christianity is unique” canard. Which sect of Christianity do you follow? ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/714 "2013-02-18T05:31:25Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > You deny all gods but yours; **Fear Itself** denies them all. That’s just one god’s worth of difference. Oh I got it the first time. Fortunately I don’t deny the only one that matters, the one and only God. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/715 "2013-02-18T05:34:42Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Oh I got it the first time. Fortunately I don’t deny the only one that matters, the one and only God. The only one that matters according to you. But your opinion on the matter has no more basis in reality than that of some ragged homeless guy on a corner screaming that we must all worship the Great Divine Aardvark who will come and devour the unbelievers on the Day of Reckoning. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/716 "2013-02-18T05:38:14Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Oh I got it the first time. Fortunately I don’t deny the only one that matters, the one and only God. The god of which sect? ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/717 "2013-02-18T05:46:51Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > No, it’s a worthless argument. One can use it just as effectively to argue for any religion, or for atheism for that matter. After all, if the One True God of the universe admired skepticism, perhaps he sends believers to Hell and atheists to Heaven; therefore disbelieving in him costs you nothing while getting you into Heaven if it’s true. That “logic” is just as good as that for the standard wager. Dude, that is really warping Pascal’s message in the extreme. You claim it is worthless because it cannot be much of a comfort to an unyielding unbeliever. It cannot argue the case for other religions which lack the specific characteristics of Christian theology that influenced the genesis of the Wager itself. You present a hypothetical concept to consider that what if God rather admired skepticism. To what extreme? There may even be people of faith who have a small measure of skepticism. He could never send a believer to oblivion because the believer paid God respect with faith and trust, while the unbeliever rejects him. God doesn’t send the rejector away; the rejector makes his own choice and God allows him that free will to choose that fate. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/718 "2013-02-18T05:58:11Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Dude, that is really warping Pascal’s message in the extreme. You claim it is worthless because it cannot be much of a comfort to an unyielding unbeliever. It cannot argue the case for other religions which lack the specific characteristics of Christian theology that influenced the genesis of the Wager itself. Which means it’s worthless. It only “works” by assuming its own correctness beforehand. > [@NormalDude](#): > > You present a hypothetical concept to consider that what if God rather admired skepticism. To what extreme? To any extreme, since it’s all made up in the first place. There’s no facts, no evidence to base the wager on in the first place; so any assumption is as good as any other. > [@NormalDude](#): > > There may even be people of faith who have a small measure of skepticism. He could never send a believer to oblivion because the believer paid God respect with faith and trust, while the unbeliever rejects him. God doesn’t send the rejector away; the rejector makes his own choice and God allows him that free will to choose that fate. More baseless claims. ---
**Author:** ![NormalDude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/7993a0/32.png) [@NormalDude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NormalDude)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 6:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/719 "2013-02-18T06:01:40Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The god of which sect? Christianity, the only one that conveys the literally easiest path to eternity, faith in him, which is more than a sign of respect and recognizing ones humility, it is honoring God’s truth and acknowledgement of his power to deliver on his promise. God who conveys love and implores humans to love and forgive each other, to do to others what you would want done to you. Beyond the element of faith, and perhaps of some interest to unbelievers, there are so many excellent benefits emanating from what Jesus conveys that if just practiced by everybody even without an element of faith would still be of great benefit to humanity. No, not the failures of humanity to follow those virtues, but actually following them. Keeping egocentricism in check and really embracing the do unto other’s theme. We all come up short, but imagine a world where we all did that infinitely better? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2013, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721/720 "2013-02-18T06:08:04Z")
> [@NormalDude](#): > > Christianity, the only one that conveys the literally easiest path to eternity, faith in him, which is more than a sign of respect and recognizing ones humility, it is honoring God’s truth and acknowledgement of his power to deliver on his promise. God who conveys love and implores humans to love and forgive each other, to do to others what you would want done to you. You didn’t even answer which sect of Christianity. And of course your description of Christianity has little to do with reality. > [@NormalDude](#): > > Beyond the element of faith, and perhaps of some interest to unbelievers, there are so many excellent benefits emanating from what Jesus conveys that if just practiced by everybody even without an element of faith would still be of great benefit to humanity. According to you. To me, Christianity is history’s greatest single evil. It has spread misery and suffering and despair and tyranny and death across the world for centuries, and continues to do so. If I could make one change to history to make the world better, eliminating Christianity would be it. That’s the opinion of this unbeliever. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721.md?page=35) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/was-it-all-an-accident-or-did-an-intelligent/647721.md?page=37)