Is 'faith' really a 'great cop-out'?

[Darwinian]

Darwinian, you say many interesting and maybe true things. I've been thinking and I've come to this conclusion: I cannot prove 'God' exists, and I sure as can't prove that He is the God of the Bible. I have to take the Bible, Jesus etc mainly on faith (which aint good). What you say seems possible (and you too Evidence) and maybe I am wrong. If I am wrong, well, I'll die just the same. I will no doubt continue to ponder these things until I die and I hope I am right, cos then we'll hopefully meet up in eternity and have a great time. The drinks are on me. (Well actually they'll probably be free).

I have a sneaking suspicion that we are all wrong! But thanks And I'm holding you to that drink...

[Edwardo Piet]

Darwinian, you say many interesting and maybe true things. I've been thinking and I've come to this conclusion: I cannot prove 'God' exists, and I sure as can't prove that He is the God of the Bible. I have to take the Bible, Jesus etc mainly on faith (which aint good). What you say seems possible (and you too Evidence) and maybe I am wrong. If I am wrong, well, I'll die just the same. I will no doubt continue to ponder these things until I die and I hope I am right, cos then we'll hopefully meet up in eternity and have a great time. The drinks are on me. (Well actually they'll probably be free).

Well I think that its better go go on the evidence, what we understand rather than what we know nothing about. And to go for the much more probable explanation. The only reason not to is to go for Pascal's Wager, which falls on its face, especially considering the fact that you can't fake belief. Belief is not a matter of policy.

[CoxRox]

Pascal's Wager sucks somewhat. You are right when you say you can't fake belief.

[Edwardo Piet]

Pascal's Wager sucks somewhat. You are right when you say you can't fake belief.

If you can't fake belief, how does it only suck somewhat? The point of Pascal's Wager is you should believe in God in case you are wrong. But you can't choose your belief, its not a matter of policy, so surely that means Pascal's Wager falls completely on its face.

[Tiberius]

Pascal's wager falls on it's face in more ways than that. It assumes that God thinks crossing your fingers behind your back and saying "I believe" is a fine way to behave towards him, or that God is an imbecile that can't see through your lie.

Neither of these Gods are portrayed in any religion, so Pascal's wager deals with a completely new and really quite stupid God.

[CoxRox]

I completely agree with you both. It really does suck 100 %.

[Edwardo Piet]

But since the argument from scripture is invalid, if there is a God he - as far as we know - is just as likely to be the silly Pascal Wager God than the God of the bible or the koran. So really isn't the problem with the argument just that it suggests that IF God wants you to believe in him then you can do so out of matter of policy.
This applies whether God genuinely wants you to believe or whether he is content with fake belief. Or 'faking it till you make it', faking belief until you convince yourself.
Essentially trying to maintain your self-delusion until you're fully convinced.
And of course, if God exists, there is no evidence to suggest he would prefer believers to non-believers. As far as we know the opposite is just as likely. He might send all believers to hell and all atheists to heaven. And of course the agnostics could go either way too.

[CoxRox]

The Pascal Wager 'God' is worth diddly squat, so why say anything about this. It's pointless. We've already ascertained that this wager is a load of rubbish. If this God were to exist, maybe he would have a laugh at people hedging their bets.

[Edwardo Piet]

Because of this:

Pascal's Wager sucks somewhat. You are right when you say you can't fake belief.

I tried to explain to you that it didn't just suck somewhat, but 100% sucked.
Then Adrian said something about it on the matter. You agreed with us. And then I was discussing with him about it.
I added the bold in the quote of course.

[CoxRox]

I see. I was just surprised you were surmising what this imaginary god would be like.