RE: Evidence Vs Faith
September 10, 2009 at 2:30 pm
(This post was last modified: September 10, 2009 at 7:21 pm by fr0d0.)
(Thanks Evie - I couldn't see as I passed the lockout time @ work didn't notice, and had no idea what had happened when I clicked 'post'!)
Which is why I said that the bribery idea was different in that it wasn't linked. I thought it'd help you to understand. This belief is like that tho'. Unlike a belief in something already known, this belief is in something entirely unknown. The reward: the Ferrari, is real, but the proof of God can never be known. But then... only through believing in God do you get the Ferrari.
Now this isn't, like is commonly attributed (but wrongly) to Pascal's wager, that the reward is unknown and irrelevant - like "believe and you go to heaven, disbelieve and you go to hell... so you may as well believe".. this is actual real world benefit. Believe and these promises will be fulfilled for you. People do it and can attest that it's true. As can I.
And more, the logic for God works provably as demonstrated in the Summa, for example.
Evie Wrote:Such promises do nothing for a change in belief, I need to actually be convinced
Which is why I said that the bribery idea was different in that it wasn't linked. I thought it'd help you to understand. This belief is like that tho'. Unlike a belief in something already known, this belief is in something entirely unknown. The reward: the Ferrari, is real, but the proof of God can never be known. But then... only through believing in God do you get the Ferrari.
Now this isn't, like is commonly attributed (but wrongly) to Pascal's wager, that the reward is unknown and irrelevant - like "believe and you go to heaven, disbelieve and you go to hell... so you may as well believe".. this is actual real world benefit. Believe and these promises will be fulfilled for you. People do it and can attest that it's true. As can I.
And more, the logic for God works provably as demonstrated in the Summa, for example.