1. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 19:42
    Pascal's Wager Simplified

    Options: 1) Accept God's Grace Gift of eternal life with an uncoerced decision to believe [place your confidence] in Christ for your salvation; 2) Reject the Person and Work of Christ as flimsy fiction. Risk/Reward Question: What if you're wrong?
  2. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    05 Jun '14 19:53
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    [b]Pascal's Wager Simplified

    Options: 1) Accept God's Grace Gift of eternal life with an uncoerced decision to believe [place your confidence] in Christ for your salvation; 2) Reject the Person and Work of Christ as flimsy fiction. Risk/Reward Question: What if you're wrong?[/b]
    Did you not get how stupid Pascal's Wager the last umpteen times you brought it up?

    http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/pascal.html

    http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_wager

    http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Pascal%27s_Wager

    http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=File:Cectic-Without_Hesitation.jpg


    It's an epically stupid argument that has been refuted. Many many many times.

    So stop making it. You're just wasting everyone's time.
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    05 Jun '14 20:07
    One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified:
    1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones.
    2. If you can't explain 1., then explain why you are not a member of all those religions. ie do you actually believe the argument is valid and act on it, or do you only expect other people to do so with regards to your religion?
  4. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 20:34
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified:
    1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones.
    2. If you can't explain 1., then explain why you are not a member of all those religions. ie do you actually believe the argument is valid and act on it, or do you only expect other people to do so with regards to your religion?
    "1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones." -twhitehead

    Thanks for your thoughtful statement of "One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified"; please identify these other options.
  5. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    05 Jun '14 21:03
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    "1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones." -twhitehead

    Thanks for your thoughtful statement of "One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified"; please identify these other options.
    Allah
    FSM
    Thor
    Loki
    Ra
    The god that only rewards Atheist's
    Ect ect ect
    ....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deities
  6. Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86348
    05 Jun '14 21:03
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    "1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones." -twhitehead

    Thanks for your thoughtful statement of "One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified"; please identify these other options.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religions_and_spiritual_traditions
  7. Joined
    13 Apr '11
    Moves
    1231
    05 Jun '14 21:08
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    [b]Pascal's Wager Simplified

    Options: 1) Accept God's Grace Gift of eternal life with an uncoerced decision to believe [place your confidence] in Christ for your salvation; 2) Reject the Person and Work of Christ as flimsy fiction. Risk/Reward Question: What if you're wrong?[/b]
    How can a decision be “uncoerced” if there are risks involved in not choosing this option? It is safe to say that if a person chooses your first option because of perceived risks (specifically the threat of being sentenced to spend an eternity in hell), that decision is being coerced.
  8. SubscriberBigDoggProblem
    The Advanced Mind
    bigdogghouse.com/RHP
    Joined
    26 Nov '04
    Moves
    110665
    05 Jun '14 21:45
    Even with GB's posts blocked, it's still painfully obvious that it's to him that people are replying.
  9. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    05 Jun '14 21:52
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    "1. Explain to me why the same argument does not apply to every other religion, including past or invented ones." -twhitehead

    Thanks for your thoughtful statement of "One problem with Pascal's Wager Simplified"; please identify these other options.
    Thanks for your thoughtless response to a thoughtful rebuttal; please identify your inability to engage in serious discussion.
  10. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 22:33
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    Allah
    FSM
    Thor
    Loki
    Ra
    The god that only rewards Atheist's
    Ect ect ect
    ....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deities
    Thank you googlefudge; I'll incorporate your listing ["Allah... FSM... Thor... Loki... Ra"] of persons and/or entities
    with my reply to twhitehead. Please clarify the identity of "The god that only rewards Atheist's Ect ect ect".
  11. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 22:36
    Originally posted by divegeester
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religions_and_spiritual_traditions
    dive, I'll include this site's contents if it provides additional entries with those furnished by googlefudge.
  12. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    05 Jun '14 22:39
    Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
    Thank you googlefudge; I'll incorporate your listing ["Allah... FSM... Thor... Loki... Ra"] of persons and/or entities
    with my reply to twhitehead. Please clarify the identity of "The god that only rewards Atheist's Ect ect ect".
    "The god that only rewards Atheist's" is one of the infinite* number of possible
    god concepts that exist in 'god space'**.

    It is a god that only sends people to heaven if they don't believe in the existence
    of gods.

    *If not infinite then extremely large, this point is debatable and may depend on
    whether infinite recursion is allowed, and whether or not god concepts are quantum.

    **Otherwise known as the 'plane of deities', 'The phase space of the gods', and Dunmanifestin.
  13. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 22:43
    Originally posted by PatNovak
    How can a decision be “uncoerced” if there are risks involved in not choosing this option? It is safe to say that if a person chooses your first option because of perceived risks (specifically the threat of being sentenced to spend an eternity in hell), that decision is being coerced.
    "How can a decision be “uncoerced” if there are risks involved in not choosing this option?" PatNovak. Same risk/reward reason that there are risks involved in choosing or not choosing "2) Reject the Person and Work of Christ as flimsy fiction." Human life on earth isn't all fun and games. There are many decisions we make which have significant consequences.
  14. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 22:46
    Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
    Even with GB's posts blocked, it's still painfully obvious that it's to him that people are replying.
    Hey, BDP. Isn't SG's gbaway working to expectation? By the way, he's been silent since late April. Should we be concerned?
  15. Standard memberGrampy Bobby
    Boston Lad
    USA
    Joined
    14 Jul '07
    Moves
    43012
    05 Jun '14 22:48
    Originally posted by Agerg
    Thanks for your thoughtless response to a thoughtful rebuttal; please identify your inability to engage in serious discussion.
    .... is there a question hidden within your full licensed paraphrase?
Back to Top