Atheism Saved My Life

[Perpetual Change]

Pascal's Wager is just an awful, awful concept.

Speaking from personal experience, PW is one of the reasons I started questioning these things.

And there is no way that belief is a choice.

Again from personal experience, I find I often have to "correct" my thinking.  I'll catch myself not believing, and I have to step back make the decision to believe again.  It's very unnatural for me but it's gotten easier over time.

I'm pretty sure belief is about more than just telling yourself something is true until you stop questioning it.

[Adami]

Pascal's Wager is just an awful, awful concept.

Speaking from personal experience, PW is one of the reasons I started questioning these things.

And there is no way that belief is a choice.

Again from personal experience, I find I often have to "correct" my thinking.  I'll catch myself not believing, and I have to step back make the decision to believe again.  It's very unnatural for me but it's gotten easier over time.

This post alone makes me question your faith.

[Jamesman42]

To me, PW works theoretically as just a good outline of the consequences. It's really just a mathematical way of figuring the results of a choice (to accept God's existence and try to live for Him or not).

Pascal's Wager is just an awful, awful concept.

Speaking from personal experience, PW is one of the reasons I started questioning these things.

And there is no way that belief is a choice.

Again from personal experience, I find I often have to "correct" my thinking.  I'll catch myself not believing, and I have to step back make the decision to believe again.  It's very unnatural for me but it's gotten easier over time.

People are probably gonna keep jumping on you for this, but this happens to me every now and then. It happens when I just sort of live out something contrary to my beliefs, and I have to get myself back on track.

[Adami]

James, it sounds like you're saying something like "Once in a while I find myself not living up to the standards of my belief system and have to put myself back on the moral track" or something along those lines.


IF that's true, it's a bit different than "Sometimes I find myself not believe in god, and then have to force myself to believe again".


The first is natural and human, the second is just impossible.

[Jamesman42]

Oh, I thought H-bar meant stuff more along the lines of specific beliefs, such as lusting or something.

[Adami]

Oh, I thought H-bar meant stuff more along the lines of specific beliefs, such as lusting or something.

Well maybe, but we were talking about belief in god when he said it, not sure why he would mention belief in specific moralities or something. But if that's what he meant, then my apologies.

[Jamesman42]

Hmm, I agree with you, because I thought it would have made sense that he wasn't talking about believing in God.

[Perpetual Change]

Hmm, I agree with you, because I thought it would have made sense that he wasn't talking about believing in God.

Yeah, I was talking about simply having to remind oneself to, say, stop visually sexing every female one comes into contact with. I was talking more about the whole, "repeat 'I believe in God' to yourself until you stop having whatever doubts you thought you were" type thing.

I always have my doubts. On better days, I like to think God put them there for a reason. Lying to myself until the doubts ceased to exist would, in my opinion, be an abuse of that.

[j]

  All of those things you listed that you consider important to being a good person probably--at least in part--come from your religious background.

-J

I see your point. But I also believe that these things are just what I've observed in every day life.
If you watch an honest, hardworking man, you'll see that he ends his day exhausted, but content with the knowledge that he's fulfilled his role as provider for his family, and as a responsible member of society. If you watch a kind, gentle person, you'll see that those surrounding him/her will be happy, and kind to others in turn.

Absolutely.  I wasn't trying to say that's the only place one could pick up those values, just that it could be likely in your case given what you said about your upbringing and what I know about Christian morals.

-J

[William Wallace]

A thought about Pascal's Wager: I doubt it was meant to be made on its own. Added to the philosophical, historical and scientific arguments in favor of God's existence, the Wager carries much more weight. With that in mind, I think this comparison makes little sense.

                     ~God is real~                 ~God isn't real~


~Believe~          yay Heaven                     blackness/nothing


~Don't Believe~    Hell                              blackness/nothng

[Ħ]

Oh, I thought H-bar meant stuff more along the lines of specific beliefs, such as lusting or something.

Well maybe, but we were talking about belief in god when he said it, not sure why he would mention belief in specific moralities or something. But if that's what he meant, then my apologies.

Well I mean everything in general.  Whether it comes to believing a verse without any other reason to believe it other than its existence, or to believing who I am, or believing in God, or believing abstract things like love/peace/strength actually exist, or believing this world we live in is actually something real, or even if there is absolute truth.  Virtually everything I believe, whether spiritual or physical, I am never 100% confident, and am constantly stepping back and starting from square 1.  I think that's healthy to constantly go through the process and reaffirm what you believe when you find yourself "backsliding" as a lot of relgious people say.

[GuineaPig]

A thought about Pascal's Wager: I doubt it was meant to be made on its own. Added to the philosophical, historical and scientific arguments in favor of God's existence, the Wager carries much more weight. With that in mind, I think this comparison makes little sense.

                     ~God is real~                 ~God isn't real~


~Believe~          yay Heaven                     blackness/nothing


~Don't Believe~    Hell                              blackness/nothng

It's still doing a cost/benefit analysis on a spiritual position.

To say nothing of the fact that it could presumably be just as bad to believe as not to believe.

[millahh]

A thought about Pascal's Wager: I doubt it was meant to be made on its own. Added to the philosophical, historical and scientific arguments in favor of God's existence, the Wager carries much more weight. With that in mind, I think this comparison makes little sense.

                     ~God is real~                 ~God isn't real~


~Believe~          yay Heaven                     blackness/nothing


~Don't Believe~    Hell                              blackness/nothng

It's still doing a cost/benefit analysis on a spiritual position.

To say nothing of the fact that it could presumably be just as bad to believe as not to believe.

"And what if we picked the wrong religion?  Every day, we're just making God madder and madder!"

[Quadrochosis]

I hope you never become so closed minded to any possibility and you will always keep your options open.

Because only Christians are open minded. Everyone else is close minded.

[Portrucci]

If I am punished for growing up in a non-religious household, and for using my reason and logic in not accepting theistic claims, then God is pretty mean.  

I just think that IF there is a God (and that's a big IF), he (why am I even using 'he' here? oh it's all so antiquated) will reward people for being decent and kind, regardless of what the believe. (as in an eskimo will be judged the same as a Christian man from Texas...on how they have acted. there will be no bias because one was 'lucky' enough to be exposed to the 'true' religion.)

At the end of the day though, believe what you need to believe in order to get through life. If you don't need to believe to be happy, never feel pressured to do so. You won't be judged harshly if your still a good person  

[Ħ]

If I am punished for growing up in a non-religious household, and for using my reason and logic in not accepting theistic claims, then God is pretty mean.  

IMO, people that grow up without being shoved religion down their throats are in a better position later on to make a logical choice.

[Quadrochosis]

If I am punished for growing up in a non-religious household, and for using my reason and logic in not accepting theistic claims, then God is pretty mean. 

IMO, people that grow up without being shoved religion down their throats are in a better position later on to make a logical choice.

There's no evidence either way to that claim.

[El JoNNo]

If I am punished for growing up in a non-religious household, and for using my reason and logic in not accepting theistic claims, then God is pretty mean. 

IMO, people that grow up without being shoved religion down their throats are in a better position later on to make a logical choice.

There's no evidence either way to that claim.

Too be fair he did say "IMO". I do disagree with what he said though.

[Ħ]

Well regarding my personal beliefs, I feel bad for Christians that grew up in that thinking, because one day they are going to ask themselves "Do I just believe this because I was born into it?" rather than a person who for lack of a better word is less biased.

[Adami]

Am I misreading this? Or did a strongly claimed christian claim that growing up agnostic/atheist is better than growing up religious..........and people who aren't religious are arguing with him?

[El JoNNo]

Yeah your right I completely misread that 

[Bombardana]

That is one of the reasons that Pascal's Wager is a terrible argument. It implies that either your God is dumb or disingenuous about wanting true belief. On top of all that if you want to resort to what if scenarios; what if it isn't the Christian god? What if it's Shangdi, Aphrodite
Apollo, Baal, Ba Xian, Fenrir, Hades etc etc etc etc.... Oh but wait there's MORE! What denomination of these religions should you follow; for it is a bigger list.

Pascal's wager is a fail argument.

People in favour of Pascal's wager never seem to think that you could go to heaven simply by being a good person (without the need for accepting Jesus Christ or whatever X religious denomination deems necessary to be "saved"). I'm an agnostic atheist, but if there were to be a personal God (and a heaven), who is to say that God would not welcome all good people regardless of belief?

Not to imply that I am good of course. 

[j]

I just think that IF there is a God (and that's a big IF), he (why am I even using 'he' here? oh it's all so antiquated)\

Ok, let's not be ridiculous here.  If there's a God, it's OBVIOUSLY not a woman.

Well regarding my personal beliefs, I feel bad for Christians that grew up in that thinking, because one day they are going to ask themselves "Do I just believe this because I was born into it?" rather than a person who for lack of a better word is less biased.

This is a good point, and I often thought of that when I was a Christian.  If God is just, then he can't punish you through ignorance that is no fault of your own.  So wouldn't I have been better off being born into a household with no Christians, instead of being a Christian by default and having a bunch of doubts?

But if you think about it, that's a very simplistic way to look at the "nurture" side of it.  Whatever we're born into, our experiences continue to affect our thinking and our decisions for our whole lives, not just when we're children living at home with our parents.

-J

[ClairvoyantCat]

I'm an agnostic atheist, but if there were to be a personal God (and a heaven), who is to say that God would not welcome all good people regardless of belief?

Because if God welcomed people of all beliefs the church would lose a lot of it's following. 

[Quadrochosis]

Ok, let's not be ridiculous here.  If there's a God, it's OBVIOUSLY not a woman.

What? Why is it ridiculous to consider the possibility that God could be a woman?

Personally, I feel that if there is a God, he (not implying gender) is a sexless being, but if he is either a man or a woman, then I think it is far more likely that he would be a woman.

Or you could take the George Carlin approach, "If there is a God, he has to be a man, after all, only a man could fuck things up this badly"

[Adami]

I'm an agnostic atheist, but if there were to be a personal God (and a heaven), who is to say that God would not welcome all good people regardless of belief?

Because if God welcomed people of all beliefs the church would lose a lot of it's following. 

According to judaism, beliefs don't matter. Hasn't affected our tiny but strong membership. But unfortunately I think you're right.

[j]

Ok, let's not be ridiculous here.  If there's a God, it's OBVIOUSLY not a woman.

What? Why is it ridiculous to consider the possibility that God could be a woman?

Personally, I feel that if there is a God, he (not implying gender) is a sexless being, but if he is either a man or a woman, then I think it is far more likely that he would be a woman.

Or you could take the George Carlin approach, "If there is a God, he has to be a man, after all, only a man could fuck things up this badly"

While I am kind of a chauvinist, I was just kidding.

But on a serious note, I think assigning a particular gender to God is just one of our anthropomorphic tendencies.

-J

[Quadrochosis]

Ok, let's not be ridiculous here.  If there's a God, it's OBVIOUSLY not a woman.

What? Why is it ridiculous to consider the possibility that God could be a woman?

Personally, I feel that if there is a God, he (not implying gender) is a sexless being, but if he is either a man or a woman, then I think it is far more likely that he would be a woman.

Or you could take the George Carlin approach, "If there is a God, he has to be a man, after all, only a man could fuck things up this badly"

While I am kind of a chauvinist, I was just kidding.

But on a serious note, I think assigning a particular gender to God is just one of our anthropomorphic tendencies.

-J

Oh ok

But yea, I agree on the gender issue, but if I had to really honestly pick, I'd probably say that God is a woman.

[Ħ]

That is one of the reasons that Pascal's Wager is a terrible argument. It implies that either your God is dumb or disingenuous about wanting true belief. On top of all that if you want to resort to what if scenarios; what if it isn't the Christian god? What if it's Shangdi, Aphrodite
Apollo, Baal, Ba Xian, Fenrir, Hades etc etc etc etc.... Oh but wait there's MORE! What denomination of these religions should you follow; for it is a bigger list.

Pascal's wager is a fail argument.

People in favour of Pascal's wager never seem to think that you could go to heaven simply by being a good person (without the need for accepting Jesus Christ or whatever X religious denomination deems necessary to be "saved"). I'm an agnostic atheist, but if there were to be a personal God (and a heaven), who is to say that God would not welcome all good people regardless of belief?

Not to imply that I am good of course. 

That's a good observation.  Just by reading some arguments online against PW, most of them revolve around the concept of being a "good person" without religion, as if they assume that PW-supporters believe that the purpose of religion is to make someone a "good person".  Which in the case of Christianity, it is not.

[Sigz]

I'd say that Pascal's Wager is a mildly convincing argument, but only of the point that believing in god is a 'safer' option. It does nothing to convince one of God's existence, and so in the end it's pretty much useless.

[El JoNNo]

Here, Matt Dillahunty utterly destroys Pascal Wager

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlIymF6Fx6c

[Tick]

The part of Pascal's wager where he unintentionally gets it right is the fact their are Kingdom principals which one can tap into unknowingly and yet still reap the rewards.
Its like the law of gravity. Whether or not you believe in it is irrelevant because if you walk off a talk building you will plummet downward. Unbelief in this law makes zero difference.

[El JoNNo]

The part of Pascal's wager where he unintentionally gets it right is the fact their are Kingdom principals which one can tap into unknowingly and yet still reap the rewards.
Its like the law of gravity. Whether or not you believe in it is irrelevant because if you walk off a talk building you will plummet downward. Unbelief in this law makes zero difference.

What?

[Tick]

The part of Pascal's wager where he unintentionally gets it right is the fact their are Kingdom principals which one can tap into unknowingly and yet still reap the rewards.
Its like the law of gravity. Whether or not you believe in it is irrelevant because if you walk off a talk building you will plummet downward. Unbelief in this law makes zero difference.

What?

Sorry, have to get to work. Don't have time to explain my statement.
Later dudes!

[Rathma]

I seriously doubt that Pascal's wager has helped convert more people to Christianity. It probably made some Christians feel good about themselves though