Religion a Figment of Human Imagination...........

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Pascal’s contention was... devoid of any ability to reason with such a concept of faith, just do good so that God will have favor on you, just in case there is a God.

...read it. Pascal himself said you can't just fake it; God will not have favor on you just for putting on a good show.

That's why it's a bad analogy. 'Swiftboating' is getting distorted from it's accurate defintion just as Pascal's term has been.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by tommyjones

how about a lifetime worth of enjoying the precious few moments we have. an understanding that this is all we got and all we are going to get makes a person very humble. In an instant, for absolutely no reason it can all be gone. if you are a believer its like the end of the sopranos, an unfulfilling totality, everything goes to black and you dont even get a last glimpse of love, life, or happiness, just blackness.
if you are not wrapped up in the afterlife you have lived life fully with the understanding this is all you got and when it ends its ok for it to be over. there isn't a need for an explanation or answers as none will come.

Does this assume Christians are not enjoying their lives? If so, how so? My belief in God actually gives me peace. I know that’s cliché but it’s true. My belief also helps me realize that when it is all gone in an instant that it’s not over.

I’m not quite sure how you conclude that if you’re a believer it’s like “an unfulfilling totality, everything goes to black and you dont even get a last glimpse of love, life, or happiness, just blackness.” Can you explain this? It’s actually just the opposite.

And believers are not wrapped up in the afterlife. That is the gift. It’s what we have to look forward to, but certainly we are living our lives just like anyone else; loving and making a difference and trying to make the best of every moment. We’re not just a bunch of mindless zombies aimlessly walking around waiting for the end.

Originally Posted by tommyjones

besides, if you are right and there is a 'god' who passes judgment on us at the end, i would think he is pretty understanding.

I can’t pass such judgment on you or anyone else. It will be between you and God. I do know that if you haven’t accepted Christ as your Lord and Savior, it’s not going to look good. Those are the rules. I didn’t make them so you will have to take that up with God. The Bible is quite clear about what happens to those that don’t believe. So it’s an equal “understanding”. Understand God’s rules and he will be understanding. I think that sounds pretty fair.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

not as I read it. Pascal himself said you can't just fake it; God will not have favor on you just for putting on a good show.

That's why it's a bad analogy. 'Swiftboating' is getting distorted from it's accurate defintion just as Pascal's term has been.

It seems Pascal’s entire philosophical spectrum revolved around the inability to come to any real conclusions that required reason. So, I don’t have one clue about Pascal’s heart. His “wager” was a philosophical one that poses the question rather than gives any answers.

I think it’s fair to ask the philosophical question “what if” though. This is where faith begins for a lot of believers.

All I want to know is... did you listen to my latest song? What'd you think?

[This_person]

Originally Posted by itsbob

So a church needs my money,


Why does ANYone need a church?

Why does anyone need a Mercedes vs a Ford Focus? Why do people need the $300 bottle of wine vs the $3 bottle? Why do people gather together at movie theaters when they could just imagine a good movie?

They do, they choose to, so what's the problem?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

It seems Pascal’s entire philosophical spectrum revolved around the inability to come to any real conclusions that required reason. So, I don’t have one clue about Pascal’s heart. His “wager” was a philosophical one that poses the question rather than gives any answers.

I think it’s fair to ask the philosophical question “what if” though. This is where faith begins for a lot of believers.

All I want to know is... did you listen to my latest song? What'd you think?

...I listened to the song. The level of aggression and expression of rage was startling. It is a tour de force, a wall of sound symbolizing all that is wrong with out world today; Not enough families enjoying parks.



Nice playing.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

It seems Pascal’s entire philosophical spectrum revolved around the inability to come to any real conclusions that required reason. So, I don’t have one clue about Pascal’s heart. His “wager” was a philosophical one that poses the question rather than gives any answers.

I think it’s fair to ask the philosophical question “what if” though. This is where faith begins for a lot of believers.

All I want to know is... did you listen to my latest song? What'd you think?

...we're going in circles, here, oddly enough.

Pascal DID, rationally enough, ask "What if?" and what he came up with is the analysis of religion and reason and he, as I understand him, was totally comfortable with the idea that you can't reason yourself into a matter of faith AND, furthermore, it is not proper to simply lay claim to faith so as to CYA.

What I am saying is that his words and his argument has been diluted over the years in conflict of what I see as his intent and Pascal's wager has become a "You can't know, so, why not?" expression of reason which is precisely what he was saying to shouldn't do.

So;

A "Do you believe in God?"

B "Well, it doesn't make sense to me rationally"

A "Well, you could be in big trouble if you don't believe and there turns out to be God."

B "Well, in that case, I guess I may as well go ahead and believe, just in case. What have I got to lose by professing faith?"

A "Doesn't work that way."


If he then goes on to explore and then truly believe, fine, but that is a different argument and popular lexicon has decided it does work that way and that you can CYA.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Originally Posted by This_person

Why does anyone need a Mercedes vs a Ford Focus? Why do people need the $300 bottle of wine vs the $3 bottle? Why do people gather together at movie theaters when they could just imagine a good movie?

They do, they choose to, so what's the problem?

SO you agree, just as someone doesn't NEED a $300 bottle of wine.. or NEED a Mercedes, niether do they NEED a church.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...I listened to the song. The level of aggression and expression of rage was startling. It is a tour de force, a wall of sound symbolizing all that is wrong with out world today; Not enough families enjoying parks.



Nice playing.

You see, you just don't understand jazz. I'll try to tone it down for you next time.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...we're going in circles, here, oddly enough.

Pascal DID, rationally enough, ask "What if?" and what he came up with is the analysis of religion and reason and he, as I understand him, was totally comfortable with the idea that you can't reason yourself into a matter of faith AND, furthermore, it is not proper to simply lay claim to faith so as to CYA.

What I am saying is that his words and his argument has been diluted over the years in conflict of what I see as his intent and Pascal's wager has become a "You can't know, so, why not?" expression of reason which is precisely what he was saying to shouldn't do.

So;

A "Do you believe in God?"

B "Well, it doesn't make sense to me rationally"

A "Well, you could be in big trouble if you don't believe and there turns out to be God."

B "Well, in that case, I guess I may as well go ahead and believe, just in case. What have I got to lose by professing faith?"

A "Doesn't work that way."


If he then goes on to explore and then truly believe, fine, but that is a different argument and popular lexicon has decided it does work that way and that you can CYA.

I'm simply going to ARGUE that Pascal asked (as you even pointed out) "just in case..." not "what if...".

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

You see, you just don't understand jazz. I'll try to tone it down for you next time.

...it was my interpretation?