Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
Fun Fact: there were at least sixteen crucifixions of major mythological/religious figures prior to the time Jesus of Nazareth was said to have existed.
Let me first establish the significance of such 'events'. I'm not implying that these crucifixions actually occurred, but surely you see the significance of texts describing such tales prior to The Bible. The story of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth is the backbone of Christianity, and it is unoriginal. Borrowed. Almost copy-paste plagiarism, which hints at us how fraudulent the text actually is. Here are the crucifixions, if you wish to further research, then do so. Cont.
@wetheatheists Here are ten crucifixions prior to the time Christ was said to have existed; I'll post the rest below: 1. Chrishna of India 1200 B.C. 2. The Hindoo Sakia 600 B.C. 3. Thammuz of Syria 1160 B.C. 4. Wittoba of the Telingonesic 552 B.C. 5. Iao of Nepaul 622 B.C. 6. Hesus (SOUND FAMILIAR?)of the Celtic Druids 834 B.C. 7. Quexalcote of Mexico Crucified 587 B.C. 8. Quirinus of Rome Crucified 506 B.C. 9. (Aeschylus) Prometheus 547 B.C. 10. Thulis of Egypt 1700 B.C.
11. Indra of Tibet 725 B.C. 12. Alcestos of Euripides 600 B.C. 13. Atys of Phrygia 1170 B.C. 14. Crite of Chaldea 1200 B.C. 15. Bali of Orissa 725 B.C. 16. Mithra of Persia 600 B.C.
I'm not implying that these crucifixions actually occurred, but surely you see the significance of texts describing such tales prior to The Bible. The story of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth is the backbone of Christianity, and it is unoriginal. Borrowed. Almost copy-paste plagiarism, which hints at us how fraudulent the text actually is. Here are the crucifixions, if you wish to further research, then do so.
No, it's a shame that religious idiots cowardly attack a brilliant man who is not alive today to defend himself. He fought your religious institutions and theocrats to the last fucking breath, as I will. You keep your salvation. Imbecile. It puzzles me how so many people are so eager to subscribe to a cruel philosophy such as the Christian one- promising eternal grace to those who follow, and eternal pain to those who don't.
@wetheatheists You say he was a 'brilliant" man. He was a self proclaimed Marxist. Look back in recent history were Marxist ideology was implemented... Not a pretty picture, is it? He supported the senseless war in Iraq... Why? Because of his hatred of Muslims.. Brilliant isn't the word that comes to mind regarding his ideology..
He was a hate filled person that made millions mocking people... He isn't someone to look up to or to follow...
@wetheatheists I'm glad that you are not a Marxist.. Marxism, wherever it has been implemented lead to genocide and human suffering.... You don't have to look that far back in history to find this... Atheist seem to love using the term "evidence".... The "evidence" for what resulted from Marxism can easily be found.. Sorry, but those who subscribe to Marxist ideology are not at all brilliant..
Yes, we do love evidence. As you should. But honestly, just about every governmental/economic paradigm that has ever been employed in the history of mankind has been used by a regime responsible for genocide and injustice. Does the fault lie on the paradigm, or the regime? You tell me. Christianity, by the way, has a history far more bloody and corrupted than Marxism.
@wetheatheists Marxism/Communism was/is responsible for the suffering of hundreds of millions. You are defending the indefensible for the sake of your hatred of Christianity... Pretty sad..
The best counter to Pascal's wager is a similarly mathematically formulated corollary, ie.;
Pascal: "Since we can't be sure the bible is true, why not bet that it's true, since the outcome of being wrong (nothing V hell) is infinitely less"
Counter: "Since we're not sure the bible is true, then it's equally probable that it was created DELIBERATELY FALSE by God (or Satan) to determine those worthy of salvation by rational reasoning (thus rejecting it as irrational) rather than clueless wagering"
He made an interesting point, but he should have mentioned the biggest weakness in the wager: The fact that it assumes an indemonstrable dichotomy of "No afterlife vs Christian afterlife". Say you chose to make the "safe bet" by accepting Christ. What if it turned out that Muslims were right, making you an infidel? Or that the afterlife rewarded only those who embraced reason and rejected superstition? There are infinite possible afterlifes that are unaccounted for. The wager is drivel.
@ExpensiveGun Yep, it also assumes that not believing in God doesn't send you to heaven which means they are making a prejudgement on what the outcomes of the decision would be. Based on the severe punishments in most of the manmade organised religions for worshipping other gods then I find this hard to accept, if someone wants to go down that route they'd be better off just being a good person and not believing in magic sky daddies.
I think he should have added that believing this to be true which seemed a requirement of the whole idea of salvation doesn't work for someone who isn't capable of some sort of double think. I could no more believe the jesus myth out of fear of hell than I could believe in jesus if you put a gun to my head. I can no more believe in jesus for the reward of heaven than believing in jesus out of desire for a million $'s. One needs credible evidence to honestly say something is true not an incentive
(The next day after I commented on this, weird coincidence...)
C-Span just reran this debate in its entirety (catch the whole thing if you can, it's quite good), and if this was CH's last major public debate, he went out punching in top form, with a rigorous intelligence and an elegant articulateness equaled only by William F. Buckley, Jr.
By "choosing" (if possible) to believe you also lose critical thinking. You close yourself off to all possibilities for truth, other than the one you've "chosen". Then there's the problem of which/god/goddess/deity do you choose, out of the tens of thousands that humans have ever worshipped. The odds don't look so good now, do they? Wouldn't such a jealous god (as most of them appear to be) be even more mad at you if you chose the wrong god, rather than no god?
I just say, gambling is a sin. Secondly, if I only believe in "God" to get a free pass, I think the God being referenced would catch on to my insincerity and act accordingly.
Also, Pascal's Wager doesn't work if there are possibility of multiple gods and you prayed (bet) with the wrong one, pissed off the "real" one. You're betting on that there is only one god, not many, and out of all the "one" gods (there are many), that one you bet on was correct.
I have a question that's kind of related to Pascal's Wager. What do you think of the reward and punishment system of heaven and hell? Do u think its based on true morality or is it just mental abuse on humans? Please state your answer and the reason why?
“If you take the side of 'there's no [proof of] God', you must prove that he doesn't exist.” ...No
“If I take the side of 'there's [proof of] a God', I must prove that he does exist.” …Yes
That was a fine example of a common argumentative fallacy. Note the corrections to both statements with the reinsertion of the omitted words, nice try though in attempting to misconstrue the meaning of your first oversimplified statement as “'there's [proof of] no God”.
"principles sold for the hope of some reward"? No! How could you be more wrong, sir? We're a fallen creation. We turned away from our very creator so long ago. Still, He loves us so much that He paid for out iniquities, such that, "whosoever believes on Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."
@DoKtaTre I hope you realize that not everyone believes the same crap you believe. So first of all you must demonstrate your crap is true, which I serious doubt you can.
There's a serious flaw in Pascal's Wager. You could not pretend to believe in god because he would know it and on judgement day would treat you just like any other atheist.
Pascal's Pensees actually does have some pretty good proto-existentialist material that you can take stuff from regardless of being a non-believer (sorta like Kierkegaard in this respect).
It's a pity his miserable wager overshadowed his legitimate stuff in the English speaking world.
It also presumes you can control your own belief and that there is no risk in living a life under the belief of god which is not always true in my opinion either.
To the Christian: There are literally thousands of gods. Yours just happens to be a popular one these days, but it's hardly the only one that still has adherents. So...WHICH god should I worship? You're ASSuming that there's only two options - your god, or disbelief. That's a false dichotomy. Look it up. RAmen.
How many useless Christians do you think will say "god punished Hitchens with cancer? Well then god punished your mother with breast cancer and your baby with leukemia. Amen.
@TamaNewb Look you stupid atheist, God curses babies with leukemia and takes the lives of the innocent to test our faith. What you senseless atheists dont seem to understand is that God works in mysterious ways and the Bible says "the sins of the fathers will be visited upon by the sons" which means that if you are a sinner God has then right to kill your innocent children. If America really loved god then our government should murder the entire families of these God-less homosexuals!
@theCYNIC by the way i was playing devil's advocate... or well, God's advocate i guess you could say. Read the Bible and if you have common sense the size of a mustard seed your atheism will move mountains!
@TamaNewb it was a joke, im an atheist, of course it makes no sense, christians dont need to make sense. They think faith is some sort of virtue which should have special protection from any type of debate or questioning.
@theCYNIC I thought it was sarcasm or the most insane comment i ever received, unfortunately there usually indistinguishable :)... these are Christians after all...
Are any of the idiots who use pascal's wager aware that there have been over a thousand gods made in human history? It's all just one giant cosmic roulette wheel. As for me, I prefer to throw my chips in reality, which I know exist, which I know I can have a even a small effect on, and which I know I can find happiness from without having to worry about an afterlife which may or may not exist.
sincerely (not a loaded question) as an atheist and if you are speaking truly for yourself, Which of these sway you more? Which is more of a root? Do you feel as though belief in a God keeps you from as the person above did "spending this life which I know exists in the way I want, to enjoy it how i wish and treat others equally." or because it is philosophically superior do to more empirical evidence as the person underneath stated? Question is for anyone. Im not going anywhere with it.
Pascal's Wager is a fallacy, surely the theist has everything to lose if God doesn't exist? If I, as an atheist am wrong (I don't think I am) but hypothetically what kind of 'benevolent,' vein deity would send me to eternal punishment through being skeptical due to no convincing philosophical argument and lack of empirical evidence? The theist has everything to lose, their whole lives have been based around a lie otherwise.
I do, hence the reason I find him to be knowledgeable. I don't see you personally fighting religion like he does, do I? I know people won't listen to me, so I root for him to keep touring and fighting a good fight. It seems you're the brainless one, since apparently every idea humans come up with is either original or followed by blind faith. I look my shit up and form my opinion, and don't try to act like you're superior to me for agreeing with Mr. Hitchens.
@TheKenTerry I'm not saying I'm superior or that you're inferior, I just highly dislike how much weight people put on any single person's ideas. It's good to take what others think into consideration, but all too often it turns into a cult of personality where people will follow a man like Hitchens (or anyone else) somewhat blindly. A quote that I've always liked is one by Mark Twain: "In religion and politics most people's beliefs are come by second-hand and without examination".
@TheKenTerry Ultimately, my point is simply that we don't "need' Hitchens, or anyone else. Once the seeds have been planted it is up to us to foster and nurture them.
I think the man himself would agree that HE is not nearly as important as his ideas. If we are so unfortunate to lose him too early then we at least retain a record of his wisdom. Not to mention the inspiration he has provided to many people. One of whom, I assure you, will stand up to take his place should he fall.
That's true, an idea has the potential to be immortal while humans don't. Whoever stands up won't be Mr. Hitchens however, and that's what i'm going to miss. We need his personality along with his words, someone who doesn't take shit and deal with nonsense. I do know it's ridiculous to expect him to actually get better though, I just hope the person who takes over won't roll over at any time.
@TheKenTerry Exactly. Ideas and beliefs are extremely powerful, which is why Religion has persisted throughout the ages, including into our own era despite all the scientific knowledge that has been gained. Science and the astounding gains it has made in just the last 100 years has basically made Religion an antiquated attempt at describing the world around us. Science not only does it better than Religion, but it does it in such a way that is flexible and adaptable to new information.
Belief can't be chosen. If yours was, then it isn't sincere, and thus isn't real. I don't choose to disbelieve the Christian god exists, I simply have no choice but to conclude that it doesn't because elements of Christian doctrine have been proven false by science, and there hasn't even been one instance of evidence that proved it does exist.
substitute tribal deity for god as represented by group speak regurgitation tyranny posturing for a pat on the had ever so vigorously bend over pawns unite and assume the rapture position head in the sand ass in the air just say no to bitch boy deities the bait and switch method of teaching idiots how to bend to their human masters who claim to speak for the deity such as diamond mine pat robberson and other purse snatchers
I didn't know he had cancer... I wish I could be there when someone claims that he got cancer for not believing in God, so I can smack them upside the head. With that said, I still believe in God... I'm just saying that being an athiest or agnostic doesn't make him any more likely to get cancer than anyone else.
Christianity also asks that you be willing to martyr yourself in the face of unbelief. What does that do to the odds? If you bet God exits and will reward your martyrdom, and you're wrong, you have indeed lost quite a bit.
The other thing he doesn't mention is wrong with Pascal's rationale, is that to adopt that attitude you couldn't just stop at Christianity you would need to cover every major religion, every minor religion, what if the spaghetti monster is real as well? You would spend the rest of your life performing some form of religious activity. No, we don't need to hedge our bets, life is too short to waste it on superstition.
@philippides -If Child rape is absolutely bad then there must be an ABSOLUTE standard giver which, is above humans there by saying, ABSOLUTES your saying God is real. Thank You sir.
Maybe you needed an absolute standard giver to threaten you with eternal torment in order to keep you from fucking little children, but that bit of morality was innate in me.
I'm glad you believe in God so that you'll be fearful enough not to act out what an awful piece of shit you are!
But more to the point now:
Absolutes indicate the limits of our perceptions in some direction...and do nothing towards proving the thousands of gods people have dreamt up over the milennia.
@philippides Here is another "thought experiment"...If humanity evolved out of "lightning hitting pond scum" 700,000,000 million years ago...then we are the desendants of electrified mud. It would all mean nothing. The extermination of 6 million Jews by Hitler would mean no more than wipping "mud" off ones shoes. It would not matter that 50 million abortions have been preformed in this country since 1973. (those #s would make both Hitler and Stalin blush) since we're just a accident of nature.?
@bheadh ive seen various forms of this argument/rationale in different threads. i believe there is an incorrect "leap of logic" within it. the conditions or intent involved during the genesis or birth of an idea, object, species, etc. do not, necessarily, inform the worth and merit of said "object" perhaps we were "born of mud", as is suggested. this, in NO WAY, lessens our value as human beings. i notice many people tend to, for some reason, use hitler/nazism as a basis for their metaphors. 1/2
@bheadh so, let us suppose this = what if, hitler had conceived a child. this child saw what his/her father had done, and was repulsed by it. the child then goes on to lead a life of public service and unflappable kindness towards others. everyone who comes in contact with this person agrees he/she is one of the nicest, most honorable people they have ever met. now, would the fact that hitler was this childs father lessen or degrade the "good" carried out by this person? 2/2
@philippides No< your "experiment" is moot. If it is by "accident" or if the universe big-banged from "nothing"....then if there is no "reason" behind any of it. Is this so hard to understand? If we all really come from is electrified mud...hunanity and everything it does means absolutly nothing.
Why does it suddenly mean something if we came from God?
If I irrefutably knew I came from a divine creator- especially one that made this many horrid design flaws in us- and he's always watching and he always knows my every thought and action, and if I do or think or say or even feel the wrong things, he will send me to a place of eternal torment...my life, to me, would immediately mean a lot less.
As a creature this imperfectly made, from my adrenaline glands being too big, my frontal lobes being too small, the optic nerve in my eye having to cross the retina, and the same throat tube being used for breathing AND swallowing- a flaw which has killed millions and for which any engineer on Earth would be fired-, I would be insulted if a Divine Creator built me this way. But as a chance happenstance on a speck in an ocean of specks, I'm heroically beating the odds already.
My life has infinitely more meaning to me this way...than it would as a badly formed pawn in a mostly wasted one-world universe whose sole purpose it is to bow and worship and think and do and feel as I'm told, or be tortured forever. How ridiculous. How provincial. How primitive and childish. Can we outgrow this thinking already? Please? Join the billions who think more clearly, and who are free.
If you have to use the word "accident", then you don't understand the science involved. Evolution is not a random accident and has nothing to do with chance.
>"...or if the universe big-banged from 'nothing'..."
If you have to use the word "nothing", then you don't understand the science involved. Big Bang Cosmology does not state that we came from 'nothing'. Creationism says that.
>"If Child rape is absolutely bad then there must be an ABSOLUTE standard giver...."
I'm going to stop you there. Do you understand the difference between a Proscriptive Law and Descriptive Law?
Also, your assertion begs for the Euthyphro Dilemma to be brought up; and you don't want that, because theism always ends up looking silly after that.
You can even make a Pascal's wager for atheism. "What if there is an all powerful being who arbitrarily awards salvation only to atheists. His holy book is this blank 8.5 by 11 paper. Why take the risk???"
Agreed, the wager can also be rendered garbage by merely mentioning the thousands of other gods throughout history and how we must also now worry about suplicating them as well. . . . .
Of course the christians usually dismiss those as "false gods" without realizing or caring about their hypocrisy. The wager is independently proposed by thousands of christians every day who have never even heard of Pascal. That should speak volumes about what a well-thought out intelli-gem it is...
Say we take Pascal's Wager and believe in a god: should we then just choose whatever god has the most horrible punishments to offer just to be safest?
By the wager's standards, a hypothetical god I'm just now making up called Example, who punishes you and everyone you love for eternity if you don't believe in him, should be chiefly worshiped. The fact that I just made her up shouldn't affect the wager at all, since when logic and reasoning is brought in all gods are invalid.
my favorite answer to the "what if youre wrong?" question is: "what if you're wrong? what if god put all this nonsensical bullshit on the planet just to weed out the idiots so he can send everyone who believes that ridiculousness to hell and keep all the people who are actually using his gift of reason with him in heaven?"
Hey is there a link to this whole debate? I need it if you have it. Im doing a school vid on atheism and this debate seems great for such a video. I thank you in advance if you send me the link.
@romperstompist Have you looked at NonStampCollector's videos? They're short and very to the point - pointing out the reasons for atheism in unique ways.
If you have a school project on atheism, I'd be happy to help. It's one of my pet projects.
@Stairc There are both items of faith (incarnation) and items that can be shown through reason. (existence of God, existence of an immaterial mind/soul) That is the reason why Thomas Aquinas is/was so important as he had a perfect balance between faith and reason. Also some more modern day scientists (Fr. Robert J. Spitzer) are so important because many believe faith and science are at odds, which couldn't be further from the truth. Obvoisuly we now see why there is an issue with fundamentalism.
Pascal's a nob, well he's French and I'm English. But here's my position on his wager; I choose to disbelieve God. Why? Because I'd rather spend this life which I know exists in the way I want. To enjoy it how I wish and treat others equally. I'm not gonna waste it on dogmatic beliefs and orders. If I'm wrong, then God is a sadistic being who treats our lives like a petty game for his own ego, and that isn't worthy of praise. So I'd tell him he's evil before giving Satan a nipple twist from hell
Pascal was brilliant, and did not mean the wager as an a valid argument for God. The wager was partly a commentary on a gambling culture of the times.
@jhsowter That first line was a little joke. I don't know where you're from but Britain (England specifically) have a rivalry with France that stretches back 1000 years. But the rest of my comment is unchanged, whatever the reason for the wager, I'm refuting the wager itself. Good day sir.
@anonymousLeroy A misunderstanding by a human that claims to "know" gods traits and can interpret them.... Kettle, this is Pot.... Your Black... Over and Out.
What you fail to realize is that the very fundamental nature of God is a being who is inherently and utterly perfect. Any fault you give Him is you describing something besides God. The concept is that of a perfect being whose perfection cannot be matched. To give Him human qualities is to therefore make him imperfect, and thus you're not actually describing him, but something close to Him. Now I'm an atheist, but I've taken a few philosophy classes, and that concept interested me.
@anonymousLeroy Again your implying something from the "Human" perspective, not from something that can be conclusively proven or demonstrated to be real in any way shape or form. As soon as you apply the words "Concept of" anything after them about mythology is pure here-say and speculation from a Human Perspective. To even speculate that there is "A God" that is "Perfect" is Human speculation itself.
@Wrahns Well as I said, my atheistic beliefs lead me to believe that yes, God is a human creation. Yet the characteristics that he has are those of a perfect being. So anything imperfect you attempt to say about Him is you describing something other than Him. That is the concept, and that is why it's often so hard to wrap ones mind around it: we're imperfect things trying to characterize a perfect being. Not really going to go too well.
@ Wrahns What you fail to realize is that the very fundamental nature of God is a being who is inherently and utterly perfect. Any fault you give Him is you something besides God. The concept is that of a perfect being whose perfection cannot be matched. To give Him human qualities is to therefore make him imperfect, and thus you're not actually describing him, but something close to Him. Now I'm an atheist, but I've taken a few philosophy classes, and that concept interested me.
@russellrummage You logical fallacy Pavloved that "I'm not gonna waste it on dogmatic beliefs and orders". Au contraire, you clearly are. What is your basis for wanting to "treat others equally?" How to measure "equality" in a moral relativist and meaningless void? You are adrift with cheaply constructed standard atheist premises. Apparently for each atheist, their opinions null and void God. Aye, now there is "ego", and not a very convincing, inspiring or useful one. Laughable.
@gmakepiece So you see equality as a dogma? Of course you do, you lack confidence that you're a good person, always hoping for mythical babysitter's approval. Relativism works, why? Because consensus is reached. We are the same animal, in the same World, so I don't think it's such a big mystery like the theist makes out; it's just an interesting bit of philosophy. I'm a humanist, so atheism isn't meaningless, the meaning is my own. If you need more to feel happy then sorry, but that's childish.
@russellrummage Excellent incoherent gibberish logical fallacy. So PC, so lefty, so atheist & so very dreary. Unconvincing, pal. So we should my, my, dump God & believe in gee, YOU then? No thanks. Why are so many atheists intolerant, ignorant, superficial, nihilist clowns? Y R they such witless unread tedious uninspiring zealots? I guess because their only standard is as high as their humourless egoist narcissistic selves. Fraud on then. Here's a smart & deeply learned atheist. prodos com
I am not sure whether to laugh or cry because of your posts. It's just filled with fallacies, ad hominems and ignorant, hateful remarks. It's quite sad because I really think this springs from your heart. You are not only wrong (atheism IN ITSELF has no philosophical, moral or beliefsystem), but the way you put it is just... I don't know, bitter?
@JumpDeluxe Excellent logical fallacy ramblings. You are an excellent atheist. You seem, I don't know, humourless, empty, shallow, unread, phony and er, bitter. Bravo.
How can I use logical fallacies, when I'm not even using a logical proposition? I only critisize yours and the way you state it. The title "excellent atheist" is hilarious, that really put a smile to my face. I'm starting to think you are a internet-troll. If you are, well done sir. If you are not, shame on you! Well.. Maybe you should be ashamed either way ;-).
@JumpDeluxe You fantastically and hilariously said and I quote "How can I use logical fallacies, when I'm not even using a logical proposition?" Wahey! Brilliant! You sum up the left liberal mind such as it is perfectly. As usual, thanks for the gut ripping laughs.I shall use this quote forever. Let the "shaming" begin!
@gmakepiece Incoherent gibberish? If you find what I say hard to follow then there is no hope for you, can I explain myself any more clearly than I have already? Not really. Logical fallacy you say? Ok, here's one for you; To mistake philosophical musings as knowledge. Understand? You don't "know" shit, nothing, it's all musing. At least I admit where my knowledge ends, you will just swallow whatever a collared paedophile preaches to you. And I'm well read thanks, in physics & cosmology, twat.
@russellrummage So you're er, "well read" eh, "in physics & cosmology" and "twat." So you're a Twat Major or a Minor Twat? When did you last "collar" a peadophile? Unusual life you lead. Hey, academia. You seem upset. Take another course then.
You are right, and it's even worse than that. Pascal's Wager does not include all the possible (including inconceivable) hypothetical natures of the word "God". He introduces his Wager as if it's a reasonable chance that the Christian God exists, when in fact the chance is infinitely small, nearing zero. It is also undesirable to just throw away our intellectual honesty in a dishonest wager. There is a incredibly small chance to gain all, and a certainty to lose much.
@russellrummage If you live life the best you can and this god won't let you in, only because you didn't believe, would you have wanted to worship that god be begin with?
Believers show being good has no value to this god, only fear/believing, that in itself is enough for me to not worship, regardless of his existence. Heck, there goes their "morals" argument too.
Imho, a "good" god should accept "good" unfaithfull in heaven easyer then the people he knows that were only good out of fear.
@enlightendbel Agree 100%. A deistic God deserves no praise as he would be indifferent. A theistic God deserves no praise, well, for all the reasons you mentioned.
@russellrummage Well I wouldn't judge Pascal so harshly. For one thing, his eponymous wager was something penned in the margin of one of his writings, not intended as a serious defense of the faith. We owe a lot to him and his work with probability and mathematics, and to condemn him entirely because he came up with a bad apologetic one time seems unfair.
No one has said you can't choose to live as you wish, that isn't part of the entire argument. Pascal's wager solely concerns itself with belief, which you are ignoring. You are simply choosing to respond this way out of petulant anger, not out of logic or reason.
@17thknight I'm sorry, but as far as I know Christianity tells me to live in a way I find divisive & abhorrent. For example if I lust after women I'm a sinner, yet homosexuality is even worse (what's that about?). If you're just talking belief, then ok but why should I believe? Because of a threat? That's what this wager is in essence. I've used logic & reason aplenty to come to my conclusion about reality, research in physics and psychology for example, certainly no faith was involved.
@17thknight Because Pascal was appealing for Christianity, I'm sure he didn't come up with this wager to create more muslims. And here we go again, why do you see reluctance to accept religion as anger? It's more a sign of how you're reading me, meaning the anger is projected from you. I may use strong adjectives, but that's all they are. You referring to me saying God's sadistic and unworthy of praise? Well by treating our lives as a test, with dire consequences, I think that's accurate.
@russellrummage Regardless of whom Pascal himself was speaking to, the wager applies to all religions, as I believe you yourself pointed out. Your own words betray your anger. You even recognize it yourself. Your loathing is betrayed in your language, as is anyone's true feeling.
@17thknight Even if it's relevant for all religions, I aimed at Christianity as the people who'll see this will mostly be Christian. Don't worry, I feel the same way about all religions (well, I will admit that I hate Islam). I can be angry with some areas of religion, but what you've seen here is frustration, not anger. If you want something that angers me then I'll give you an example. The claim of some people to be able to have authority over me for intangiable reasons, never gonna happen :)
@pwoodfi dude don t laugh at the poor thing for how he looks that is beyond him, laugh at him for what he says inventing a god that is so stupid he can easily trick it, is not a god, its a stupid human invention
This has been flagged as spam show
Only a REAL FOOL would claim there is no God! Man creates awesome skyscrapers, fake hearts, tunnels, vehicles etc.. If we are very imperfect then what more can God create THE UNIVERSE! You must accept Jesus Christ as your Savior to receive eternal rest in heaven! Simple! John 3:16 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him! Repent & accept Jesus Christ! Jesus Christ or HELL?!? Visit cbn. com
tigersforchrist 2 days ago
Jesus Saves.
ITNOJ1 3 weeks ago
@ITNOJ1
Jesus isn't real
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists -The evidence would disagree with you.
ITNOJ1 2 weeks ago
@ITNOJ1
Fun Fact: there were at least sixteen crucifixions of major mythological/religious figures prior to the time Jesus of Nazareth was said to have existed.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists -Prove it.
ITNOJ1 2 weeks ago
@ITNOJ1
Let me first establish the significance of such 'events'. I'm not implying that these crucifixions actually occurred, but surely you see the significance of texts describing such tales prior to The Bible. The story of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth is the backbone of Christianity, and it is unoriginal. Borrowed. Almost copy-paste plagiarism, which hints at us how fraudulent the text actually is. Here are the crucifixions, if you wish to further research, then do so. Cont.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists
11. Indra of Tibet 725 B.C. 12. Alcestos of Euripides 600 B.C. 13. Atys of Phrygia 1170 B.C. 14. Crite of Chaldea 1200 B.C. 15. Bali of Orissa 725 B.C. 16. Mithra of Persia 600 B.C.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists -You made a bunch of claims haven't proven anything.
ITNOJ1 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ITNOJ1
I'm not implying that these crucifixions actually occurred, but surely you see the significance of texts describing such tales prior to The Bible. The story of the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth is the backbone of Christianity, and it is unoriginal. Borrowed. Almost copy-paste plagiarism, which hints at us how fraudulent the text actually is. Here are the crucifixions, if you wish to further research, then do so.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@ITNOJ1
All three comments below are just for you; enjoy.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
idiot below me.
dkthg 1 month ago
Shame to see a man throw away his own salvation.
imax1971 1 month ago
@imax1971
No, it's a shame that religious idiots cowardly attack a brilliant man who is not alive today to defend himself. He fought your religious institutions and theocrats to the last fucking breath, as I will. You keep your salvation. Imbecile. It puzzles me how so many people are so eager to subscribe to a cruel philosophy such as the Christian one- promising eternal grace to those who follow, and eternal pain to those who don't.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists You say he was a 'brilliant" man. He was a self proclaimed Marxist. Look back in recent history were Marxist ideology was implemented... Not a pretty picture, is it? He supported the senseless war in Iraq... Why? Because of his hatred of Muslims.. Brilliant isn't the word that comes to mind regarding his ideology..
He was a hate filled person that made millions mocking people... He isn't someone to look up to or to follow...
imax1971 2 weeks ago
@imax1971
I am not a Marxist, but I have plenty of brilliant friends who are. All governmental paradigms have their weaknesses.
Hitchens hated Islam, not Muslims. Your God is the one who hates Muslims. As well as members of any other religion, I might add.
And I find his mockeries rather entertaining.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists I'm glad that you are not a Marxist.. Marxism, wherever it has been implemented lead to genocide and human suffering.... You don't have to look that far back in history to find this... Atheist seem to love using the term "evidence".... The "evidence" for what resulted from Marxism can easily be found.. Sorry, but those who subscribe to Marxist ideology are not at all brilliant..
imax1971 2 weeks ago
@imax1971
Yes, we do love evidence. As you should. But honestly, just about every governmental/economic paradigm that has ever been employed in the history of mankind has been used by a regime responsible for genocide and injustice. Does the fault lie on the paradigm, or the regime? You tell me. Christianity, by the way, has a history far more bloody and corrupted than Marxism.
wetheatheists 2 weeks ago
@wetheatheists Marxism/Communism was/is responsible for the suffering of hundreds of millions. You are defending the indefensible for the sake of your hatred of Christianity... Pretty sad..
imax1971 2 weeks ago
@imax1971 Marxism/Communism is NOT responsible for the suffering of hundreds of millions, fascist totalitarian dictatorships are.
BrokenBard 11 hours ago
The best counter to Pascal's wager is a similarly mathematically formulated corollary, ie.;
Pascal: "Since we can't be sure the bible is true, why not bet that it's true, since the outcome of being wrong (nothing V hell) is infinitely less"
Counter: "Since we're not sure the bible is true, then it's equally probable that it was created DELIBERATELY FALSE by God (or Satan) to determine those worthy of salvation by rational reasoning (thus rejecting it as irrational) rather than clueless wagering"
BiggerThinking1 1 month ago
Comment removed
BiggerThinking1 1 month ago
He made an interesting point, but he should have mentioned the biggest weakness in the wager: The fact that it assumes an indemonstrable dichotomy of "No afterlife vs Christian afterlife". Say you chose to make the "safe bet" by accepting Christ. What if it turned out that Muslims were right, making you an infidel? Or that the afterlife rewarded only those who embraced reason and rejected superstition? There are infinite possible afterlifes that are unaccounted for. The wager is drivel.
ExpensiveGun 2 months ago
@ExpensiveGun Yep, it also assumes that not believing in God doesn't send you to heaven which means they are making a prejudgement on what the outcomes of the decision would be. Based on the severe punishments in most of the manmade organised religions for worshipping other gods then I find this hard to accept, if someone wants to go down that route they'd be better off just being a good person and not believing in magic sky daddies.
haz464 1 month ago
I think he should have added that believing this to be true which seemed a requirement of the whole idea of salvation doesn't work for someone who isn't capable of some sort of double think. I could no more believe the jesus myth out of fear of hell than I could believe in jesus if you put a gun to my head. I can no more believe in jesus for the reward of heaven than believing in jesus out of desire for a million $'s. One needs credible evidence to honestly say something is true not an incentive
TheAlphaPyro 2 months ago
10/17/11, 10:04PM:
(The next day after I commented on this, weird coincidence...)
C-Span just reran this debate in its entirety (catch the whole thing if you can, it's quite good), and if this was CH's last major public debate, he went out punching in top form, with a rigorous intelligence and an elegant articulateness equaled only by William F. Buckley, Jr.
tuxguys 2 months ago
RIP
sorry8140 2 months ago
Hitch at his best... the C. S. Lewis of atheists.
Incidentally, I admired him enormously, and disagreed with him, not about Christianity, but about the existence of God, completely.
tuxguys 2 months ago
You are missed Christopher. And I loved you. :'(
sesshoin1 2 months ago
By "choosing" (if possible) to believe you also lose critical thinking. You close yourself off to all possibilities for truth, other than the one you've "chosen". Then there's the problem of which/god/goddess/deity do you choose, out of the tens of thousands that humans have ever worshipped. The odds don't look so good now, do they? Wouldn't such a jealous god (as most of them appear to be) be even more mad at you if you chose the wrong god, rather than no god?
Codex7777 3 months ago
There is a very good reason why the Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental Disorders considers fundamentalist beliefs a MENTAL DISORDER!
saburius 3 months ago
hitchens should do a hubbard and discard that diminishing body of his. its only weighing him down.
volound 3 months ago
christianity has abbandoned mysticism..... that why we get Atheists....
o0POSH0o 3 months ago
I just say, gambling is a sin. Secondly, if I only believe in "God" to get a free pass, I think the God being referenced would catch on to my insincerity and act accordingly.
TerrencePhillip66 3 months ago
Also, Pascal's Wager doesn't work if there are possibility of multiple gods and you prayed (bet) with the wrong one, pissed off the "real" one. You're betting on that there is only one god, not many, and out of all the "one" gods (there are many), that one you bet on was correct.
dlite922 3 months ago
I have a question that's kind of related to Pascal's Wager. What do you think of the reward and punishment system of heaven and hell? Do u think its based on true morality or is it just mental abuse on humans? Please state your answer and the reason why?
Blackman1000ify 3 months ago
@craigslistflow No lol we dont have to prove anything that he doesnt exist noob
KeySour 4 months ago
@craigslistflow
“If you take the side of 'there's no [proof of] God', you must prove that he doesn't exist.” ...No
“If I take the side of 'there's [proof of] a God', I must prove that he does exist.” …Yes
That was a fine example of a common argumentative fallacy. Note the corrections to both statements with the reinsertion of the omitted words, nice try though in attempting to misconstrue the meaning of your first oversimplified statement as “'there's [proof of] no God”.
HotblackDesiat042 4 months ago 2
@HotblackDesiat042 hey that was good
Serpico261 4 months ago
@craigslistflow So if I die before you do, it would somehow prove there's a creator?
LOL!!! I love these delusional god believers.
gupsphoo 5 months ago 3
Among other things, the best polemicist of our times, maybe ever.
channelislander 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
foxnews(.)com/opinion/2011/07/27/does-cross-belong-at-11-memorial-site Vote!
Reaperlastfm 7 months ago
"principles sold for the hope of some reward"? No! How could you be more wrong, sir? We're a fallen creation. We turned away from our very creator so long ago. Still, He loves us so much that He paid for out iniquities, such that, "whosoever believes on Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life."
DoKtaTre 7 months ago
@DoKtaTre
Silly little fool.
z3r0t0l3r4ns 7 months ago
@DoKtaTre I hope you realize that not everyone believes the same crap you believe. So first of all you must demonstrate your crap is true, which I serious doubt you can.
gupsphoo 6 months ago 12
good to see hitch is back!!!
doobon 7 months ago
There's a serious flaw in Pascal's Wager. You could not pretend to believe in god because he would know it and on judgement day would treat you just like any other atheist.
OneAtheist1 8 months ago
Pascal's Pensees actually does have some pretty good proto-existentialist material that you can take stuff from regardless of being a non-believer (sorta like Kierkegaard in this respect).
It's a pity his miserable wager overshadowed his legitimate stuff in the English speaking world.
anarchovendean 8 months ago
If there WAS a god, awesome ppl like Hitchens wouldn't have fucking throat cancer
TAz69x 8 months ago
@TAz69x He actually has esophageal cancer.
LoquaciousApe 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"UFO Disclosure A Global Deception Conspiracy" ON
YOUTUBE is a compilation of with held knowledge from the public of life
beyond Earth. The compilation contains statements from military personnel,
astronauts, politicians & presidents and credible news footage.
Futurecop2012C 8 months ago
It also presumes you can control your own belief and that there is no risk in living a life under the belief of god which is not always true in my opinion either.
ciaracustard 8 months ago
The fact that religious people of all stripes will use this so obviously flawed argument proves that we are winning.
spacecowboy95 8 months ago 2
To the Christian: There are literally thousands of gods. Yours just happens to be a popular one these days, but it's hardly the only one that still has adherents. So...WHICH god should I worship? You're ASSuming that there's only two options - your god, or disbelief. That's a false dichotomy. Look it up. RAmen.
I worship the FSM, mothafuckas.
RazonSuprema 8 months ago 3
How many useless Christians do you think will say "god punished Hitchens with cancer? Well then god punished your mother with breast cancer and your baby with leukemia. Amen.
TamaNewb 9 months ago 56
This has been flagged as spam show
@TamaNewb If there is such a thing as a God, at best he is an Absentee Landlord.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@TamaNewb Look you stupid atheist, God curses babies with leukemia and takes the lives of the innocent to test our faith. What you senseless atheists dont seem to understand is that God works in mysterious ways and the Bible says "the sins of the fathers will be visited upon by the sons" which means that if you are a sinner God has then right to kill your innocent children. If America really loved god then our government should murder the entire families of these God-less homosexuals!
theCYNIC 2 months ago
@theCYNIC by the way i was playing devil's advocate... or well, God's advocate i guess you could say. Read the Bible and if you have common sense the size of a mustard seed your atheism will move mountains!
theCYNIC 2 months ago
@theCYNIC Explain to me then why you worship this evil god?
TamaNewb 2 months ago
@TamaNewb it was a joke, im an atheist, of course it makes no sense, christians dont need to make sense. They think faith is some sort of virtue which should have special protection from any type of debate or questioning.
theCYNIC 2 months ago
@theCYNIC I thought it was sarcasm or the most insane comment i ever received, unfortunately there usually indistinguishable :)... these are Christians after all...
TamaNewb 2 months ago
@theCYNIC I was about to go off on you until I read your latest comment :3
OneUhBuv 2 months ago
@TamaNewb Only the Westboro Baptist Church.
Ebvardh 1 month ago
Nearly dead and still the biggest balls I have ever seen. I wish I will show that kind of integrity when I face something bad.
AxeHomeless 9 months ago 3
Are any of the idiots who use pascal's wager aware that there have been over a thousand gods made in human history? It's all just one giant cosmic roulette wheel. As for me, I prefer to throw my chips in reality, which I know exist, which I know I can have a even a small effect on, and which I know I can find happiness from without having to worry about an afterlife which may or may not exist.
alienisuntverus 9 months ago
@alienisuntverus Oh yee of little scientific and philosophical background. You "know" reality exists? How?
17thknight 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
sincerely (not a loaded question) as an atheist and if you are speaking truly for yourself, Which of these sway you more? Which is more of a root? Do you feel as though belief in a God keeps you from as the person above did "spending this life which I know exists in the way I want, to enjoy it how i wish and treat others equally." or because it is philosophically superior do to more empirical evidence as the person underneath stated? Question is for anyone. Im not going anywhere with it.
Brazillianviking 9 months ago
Comment removed
Brazillianviking 9 months ago
Pascal's Wager is a fallacy, surely the theist has everything to lose if God doesn't exist? If I, as an atheist am wrong (I don't think I am) but hypothetically what kind of 'benevolent,' vein deity would send me to eternal punishment through being skeptical due to no convincing philosophical argument and lack of empirical evidence? The theist has everything to lose, their whole lives have been based around a lie otherwise.
wackojacko2222 9 months ago 3
wheres the rest of this???
911BeganTheEndOfGod 9 months ago
Religion is puke. Lol
Jonathanedward2010 9 months ago
This man is very smart
WonderNerd24 9 months ago
Get well Christopher...we effin need you.
TheKenTerry 10 months ago 75
@TheKenTerry You "need" him? Try thinking for yourself.
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight
"We" need him. As in people benefit from his words. Try being more of twat.
TheKenTerry 7 months ago
@TheKenTerry "We" don't need anyone. Learn to think for yourself.
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight
I do, hence the reason I find him to be knowledgeable. I don't see you personally fighting religion like he does, do I? I know people won't listen to me, so I root for him to keep touring and fighting a good fight. It seems you're the brainless one, since apparently every idea humans come up with is either original or followed by blind faith. I look my shit up and form my opinion, and don't try to act like you're superior to me for agreeing with Mr. Hitchens.
TheKenTerry 7 months ago
@TheKenTerry I'm not saying I'm superior or that you're inferior, I just highly dislike how much weight people put on any single person's ideas. It's good to take what others think into consideration, but all too often it turns into a cult of personality where people will follow a man like Hitchens (or anyone else) somewhat blindly. A quote that I've always liked is one by Mark Twain: "In religion and politics most people's beliefs are come by second-hand and without examination".
17thknight 7 months ago
@TheKenTerry Ultimately, my point is simply that we don't "need' Hitchens, or anyone else. Once the seeds have been planted it is up to us to foster and nurture them.
17thknight 7 months ago
@TheKenTerry
I think the man himself would agree that HE is not nearly as important as his ideas. If we are so unfortunate to lose him too early then we at least retain a record of his wisdom. Not to mention the inspiration he has provided to many people. One of whom, I assure you, will stand up to take his place should he fall.
z3r0t0l3r4ns 7 months ago
@z3r0t0l3r4ns
That's true, an idea has the potential to be immortal while humans don't. Whoever stands up won't be Mr. Hitchens however, and that's what i'm going to miss. We need his personality along with his words, someone who doesn't take shit and deal with nonsense. I do know it's ridiculous to expect him to actually get better though, I just hope the person who takes over won't roll over at any time.
TheKenTerry 7 months ago
@TheKenTerry Exactly. Ideas and beliefs are extremely powerful, which is why Religion has persisted throughout the ages, including into our own era despite all the scientific knowledge that has been gained. Science and the astounding gains it has made in just the last 100 years has basically made Religion an antiquated attempt at describing the world around us. Science not only does it better than Religion, but it does it in such a way that is flexible and adaptable to new information.
GoongalaGoongala 6 months ago
@TheKenTerry He's gone - he's passed the torch to you - run with it!
BiggerThinking1 1 month ago
@BiggerThinking1
Ha, I wouldn't say that at all. I'm doing my part, but it's only a fraction to what Hitch did.
TheKenTerry 1 month ago
Belief can't be chosen. If yours was, then it isn't sincere, and thus isn't real. I don't choose to disbelieve the Christian god exists, I simply have no choice but to conclude that it doesn't because elements of Christian doctrine have been proven false by science, and there hasn't even been one instance of evidence that proved it does exist.
etowncards80 10 months ago
I cannot choose to believe; it is NOT an act of volition
matprithellodave 10 months ago
allentolman 10 months ago
Pascal's wager has always been the succour of the weak willed and feeble minded.
Think;; reason; decide; then...Either go for it, or don't!
Stop pussy footing around.
BTW. I have a beautiful teapot for sale, unique and well preserved, not see in this lifetime, all reasonable offers accepted. :-)
jc333jc 10 months ago 2
I didn't know he had cancer... I wish I could be there when someone claims that he got cancer for not believing in God, so I can smack them upside the head. With that said, I still believe in God... I'm just saying that being an athiest or agnostic doesn't make him any more likely to get cancer than anyone else.
rayalvarado2010 10 months ago
Christianity also asks that you be willing to martyr yourself in the face of unbelief. What does that do to the odds? If you bet God exits and will reward your martyrdom, and you're wrong, you have indeed lost quite a bit.
IFStravinsky 11 months ago
Absolsute, in no way entails a god. This is false logic as much as the existance of god is false.
bodhidharma78 11 months ago
The other thing he doesn't mention is wrong with Pascal's rationale, is that to adopt that attitude you couldn't just stop at Christianity you would need to cover every major religion, every minor religion, what if the spaghetti monster is real as well? You would spend the rest of your life performing some form of religious activity. No, we don't need to hedge our bets, life is too short to waste it on superstition.
stubertbear 11 months ago
Can there be ABSOLUTES in a universe without God? :Question
MrEmeraldfusion 11 months ago
@MrEmeraldfusion
Child rape is absolutely bad,
creationism is absolutely false, and
absolutely every living human has to breathe.
As an Atheist, I would say there is no God but that this universe does contain absolutes, so the answer would be a definite yes.
philippides 11 months ago
@philippides -If Child rape is absolutely bad then there must be an ABSOLUTE standard giver which, is above humans there by saying, ABSOLUTES your saying God is real. Thank You sir.
MrEmeraldfusion 11 months ago
@MrEmeraldfusion
Maybe you needed an absolute standard giver to threaten you with eternal torment in order to keep you from fucking little children, but that bit of morality was innate in me.
I'm glad you believe in God so that you'll be fearful enough not to act out what an awful piece of shit you are!
But more to the point now:
Absolutes indicate the limits of our perceptions in some direction...and do nothing towards proving the thousands of gods people have dreamt up over the milennia.
philippides 11 months ago
@philippides -Why do you have to use that type of language is it because you know I am right? you cannot have absolutes without God and you know it.
MrEmeraldfusion 11 months ago
@MrEmeraldfusion
Why can you not have absolutes without God?
philippides 11 months ago
@MrEmeraldfusion
I submit that you can, and even if you couldn't, God wouldn't help the matter. Consider the following:
If something is absolute, is it absolute because god says its absolute, or does god say its absolute because he observes it to be so?
On the one hand, it's arbitrary what the absolute thing is (god could have made something else absolute), and on the other it's out of god's control
Now substitute the word "absolute" with "moral" and run the same thought experiment
philippides 11 months ago
@philippides Here is another "thought experiment"...If humanity evolved out of "lightning hitting pond scum" 700,000,000 million years ago...then we are the desendants of electrified mud. It would all mean nothing. The extermination of 6 million Jews by Hitler would mean no more than wipping "mud" off ones shoes. It would not matter that 50 million abortions have been preformed in this country since 1973. (those #s would make both Hitler and Stalin blush) since we're just a accident of nature.?
bheadh 11 months ago
@bheadh ive seen various forms of this argument/rationale in different threads. i believe there is an incorrect "leap of logic" within it. the conditions or intent involved during the genesis or birth of an idea, object, species, etc. do not, necessarily, inform the worth and merit of said "object" perhaps we were "born of mud", as is suggested. this, in NO WAY, lessens our value as human beings. i notice many people tend to, for some reason, use hitler/nazism as a basis for their metaphors. 1/2
benjamminroemer 11 months ago
@benjamminroemer You can "believe" whatever you want. We're still THAT free. I thought there was no "intent"? ?????
bheadh 11 months ago
@bheadh so, let us suppose this = what if, hitler had conceived a child. this child saw what his/her father had done, and was repulsed by it. the child then goes on to lead a life of public service and unflappable kindness towards others. everyone who comes in contact with this person agrees he/she is one of the nicest, most honorable people they have ever met. now, would the fact that hitler was this childs father lessen or degrade the "good" carried out by this person? 2/2
benjamminroemer 11 months ago
@bheadh
So my above thought experiment still applies:
Do we have intrinsic worth regardless of what God thinks, or are we worth nothing unless God decides we are?
And you think I'm the one with the bleak philosophy.
Here's a number for you: 100,000,000,000
That's about how many people have suffered and perished since the dawn of man as God looked on, indifferent.
I can see why you people want to pretend like the Earth's only several thousand years old.
philippides 11 months ago
@philippides No< your "experiment" is moot. If it is by "accident" or if the universe big-banged from "nothing"....then if there is no "reason" behind any of it. Is this so hard to understand? If we all really come from is electrified mud...hunanity and everything it does means absolutly nothing.
bheadh 11 months ago
@bheadh
Why does it suddenly mean something if we came from God?
If I irrefutably knew I came from a divine creator- especially one that made this many horrid design flaws in us- and he's always watching and he always knows my every thought and action, and if I do or think or say or even feel the wrong things, he will send me to a place of eternal torment...my life, to me, would immediately mean a lot less.
philippides 11 months ago
@bheadh
As a creature this imperfectly made, from my adrenaline glands being too big, my frontal lobes being too small, the optic nerve in my eye having to cross the retina, and the same throat tube being used for breathing AND swallowing- a flaw which has killed millions and for which any engineer on Earth would be fired-, I would be insulted if a Divine Creator built me this way. But as a chance happenstance on a speck in an ocean of specks, I'm heroically beating the odds already.
philippides 11 months ago
@bheadh
My life has infinitely more meaning to me this way...than it would as a badly formed pawn in a mostly wasted one-world universe whose sole purpose it is to bow and worship and think and do and feel as I'm told, or be tortured forever. How ridiculous. How provincial. How primitive and childish. Can we outgrow this thinking already? Please? Join the billions who think more clearly, and who are free.
philippides 11 months ago
@bheadh
>"If it is by 'accident'..."
If you have to use the word "accident", then you don't understand the science involved. Evolution is not a random accident and has nothing to do with chance.
>"...or if the universe big-banged from 'nothing'..."
If you have to use the word "nothing", then you don't understand the science involved. Big Bang Cosmology does not state that we came from 'nothing'. Creationism says that.
>"there is no 'reason' behind any of it."
Theism renders life meaningless.
LordCustos3 10 months ago
@MrEmeraldfusion
>"If Child rape is absolutely bad then there must be an ABSOLUTE standard giver...."
I'm going to stop you there. Do you understand the difference between a Proscriptive Law and Descriptive Law?
Also, your assertion begs for the Euthyphro Dilemma to be brought up; and you don't want that, because theism always ends up looking silly after that.
LordCustos3 10 months ago 2
You can even make a Pascal's wager for atheism. "What if there is an all powerful being who arbitrarily awards salvation only to atheists. His holy book is this blank 8.5 by 11 paper. Why take the risk???"
That should show how garbage the wager is.
AspiringPotato 11 months ago
@AspiringPotato
Agreed, the wager can also be rendered garbage by merely mentioning the thousands of other gods throughout history and how we must also now worry about suplicating them as well. . . . .
philippides 11 months ago
@philippides
Of course the christians usually dismiss those as "false gods" without realizing or caring about their hypocrisy. The wager is independently proposed by thousands of christians every day who have never even heard of Pascal. That should speak volumes about what a well-thought out intelli-gem it is...
AspiringPotato 11 months ago
Say we take Pascal's Wager and believe in a god: should we then just choose whatever god has the most horrible punishments to offer just to be safest?
By the wager's standards, a hypothetical god I'm just now making up called Example, who punishes you and everyone you love for eternity if you don't believe in him, should be chiefly worshiped. The fact that I just made her up shouldn't affect the wager at all, since when logic and reasoning is brought in all gods are invalid.
hobodoctor 11 months ago 2
my favorite answer to the "what if youre wrong?" question is: "what if you're wrong? what if god put all this nonsensical bullshit on the planet just to weed out the idiots so he can send everyone who believes that ridiculousness to hell and keep all the people who are actually using his gift of reason with him in heaven?"
DarthJohn111 11 months ago
Hey is there a link to this whole debate? I need it if you have it. Im doing a school vid on atheism and this debate seems great for such a video. I thank you in advance if you send me the link.
romperstompist 1 year ago
@romperstompist Have you looked at NonStampCollector's videos? They're short and very to the point - pointing out the reasons for atheism in unique ways.
If you have a school project on atheism, I'd be happy to help. It's one of my pet projects.
Stairc 1 year ago
@Stairc There are both items of faith (incarnation) and items that can be shown through reason. (existence of God, existence of an immaterial mind/soul) That is the reason why Thomas Aquinas is/was so important as he had a perfect balance between faith and reason. Also some more modern day scientists (Fr. Robert J. Spitzer) are so important because many believe faith and science are at odds, which couldn't be further from the truth. Obvoisuly we now see why there is an issue with fundamentalism.
BeatMasterPhil 1 year ago
Comment removed
AQGOAT24 1 year ago
Pascal's a nob, well he's French and I'm English. But here's my position on his wager; I choose to disbelieve God. Why? Because I'd rather spend this life which I know exists in the way I want. To enjoy it how I wish and treat others equally. I'm not gonna waste it on dogmatic beliefs and orders. If I'm wrong, then God is a sadistic being who treats our lives like a petty game for his own ego, and that isn't worthy of praise. So I'd tell him he's evil before giving Satan a nipple twist from hell
russellrummage 1 year ago 68
@russellrummage
Pascal was brilliant, and did not mean the wager as an a valid argument for God. The wager was partly a commentary on a gambling culture of the times.
jhsowter 1 year ago
@jhsowter That first line was a little joke. I don't know where you're from but Britain (England specifically) have a rivalry with France that stretches back 1000 years. But the rest of my comment is unchanged, whatever the reason for the wager, I'm refuting the wager itself. Good day sir.
russellrummage 1 year ago
@russellrummage The fact that you apply human traits to god shows an inherent misunderstanding of the concept of "God".
anonymousLeroy 11 months ago
@anonymousLeroy A misunderstanding by a human that claims to "know" gods traits and can interpret them.... Kettle, this is Pot.... Your Black... Over and Out.
Wrahns 11 months ago
Comment removed
anonymousLeroy 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What you fail to realize is that the very fundamental nature of God is a being who is inherently and utterly perfect. Any fault you give Him is you describing something besides God. The concept is that of a perfect being whose perfection cannot be matched. To give Him human qualities is to therefore make him imperfect, and thus you're not actually describing him, but something close to Him. Now I'm an atheist, but I've taken a few philosophy classes, and that concept interested me.
anonymousLeroy 11 months ago
@anonymousLeroy Again your implying something from the "Human" perspective, not from something that can be conclusively proven or demonstrated to be real in any way shape or form. As soon as you apply the words "Concept of" anything after them about mythology is pure here-say and speculation from a Human Perspective. To even speculate that there is "A God" that is "Perfect" is Human speculation itself.
Wrahns 11 months ago
@Wrahns Well as I said, my atheistic beliefs lead me to believe that yes, God is a human creation. Yet the characteristics that he has are those of a perfect being. So anything imperfect you attempt to say about Him is you describing something other than Him. That is the concept, and that is why it's often so hard to wrap ones mind around it: we're imperfect things trying to characterize a perfect being. Not really going to go too well.
anonymousLeroy 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ Wrahns What you fail to realize is that the very fundamental nature of God is a being who is inherently and utterly perfect. Any fault you give Him is you something besides God. The concept is that of a perfect being whose perfection cannot be matched. To give Him human qualities is to therefore make him imperfect, and thus you're not actually describing him, but something close to Him. Now I'm an atheist, but I've taken a few philosophy classes, and that concept interested me.
anonymousLeroy 11 months ago
@russellrummage i love you
ChuckNorrisKilledGod 10 months ago
@russellrummage
He is not a nob, but his wager is idiotic. Good post all together, but Pascal was brilliant.
kisskisskiss121212 10 months ago
@kisskisskiss121212 The first line was a joke, I do respect intellect and I wish more people did.
russellrummage 10 months ago
@russellrummage You logical fallacy Pavloved that "I'm not gonna waste it on dogmatic beliefs and orders". Au contraire, you clearly are. What is your basis for wanting to "treat others equally?" How to measure "equality" in a moral relativist and meaningless void? You are adrift with cheaply constructed standard atheist premises. Apparently for each atheist, their opinions null and void God. Aye, now there is "ego", and not a very convincing, inspiring or useful one. Laughable.
gmakepiece 10 months ago
@gmakepiece So you see equality as a dogma? Of course you do, you lack confidence that you're a good person, always hoping for mythical babysitter's approval. Relativism works, why? Because consensus is reached. We are the same animal, in the same World, so I don't think it's such a big mystery like the theist makes out; it's just an interesting bit of philosophy. I'm a humanist, so atheism isn't meaningless, the meaning is my own. If you need more to feel happy then sorry, but that's childish.
russellrummage 10 months ago
@russellrummage Excellent incoherent gibberish logical fallacy. So PC, so lefty, so atheist & so very dreary. Unconvincing, pal. So we should my, my, dump God & believe in gee, YOU then? No thanks. Why are so many atheists intolerant, ignorant, superficial, nihilist clowns? Y R they such witless unread tedious uninspiring zealots? I guess because their only standard is as high as their humourless egoist narcissistic selves. Fraud on then. Here's a smart & deeply learned atheist. prodos com
gmakepiece 10 months ago
I am not sure whether to laugh or cry because of your posts. It's just filled with fallacies, ad hominems and ignorant, hateful remarks. It's quite sad because I really think this springs from your heart. You are not only wrong (atheism IN ITSELF has no philosophical, moral or beliefsystem), but the way you put it is just... I don't know, bitter?
JumpDeluxe 10 months ago
@JumpDeluxe Excellent logical fallacy ramblings. You are an excellent atheist. You seem, I don't know, humourless, empty, shallow, unread, phony and er, bitter. Bravo.
gmakepiece 10 months ago
@gmakepiece
How can I use logical fallacies, when I'm not even using a logical proposition? I only critisize yours and the way you state it. The title "excellent atheist" is hilarious, that really put a smile to my face. I'm starting to think you are a internet-troll. If you are, well done sir. If you are not, shame on you! Well.. Maybe you should be ashamed either way ;-).
JumpDeluxe 10 months ago
@JumpDeluxe You fantastically and hilariously said and I quote "How can I use logical fallacies, when I'm not even using a logical proposition?" Wahey! Brilliant! You sum up the left liberal mind such as it is perfectly. As usual, thanks for the gut ripping laughs.I shall use this quote forever. Let the "shaming" begin!
gmakepiece 10 months ago
@gmakepiece Incoherent gibberish? If you find what I say hard to follow then there is no hope for you, can I explain myself any more clearly than I have already? Not really. Logical fallacy you say? Ok, here's one for you; To mistake philosophical musings as knowledge. Understand? You don't "know" shit, nothing, it's all musing. At least I admit where my knowledge ends, you will just swallow whatever a collared paedophile preaches to you. And I'm well read thanks, in physics & cosmology, twat.
russellrummage 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@russellrummage So you're er, "well read" eh, "in physics & cosmology" and "twat." So you're a Twat Major or a Minor Twat? When did you last "collar" a peadophile? Unusual life you lead. Hey, academia. You seem upset. Take another course then.
gmakepiece 10 months ago
@russellrummage
You are right, and it's even worse than that. Pascal's Wager does not include all the possible (including inconceivable) hypothetical natures of the word "God". He introduces his Wager as if it's a reasonable chance that the Christian God exists, when in fact the chance is infinitely small, nearing zero. It is also undesirable to just throw away our intellectual honesty in a dishonest wager. There is a incredibly small chance to gain all, and a certainty to lose much.
JumpDeluxe 10 months ago
@russellrummage If you live life the best you can and this god won't let you in, only because you didn't believe, would you have wanted to worship that god be begin with?
Believers show being good has no value to this god, only fear/believing, that in itself is enough for me to not worship, regardless of his existence. Heck, there goes their "morals" argument too.
Imho, a "good" god should accept "good" unfaithfull in heaven easyer then the people he knows that were only good out of fear.
enlightendbel 9 months ago
@enlightendbel Agree 100%. A deistic God deserves no praise as he would be indifferent. A theistic God deserves no praise, well, for all the reasons you mentioned.
russellrummage 9 months ago
@russellrummage omg the last part of your comment cracked me up, giving "satan a nipple twist" too funny
zipitup75 9 months ago
@russellrummage Well I wouldn't judge Pascal so harshly. For one thing, his eponymous wager was something penned in the margin of one of his writings, not intended as a serious defense of the faith. We owe a lot to him and his work with probability and mathematics, and to condemn him entirely because he came up with a bad apologetic one time seems unfair.
Arkalius80 9 months ago
No one has said you can't choose to live as you wish, that isn't part of the entire argument. Pascal's wager solely concerns itself with belief, which you are ignoring. You are simply choosing to respond this way out of petulant anger, not out of logic or reason.
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight I'm sorry, but as far as I know Christianity tells me to live in a way I find divisive & abhorrent. For example if I lust after women I'm a sinner, yet homosexuality is even worse (what's that about?). If you're just talking belief, then ok but why should I believe? Because of a threat? That's what this wager is in essence. I've used logic & reason aplenty to come to my conclusion about reality, research in physics and psychology for example, certainly no faith was involved.
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage And why do you single out Christianity as the religion against which you vent your anger?
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight Because Pascal was appealing for Christianity, I'm sure he didn't come up with this wager to create more muslims. And here we go again, why do you see reluctance to accept religion as anger? It's more a sign of how you're reading me, meaning the anger is projected from you. I may use strong adjectives, but that's all they are. You referring to me saying God's sadistic and unworthy of praise? Well by treating our lives as a test, with dire consequences, I think that's accurate.
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage Regardless of whom Pascal himself was speaking to, the wager applies to all religions, as I believe you yourself pointed out. Your own words betray your anger. You even recognize it yourself. Your loathing is betrayed in your language, as is anyone's true feeling.
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight Even if it's relevant for all religions, I aimed at Christianity as the people who'll see this will mostly be Christian. Don't worry, I feel the same way about all religions (well, I will admit that I hate Islam). I can be angry with some areas of religion, but what you've seen here is frustration, not anger. If you want something that angers me then I'll give you an example. The claim of some people to be able to have authority over me for intangiable reasons, never gonna happen :)
russellrummage 7 months ago
@russellrummage That makes sense and is an intellectually honest answer and I thank you for it :)
17thknight 7 months ago
@17thknight Debate is always useful. Been a pleasure, sir.
russellrummage 7 months ago
Simply amazing... Even in the clutches of a terrible disease like cancer and obviously undergoing chemotherapy the man can articulate so beautifully
bootlipnaga 1 year ago
I LOVE HITCHENS...I FUCKING HATE!!! TO SEE HIM LIKE THAT...I WISH HE IS IMMORTAL
STUMPYBOY1 1 year ago
:) it's all good!
pwoodfi 1 year ago
@joywonder, don't judge. I'm not laughing. I just think he looks like Luke's dad from Star Wars without his hair. Just an observation. Lighten up.
pwoodfi 1 year ago
@pwoodfi my bad
joywonder 1 year ago
Hitchens looks like Darth Vader
pwoodfi 1 year ago
@pwoodfi dude don t laugh at the poor thing for how he looks that is beyond him, laugh at him for what he says inventing a god that is so stupid he can easily trick it, is not a god, its a stupid human invention
joywonder 1 year ago
I never liked Pascal's wager, it always seemed like more of a threat.
georgekostaras 1 year ago 59