|
Post by Kenny on Feb 9, 2005 18:44:25 GMT -5
So, what do you think with Pascal's wager...I wasn't exactly sure where to post it, in here, or the apologetics section... Anyways, what is Pascal's wager? Here it is: | I believe in God | I reject God | God Exists | Suffer through life, then enjoy God forever in bliss | I enjoy a few pleasures, then suffer eternally | God does not exist |
[/b][/td][td]I live a good life, missing out on a few things, then I cease to exist[/td][td]I enjoy meaningless pleasure, then I cease to exist.[/td][/tr][/table] Thoughts? By pure logic, it is more logical to believe in God than to not to believe in God. Not saying this is the way to go in witnessing , but if you are arguing about logic in a debate, present this. If you are on a forum here is the easy code: [table][tr][td][/td][td][b]I believe in God[/b][/td][td][b]I reject God[/b][/td][/tr][tr][td][b][i]God Exists[/i][/b][/td][td]Suffer through life, then enjoy God forever in bliss[/td][td]I enjoy a few pleasures, then suffer eternally[/td][/tr][tr][td][i][b]God does not exist[/i][/b][/td][td]I live a good life, missing out on a few things, then I cease to exist[/td][td]I enjoy meaningless pleasure, then I cease to exist.[/td][/tr][/table] Just copy and paste.
|
|
|
Post by melinky on Feb 9, 2005 21:48:57 GMT -5
It's very interesting. As for a tool for witnessing... I think there are times when people, especially nonbeievers, pull away from a direct, scriptural-based approach. While this statement may not minister to the soul, it might be enough food for thought to sink a hook and get them thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Kenny on Feb 9, 2005 22:01:36 GMT -5
It's very interesting. As for a tool for witnessing... I think there are times when people, especially nonbeievers, pull away from a direct, scriptural-based approach. While this statement may not minister to the soul, it might be enough food for thought to sink a hook and get them thinking. Yes, this can hook the person onto thinking that God is a good choice; however, I wouldn't want a relationship with God just through logic and no faith - since it will not get you anywhere.
|
|
|
Post by TheArchDuke on Feb 10, 2005 9:50:56 GMT -5
hmmm...pascal's wager doesn't really work in my experience. i used it in a dabate (unknowingly because i hadn't even heard of it) and this is how he replied (he knows about this forum so he's probably reading this post right now hahaha):
"Pascal's Wager" is an argument in favour of Christian belief proposed by the mathematician Pascal. I'm mentioning it because you have basically rephrased it in your post detailing reasons to believe Christianity to be true. As it turns out, the argument has a problem or two with it. I'll detail it here.
Here is the foundation of the argument. A mistake has already been made. It is not the case that these are the only options. For example, it is possible that:
I can come up with an infinite number of possible beings that might exist, and whom we might choose to believe in. The fact that Pascal's Wager does not consider these alternative possibilities makes it a fallacy (known as a false dilemma). This is not the only problem with the argument, however. I'll continue with the argument summary:
The false dilemma is striking in this instance, because it ignores the fact that it is possible that one could choose to believe and yet still get infinite bad (if the Muslim god exists then Christians will still burn in hell, as an example). Consequently, the Wager should not be considered grounds for Christian belief.
There are some other problems with this argument, but this is the chief one in my view.
i told him that pascal's wager isn't THE reason why i believe but he does bring up a good arguement
|
|