Pascal's wager

[Mystic]

Well that's a different wager, which would be "Don't offend any gods..." as opposed to "choose belief in them".

Worship was required for the emperor at times, and even heirs and representatives. So, no, it wasn't all that different throughout the entire history of the Imperium.

(See )

Ahh ok, thanks for the info.

[Anomalocaris]

Well that's a different wager, which would be "Don't offend any gods..." as opposed to "choose belief in them".

Worship was required for the emperor at times, and even heirs and representatives. So, no, it wasn't all that different throughout the entire history of the Imperium.

(See )

The Romans during the Imperior period require worship of the emporer in much the same sense we might demand pledges of allegence to the flag. It is different from threatening infinite torture for all eternity if you don't banish all doubt of any kind of the emperor from every last corner of your heart and mind.

[Cato]

Some problems I have with pascal's wager:

1) No religion accepts fake belief, so you cannot fake belief in a God.
2) There is different religions, so why appease one and not the other?
3) A True God would want you to be honest to yourself, so if you honestly don't believe in God, he would want you to remain honest with that.
4) Hell and God don't go together, if there is God, he is Merciful, if he is Merciful, then there is no hell. Simple as that.

Mystic,

I will share with you my views; however, I disdain the usual parsing of arguments where others lose all semblance of meaning. I will use your numbering to differentiate:

1) One could easily do this to get along with a social group; however, God would know the differnece, so what's the point?

2) You brought the point into focus with this point. If one were consistent, then one 'must' abide by 'every' religion. The problem for the individual is that religions establish a system that is singularly exclusive (most, talking Abrahamic religions here).

3) This is the point where you become a deist and I become an atheist. If there were a God I would expect that he/she valued truth and honsty. Religion has proved, regardless of religious flavor, that God does not value truth and honesty...has not, does not, will not...according to religion. As a deist you invoke god for what I simply say we don't know yet. Considering either case, religion be damned.

4) You seemed to have already figured out that the traditional attributes given to God don't reconcle with reality, religiously speaking. Not only is there no hell; there is no heaven.

[CliveStaples]

I don't understand the "God would want you to be honest to yourself" thing. God wants child molesters to be child molesters?

[Mystic]

I don't understand the "God would want you to be honest to yourself" thing. God wants child molesters to be child molesters?

I don't understand your analogy.

[Rhizomorph13]

I don't understand the "God would want you to be honest to yourself" thing. God wants child molesters to be child molesters?

I don't understand your analogy.

Obvious strawman is obvious.

[CliveStaples]

I don't understand the "God would want you to be honest to yourself" thing. God wants child molesters to be child molesters?

I don't understand your analogy.

Suppose that you're quite an evil person at your core. If God wants you to be honest to yourself, then you must act authentically to who you are at your core.

But I don't think that's right. If you're quite an evil person at your core, wouldn't a good person--divine or otherwise--want you do choose to be different? To care more for others, etc.?

[Darth]

Theramintrees'/Qualiasoup's destruction of Pascal's wager
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZpJ7yUPwdU

One point: According to that video Pascal actually said that the faking, the going through the motions of belief, doing the rituals, will cause you to become a believer.

[jonb]

Suppose that you're quite an evil person at your core. If God wants you to be honest to yourself, then you must act authentically to who you are at your core.

Yes that is one of the many problems with that god notion of yours which you have correctly identified there. You can aviod it by rejecting concept of good and evil, but then. . . I could go on forever, but who am I to usurp Fr0d0's job.

[Raskolnikov]

Some problems I have with pascal's wager:

1) No religion accepts fake belief, so you cannot fake belief in a God.
2) There is different religions, so why appease one and not the other?
3) A True God would want you to be honest to yourself, so if you honestly don't believe in God, he would want you to remain honest with that.
4) Hell and God don't go together, if there is God, he is Merciful, if he is Merciful, then there is no hell. Simple as that.

There are a lot of assumptions about the nature of the uber deity here. Specifically re part 4, why should mercy be a requisite divine characteristic? The OT paints god as an epic, jealous tyrant.