Good Quotes

Standard memberRemoved
Spirituality 05 Nov '12 23:42
  1. Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    08 Dec '04
    Moves
    100919
    05 Nov '12 23:42
    I would rather live my life believing in Jesus Christ as my Savior and die to find out he wasn't... than to live my life not believing and die to find out he could have been.
    Author unknown

    I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary,
    too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
    — President Thomas Jefferson
  2. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    06 Nov '12 00:22
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    I would rather live my life believing in Jesus Christ as my Savior and die to find out he wasn't... than to live my life not believing and die to find out he could have been.
    Author unknown

    I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary,
    too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
    — President Thomas Jefferson
    How you can believe both of these quotes is beyond me.

    True Christians in government try to help the downtrodden, not label them as parasites. Labeling the rich as industrious is just as delusional.
  3. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    06 Nov '12 00:52
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    I would rather live my life believing in Jesus Christ as my Savior and die to find out he wasn't... than to live my life not believing and die to find out he could have been.
    Author unknown

    I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary,
    too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.
    — President Thomas Jefferson
    Giles: It may be that we are all that stands between the Earth and utter destruction.
    Buffy: Well, I gotta look on the bright side. Maybe I can still get kicked out of school.
    Xander: Oh, yeah, that's a plan. Cause lots of schools aren't on Hellmouths.
    Willow: Maybe you could blow something up. They're really strict about that.
    Buffy: I was thinking of a more subtle approach, ya know, like excessive not studying.
    Giles: [to himself as the others are walking away] The Earth is doomed.


    So....

    Do you think that pascals wager is a good argument for believing?...

    http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/pascal.html
  4. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    06 Nov '12 00:591 edit
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    [i]Giles: It may be that we are all that stands between the Earth and utter destruction.
    Buffy: Well, I gotta look on the bright side. Maybe I can still get kicked out of school.
    Xander: Oh, yeah, that's a plan. Cause lots of schools aren't on Hellmouths.
    Willow: Maybe you could blow something up. They're really strict about that.
    Buf ...[text shortened]... er is a good argument for believing?...

    http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/pascal.html
    [/i]I agree with the whole "Pascal's wager" argument.

    Man should have a reason for submitting to God that goes beyond "hedging bets" and "what's the harm?"
  5. Joined
    24 Apr '05
    Moves
    3061
    06 Nov '12 01:09
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    [/i]I agree with the whole "Pascal's wager" argument.

    Man should have a reason for submitting to God that goes beyond "hedging bets" and "what's the harm?"
    I think you mean you disagree with Pascal's wager; or that you agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager....
  6. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    06 Nov '12 01:12
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    [/i]I agree with the whole "Pascal's wager" argument.

    Man should have a reason for submitting to God that goes beyond "hedging bets" and "what's the harm?"
    Could you clarify... I am not sure how to interpret this.
  7. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    06 Nov '12 01:341 edit
    Originally posted by LemonJello
    I think you mean you disagree with Pascal's wager; or that you agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager....
    Right.

    Isn't that the whole argument from your side?

    You disagree with the wager. I'm saying one's decision to accept God and Jesus should be based on a little more than just "hedging your bets", like the wager says. So yes, I can agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager.
  8. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    06 Nov '12 01:40
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Could you clarify... I am not sure how to interpret this.
    I'm saying that your decision to follow God should be because you love God, and that you believe His way to be the correct way.

    Not because you're trying to "hedge your bets" or to have it "both ways", or as a "just in case" justification.

    So yes, I agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager, as LJ brought to my attention. I was saying I agree with the atheist argument about Pascal's wager, i.e. the rejection of it, but obviously not for the same reasons. "Hedging one's bets" is not a good reason to believe in God. Faith is.
  9. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35531
    06 Nov '12 01:43
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Could you clarify... I am not sure how to interpret this.
    "not sure if srs..."?

    lol
  10. Joined
    24 Apr '05
    Moves
    3061
    06 Nov '12 03:151 edit
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    Right.

    Isn't that the whole argument from your side?

    You disagree with the wager. I'm saying one's decision to accept God and Jesus should be based on a little more than just "hedging your bets", like the wager says. So yes, I can agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager.
    I was just clarifying.

    The argument for theistic belief that Blaise Pascal put forth is commonly referred to as "Pascal's Wager". Therefore, you could see how it could potentially lead to a lot of confusion if you state "I agree with the whole 'Pascal's wager' argument" when in fact what you mean is you agree with some refutation of Pascal's Wager.

    I knew what you meant though. You are quite right to reject Pascal's Wager, since it is quite a bad argument.
  11. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    06 Nov '12 07:05
    Originally posted by LemonJello
    You are quite right to reject Pascal's Wager, since it is quite a bad argument.
    I disagree - I cannot think of a more
    rational reason to believe in a god!

    Its still a bad argument though, but
    one no theist should reject. Because
    at least it is an argument
  12. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12697
    06 Nov '12 08:21
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    I'm saying that your decision to follow God should be because you love God, and that you believe His way to be the correct way.

    Not because you're trying to "hedge your bets" or to have it "both ways", or as a "just in case" justification.

    So yes, I agree with the rejection of Pascal's wager, as LJ brought to my attention. I was saying I agree with t ...[text shortened]... e reasons. "Hedging one's bets" is not a good reason to believe in God. Faith is.
    My decision to follow God is because He loves me.

    HalleluYah !!! Praise the Lord! Holy! Holy! Holy!
  13. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    06 Nov '12 10:081 edit
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    I disagree - I cannot think of a more
    rational reason to believe in a god!

    Its still a bad argument though, but
    one no theist should reject. Because
    at least it is an argument
    ????

    I think we are using a different meaning of the word rational.

    Pascals wager is badly logically flawed.

    The fact that it sounds superficially convincing doesn't make it rational given that it is
    shot full with logical fallacies.

    in fact the entire raison d'etre of the site I linked is pointing out that pascals wager is
    a really terrible argument full of logical fallacies....

    Which brings me back to "how can an argument that is known to be fatally logically flawed
    be termed rational?"



    Although I can see where Suzianne is coming from when she says pascals wager is a bad reason
    to believe in god. (the idea that god couldn't tell those who were just hedging their bets is a perfectly
    valid objection to pascals wager) I suspect that she now rejects pascal's wager because it is logically
    unsound and has been totally destroyed.

    Because Suzianne used to advocate pascals wager.... Then we had a discussion about it where she
    accused me of using the arguments of the devil (because they were so frikin awesome apparently)
    and now she doesn't use pascals wager any more....




    EDIT: as this is the 'good quotes' thread....


    Giles: This is madness. What could you have been thinking? You are the Slayer. Lives depend upon you. I make allowances for your youth, but I expect a certain amount of responsibility, instead of which you enslave yourself to this-this... cult.
    [we see Buffy is wearing a cheerleading outfit]
    Buffy: You don’t like the color?
  14. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    06 Nov '12 13:003 edits
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    ????

    I think we are using a different meaning of the word rational.

    Pascals wager is badly logically flawed.

    The fact that it sounds superficially convincing doesn't make it rational given that it is
    shot full with logical fallacies.

    in fact the entire raison d'etre of the site I linked is pointing out that pascals wager is
    a really terri [we see Buffy is wearing a cheerleading outfit]
    Buffy: You don’t like the color?
    I think that Wolfgang is actually saying that 'of all the arguments to believe in a god, Pascal's wager is the most rational'.

    I.e. this fundamentally flawed argument is actually the best (or should we say 'least worst'😉 one we can come up with.

    Suzienne's perfectly valid reason for rejecting it is only one of the ways that it fails.

    Oh, and a quote: The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike (Delos B. McKown)

    --- Penguin.
  15. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    06 Nov '12 13:16
    Originally posted by checkbaiter
    I would rather live my life believing in Jesus Christ as my Savior and die to find out he wasn't... than to live my life not believing and die to find out he could have been.
    Author unknown
    Do you feel the same way about Mohammed and Allah, or do Muslims not enjoy the same benefits as Christians when it comes to getting it wrong?
Back to Top