Priorities

Originally posted by SwissGambit
**whistles the "Jeopardy" theme**

I revised my statement saying that I couldn't possibly have been using "Pascal's Gamble" since I had absolutely no knowledge of it previousely. Turns out, ironically, that I was using the idea. Great minds think alike? Or are atheists just plain afraid of being proven wrong twice by two minds that never heard of each other? They have nothing to lose ONLY if they acknowledge their faliures.

Does anyone care to shoot down the "Pascal's Gamble" theory? This will last a while.

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
I revised my statement saying that I couldn't possibly have been using "Pascal's Gamble" since I had absolutely no knowledge of it previousely. Turns out, ironically, that I was using the idea. Great minds think alike? Or are atheists just plain afraid of being proven wrong twice by two minds that never heard of each other? They have nothing to lose ...[text shortened]... .

Does anyone care to shoot down the "Pascal's Gamble" theory? This will last a while.

Swissgambit posted a refutation of it above. Feel free to let us know what you find wrong with it.

You still haven't explained how it proves atheists wrong. Pascal's wager doesn't prove anything with respect to whether god exists or not.

Pascal's Wager doesn't prove that God does exist, but it proves atheists wrong for not abiding by their own rules. If atheists are supposed to be "logical," shouldn't they take into their chances into consideration and prove once and for all that they're not loony?

Take into consideration the many miracles, most recently the Apparitions at Fatima (13 October 1917), and realize that there were 70,000 approx. people there who witnessed this miracle.

http://www.ewtn.com/fatima/apparitions/October.htm

If atheists are hard core logical creatures, shouldn't they regard God's existence being true as a gamble they cannot lose?

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
Pascal's Wager doesn't prove that God does exist, but it proves atheists wrong for not abiding by their own rules. If atheists are supposed to be "logical," shouldn't they take into their chances into consideration and prove once and for all that they're not loony?

Take into consideration the many miracles, most recently the Apparitions at Fatima ...[text shortened]... reatures, shouldn't they regard God's existence being true as a gamble they cannot lose?

Atheists rules? What specific rule are you talking about?

I don't need to "take my chances" to prove I'm not loony. I don't believe in a god just as a bet. First of all, that's not true belief. Second, which god?

Which god should I roll the dice with? The Muslim god? Jesus? The Jewish view of God?

How about Krishna? Ganesh?

Not all atheists are logical and it's obvious not all theists are either.

If you know something about logical falacies then you should know the idea of the "false dichotomy" - you are posing that Atheists would either believe in god or they are loony. That's ridiculous on its face.

Have you read the refutation that SwissGambit posted? Do you have an actual logical response to it?

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
If atheists are hard core logical creatures, shouldn't they regard God's existence being true as a gamble they cannot lose?

Atheists are simply people who don't believe in God. Some of us are logical some are not. I am interested however that you made the claim. It clearly shows that you believe that logic must be a good reason for atheism.

I am one of those 'logical' atheists and I can tell you right now that 'a gamble you cannot loose' is a contradiction in terms. If you cannot loose, it is not a gamble.

Pascals wager has been refuted many times by many people and you know that. Now since you know that and yet still use it, you are essentially attempting to deceive. Please tell us why you wish to deceive us in order to support your claim.

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
Take into consideration the many miracles, most recently the Apparitions at Fatima (13 October 1917), and realize that there were 70,000 approx. people there who witnessed this miracle.

http://www.ewtn.com/fatima/apparitions/October.htm

Lets see. Do you have statements from all 70,000 people? If not then you clearly attempted to deceive us by implying that you did. What you probably have is the statements of a very small group of people who claim that they and 70,000 others witnessed something. I would also bet (since you want me to gamble) that the few witnesses that reported seeing something gave different reports.
Its also rather odd that there have been no apparitions since 1917. Other religions have had lots since then. Don't you think you should consider converting to another one?

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
LET THIS PUT JUSTIFIED FEAR IN ALL WHO READ IT. EINSTIEN'S THEORY OF RELATIVITY STATES, "MATTER CAN NEITHER BE CREATED NOR DESTROYED, ONLY CHANGED FROM ONE FORM TO ANOTHER." Here's a little logic for all you chess lovers, WHAT ELSE ABIDES BY THE SAME LAW? THE THEOLOGICAL CONCEPT OF GOD. THE UNIFICATION OF THE QUANTUM AND RELATIVITY SCIENTIFIC THEORIE ...[text shortened]... M.

DOES ANYONE DARE ECHO THIS CALL TO ACTION?

Either GOD is every particle in the universe (Pantheism) or there is no GOD (Atheism).

Originally posted by Rajk999
You seem to be making statements about the Bible without actually knowing what the Bible says. eg you said .... "The bible also says that god will hold true the laws that men set on earth, in heaven. ...." Which I asked you to verify but you obviously cannot.

Now you are saying that an atheist - a man that denies the existance of God is equivalent to one ...[text shortened]... E IS NO GOD. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

And if you believe in the bible, that's fine. For an atheist, it's just a book. Maybe an atheist should write a book and damn theists for believing, maybe that will convert you?

as for my talk about the bible, I've read it. twice, and some parts more than that. But, I apologize for not having a photographic memory and able to quote chapter and verse verbatim.

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
If one worships the wrong God, without knowledge of a better alternative, Christians believe that God will NOT condemn those who do not know any better. That is why it is so important that those who have the means to research NOT give in to impatience. It is therefore safer to believe in God than not to.

Example:

A Jew is raised his entire life ...[text shortened]... they're right or wrong simply because one aspect of ther belief cannot be disproved.

Are you saying that everyone with internet access and doesn't believe in god (or the RIGHT god) is damned?

Originally posted by brobluto
And if you believe in the bible, that's fine. For an atheist, it's just a book. Maybe an atheist should write a book and damn theists for believing, maybe that will convert you?

as for my talk about the bible, I've read it. twice, and some parts more than that. But, I apologize for not having a photographic memory and able to quote chapter and verse verbatim.

Here is the verse you are misinterpreting :

Matt 16: 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Tell me what does that have to do with atheists (also called fools in the Bible) making rules that will apply in heaven.

As for the consequences of being wrong ... there are 3 groups of people in the world :
1. the righteous (reward - eternal life)
2. the evil (punishment - death by fire)
3. the innocent (neither reward nor punishment .. you live and die never to be raised).

You figure out where atheists who actively condemn and insult God faring people will fall.

Originally posted by legochessmaniac
Pascal's Wager doesn't prove that God does exist, but it proves atheists wrong for not abiding by their own rules. If atheists are supposed to be "logical," shouldn't they take into their chances into consideration and prove once and for all that they're not loony?

Take into consideration the many miracles, most recently the Apparitions at Fatima ...[text shortened]... reatures, shouldn't they regard God's existence being true as a gamble they cannot lose?

I once met an Islamic fundamentalist and had a chat with him.

He told me I was going to hell unless I converted to Islam.

Specifically, he claimed that merely believing in God and Jesus was insufficient to save me from hell; I had to believe in Allah and Muhummad.

So, I have nothing to lose by believing in Islam, and everything to gain.

Don't you agree?

Originally posted by caissad4
Either GOD is every particle in the universe (Pantheism) or there is no GOD (Atheism).

I have a sophisticated theologian friend who claims that panentheism is also an option.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Here is the verse you are misinterpreting :

Matt 16: 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and ...[text shortened]... ).

You figure out where atheists who actively condemn and insult God faring people will fall.

My question regarding that passage is why doesn't the church make a law that people don't have to believe in God and worship him in order to enter int heaven? That all people, good and bad will enter through god's forgiveness since he is all merciful.

That sounds more like a god I can believe in. Benevolent and truly merciful.

Originally posted by brobluto
My question regarding that passage is why doesn't the church make a law that people don't have to believe in God and worship him in order to enter int heaven? That all people, good and bad will enter through god's forgiveness since he is all merciful.

That sounds more like a god I can believe in. Benevolent and truly merciful.

Why should church leades do something that makes absolutely no sense?

Originally posted by Rajk999
Why should church leades do something that makes absolutely no sense?

How does it make no sense? If God truly is merciful and benevolent, shouldn't he accept everyone? Why the stipulation of belief?