Pascal's Wager, Biblical Contradition

[quankanne]

religion promotes immorality in the following ways

 

a) it sacrifices reality and concern over temporal affairs for a fantasy of salvation

 

how is wanting to live right and do right by others through a soul-magnifying force I call God “sacrificing reality and concern over temporal affairs”? My be-all end-all is not aimed at gaining that salvation, but trying to love others the way I’m asked to love while I’m here on this earth ... even when all I want to do is pinch heads at times

 

my faith gives me a goal of being a better person so I can affect change in my life and the lives of others around me, not sit around in some self-induced religious funk that only has me and God as the central characters, as you suggest. God has opened up the world around me in that he’s asked me to step outside my narrow, selfish world to minister to others in whatever means he’s called me to do so …

 

b) it conditions people to view the world from a sycophantic perspective...this has led to all kinds of problems like idolizing other human beings such as hitler to idolizings secular ideolgies such as communism

 

idolatry isn’t limited to religion or religious belief, as you point out with your comment about communism. That is the human person taking and running with a very narrow view of humanity that’s hurtful to man’s soul, and trying to promote it as something positive. And if you look at communism, you’ll see that in some areas of the world it’s failed, while in others, it’s starting to collapse because it fails to address what man’s soul cries out for (re: St. Augustine).

 

c) and this may be the worst ... it takes away the beauty of the concept of authentic true selflessness and replaces it with vulgar selfishness and the hope for personal gain

 

from my perspective, you’ve got it skewed: Faith inspires “authentic true selflessness” because it helps you to see outside yourself and consider others because all of a sudden, the people around you are your brothers and sisters in God (part of the Body of Christ, as Christians put it). How can someone who rejects a common unifying force like faith expect to set standards of morality and selflessness if there’s nothing to base it on? Or, in other words why should *I* find value in those things that *you* say have X value when there’s no common ground?

 

We are ALL apes baby.... some of us have more characteristics than others...

 

hey! Who told?!! Damned electrologist …

 

Both atheists and Christians are looking for the meaning outside themselves. Atheists are more honest, they don't accept ideas without testing them. Christians for the most part are Christians, because they were born in a family of Christians, they never even gave thought as to why they are Christians. I would call that being incapable of critical thinking. An automatic obedience is nothing to be proud of, that just means you are not intelligent enough, that you don't trust your own perceptions of reality and yourself. It also means that you are scared, Christianity is based on fear.

 

you had me at the first sentence, then you quickly lost me after that. Because once again, you’re placing your values on my experience as a Catholic Christian and saying they fall short because you don’t approve of them. Faith is a very personal thing, even though we tend to get together with others to share our “kind” of believe … and to say that I’m scared into sticking with a religion because it’s what’s been handed down to me from my mother isn’t valid is just plain silly. She’s just the one who opened me up to the possibility of a loving God, but ultimately, I am the one who must accept or reject Him, and that’s a choice I come to each and every time I encounter crisis that impacts me morally or spiritually. My mother has nothing to do with it, because it’s my faith journey, not hers.

 

If something is good for all people at all times in all situations - it's moral, if not - it's immoral.

 

which comes back to the original thought: Who decides? What is the basis for deciding? As someone pointed out earlier, in the Western world we’d find morally repugnant to set a woman on fire for an insufficient dowry, but in other cultures, that’s perfectly okay. So who is right, and more importantly why? The Westerners, who say the woman is a valued part of her society, or the others, who say what she has to bring to the marriage table is of higher value than her person?

 

It's all about the here and now as well. Guidance, peace, and joy in everyday life man! and It is much greater*… it goes deeper ...

 

well said, guys! Yes, a seat in heaven, perpetually with the one who loves you more than you could ever believe is a wonderful “prize” at the end of the game of life, but we still have to live that life before we can claim the prize … if we believe in His love, then why can’t we be allowed to be inspired to share it with those slogging through life with us by doing those acts of love for others? Feeding the hungry, clothing the poor, visiting the incarcereles? It doesn’t make me *feel* better, but it gives my life definition because it takes me out of my selfish state of being … and does “right” by my fellow man.

 

Jesus boiled the Ten Commandments down to this: Love God, and love one another.

 

But, as Mother Teresa puts it, “We cannot show our love for God whom we cannot see and who is in need of nothing except by loving and serving our neighbor whom we see and love as God’s child.”

 

that is what my faith gives me … the chance to share love with my brothers and sisters in Christ … and being able to do that is a more pressing concern that what lies at the end of the road. Do I want to go to hell? Of course not. But living out my faith is not about heaven or hell, just love.

[VIP]

Ok.....the question was, "WHO"?

 

Who convicted who?

 

Who obtained confessions?

 

These acts where done by men. Not God. Not religion. Mere men.

 

Men of your religion, in the name of your god. And not just men, but heads of the church. If you want to know more about it, research about inquisition,

[quankanne]

research about inquisition

 

ah, the Church's first noticeable black eye … which, when it boils down to it, was not about faith or God, but a gross manipulation and abuse of authority. Much like today's Church's black eye with pedophile priests: People think it has to do with the Catholic faith, when it's really about men in places of power with warped values.

[Trimmer]

First, I don't boast about, "automatic obedience". In fact, I'm quite the opposite. I beat myself up over it in fact because I never feel obedient enough!

Moose, you have me confused now. The way "automatic" first came into this discussion was by your own hand:

You see, if you are a true believer, these acts of obedience are automatic, there are no threats to be concerned about.......

So you have spoken concretely about your automatic obedience and the absence of threat and fear, but then gone on to argue passionately that you make conscious choices, in the face of that truck bearing down upon you. I'm not sure I understand how these are consistent...

 

Did you talk to every Christian and ask them if they were born into a Christian family or ever gave it thought? If not, you cannot make that statement (you wouldn't even be able to say "for the most part". Who said Christians are "automatically obeying" besides you? It's a conscious choice, actually. To say Christians are not intelligent enough is just judgemental, stereotypical, and completely ignorant... how annoying.

I agree, the whole "people who believe that are not intelligent" line is a no-starter, is abrasive, and doesn't add anything useful to the conversation.

 

Now, having said that, do you grant equal consideration to the precept that believers in the world's other religions aren't believers simply because they were born into Muslim, Buddhist, Wiccan, etc. families either, but that they also, like you, made conscious, intelligent choices for themselves, just as you say Christians do?

 

Incidentally - and I know this gets discussed all the time - but remind me what happens to fundamentally "good" folks from other religions when they get to Judgement Day? Are they punished in hell for not making the right choice of God (put none before me, after all) or do they receive some consideration, perhaps because Christians just haven't had enough time to spread Christianity across the world yet?

 

I think the meaning here is that when one assumes/believes that there is no Higher Being, he or she then may/must consider himself or herself the Higher Being. If we believe that there is nobody greater, then we must be the greatest.

Believing in the absence of a particular god does not equate to believing one is a god, or the god. I get your interpretation, but humility is still possible within people by those who do not believe in your God, and I believe by those who do not believe in any god.

 

I am not sure I agree that it is always correct, but if there is a God, and we do not believe in His existence, then I am guessing that in His Eyes, we have usurped His Throne.

Pretty much brings us full circle back around to Pascal's Wager, fear, and the threat of retribution from an angry God, doesn't it?

 

And I realize I can't ever ask a "why would God do this?" question without getting a "we can't ever presume to know God's plan" answer (which I have to admit is an awfully handy answer to have at the ready for such questions...) But with a God so concerned with the distinction between right and wrong, with the need to worship only Him, the One True God (I get confused exactly when to capitalize...), so angry, sad, disappointed, vengeful - whatever - when we stray from His path, why would He go to such lengths to not only hide His existence, but to make Himself appear the creation of man, instead of the converse?

 

Blink the heavens and earth into existence 5000 years ago, but also blink into place all the photons and cosmic background evidence to precisely represent the remnants of a "big bang" billions of years earlier? Why hide Himself? Blink into existence millions of years of fossil, mineral, and isotopic evidence that the earth existed long previous? Why hide Himself? Create us in His image? That sounds more like the conceit of man, and serves only to limit our God to our own image - wouldn't any concept of God have to be unimaginably more complex than we are? Wait until what we know as "the time of Christ" to reveal His Word, through the writings of men? Why hide himself, when he could - in any instant - reveal himself unambiguously to us? Why go to such lengths to hide any unambiguous, direct evidence of His existence, and not only that, but to make Himself appear completely consistent with a creation of man?

 

I guess we can't ever know God's plan, I agree with that.

 

And if you claim that He lives within us, I can actually agree with that, too.

[VIP]

And millions of Jews were gassed by Hitler in WW2...how is either statement relevant?

 

I am not sure how that answered the question. Explain.

 

If Christian church burned 500.000 innocent people, it cannot be an authority to decide on what is moral and what is not.

[quankanne]

why hide Himself

 

this is personal conjecture, but I think it has to do with "walking through the narrow gate," as Jesus puts it: that while God is available to all, not all avail themselves to him. That in a two-way relationship, both parties have to strive to make it work.

 

a recent news magazine talked about Mother Teresa's "dark night of the soul," in which she was spiritually dry. Now where was a woman that many folks consider a modern-day saint for her great love of those in need, and for the work she'd done in God's name to give them peace in their lives. But her journals reveal that she felt God was hiding from her, that he was elusive – I'm guessing that the more entrenched she became in her work, the harder it was to see the hand of God at work, and she had a great spiritual crisis. However barren or neglected or denied she may have felt, she still continued her work as a reflection of the faith that she thought was gone, simply because she believed in Him so much.

 

maybe it's a test of faith, maybe revelation is our prize at the end, I don't know. But I do believe that God is present regardless of what my present state of being/mind is!

[VIP]

And who may I asked decided what is good for all people at all times?

 

Most philosophers agree that the kinds of actions that directly or indirectly harm other people are the kinds of action with which morality is concerned. Do you think otherwise?

[quankanne]

remind me what happens to fundamentally "good" folks from other religions when they get to Judgement Day? Are they punished in hell for not making the right choice of God (put none before me, after all) or do they receive some consideration, perhaps because Christians just haven't had enough time to spread Christianity across the world yet?

 

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, our profession of faith talks about Christ descending into Hell, “to free the just who had gone before Him” because (according to 1 Peter 4:6), “the Gospel was preached even to the dead that, though condemned in the flesh in human estimation, they might live in the spirit of the estimation of God.” So Jesus brings to every man throughout the ages the hope of the salvation:

Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity. – (No. 1260, the Catechism of the Catholic Church)

[Moose]

So you have spoken concretely about your automatic obedience and the absence of threat and fear, but then gone on to argue passionately that you make conscious choices, in the face of that truck bearing down upon you. I'm not sure I understand how these are consistent...

And I'm not sure what you're confused about. Of course I have the ability to make my own choices. What makes my choices different is that I choose to obey God. Not out of fear, but out of reverence.

 

HOWEVER.....I'm not perfect.....I make bad choice just like the next guy every now and again, and yes, it upsets me.

 

The question lies, do I get punished.....or do I get corrected? When you're a child of God, you're not being punished, you're being edified.

Incidentally - and I know this gets discussed all the time - but remind me what happens to fundamentally "good" folks from other religions when they get to Judgement Day? Are they punished in hell for not making the right choice of God (put none before me, after all) or do they receive some consideration, perhaps because Christians just haven't had enough time to spread Christianity across the world yet?

It's written that if they don't know Christ, they will be eternally seperated from God. Simple as that. And yes, that means an enternity in Hell.

perhaps because Christians just haven't had enough time to spread Christianity across the world yet?

It's also written that man will not have the ignorance card to play either. One of the main points I always try to make is that God reveals Himself to every man, woman and even child at an age of accountability.

And I realize I can't ever ask a "why would God do this?" question without getting a "we can't ever presume to know God's plan" answer

I've got a better answer for you, "you'll see"......

I guess we can't ever know God's plan, I agree with that.

To the contrary.....we CAN know God's plan, it's all written down and explained in GREAT detail.....you just need to read it.....

If Christian church burned 500.000 innocent people, it cannot be an authority to decide on what is moral and what is not.

A Christian Church would never burn innocent people. Misguided men might.....but not the Church....

[Jinnah]

Moose, you have me confused now. The way "automatic" first came into this discussion was by your own hand:

 

So you have spoken concretely about your automatic obedience and the absence of threat and fear, but then gone on to argue passionately that you make conscious choices, in the face of that truck bearing down upon you. I'm not sure I understand how these are consistent...

 

I took this to mean that he has chosen to do God's will and studied it so much that his responses are, in a way, automatic... just like memorizing the multiplication table.

 

I agree, the whole "people who believe that are not intelligent" line is a no-starter, is abrasive, and doesn't add anything useful to the conversation.

 

Now, having said that, do you grant equal consideration to the precept that believers in the world's other religions aren't believers simply because they were born into Muslim, Buddhist, Wiccan, etc. families either, but that they also, like you, made conscious, intelligent choices for themselves, just as you say Christians do?

 

Maybe in their opinion they did, but what does how does that come into play in this particular thread?

 

Incidentally - and I know this gets discussed all the time - but remind me what happens to fundamentally "good" folks from other religions when they get to Judgement Day? Are they punished in hell for not making the right choice of God (put none before me, after all) or do they receive some consideration, perhaps because Christians just haven't had enough time to spread Christianity across the world yet?

 

I see sarcasm in this question, so I won't spend too much time answering it, but, yes... the only way to Heaven is through Christ. Everyone has heard of Jesus Christ. God can make his decision on anyone who hasn't. Why don't you ask him since you are the one who wants to know?

 

 

Believing in the absence of a particular god does not equate to believing one is a god, or the god. I get your interpretation, but humility is still possible within people by those who do not believe in your God, and I believe by those who do not believe in any god.

 

 

Pretty much brings us full circle back around to Pascal's Wager, fear, and the threat of retribution from an angry God, doesn't it?

 

And I realize I can't ever ask a "why would God do this?" question without getting a "we can't ever presume to know God's plan" answer (which I have to admit is an awfully handy answer to have at the ready for such questions...) But with a God so concerned with the distinction between right and wrong, with the need to worship only Him, the One True God (I get confused exactly when to capitalize...), so angry, sad, disappointed, vengeful - whatever - when we stray from His path, why would He go to such lengths to not only hide His existence, but to make Himself appear the creation of man, instead of the converse?

 

That is an accurate answer, and that is why it is used.

 

Blink the heavens and earth into existence 5000 years ago, but also blink into place all the photons and cosmic background evidence to precisely represent the remnants of a "big bang" billions of years earlier? Why hide Himself? Blink into existence millions of years of fossil, mineral, and isotopic evidence that the earth existed long previous? Why hide Himself? Create us in His image? That sounds more like the conceit of man, and serves only to limit our God to our own image - wouldn't any concept of God have to be unimaginably more complex than we are? Wait until what we know as "the time of Christ" to reveal His Word, through the writings of men? Why hide himself, when he could - in any instant - reveal himself unambiguously to us? Why go to such lengths to hide any unambiguous, direct evidence of His existence, and not only that, but to make Himself appear completely consistent with a creation of man?

 

Jesus did appear and even then a lot of people did not believe anyway... so no God actually has not "hidden" Himself. He came to earth, performed miracles, died and rose from the dead, and some men were so stubborn and their hearts were so hardened that they did not believe anyway, so you see he did and it still did not matter to some. As for those of us in the present time, he who does not see but believes is blessed. It has a lot to do with faith. You hear about Jesus, know what happened when He lived, and decide for yourself what you want to believe.

 

I guess we can't ever know God's plan, I agree with that.

 

And if you claim that He lives within us, I can actually agree with that, too.

 

 

I hope that helps.

[Jinnah]

My multi-quote didn't go as planned, so my response is in bold letters in the message. Someone explain it to me again how to do what I wanted to do correctly.

[Jinnah]

Jesus did appear and even then a lot of people did not believe anyway... so no God actually has not "hidden" Himself. He came to earth, performed miracles, died and rose from the dead, and some men were so stubborn and their hearts were so hardened that they did not believe anyway, so you see he did and it still did not matter to some. As for those of us in the present time, he who does not see but believes is blessed. It has a lot to do with faith. You hear about Jesus, know what happened when He lived, and decide for yourself what you want to believe.

[sb129]

Where does this Moral Law originate? Who decided that it is wrong to do something? Since right and wrong is relative, from where do morals without a God originate?

 

This question has already been answered.

 

As Moai said, animals can have consciences AND morality to a certain extent, but to date, they don't believe in a god..

[VIP]

Of course I have the ability to make my own choices. What makes my choices different is that I choose to obey God.

 

That means you lost your ability to make your own choices.

 

It's written that if they don't know Christ, they will be eternally seperated from God. Simple as that. And yes, that means an enternity in Hell.

 

There are people who have other beliefs and they are not separated from god. In fact, nothing and nobody can ever be separated from god.

 

God reveals Himself to every man, woman and even child at an age of accountability.

 

That's not true

 

A Christian Church would never burn innocent people. Misguided men might.....but not the Church....

 

You cannot deny the facts.

[Moose]

That means you lost your ability to make your own choices.

How so? It's my choice to obey. And I usually do, but sometimes I don't. Sometimes I didn't even know I wasn't being obedient. Just like life itself, it's a growing and learning process, just on a different level.

There are people who have other beliefs and they are not separated from god. In fact, nothing and nobody can ever be separated from god.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions. I would just say that the God of the Bible, (My God), would beg to differ on both accounts.

That's not true

Prove it.

You cannot deny the facts.

So.... produce some.

[VIP]

Prove it.

 

He didn't revel himself to the atheists.

 

So.... produce some.

 

It's a historical fact, if you need to know more, study history.

[JamesM]

Most philosophers agree that the kinds of actions that directly or indirectly harm other people are the kinds of action with which morality is concerned. Do you think otherwise?

 

If I did then that is my reality and perception. Who are you to tell me I am wrong? And if you did, then who defined right and wrong?

 

If "most" philosophers agree, why did not all? When did these philosophers decide this major morals issue? And will it change as time goes on/

[JamesM]

This question has already been answered.

 

As Moai said, animals can have consciences AND morality to a certain extent, but to date, they don't believe in a god..

 

Please quote me where Moai said this. before he left, he did say that the conscience evolved, and there seems to even be evidence that animals have one, but other than that my question has not been answered.

 

Although I do not believe an evolved conscience fits in with the "survival of the fittest" evolution theory, I will wait to hear what Moai says.

 

My question is who decided what the Moral Law is? And if this evolved, why then do we not have one Moral Law that is obeyed? Who decided that stealing is wrong? And since relativism says that there is no right and wrong, then how does that fit?

[VIP]

JamesM, I don't know about you, but my moral law is in my consciousness. Do you need some authority to tell you that it's not ok to steal or to kill? Is that the only thing that will stop you? Can your intuition tell right from wrong?

[JamesM]

Believing in the absence of a particular god does not equate to believing one is a god, or the god. I get your interpretation, but humility is still possible within people by those who do not believe in your God, and I believe by those who do not believe in any god.

 

I guess the meaning is misunderstood. I am not saying that someone who believes there is no God is proud and and not humble. And I was interpreting the statement...not necessarily agreeing with it. But if one believes there is no Deity, then he believes that there is no Being who reigns over him. Hence, he is a god.

 

I for one second do not believe that this makes an atheist less humble than an individual who believes in any sort of Higher Being.

[JamesM]

JamesM, I don't know about you, but my moral law is in my consciousness. Do you need some authority to tell you that it's not ok to steal or to kill? Is that the only thing that will stop you? Can your intuition tell right from wrong?

 

But I think you are ignoring the main point...where did your conscience get the idea that killing is "not okay?" A conscience is not some organ inside that has biological instincts saying what is right and wrong...is it? And where did it get the intuition to know that stealing is "not okay?" Was this inbred over many, many years? And if so, why is killing considered wrong, when the naturalists believe in the survival of the fittest...which includes killing the weak?

 

Define intuition. Does it include the ability to know right from wrong? And who over all these years decided what was right and wrong?

 

As for an authority to say what is right and wrong, I am guessing that our society would not be guided by intuition very long without a governing body that polices its citizens.

 

I guess my whole question is where does that moral law/conscience that guides you originate? Is it inborn or a result of evolution?

[Moose]

He didn't revel himself to the atheists.

Sure He did/does. It's the, "atheist" who, CHOOSES, not to see Him.

 

Ask anyone who's been in a dire situation. Have you heard the term, "There are no atheists in a fox hole". This rings true, in EVERY impossible situation.

 

Our problem, (in human form), is that when bad things happen to us, or things don't go the way WE want them to go, we blame God for our/those trangressions.

 

We don't understand that anything and everything happens for God's ultimate purpose.

 

It's not our place to understand why or what, it is our place, (if you are one of His children), to trust that He knows what He's doing.

It's a historical fact, if you need to know more, study history.

Thanks.....I'll try to do better.....I just thought it would be nice if you could provide the LS audience your direct thoughts pertaining to the subject without us having to read your mind....

[VIP]

I guess my whole question is where does that moral law/conscience that guides you originate? Is it inborn or a result of evolution?

 

It's inborn.

[VIP]

Sure He did/does. It's the, "atheist" who, CHOOSES, not to see Him.

 

Ask anyone who's been in a dire situation. Have you heard the term, "There are no atheists in a fox hole". This rings true, in EVERY impossible situation.

 

Our problem, (in human form), is that when bad things happen to us, or things don't go the way WE want them to go, we blame God for our/those trangressions.

 

We don't understand that anything and everything happens for God's ultimate purpose. It's not our place to understand why or what, it is our place, (if you are one of His children), to trust that He knows what He's doing.

 

I agree with that 100%. Only god doesn't have the image of a man, I wouldn't attempt to describe it, some things can only be felt.

 

I just thought it would be nice if you could provide the LS audience your direct thoughts pertaining to the subject without us having to read your mind....

 

Thoughts on what? On the inquisition?

[JamesM]

He didn't revel himself to the atheists.

 

 

 

It's a historical fact, if you need to know more, study history.

 

 

Many times I talk to my children and they do not hear me or refuse to listen. Does that mean I have not told them something? So, because someone...whether he or she believes in God...has not heard God or refuses to listen to God...does that mean God has not revealed Himself to them?

 

It is an historical fact...study history. History is an interpretation of facts as well as a document of facts. Many facts are interpreted based on the person's worldview.

 

The Inquisition was real and torture occurred. Much of the "rules" and punishments were not related to torture. And to say that the Church advocated the torture is stretching it, because they did not. However, many many people advocated torture and used it...using the name of the Church as their reason. Biblical Christianity has not supported this, nor has any church that abided by Biblical principles.

 

I would also like to note that the Catholic Church used the inquisition against the Protestant Church. One of the many reasons that Martin Luther felt it necessary to leave the RC Church was the abuse of power by the pope. It was not a Biblical mandate carried out by the pope but a personal abuse of power. Since the Bible was not given to the common man, anyone who did not follow the rules handed down by the pope was considered an heretic.

 

The Inquisition was not instituted by a Christian church perse but by a church that used Christianity for its own power.

 

Here is a good link or two that speaks to this quite well...

http://tektonics.org/qt/spaninq.html

http://jmgainor.homestead.com/files/PU/Inq/si.htm