Atheists and Agnostics risk infinite loss for no gain

[Faith No More]

You still are using a possible God to try to defeat Pascal's wager.

No, I'm not, but I suspect such nuances are lost on you.

Let's see if I can clarify by removing all mentions of gods from the argument.

You are using and argument to claim A exists. I point out that your argument works equally to prove B,C, and D exist, which means you are not any closer to proving A exists. That does not mean I am using the existence of B,C, and D to prove you wrong.

That is just one of the ways in which Pascal's wager fails.

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

You still are using a possible God to try to defeat Pascal's wager.

No, I'm not, but I suspect such nuances are lost on you.

Let's see if I can clarify by removing all mentions of gods from the argument.

You are using and argument to claim A exists. I point out that your argument works equally to prove B,C, and D exist, which means you are not any closer to proving A exists. That does not mean I am using the existence of B,C, and D to prove you wrong.

That is just one of the ways in which Pascal's wager fails.

The atheist or agnostic is still risking infinite loss if he is wrong no matter if there are 1 or 4 choices of believe or damned.

So it does not help the predicament of the atheist or agnostic.

Pascal's wager says investigate the 4 choices.

[Minimalist]

There are many more than 4. Whatever will you do if you arrive at Valhalla and Odin wants to know why you did not die with a sword in your hand?

[Searching4truth]

how are we to investigate what is more appealing to its if his ways are above our ways as your Bible suggests

[Doubting Thomas]

For some reason, I do not feel threatened by the idea of hell. It might have something to do with not believing in it, and something to do with how fucking stupid Pascal's Wager is.

Same here. For Pascal's Wager to have any effect, they first need to prove that Hell is a real place, our consciousness survives death, that our consciousness would somehow be able to feel pain after being separated from our body, and that this god will actually send us to hell for not believing in him when he never offers proof of his existence.

The fact that God could make me believe if he wanted to but doesn't is either evidence that he wants to send me to Hell, in which case he is a monster not worthy of worship, or else he doesn't exist.

[Esquilax]

The atheist or agnostic is still risking infinite loss if he is wrong no matter if there are 1 or 4 choices of believe or damned.

So it does not help the predicament of the atheist or agnostic.

Pascal's wager says investigate the 4 choices.

*Sigh.*

Okay, let's try something new.

Hello! Welcome to Atheist Forums! We hope you'll engage us in discussion on a number of topics including religion, and enjoy your time doing so.

Discussion.

Meaning that you actually respond to points made, and have an ongoing dialogue about ideas. Do you get it?

Look, I don't know if you're a troll, or a poe, or just legitimately mistaken, for a believer, but I also don't care. Because, let me tell you, whatever your reasons for being here, if you actually want to continue without being ignored, then you need to absorb the things that people say to you and provide more than flat assertions when you respond. We're atheists, we prize evidence, and right now you're doing nothing to show us you're to be taken seriously. We don't like talking to brick walls.

It just depends: if you want to actually succeed in reaching people, you're going to have to start doing more than preaching. If you're happy failing your way out of the forum on a preaching ban, then by all means, continue doing what you're doing.

[Doubting Thomas]

When an atheist invokes the possibility of God, the atheist has just contradicted their own belief.

No, an atheist still doesn't believe in any gods, even if he/she admits that a god could exist if shown to in some manner. No gods have ever been shown to exist, and all gods were likely made up by man's imagination, but science will tell us that we don't know everything, and there could be some being way out there in space which fits the definition of a god. But until that being is discovered, we remain skeptical of all god claims since none of them are based upon evidence.

---

The atheist or agnostic is still risking infinite loss if he is wrong no matter if there are 1 or 4 choices of believe or damned.

No they're not. They're only risking not following some crazy, made up bullshit idea of a vengeful god which will condemn anyone to an eternity of suffering and torment even for the slightest transgression. Pascal's Wager only works if you presuppose that Christianity is true and there really is a Hell. It also only works if you accept the idea that someone can choose to start believing in something they don't believe in, your god is not omniscient, or else he doesn't care if someone is just going through the motions and only cares about increasing the numbers in the pews on Sunday mornings.

Pascal's wager says investigate the 4 choices.

More like investigate the 4,000 choices. You can't follow every single religion and not violate the tenets of the others. Christianity says to have no other gods except God, so even if you worship other gods "just in case" they're the right god, you're going to hell if Christianity is the one true religion. And I'm sure other religions have prohibitions against practicing Christianity. And even in Christianity there are thousands of different denominations.

So the smart thing to do is sit back and wait for one religion to prove itself beyond any doubt as the one true religion and then worship that one. Since none of them can do that, looks like my Sundays will be free.

[max-greece]

No, I'm not, but I suspect such nuances are lost on you.

Let's see if I can clarify by removing all mentions of gods from the argument.

You are using and argument to claim A exists. I point out that your argument works equally to prove B,C, and D exist, which means you are not any closer to proving A exists. That does not mean I am using the existence of B,C, and D to prove you wrong.

That is just one of the ways in which Pascal's wager fails.

The atheist or agnostic is still risking infinite loss if he is wrong no matter if there are 1 or 4 choices of believe or damned.

So it does not help the predicament of the atheist or agnostic.

Pascal's wager says investigate the 4 choices.

There are 4,400 choices, plus one on the basis that the "right" Belief may not have been stumbled upon as yet.

If we assume it would take you at least a week to evaluate a religion properly we'll need just over 84 years to have looked at them all and chosen one.

Therefore - you lose all your life to a fruitless study on the possibility that you might gain everlasting life thereafter.

A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush.

[JesusHChrist]

I can't believe some Christians continue to trot out worthless arguments such as Pascal's Wager. And seven pages of this crap!

Is this a member of the "Debating Atheists 101" class?

[Tonus]

Atheists and Agnostics risk infinite loss for no gain

Only if he becomes a theist.