Do you think you can cheat God?

[naomi24]

Pascal’s Wager, in short, states that:

**a man has everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in God, and everything to lose and nothing to gain by not believing in God. On these grounds, one would be foolish not to believe.** (**-** Copied from the internet).

So, according to that, Pascal’s faith wasn’t genuine – but more importantly, he rather stupidly overlooked the fact that God is, allegedly, omniscient, and would therefore be aware of this devious ploy.

Many of the religious here appear to have no hesitation in trumpeting their piety and their good deeds, whilst at the same time often vilifying their fellow man, and in particular those who don’t believe as the religious claim to. In my understanding of Christianity, all of that seems rather contrary to Christ’s teachings. However, it now appears that one self-proclaimed Christian here is, in fact, taking the path of Pascal’s Wager, and I wonder just how many others are secretly following suit– and if so, if it transpires that God does indeed exist, do they really think they are capable of cheating him?

[Zabadak]

Hi Naomi - still setting up Aunt Sallies for the usual suspects to knock down, I see. Where are all these "religious trumpeting their piety and good deeds"? I thought the problem in this little corner of the universe was that they barely bothered turning up to state their case.
As for Pascal - well, to quote completely out of context from Python (ironically in fact on a subject apparently very dear to your heart) "Hohh, it's not as simple as that, Nigel. God knows all! He'd see through such a cheap trick." It'd be a bit like cheating at golf. No-one else would know, but you would. (Note to pre-empt: I don't mean you personally, of course).

[Zabadak]

Describing potential contributors as the "religious.....trumpeting their piety and their good deeds" is emotive, not rational.

[mibn2cweus]

As I understand it, any hope for winning the wager entails admission of an alleged guilt and repentance for having been born a human being and cashing in on the gruesome bloody sacrifice of His only *cough* begotten Son as compensation for non-compliance with an arbitrary list of demands designed specifically to ensure failure.

Appears to be plenty of cheating going on all around . . . more like a game of liar's poker with a stacked deck when you consider all the players involved.

[naomi24]

Zabadak, // "religious.....trumpeting their piety and their good deeds" is emotive, not rational.//

You seem to have missed something here – or perhaps you’re just prone to selective reading.

[Zabadak]

Supposing I had included in a discussion starter "the faithless bragging about their superior reasoning", would that have been encouraging rational debate? Perhaps you'd like to give some examples of what you meant.

[goodlife]

One of the most ancient guides for living, the Bible, counsels against applying a different standard to others from what we do to ourselves. It states: A cheating pair of scales is something detestable to Jehovah. (Prov. 11:1) All things . . . that you want men to do to you, you also must likewise do to them. (Matt. 7:12) Do not you people be owing anybody a single thing, except to love one another . . . Love does not work evil to one’s neighbour. (Rom. 13:8, 10) But is what the Scriptures outline really practical in a dishonest world?
Well many qualities that help true Christian not to think more of himself than is necessary are submissiveness and humility. The submissive Christian is always learning from God’s Word and applying what he learns to his own life.

[jomifl]

Zabadak :-) I don't think that the 'faithless' necessarily have superior powers of reasoning, they are just prepared to use what powers they have and and put a little effort into thinking. The 'faithful' having shackled their brains with religious dogma have to reason within a very small area of logic so put themselves (voluntarily?) at a disadvantage.

[naomi24]

Zabadak, //Supposing I had included in a discussion starter "the faithless bragging about their superior reasoning",//

Fine by me. That happens fairly frequently – and if you’d like to extend it to include the ‘immoral atheists’ charges that are not unknown around here, you’ll have an example.

[vetuste_ennemi]

Thank you, Sandy, but I might not want to be in a choir with Ratter and Naomi, nor they with me. And what about the audience? Intentions are one thing; consequences are another.

[naomi24]

VE, can't blame you for not wanting to be in a choir with me. I have a terrible singing voice. :o/

[Zabadak]

Hi Jomifl. I'm grateful that you recognised my caricature for what it was. You will know from past encounters that I'm not against reason per se, indeed, it's perhaps the most precious of out faculties, and I do try to use mine. I am critical of a reductive rationalism that assumes it's all we have, and seeks to divide the human race into us, the pure rationalists, and them, the poor, ignorant rest with their superstitions and religions and (phooey) faith. Pascal's wager is a very interesting piece of reasoning that interprets and comments on the human condition of being caught between there is/is not a god, neither of which is provable by rationality alone. We all come at the question carrying different baggage - Pascal's was of the Catholic religion of his time - and travel between different conclusions, changing as we go. Pascal's contempt was reserved for those who refuse to consider the question at all:

"This carelessness in a matter which concerns themselves, their eternity, their all, moves me more to anger than pity; it astonishes and shocks me; it is to me monstrous."

I'm for honesty in debate, and respect for our fellow travellers trying to make sense of the uncertainty of life - "This is what I see, and what troubles me. I look on all sides, and everywhere I see nothing but obscurity. Nature offers me nothing that is not a matter of doubt and disquiet." - Pascal again. What I see here (remarkably consistently, it seems, as I'm an infrequent visitor and it seems to be going on every time I visit) is a tendency to mock and caricature the supposed opposition before they have a chance to join in the debate - not a tendency exclusive to the rationalists, atheists, religionists or any other -ists that inhabit this little circle. My best wishes to you and all who gather here.

[beso]

Zabadak //Describing potential contributors as the "religious.....trumpeting their piety and their good deeds" is emotive, not rational//

It would seem to be an accurate rational description of this post by Goodlife.

//But is what the Scriptures outline really practical in a dishonest world?
Well many qualities that help true Christian not to think more of himself than is necessary are submissiveness and humility. The submissive Christian is always learning from God’s Word and applying what he learns to his own life. //

[vetuste_ennemi]

Goodlife was just quoting from the Watchtower, Beso.
If religions were crosswords would the Jehovah's Witnesses get the Z prize, Zabadak?

[Zabadak]

For vetuste_ennemi: (nice Moniker - can we be nouveaux amis?) - You may think that, I could not possibly comment! Perhaps more deserving, those who "close the door for people to enter the kingdom of heaven. You yourselves don't enter, and you stop others who are trying to enter", somewhat analogous to those setters of the Listener who seem to rejoice in being as opaque as possible.

[sandyRoe]

Perhaps the discordant choir of reluctant ABers would be employed to sing to the poor souls in Hell to add to their anguish?

[Zabadak]

Beso - it's a rather muted trumpet, isn't it, almost to the point of inaudibility?

[cupid04]

No he is all seeing.

[vivandorron]

cupid....If your God is all seeing.....Does he need glasses to see all the evil in the world, which he/she/it is supposed to have created with man in his own image.?... Evil wouldn't exist if he wishes us all to live with love in our hearts and is all powerful; as I think, from other of your postings in AB, you would have us all believe.

Incidentally, as I am unaware of from where you believe that all evil emanates, perhaps you will kindly enlighten me.

Ron.

Ron.