ALL B.S ASIDE DO YOU BELEAVE IN GOD?

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
G

Gordon Gekko

Sicc OG
#8
May 15, 2002
4,689
15
38
#8
I see it like this. I believe in God, but its hard to these days though because everybody who teaches you about God is only doing it for money. It makes you wonder if they just fuckin with ya head to get paid or are they really doing it for the love of God. You look at Church, its just a big ass business that feeds off of people's beliefs. You look in the bible, they say u gotta pay tithes...the church take tithes as being money when the bible never said that. Tithes can just be your time, attention or somethin...so basically people are using God to make money these days so its hard to believe. Then u got Hollywood and the MAN MADE bible telling you what they want you to believe. The bible seems like one big fairy tale because nobody knows what happened back then. But I beleive in God because its some things that happens on this earth that u cant explain.
 
shep

shep

Sicc OG
#9
Oct 2, 2002
3,233
2
0
#9
2-0-Sixx said:
Oh, all B.S aside. Well then, that changes everything...........................NO, I don't believe in God, but I once met a man named Godfrey
Click to expand...

hahaha.... now that's funny


i don't believe in god either
 
SMOKIELOCS

SMOKIELOCS

Sicc OG
#11
Aug 20, 2003
4,122
376
0
#11
LOOK I ASKED A ? ITS A SIMPLE ONE ALOT OF YOU FOOLS TRY TO BE CUTE ON THE NET THAT SHITS UNCALLED FOR.YES OR NO AND HERES ANOTHER ? FOR ALL THOSE THAT DONT BELIEVE IN GOD LETS SAY YOR ABOUT 2 DIE WHO YOU GUNNA CALL ON?ALOT OF ATHIESTS WILL PROBLY CALL ON JESUS.AND NO NEED 2 ACT ALL TOUGH OR CUTE THIS IS ANOTHER SIMPLE ?
 
2-0-Sixx

2-0-Sixx

Sicc OG
#14
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#14
Pascal's Wager (God is a safe bet)


"If you believe in God and turn out to be incorrect, you have lost nothing -- but if you don't believe in God and turn out to be incorrect, you will go to hell. Therefore it is foolish to be an atheist."

This argument is known as Pascal's Wager. It has several flaws.

Firstly, it does not indicate which religion to follow. Indeed, there are many mutually exclusive and contradictory religions out there. This is often described as the "avoiding the wrong hell" problem. If a person is a follower of one religion, he may end up in another religion's version of hell.

Even if we assume that there's a God, that doesn't imply that there's one unique God. Which should we believe in? If we believe in all of them, how will we decide which commandments to follow?

Secondly, the statement that "If you believe in God and turn out to be incorrect, you have lost nothing" is not true. Suppose you're believing in the wrong God -- the true God might punish you for your foolishness. Consider also the deaths that have resulted from people rejecting medicine in favor of prayer.

Another flaw in the argument is that it is based on the assumption that the two possibilities are equally likely -- or at least, that they are of comparable likelihood. If, in fact, the possibility of there being a God is close to zero, the argument becomes much less persuasive. So sadly the argument is only likely to convince those who believe already.

Also, many feel that for intellectually honest people, belief is based on evidence, with some amount of intuition. It is not a matter of will or cost-benefit analysis.

Formally speaking, the argument consists of four statements:

-One does not know whether God exists.

-Not believing in God is bad for one's eternal soul if God does exist.

-Believing in God is of no consequence if God does not exist.

-Therefore it is in one's interest to believe in God.

There are two approaches to the argument. The first is to view Statement 1 as an assumption, and Statement 2 as a consequence of it. The problem is that there's really no way to arrive at Statement 2 from Statement 1 via simple logical inference. The statements just don't follow on from each other.

The alternative approach is to claim that Statements 1 and 2 are both assumptions. The problem with this is that Statement 2 is then basically an assumption which states the Christian position, and only a Christian will agree with that assumption. The argument thus collapses to "If you are a Christian, it is in your interests to believe in God" -- a rather vacuous tautology, and not the way Pascal intended the argument to be viewed.

Also, if we don't even know that God exists, why should we take Statement 2 over some similar assumption? Isn't it just as likely that God would be angry at people who chose to believe for personal gain? If God is omniscient, he will certainly know who really believes and who believes as a wager. He will spurn the latter... assuming he actually cares at all whether people truly believe in him.

Some have suggested that the person who chooses to believe based on Pascal's Wager, can then somehow make the transition to truly believing. Unfortunately, most atheists don't find it possible to make that leap.

In addition, this hypothetical God may require more than simple belief; almost all Christians believe that the Christian God requires an element of trust and obedience from his followers. That destroys the assertion that if you believe but are wrong, you lose nothing.

Finally, if this God is a fair and just God, surely he will judge people on their actions in life, not on whether they happen to believe in him. A God who sends good and kind people to hell is not one most atheists would be prepared to consider worshipping.
Click to expand...
 
SMOKIELOCS

SMOKIELOCS

Sicc OG
#17
Aug 20, 2003
4,122
376
0
#17
2-0-Sixx said:
^^^Simple answer for a simple minded dumb fuck. NO. I would not call on Hey-Zues

When I die I will close my eyes and embrace the darkness.
Click to expand...
I GUESS I MUST OF HIT A NERVE FOR YOU 2 COME SIDEWAYS AT ME LIKE THAT.LISTEN BRO WHILE YOUR NICE AND SAFE BEHIND A COMPUTER SCREEN YOU CAN MAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND INSULTS.IN THE STREETS YOU WOULDNT SAY SHIT TO ME.SO CHECK THIS OUT HIT ME ON THE PM.OR YOU CAN SEE ME AT THE NEXT BBQ.IT WAS A ? THAT I ASKED.SO SINCE YOUR TRYING 2 BE CUTE.AND I NEW ONE OF YOU FOOLS WOULD SAY SOME STUPID SHIT.IM GUNNA CALL YOU ON ITYOU WANNA TALK 2 ME LIKE A MAN OR BITCH OUT BEHIND A COMPUTER SCREEN.ITS UP 2 YOU 2 0 SIXX....
 
SMOKIELOCS

SMOKIELOCS

Sicc OG
#19
Aug 20, 2003
4,122
376
0
#19
OK I SEE THE TYPE OF PERSON YOU ARE.LISTEN MAN IF I INUSLTED YOU THAT WASNT THE INTENTION I ASKED THE SECOND ? AND COMENTED ON IT.HERE'S A BETTER ? WHY DONT YOU BELIVE.THE REASON WHY IM ASKIN THESE ?'S IS IM WORKING ON A RELIGION VS ATHEISTISM PAPER AND WANTED FEED BACK AND I GOT IT.SO COMEIN AT ME SIDEWAYS SHOWED THAT IGNORANCE HAS NO BOUNDS.AND ANOTHER THING I THOUGHT ATHIESTS DIDNT GIVE A FUCK ABOUT SHIT.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom