Pascal's Wager

If the basis of my belief in God is that im better off beliveing than not. Would God still accept me as his believer?

Other urls found in this thread:

gotquestions.org/Matthew-7-21-23.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No, because you've done nothing about it beyond 'claim' the belief, and faith (belief) without works is "dead".
If, based on Pascal's wager, you make the only rational decision of genuinely looking for God, such that even He would have to admit you attempted it beyond reasonable doubt and are therefore non-imputable with blame should you fail to conclude He exists, then the curious thing is that you will invariably find that as it turns out He actually does, so long as you genuinely search for evidence.
Therefore making it so you are prompted to act in accordance with your discovery, and ultimately making you acceptable as a genuine believer, winning Pascal's wager.
Best of luck, the evidence is everywhere.
p.s. do some research on the fall of Babylon and the bible prophecy on it, that should activate your almonds

>If the basis of my belief in God is that im better off beliveing than not. Would God still accept me as his believer?
He would probably appreciate rational reasoning, yes.

Be truthful to yourself and fuck the consequences.
Let justice be done though the heavens fall.

thats a bad reason to believe in anything and at the end of the day is intellectually dishonest.

but yeah consciousness exists because a conscious being decided so in some atemporal causal relation apparently... lol. whay kind of mental gymnastics do you need to go through to believe in god? ill never understand it but i guess feels > reason.

mostly you need some experiences

Where can i find i formation on this matter? Surely it must be in the bible no?

I actually agree with you, user.
But I firmly believe that being truthful to oneself is essential to justice (individual goods in the context of the common good).

>accept me as his believer
Of course not. He knows you don't believe

The whole argument is bullshit. You know as well as He does whether or not you believe. That doesn't stop you from engaging in works anyway, but what are you doing other than being the best person you can be?

One of the few semi-contradictions in the Bible actually...
Paul claims faith alone saves, James says works & not faith alone.
A lot of people argue that works naturally stem from true belief and this it's not a genuine contradiction, but there is definitely different schools of thought on the subject between sects.

No.

I'd say no because he'd think youre stupid but then again he does prefer people stupid.
>because you've done nothing about it beyond 'claim' the belief
That's all you need. If you needed to do good works deathbed conversions/confessions would be no good.

Matthew 7:21-23King James Version (KJV)

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Just posting this here. Not trying to make a point or anything.

That's a good one. The "faith alone" meme is heavily tied to degeneracy and its' acceptance IME.

god can see right through your bullshit. IF you're belief is not sincere but motivated only by fear of hell and you believe in god only because you want to avoid hell god will call your bluff faggot and send your ass to hell anyway

If doing good things is necessary for salvation how could deathbed confessions be valid? They must be valid because Yeshua himself accepted one. Therefore faith is all you need.

No

Have you considered that child molestation exists.

Have fun on your death bed explaining why you lived your life the way you did and saying
>oh but I have faith
>pls save me pls

>caring about some semite skydaddy

What if you choose the wrong religion, and every week you make the real god madder and madder?

it depends on the brand of christianity. Some don't even have a hell, only heaven! Catholcucks have been notoriously corrupt historically and just absolved your sins if you wrote the priest a check. The priest is like your daddy for catholcucks he basically has aboslute power over your soul and has a direct line of communication to jesus. Calvinists belive that since god is all knowing he already planned out who is going to heaven and hell since the begging of time and that only a small elect are selected by god to go into heaven while the rest will burn in hell therefore worrying about shit is fucking pointless

gotquestions.org/Matthew-7-21-23.html
This gets more in depth about the verses.

tru, so being a theist and not practicing anyhting is the best bet

I just do what I think is right. If a god/goddess/etc really do exist, they may judge me as they please. Heaven, hell or perhaps something inbetween? I don't really care as long as I'm happy about the way I've lived my life.

A) Who specifically are you referring to getting saved? The man getting crucified alongside him? Where does it say that man never did any good works?
B) in practice your belief has essentially the opposite effect of Pascal's wager: ooohoho I can be as much of a degenerate as I want for my entire life because I can always be forgiven.

Norbro is lost but he's on a good track.

Well, if some cunt in the clouds are going to condemn me to hell just for not saying some magic words every Sunday; Even if I've been almost saintly, then I'll rather burn.

Implying that's not what everyone does to some degree. No Christian or any religious mong literally follows the bible as it was written.

I like your spirit tbqhfam.

Jews do. They think they have to chop up dicks for the covenant and that they need to invade and murder everybody for their holy land so they can build the next temple.

Jesus said, "If your leaders say to you, 'Look, the (Father's) kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the (Father's) kingdom is within you and it is outside you.
T.Gospel of Thomas
>magic words on Sunday
That's not biblical teaching, just fake Shit you saw on atheist memes.
Hell is natural law akin to "do stupid things win stupid prizes"

Thanks burgerbro!
Let's just hope for a kind and just god, and that our morals are the right ones. Would hate to burn for something shitty like eating pork.

You might believe something different, but I believe in a mighty and just God. We'll just have to see for ourselves where it all goes.

Yeah, I guess. Godspeed, for what it's worth coming from a heathen.

Godspeed to you as well, my friend.

No ofcourse god knows your reasoning.

But the other problem is which type of god do you pretend to believe in. Maybe Allah is the right one or or one of the christian sects like Mormons.

Also what if buddhism is the correct choice. How can you avoid going to naraka if you are not collecting karma points ?

So actually pascals wager is shit because if you are incorrect you will possibly go to other hells from other religions. And if you are correct god will not take your belief as genuine and you will go to hell too as you did not truly accept jesus in your heart.

I dunno m8, i've heard a few things saying it's not about your works, rather Christ dieing for our sins was a free gift, our works are just a bonus. No one earns, or even deserves heaven, which is why your works don't get you there.

But the point is to really believe if you just believe because it might be a possibility its not true faith. Its fake

Homer's rebuttal makes me think this wouldn't suffice.

John 14:6King James Version (KJV)

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Lmao Sup Forums, this is twice in a night I come across a thread about something I talked about earlier today with my roommate.

Pascal's wager is for pussies. If you pray to any god, purely to appease it in a halfassed manner in order to 'cover' yourself, as if you're paying for next month's car insurance, that is retarded.

Think about it, what if you were a god, and some dude is like "lol i praised you so you can't technically do anything now save me lol".

>23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

The Bible seems to be clear, I wouldn't be surprised if other religions are similar in this question.

well yeah if your life isn't at all changed by the fact that you believe in god, then you're probably doing it wrong.

I think one of the best things for me was to learn of the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus, and the arguments for intelligent design. It's two of the major things that made me feel certain of my faith.

The one that had the biggest impact on the way I think from day to day life so far was a combination of 2 things. learning about the problem of evil, and learning more in depth about the problem of Omniscience.

God is good, and yet there is still evil in the world. If he's good, why does he allow evil? Well there's actually a way to resolve this. All you gotta do is accept that while evil is still evil, ultimately the existence of evil creates even more good than it destroys, meaning that it's actually more moral to allow evils existence, than to take it away.

The second problem was with omnipotence, which actually turned out to be more of a semantics problem than anything, so I won't get into it, but I'll tell you what I learned from it.
When you realize that God knows everything, you learn that in a sense, although we do still have real free will, God knew what we were going to do with our free will, and therefore planned the universe accordingly. Before I learned this, coincidences were just coincidences. Now there are no coincidences because God chose that this is to happen. God uses everything around you to teach a lesson, and life's become a metaphor. I know what placebos are, and I do try to account for them, but ever since I learned this, there have been a lot more of these "coincidences" in my life.

anyways, ye. Dunno why I felt I had to type all this.

Maybe you felt you needed to type it because I strongly relate to this post. Feels good, bro.

not according to Christian theology

The question is does evil create infact more good ?

It might be, but how do you test that ? You would need 2 universes to compare. One with less evil one with more and then measure the goodness, in both of them.

>halfassed manner in order to 'cover' yourself
source? I always see this fallacy in the supposed refutation of pascals wager.

there is only three real classes of religions
messiah is coming
messiah was here
no messiahs

Christianitys messiah did come, he is currently not here and should come in the future again.

believing only (and I stress only) in things that you can test reproducible is autistic and not using all the tools you have available. in fact it's actually self defeating. For example, the assertion that only beliefs reproducible by scientific method are valid, but is this statement reproducible by the scientific method? Of course not. The scientific method is built from logic, so to say that you can only use science and not also logic is self defeating.

If you know any crafts, you'll know the best way to get the right result is to use every useful tool you have available. Science is just 1 of the useful tools, and it's silly to limit yourself like that in an honest open minded search for truth.

like it's good to be rational, just not at the cost of being illogical.

Fun fact: if you read his Pensées, you'll discover that he didn't based his believe on God because of this.

Who gives a shit. Unless you pray to Odin/Perun you aren't going to Valhalla you cuck.

*CHOP*

The two are in balance, always.

This balance cannot be upset, as it will inevitably find its way back. No matter how hard it has been shifted to one pole or the other.

>worship fictional pagan gods over one true god

I agree with you that using only the scientific method in your daily live is retarded.

But you made a theory on how the world works.

The problem is you can not figure out whats real and what is not without testing it, So yes you can make an educated guess based on your experience and feelings. And maybe you are right but you will not know if you are right until you test it.

Also you need to do this to convince others. You could actually elevate that theory to factual truth if you could test it. And thus spread it.

It would also take apart many arguments by atheists.

Its autistic if you use the scientific method for everything in your life. Like Relationships.

But in this case its not.

>If the basis of my belief in God is that im better off beliveing than not.
You don't really believe in it. But don't worry, most other religion people don't either and are just larpers.

I like to think of it in terms of economics. If everyone was good, then no one would work very hard. When there's evil, you have something to compete against, and this competition drives people to do incredible works of good.

That and evil also helps to hit the reset button, and forces us appreciate the good things we have. It teaches lessons in appreciation and humility that couldn't possibly exist in a world of only good.

It does make sense. And to prove it you need to test it.

2 universes would be the ideal test. But I think it could be tested in a country. That is closed of totally walled off.

For example in NK. Alot of bad shit is happening how much good is happening there ? You could measure it on a scale. Maybe goodness could be measured as the relative change in hormone levels.

It might be possible to test it but it would require a lot of ressources money and time. And it would need to be done by a government directly. Kinda like the moon landing project. Over decades.

fuck your stupid classifications. What we're all interested in in the first place is what afterlife there is for us, and how to plan your beliefs accordingly.

>the one true god
>some fictional kike on a stick

Honestly if any of you are hardcore believers in Cucktianity or even thinking about it, I highly recommend both the Yale course on the New Testament and the one for the Old Testament. Being given an encyclopedic view of a religion is the best way to assess its credibility.

Soul re-attaches to another body based on how well you developed it.

If you damaged it, it may stick to something random like a beetle.

what evidence do you have for this incredible assertion

No because pascal's wager falls apart even if you introduce protestants and catholics side by side

So you would be faithless AND an idiot. If my name was Michael I would feel bad about sending someone to hell for being dumb.

kek i saw a post saying the christian god was actually satan and was fattening up our souls with prayer so he could eat them

religion is too open to intepretation

if the books say otherwise say they were written by false prophets

But what if there's a god that wants people to think he doesn't exist?

what makes him the true god, though? there's exactly the same amount of evidence for all of the deities we believed in at some point in time, which is zero.

you test what is testable, and you argue what is arguable. I acknowledge that testing and observation receive the right of way, but that doesn't mean arguments and thought experiments aren't a good way of figuring things out, especially in the realm of theology.

I think it's important for rationalists to realize that you can only test things that are of the temporal, spacial, and matterial world (ie the natural world), and that God is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial (ie beyond nature, and supernatural). Science can only test things that are of nature, so funny enough, you both figuratively and quite literally shouldn't try to test god.

However, what science can do is test things in nature that do logically suggest the existence or non-existence of the supernatural. An example of this is cosmology.

Here's an argument.
>1: Things that always exist don't need a cause, in fact it's actually somewhat logically impossible for them to have one, because to have a cause implies there was a time when the eternal thing didn't exist, and being eternal means there was no time when you didn't exist.
>2: Everything that comes to exist must have a cause, because we know from the law of causality that things just don't pop into existence out of nowhere.
>3: From this, we can conclude that If the universe is not eternal, then it was created.
>4: Scientific evidence suggests that there was no time, there was no space, there was no matter, and then boom, big bang and now nature exists.
>5: This means that something created the universe.
>6: That something is probably timeless, spaceless, and immaterial because it existed before there was time, space or matter for it to be.
Both the supernatural, eternal, conscious God, and the supernatural, eternal, random multiverse could fit here, although I happen to think God better explains all the evidence. I want to emphasize that the multiverse too is supernatural, so atheists need to stop being material-only retards.

God doesnt exist. And if he did isnt it arrogant that you speak in gods behalf when you have no clue?

If the soul is always attached to you, it must be sticky. It sticks best to you because you match it the best.

If you damage it then it will attach to something worse