I like to call it Pascal's copout.
Is "belief" under Pascal's wager really "belief" at all? How can you go from not believing in something due to lack of evidence, and then go to a state of "believing" while still knowingly lacking evidence? Seems to me more like pretending than believing which under most theist's line of "thinking" won't cut it to get you out of hell.
Is "belief" under Pascal's wager really "belief" at all? How can you go from not believing in something due to lack of evidence, and then go to a state of "believing" while still knowingly lacking evidence? Seems to me more like pretending than believing which under most theist's line of "thinking" won't cut it to get you out of hell.
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
