Pascal did not intend his wager to be a basis or reason for faith. He was aiming it squarely at people for who the question of God was, in their mind, not worth considering in the first instance. ? . The question has its own intrinsic value and, I believe, is an interesting one, stirring debate and provoking deeper thought on the matter. Better than merely dismissing the whole concept of God.
Well said. I do find it odd how many people think that the existence of God (of any religion) is not worth considering. The existence of God clearly has many profound effects upon the way in which you should live your life; it is one of the most important decisions I can think of.
Physics isn't proven. We can stipulate that given a few basics, the rest follows. That's human understanding in a nutshell, and it's also why athiesm is just as much a religion of zealotry as is any other.
That's why I put proof in quotation marks. There are many "laws" of physics which have been shown many times over to hold on our planet, solar system, galaxy and observable universe. we are getting better and better at observing and measuring the universe and then applying those observations.
But yes, atheism is a "religion" - it is belief-based. There is absolutely no way that we can prove or disprove the existence of God by observing the Universe.
But what if God really doesn't care, or will send faithful people to hell just for kicks, or perhaps you worshipped God in the wrong way and God are turning a blind eye to those not worshipping while tormenting you for eternity?
Same as the stupid equation, which essentially says that the chance that I would meet the love of my life tomorrow is about 50% since there only are two possible outcomes. Well, multiply that with a number depending on how social I will be tomorrow.
In the end, does it really matter? Do we need a God to know how to live our lives? Try to prove your worthiness of existance for your fellow humans instead of trying to prove it to your God.
But what if God really doesn't care, or will send faithful people to hell just for kicks..
The basis of nearly all religion(s) is that your God really does care. What would be the point of worshipping an uncaring and mischievous God as you describe? That just would not support or sustain human nature and need.
Quote:
Same as the stupid equation..
Got you thinking though, didn't it
Quote:
In the end, does it really matter? Do we need a God to know how to live our lives?
That is the big question is it not? Do you need a God? A lot of people do. It's within human nature to need and have faith in something. A lot of people like to think there is something after this. "Faith" is exactly that. It is believing unconditionally in that which cannot be scientifically proven or objectively defined.
Quote:
Try to prove your worthiness of existance for your fellow humans instead of trying to prove it to your God.
It is an argument that goes round in circles. All the major faiths teach their followers to (example) "Love thy neighbour as thyself" thus proving ones worthiness to others and, therefore, to your God. Yes, people may have an "inbuilt' sense of moral value, what is right or wrong, though could this not have been given to humanity by God?
N.B: I'm not trying to convert or preach, just demonstrate and define the argument.
Believing in God can't hurt you. In fact, it has a lot of advantages.
1. You have hope in some kind of afterlife.
2. It makes you feel special because you were created by a kind, loving God. Who doesn't want to feel loved?
3. Following a religion gives you guidelines on how to be a better person. At least with Christianity, I don't know much about other religions, to be honest. But I assume most religions would want to do some good to you (the follower of such religion) and guide you with moral principles.
But to believe in God you must have faith, and faith is not something that you can choose to have. Either you have it, or you don't. I'm glad I have faith in God, and I guess I'd feel sorry for myself if I was unable to believe in God, because it just gives you a different look on life. I might say believing in God gives you a purpose (Salvation of your soul, a reason to do good things for others, etc.)
Otherwise we're just a fluke, a product of chance, bags of dust that exist without a real purpose.
This is just my opinion, I'm not saying I'm right or wrong. It's just what I'm thinking.
To toss a couple of questions out that came from my students in a country that embraces Shinto, a multi-godded spirituality:
Sex... Christianity... Adam and Eve.. we are descendents of the two... How do Christians 1) account for the incest that would have been necessary to populate the planet in the early days [ 2 gerations would be the normal limit] and 2) account for the wide variety of races on the planet?
Another: In the Bible, God says that we should not beleive in any other gods, therefore suggesting their existence. How many gods are there and if we are to believe in only one, why that one?
Religions are not absolute truths but moral guides which attempt to address the spiritual weaknesses and needs (for lack of better phrasing) in humans and which use(d) story-telling as a primary medium due to the relatively low level of common education and the lack of things such as cable TV, video and printing presses. Aesop's fables are (I know this will shatter some of you) not truthful retellings of actual events, but are very useful for discussing moral issues with children. That does not make them a religion, however. The Bible is no different, except that it claims to be so.
The basis of nearly all religion(s) is that your God really does care. What would be the point of worshipping an uncaring and mischievous God as you describe? That just would not support or sustain human nature and need.
But it does not matter what people believe about their God. That means nothing, if there indeed is a God. If God exist, religion won't have had anything to do with that fact, unless you imply that mankind created God and as such he is inferior to us. Or perhaps we "created a monster."
Quote:
Got you thinking though, didn't it
About as much as Drake's equation. That is, take two seconds to figure out why it doesn't hold.
Quote:
That is the big question is it not? Do you need a God? A lot of people do. It's within human nature to need and have faith in something. A lot of people like to think there is something after this. "Faith" is exactly that. It is believing unconditionally in that which cannot be scientifically proven or objectively defined.
I have faith in my friends. Do I need any more?
Quote:
It is an argument that goes round in circles. All the major faiths teach their followers to (example) "Love thy neighbour as thyself" thus proving ones worthiness to others and, therefore, to your God. Yes, people may have an "inbuilt' sense of moral value, what is right or wrong, though could this not have been given to humanity by God?
But does not the Christian God want unconditional love? In any case, most religions are indeed based on a few principles which probably did make sense when they were written, such as not eating pigs, because of parasites and such. Then why we need a "higher" being to make us do something what is just common sense is what I dispute, and I also dispute that "God"* requires us to follow rules which does not make sense any more.
*That is, in most official religions. I'm perfectly okay with people shaping their own God for themselves.
But it does not matter what people believe about their God. That means nothing, if there indeed is a God. If God exist, religion won't have had anything to do with that fact, unless you imply that mankind created God and as such he is inferior to us. Or perhaps we "created a monster."
Belief is faith, faith is belief. I don't imply anything of the sort. You miss the whole concept of my initial posting. What Pascal intended with his wager was the implementation of thought on the subject, not to actually prove anything. What one believes in is entirely up to oneself.
Quote:
About as much as Drake's equation. That is, take two seconds to figure out why it doesn't hold.
One man's meat is another man's poison.
Quote:
I have faith in my friends. Do I need any more?
I certainly can't answer that for you.
Quote:
But does not the Christian God want unconditional love? In any case, most religions are indeed based on a few principles which probably did make sense when they were written, such as not eating pigs, because of parasites and such. Then why we need a "higher" being to make us do something what is just common sense is what I dispute, and I also dispute that "God"* requires us to follow rules which does not make sense any more.
Sorry, you've lost me there. As I've stated previously, it is up to the individual to believe or not, and everyone has a choice in what/whom to believe in. To pose the question and spark idea and thought on the matter is the crux. Religion is a lot more complicated than just 'common sense' and if you choose to follow one then you are obliged to obey the teaching of said faith.
You have answered your own question. Everyone's answer is different.
To toss a couple of questions out that came from my students in a country that embraces Shinto, a multi-godded spirituality:
Sex... Christianity... Adam and Eve.. we are descendents of the two... How do Christians 1) account for the incest that would have been necessary to populate the planet in the early days [ 2 gerations would be the normal limit] and 2) account for the wide variety of races on the planet?
Another: In the Bible, God says that we should not beleive in any other gods, therefore suggesting their existence. How many gods are there and if we are to believe in only one, why that one?
Religions are not absolute truths but moral guides which attempt to address the spiritual weaknesses and needs (for lack of better phrasing) in humans and which use(d) story-telling as a primary medium due to the relatively low level of common education and the lack of things such as cable TV, video and printing presses. Aesop's fables are (I know this will shatter some of you) not truthful retellings of actual events, but are very useful for discussing moral issues with children. That does not make them a religion, however. The Bible is no different, except that it claims to be so.
The incest from Adam and Eve was not a problem at all. In the beginning, Adam and Eve were pefect beings. There were no defects at all, no genetic mutations. They were perfect creatures created by God. When Sin entered, thats where the problems began. Even after that, the genetic mutations and the problems that would come from incest today weren't there. There weren't any bad things to magnify through incest.
God says not to have any other god before Him. Belief in other gods was and still is common.
If we all have a spiritual weakness or need, and there are moral guides to help us with moral issues, then how is there not a god behind the spirituality and morality? If those aspects are in humans, and not in animals or plants, then that doesn't make sense unless there is a creator God. The Bible has some pretty strong historical validity too. I'd think twice before counting off as a bunch of fables. There is quite a bit of evidence for it's validity.
Firstly, I do believe in some sort of "higher intelligence", it may started with the big bang or way before, maybe it was there forever. I really doubt some evolved monkeys could understand it... Oh.. I forgot, some don't even believe in evolution...
I also think that humanity is no more than a grain of sand in the sahara, if you look from a "gods view", but humans like to think that they are more then a little detail in the "big plan".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homestar06
God says not to have any other god before Him. Belief in other gods was and still is common.
"Other Gods" is just a point of view, if you we're born somewhere else, you might were a muslim or a budhist...
If talked with many people about sense and origin of life when we were outside looking at the stars or campfire. I imagine that other people did this before tousands of year ago, some of this discussions may led to the birth of the different religions.
People really tend to overestimate themself, it starts when you make a big difference between humans and animals and it leds to things like people who couldn't accept that the earth is not the center of the universe and to creationism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Homestar06
If we all have a spiritual weakness or need, and there are moral guides to help us with moral issues, then how is there not a god behind the spirituality and morality? If those aspects are in humans, and not in animals or plants, then that doesn't make sense unless there is a creator God. The Bible has some pretty strong historical validity too. I'd think twice before counting off as a bunch of fables. There is quite a bit of evidence for it's validity.
Yes, we do have a spiritual need. To give our life a sense.
There are many ways to do so: family, friends, self-realisation, religion.
Nearly everyone knew that it isn't nice to kill, steal and lie 10'000 years ago, since then it's a fight between egoism and awareness of wrongdoing (which depends on education). Many people have been killed because they were "infidel" by the definition of the prevalent religion.
Of course I do believe that there are historical facts in the bible, but many things are just made up or exagerated.
People who think "their" religion is the right one are somehow ignorant.
How should humans be able to know what god is about and what he/she/it 's expecting of us? Finally prophets are still humans/evolved monkeys.
Yes, there is some good history in the Bible, but there are also some rather tall tales which obviously had been passed down by word of mouth, developed and then eventually put to script.
Noah's Ark... anyone been to a zoo and an aquairum lately? They are huge and only present a mere handful of the many thousands and thousands of species that inhabit the earth. Don't think one man coupld have 1) built an ark big enough to hold everything nor 2) actually gathered them himself. There are species indigenous to Tasmania, the Galpogus Islands and even my back yard that were nowhere nere where Noah supposedly lived. The Ark is not a historic fact as such, but may have been a real lifeboat of sorts during a large flood. Once again, a story, a metaphore, for something larger.
Incest... if there were only Adam and Eve in the beginning, every single person on the planet would look alike. That simply is not the case.
Comments
Pascal did not intend his wager to be a basis or reason for faith. He was aiming it squarely at people for who the question of God was, in their mind, not worth considering in the first instance. ? . The question has its own intrinsic value and, I believe, is an interesting one, stirring debate and provoking deeper thought on the matter. Better than merely dismissing the whole concept of God.
Well said. I do find it odd how many people think that the existence of God (of any religion) is not worth considering. The existence of God clearly has many profound effects upon the way in which you should live your life; it is one of the most important decisions I can think of.
Physics isn't proven. We can stipulate that given a few basics, the rest follows. That's human understanding in a nutshell, and it's also why athiesm is just as much a religion of zealotry as is any other.
That's why I put proof in quotation marks. There are many "laws" of physics which have been shown many times over to hold on our planet, solar system, galaxy and observable universe. we are getting better and better at observing and measuring the universe and then applying those observations.
But yes, atheism is a "religion" - it is belief-based. There is absolutely no way that we can prove or disprove the existence of God by observing the Universe.
Hmmm... here we go again
Try this...
Pascal's wager.
Everyone has a choice... either,
1: I believe in the existance of God or,
2: I do not believe that God exists.
/.../
But what if God really doesn't care, or will send faithful people to hell just for kicks, or perhaps you worshipped God in the wrong way and God are turning a blind eye to those not worshipping while tormenting you for eternity?
Same as the stupid equation, which essentially says that the chance that I would meet the love of my life tomorrow is about 50% since there only are two possible outcomes. Well, multiply that with a number depending on how social I will be tomorrow.
In the end, does it really matter? Do we need a God to know how to live our lives? Try to prove your worthiness of existance for your fellow humans instead of trying to prove it to your God.
But what if God really doesn't care, or will send faithful people to hell just for kicks..
The basis of nearly all religion(s) is that your God really does care. What would be the point of worshipping an uncaring and mischievous God as you describe? That just would not support or sustain human nature and need.
Same as the stupid equation..
Got you thinking though, didn't it
In the end, does it really matter? Do we need a God to know how to live our lives?
That is the big question is it not? Do you need a God? A lot of people do. It's within human nature to need and have faith in something. A lot of people like to think there is something after this. "Faith" is exactly that. It is believing unconditionally in that which cannot be scientifically proven or objectively defined.
Try to prove your worthiness of existance for your fellow humans instead of trying to prove it to your God.
It is an argument that goes round in circles. All the major faiths teach their followers to (example) "Love thy neighbour as thyself" thus proving ones worthiness to others and, therefore, to your God. Yes, people may have an "inbuilt' sense of moral value, what is right or wrong, though could this not have been given to humanity by God?
N.B: I'm not trying to convert or preach, just demonstrate and define the argument.
1. You have hope in some kind of afterlife.
2. It makes you feel special because you were created by a kind, loving God. Who doesn't want to feel loved?
3. Following a religion gives you guidelines on how to be a better person. At least with Christianity, I don't know much about other religions, to be honest. But I assume most religions would want to do some good to you (the follower of such religion) and guide you with moral principles.
But to believe in God you must have faith, and faith is not something that you can choose to have. Either you have it, or you don't. I'm glad I have faith in God, and I guess I'd feel sorry for myself if I was unable to believe in God, because it just gives you a different look on life. I might say believing in God gives you a purpose (Salvation of your soul, a reason to do good things for others, etc.)
Otherwise we're just a fluke, a product of chance, bags of dust that exist without a real purpose.
This is just my opinion, I'm not saying I'm right or wrong. It's just what I'm thinking.
What the heck does recreational sex have to do with the existence of a deity?
As I understand it, most religions view recreational sex as somewhat of a no-no.
Sex... Christianity... Adam and Eve.. we are descendents of the two... How do Christians 1) account for the incest that would have been necessary to populate the planet in the early days [ 2 gerations would be the normal limit] and 2) account for the wide variety of races on the planet?
Another: In the Bible, God says that we should not beleive in any other gods, therefore suggesting their existence. How many gods are there and if we are to believe in only one, why that one?
Religions are not absolute truths but moral guides which attempt to address the spiritual weaknesses and needs (for lack of better phrasing) in humans and which use(d) story-telling as a primary medium due to the relatively low level of common education and the lack of things such as cable TV, video and printing presses. Aesop's fables are (I know this will shatter some of you) not truthful retellings of actual events, but are very useful for discussing moral issues with children. That does not make them a religion, however. The Bible is no different, except that it claims to be so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto
As I understand it, most religions view recreational sex as somewhat of a no-no.
Most ≠ all. tonton's generalizing something for no reason at all.
Most ≠ all. tonton's generalizing something for no reason at all.
Indeed. But Tonton's post was in response to one that was talking about the Christian God.
Indeed. But Tonton's post was in response to one that was talking about the Christian God.
Right, and I'm a Christian; doesn't mean I haven't used contraceptives. It's a very diverse religion.
The basis of nearly all religion(s) is that your God really does care. What would be the point of worshipping an uncaring and mischievous God as you describe? That just would not support or sustain human nature and need.
But it does not matter what people believe about their God. That means nothing, if there indeed is a God. If God exist, religion won't have had anything to do with that fact, unless you imply that mankind created God and as such he is inferior to us. Or perhaps we "created a monster."
Got you thinking though, didn't it
About as much as Drake's equation. That is, take two seconds to figure out why it doesn't hold.
That is the big question is it not? Do you need a God? A lot of people do. It's within human nature to need and have faith in something. A lot of people like to think there is something after this. "Faith" is exactly that. It is believing unconditionally in that which cannot be scientifically proven or objectively defined.
I have faith in my friends. Do I need any more?
It is an argument that goes round in circles. All the major faiths teach their followers to (example) "Love thy neighbour as thyself" thus proving ones worthiness to others and, therefore, to your God. Yes, people may have an "inbuilt' sense of moral value, what is right or wrong, though could this not have been given to humanity by God?
But does not the Christian God want unconditional love? In any case, most religions are indeed based on a few principles which probably did make sense when they were written, such as not eating pigs, because of parasites and such. Then why we need a "higher" being to make us do something what is just common sense is what I dispute, and I also dispute that "God"* requires us to follow rules which does not make sense any more.
*That is, in most official religions. I'm perfectly okay with people shaping their own God for themselves.
What the heck does recreational sex have to do with the existence of a deity?
Not many people know this, but if you flip your cock over, you can read the EULA God wrote on it.
But it does not matter what people believe about their God. That means nothing, if there indeed is a God. If God exist, religion won't have had anything to do with that fact, unless you imply that mankind created God and as such he is inferior to us. Or perhaps we "created a monster."
Belief is faith, faith is belief. I don't imply anything of the sort. You miss the whole concept of my initial posting. What Pascal intended with his wager was the implementation of thought on the subject, not to actually prove anything. What one believes in is entirely up to oneself.
About as much as Drake's equation. That is, take two seconds to figure out why it doesn't hold.
One man's meat is another man's poison.
I have faith in my friends. Do I need any more?
I certainly can't answer that for you.
But does not the Christian God want unconditional love? In any case, most religions are indeed based on a few principles which probably did make sense when they were written, such as not eating pigs, because of parasites and such. Then why we need a "higher" being to make us do something what is just common sense is what I dispute, and I also dispute that "God"* requires us to follow rules which does not make sense any more.
Sorry, you've lost me there. As I've stated previously, it is up to the individual to believe or not, and everyone has a choice in what/whom to believe in. To pose the question and spark idea and thought on the matter is the crux. Religion is a lot more complicated than just 'common sense' and if you choose to follow one then you are obliged to obey the teaching of said faith.
You have answered your own question. Everyone's answer is different.
Not many people know this, but if you flip your cock over, you can read the EULA God wrote on it.
Dude, Digital Penis Rights Management is so 2005.
To toss a couple of questions out that came from my students in a country that embraces Shinto, a multi-godded spirituality:
Sex... Christianity... Adam and Eve.. we are descendents of the two... How do Christians 1) account for the incest that would have been necessary to populate the planet in the early days [ 2 gerations would be the normal limit] and 2) account for the wide variety of races on the planet?
Another: In the Bible, God says that we should not beleive in any other gods, therefore suggesting their existence. How many gods are there and if we are to believe in only one, why that one?
Religions are not absolute truths but moral guides which attempt to address the spiritual weaknesses and needs (for lack of better phrasing) in humans and which use(d) story-telling as a primary medium due to the relatively low level of common education and the lack of things such as cable TV, video and printing presses. Aesop's fables are (I know this will shatter some of you) not truthful retellings of actual events, but are very useful for discussing moral issues with children. That does not make them a religion, however. The Bible is no different, except that it claims to be so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto
The incest from Adam and Eve was not a problem at all. In the beginning, Adam and Eve were pefect beings. There were no defects at all, no genetic mutations. They were perfect creatures created by God. When Sin entered, thats where the problems began. Even after that, the genetic mutations and the problems that would come from incest today weren't there. There weren't any bad things to magnify through incest.
God says not to have any other god before Him. Belief in other gods was and still is common.
If we all have a spiritual weakness or need, and there are moral guides to help us with moral issues, then how is there not a god behind the spirituality and morality? If those aspects are in humans, and not in animals or plants, then that doesn't make sense unless there is a creator God. The Bible has some pretty strong historical validity too. I'd think twice before counting off as a bunch of fables. There is quite a bit of evidence for it's validity.
I also think that humanity is no more than a grain of sand in the sahara, if you look from a "gods view", but humans like to think that they are more then a little detail in the "big plan".
God says not to have any other god before Him. Belief in other gods was and still is common.
"Other Gods" is just a point of view, if you we're born somewhere else, you might were a muslim or a budhist...
If talked with many people about sense and origin of life when we were outside looking at the stars or campfire. I imagine that other people did this before tousands of year ago, some of this discussions may led to the birth of the different religions.
People really tend to overestimate themself, it starts when you make a big difference between humans and animals and it leds to things like people who couldn't accept that the earth is not the center of the universe and to creationism.
If we all have a spiritual weakness or need, and there are moral guides to help us with moral issues, then how is there not a god behind the spirituality and morality? If those aspects are in humans, and not in animals or plants, then that doesn't make sense unless there is a creator God. The Bible has some pretty strong historical validity too. I'd think twice before counting off as a bunch of fables. There is quite a bit of evidence for it's validity.
Yes, we do have a spiritual need. To give our life a sense.
There are many ways to do so: family, friends, self-realisation, religion.
Nearly everyone knew that it isn't nice to kill, steal and lie 10'000 years ago, since then it's a fight between egoism and awareness of wrongdoing (which depends on education). Many people have been killed because they were "infidel" by the definition of the prevalent religion.
Of course I do believe that there are historical facts in the bible, but many things are just made up or exagerated.
People who think "their" religion is the right one are somehow ignorant.
How should humans be able to know what god is about and what he/she/it 's expecting of us? Finally prophets are still humans/evolved monkeys.
Noah's Ark... anyone been to a zoo and an aquairum lately? They are huge and only present a mere handful of the many thousands and thousands of species that inhabit the earth. Don't think one man coupld have 1) built an ark big enough to hold everything nor 2) actually gathered them himself. There are species indigenous to Tasmania, the Galpogus Islands and even my back yard that were nowhere nere where Noah supposedly lived. The Ark is not a historic fact as such, but may have been a real lifeboat of sorts during a large flood. Once again, a story, a metaphore, for something larger.
Incest... if there were only Adam and Eve in the beginning, every single person on the planet would look alike. That simply is not the case.