{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by Jodoronapo:
12/22/2016 8:21:15 PM
26
Care to make a wager
Warning: This post's content may trigger many people.
I have always been a follower of Jesus. And though I know not all of you are, an article recently caught my attention (and if some triggered atheist tries to shoot this down, so be it). Here is a reason to believe in God. Assisted by the probability theory.
Pascal's Wager
"God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives.
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
You must wager (it is not optional).
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain. God some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves.
Summary: "He is saying that if you say there is no God, and there is, then you missed an opportunity for a life of eternal happiness. But if you believe in God, and there turns out not to be one, then nothing good or bad happens after death. So the better choice would be to believe in God"
Merry Christmas!
-
[quote]Warning: This post's content may trigger many people. I have always been a follower of Jesus. And though I know not all of you are, an article recently caught my attention (and if some triggered atheist tries to shoot this down, so be it). Here is a reason to believe in God. Assisted by the probability theory. Pascal's Wager "God is, or God is not. Reason cannot decide between the two alternatives. A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up. You must wager (it is not optional). Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain. God some cannot believe. They should then 'at least learn your inability to believe...' and 'Endeavour then to convince' themselves. Summary: "He is saying that if you say there is no God, and there is, then you missed an opportunity for a life of eternal happiness. But if you believe in God, and there turns out not to be one, then nothing good or bad happens after death. So the better choice would be to believe in God" Merry Christmas! [/quote] I agree with you mate:)
-
It's always seemed like BS to me. It doesn't seem like if you're weighting the benefits of believing or not, you're really not believing if you choose too.
-
>Pascal's wager >2016
-
5 RepliesThe wager only helps the point that believing in a specific religion is a waste. This picture only shows the bigger ones. Not the other million or so
-
5 RepliesI didn't know Christians supported betting...
-
Okay, yes you don't lose anything if there is no god, but honestly living a godless life sounds a lot more liberating and fun, so if there is no god, then I'd prefer to gain things in this life rather than not lose anything but believe in god when he doesn't exist, since I wouldn't lose anything if I didn't believe anyways. Also, I will gladly refuse a god who bases passage of eternal life simply on your belief in him. All we have is a 2,000 year old (some parts obviously are older than that but you get what I'm saying) book to base this belief off of. And the farther that book falls into the past the more illogical it appears to be. Also, I'd prefer to be godless and kind, because it's the right thing to do, instead of being good out of fear of eternal damnation, because I don't consider that true kindness. I refuse to stand by a god who would toss atheists out of eternity purely because of their beliefs because my atheist friends are some of the best people I know, and why would an omnipotent being be concerned with the beliefs of inferior beings on an inferior and average world in an inferior and average solar system? Why should the beliefs of humans, only alive for a split second on the scale of time for a god, be such a large concern? It almost makes this god seem sadistic or heartless. If you read this far thank you for hearing the whole thing before lashing out, congratulations you're better than most. I hope you were able to see this point of view, I certainly understood your's despite my response
-
3 RepliesAren't there like 3000 gods in the world, how do we pick the right one.??
-
Pascal's wager has always been shot down by atheists. To them it seems naive or pointless. [spoiler]agnostic btw[/spoiler]
-
2 RepliesWhat If, in my religion, you go to hell for believing in god? [spoiler]checkm8[/spoiler]
-
Dormammu. I've come to bargain.
-
-
I didn't read but I'll bet $30
-
This is now a Talos thread.
-
Simply saying you believe in something is not the same as actually believing.
-
Edited by Captain_Yankz: 12/23/2016 1:36:11 AMEven if I didn't believe in God and this deity turned out to be real and benevolent, I'd assume said supreme being would forgive my ignorance and accept me with open arms. Eternal happiness is suffering, I would hate to live a life of nothing but pure happiness, that's boring. Change is the life of the universe, to be stuck with nothing but happiness is the equivalent to evolutionary stagnation. Quick edit: I'm Agnostic.
-
2 RepliesGod is that which cannot be defined. I've never had an issue with people believing in a higher power. My beef has always been with people trying to define that higher power through texts written by men, laws created by men, or words spoken by men. You cannot define god, you cannot fathom what it is because it is unfathomable. God cannot be a he or a she, a biped or quadruped, God cannot be good or evil, because all of these things are the creations of men. Taoism is quite clear about this: the Tao, their version of "God", is a force of nature which can never be grasped, comprehended, described, or defined by anyone or anything.
-
Edited by Fourteen 88: 12/23/2016 1:29:26 AMIf this so called "all knowing" being even existed, I'm pretty sure he would know that you believe in him only for your own selfish purposes and would send you to hell for that reason.
-
3 RepliesI live a basic life... I try to do good, do charity work, help anyone I can and live a peaceful life. Besides a bit of trolling I see myself living a good life but I don't believe in Christian religion or any religion. As a christian, do you see me as a good person or a bad person? And why?
-
What if, like what happens when you die, is like, based on what you believe? [spoiler]I'm so sorry for the cringe worthy post.[/spoiler]
-
I'm just gonna stick with what I believe in and say it's possible that god exists, and it's possible that god does not exist.
-
Good luck with this post! Most of the edgy tweens are going to attack you vehemently!
-
4 Replies[quote]Summary: Basically, what this is saying is by believing in God you can gain all but only lose little. But by not believing in Him you can lose much but gain very little."[/quote] >OP doesn't understand his own quote. >Deadass
-
I'm athiest, and I will let you have your own beliefs without saying a word against your choice
-
[b] [/b]
-
4 RepliesAs people will point out, though you may chose to believe there are so many interpretations that your odds of choosing correctly are astronomically small. In light of this, might I propose a different thought experiment I shall call "[i]The Nuclear Maze[/i]" Imagine you are in a nuclear reactor that's about to melt down. Protocol dictates that the entire facility will go into lockdown if such an event takes place. You heard a rumor, however, from a co-worker that one door will remain unlocked. A different co-worker said its a different door. Yet another mentioned that all exterior doors will be locked [b][i]but[/i][/b] there's a safe room somewhere in the facility. And so on and so on. So, which door/hall/elevator/airduct/etc. do you choose OR do you simply accept your fate and spend your last few minutes doing whatever you want?
-
Interesting thought.
