Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No doubt. So...a 'Frostian' look....
T...roads diverged in a yellow wood,And sorry I could not travel both. And be one traveler, long I stood,And looked down one as far as I could.
To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, because it was grassy and wanted wear.
Though as for that the passing thereHad worn them really about the same, And both that morning equally lay. In leaves no step had trodden black.Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh. Somewhere ages and ages hence:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
T[...roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel bothAnd be one traveler, long I stood. And looked down one as far as I could. To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, and having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear;Though as for that the passing there. Had worn them really about the same, And both that morning equally layI. n leaves no step had trodden black.Oh, I kept the first for another day!Yet knowing how way leads on to way,I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh. Somewhere ages and ages hence:Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—I took the one less traveled by,And that has made all the difference.
Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth;
Then took the other, as just as fair
And having perhaps the better claim,
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that, the passing there
Had worn them really about the same,
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
two roads diverged in a wood, and I --
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.
I'd think we all see that 'fork'. Thing is I am learning very much that in the end what matters is we must, at bottom, be comfortable with the choices we make and understand that it's possible more 'forks' can occur continually and beliefs again could be challenged. Of course, the 'right' road for one will not be for the other. And as Sinatra said, 'that's life!'.
I suppose the four options were mixed up with consequence ... but that's not really what I meant. What I meant is that if you had to hedge your bets so you could forget about it - think about other more interesting things - it's best to just accept that God might exist because if God exists, it's best to have that belief. If God does exist and you deny existence, it's hellish. If God doesn't exist, belief/disbelief makes no difference ... so given all the possibilities, what is the best choice?
I don't think a belief in God has anything to do with any particular religion. A belief in God is the one thing that all religions have in common. Without that belief, it's not a religion. Religion is not about buying into a story book about Vishnu and Allah.
Why is the question about the existence of God mixed up with individual beliefs? What is the relationship?
That makes no sense, so you are hedging your bets that some random vague God that loves all theist but hates atheists exists? What if the real God(s) loves only atheists and/or agnostics and hates all the religions that blaspheme her/him/them with their false cafeteria ways? I'm just giving more of the possibilities. Gods and Heavens are characterized differently by various religions, and since they are competing, they usually say that having the other religions/denominations isn't as good or is intact catastrophic (to add urgency and decrease time and rationality for thinking it through). The religions don't hold that their sacred myths are just story books, they believe the writings and oral traditions characterize reality properly and were created by the Divine.
For example, most Christian denominations teach that it is not enough to be theist, you must deny oligarchist-polytheism; and it is not enough to be monarchist-monotheist, you must accept Jesus as the Monotheist God, and it is not enough to believe in Father-Jesus-Spirit, you must do it right and follow the Biblical mandated rituals such as Baptism , and it is not enough to follow and believe in the rituals and expectations, you must also acquire God's grace through God's mysterious way. Otherwise you might as well be an Atheist and you will suffer for your deluded Theism in the Afterlife.
God-belief alone wouldn't help you against the consequences set up for injuring/ignoring/denying the God expected from those Christian denominations.
Atheists or Agnostics can simply be confident, through logic/faith/grace etc, that God(s)/Karma that will be their superhero/rewarder (and punish the Theists and Religious) exists instead.
For example, the polytheist pantheon on Ancient Greece required no belief, only sacrifices and changes during tribulations... They punished only those who insulted them outwardly (Blasphemers such as Atheists, Monotheists, and competing polytheist religions, that were vocal insulters) and those that weren't good. Usually the idea was that they did this through the recycling of souls (called shades of the dead, sort of like ghosts). The Egyptians had like 5 souls per person so it's even harder to explain (I'm guessing a divine spirit, a lower spirit, a divine mind, a lower mind, etc or something like that).
The FSM could be the ultimate reality as well, and the FSM is for sure more kind to good atheists and agnostics than to religious people. No reason to deny God a healthy sense of humor.
Any Gods could exist that like this or that group better than the other, so that in the cold, hard mathmatical terms: both Monotheists and Polytheists would be just as safe as Atheists.
Since all are equal as possibilities in the as-yet unaccesable afterlife, the only evidence for which stance was better would have to be found here in Physical Reality...which is scientifically testable. Would it be this or that religion, atheism, vague theism, or theological agnosticism? We'll have to wait for the surveys and tests.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 03-26-2014 at 08:48 PM..
The existence of God has nothing to do with Christianity.
Math, Robots, Resurrections, Psychosis, Reward, Punishment, and Bad Externalization don't actually go together.
What do you mean? I though we were talking about Pacal's Wager and "hedging our bets." That would mean we would have to take into consideration all the possible good and bad consequences, which means taking into account the math, the possibilities, the negative and positive physical and possible after-life consequences, and anything else that might help us decide whether we should be vague Monotheists or not.
Last edited by LuminousTruth; 03-26-2014 at 08:49 PM..
What do you mean? I though we were talking about Pacal's Wager and "hedging our bets." That would mean we would have to take into consideration all the possible good and bad consequences, which means taking into account the math, the possibilities, the negative and positive physical and possible consequences, and anything else that might help us decide whether we should be vague Monotheists or not.
I've always daydreamed of writing a play some what like "The Devil and Daniel Webster" were present Saint Peter with my defense for being a non-belief, by pointing to utter failings of God's messengers like Jim Swaggert, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Jones, et al see Exhibit A, I would ask why should I believe a book, where 30 or so accounts were arbitrarily excluded, and the innumerable acts of barbarity committed in "God's" name be they Christians, Jews or Muslims, closing my defense with the question, "if these were your witnesses on earth, would you have believed?" I'll bet a dollar to a dime that if the case wasn't dismissed out of hand, I would be acquitted with little deliberation.
And how little a god must you believe in to think you can trick it into rewarding you for pretending to believe like this?
THIS. This this this. We have a winner. This is why Pascal's Wager drives me crazy (well, one of the reasons, anyway). You're going to "pretend" (because let's face it, if you don't fully believe, you're pretending) to believe in some god "just in case" and on the chance that there IS a real god, it's not going to see right through that and press the button to flush you straight down anyway?
A person who goes in for Pascal's Wager must truly think God, if it exists, is idiotic. And that's even scarier than the other possibilities.
You want to spend eternity under the rule of a stupid God, in the company of other sheisters who managed to work the system around?
Yeah, sure sounds like paradise to me. Just you, drool-down-the-chin God and a bunch of liars, sheisters and tricksters who don't really know what they think or believe, but they sure are out for their own, whatever that takes.
Somehow, I'm just not getting a fluffy-wings-and-angelic-voices vibe out of that thought.
THIS. This this this. We have a winner. This is why Pascal's Wager drives me crazy (well, one of the reasons, anyway). You're going to "pretend" (because let's face it, if you don't fully believe, you're pretending) to believe in some god "just in case" and on the chance that there IS a real god, it's not going to see right through that and press the button to flush you straight down anyway?
A person who goes in for Pascal's Wager must truly think God, if it exists, is idiotic. And that's even scarier than the other possibilities.
You want to spend eternity under the rule of a stupid God, in the company of other sheisters who managed to work the system around?
Yeah, sure sounds like paradise to me. Just you, drool-down-the-chin God and a bunch of liars, sheisters and tricksters who don't really know what they think or believe, but they sure are out for their own, whatever that takes.
Somehow, I'm just not getting a fluffy-wings-and-angelic-voices vibe out of that thought.
Amen! Pascal's wager is an absurdity predicated on a barbaric notion of God.
Amen! Pascal's wager is an absurdity predicated on a barbaric notion of God.
That is only one reason why it is absurd. It is also absurd because it is an argument from implication fallacy. Things are true because they are true - and false because they are false - not because we personally prefer the implications of it being true or false.
But theists have no actual arguments for god - so we should hardly be surprised they present absurd ones should we?
That makes no sense, so you are hedging your bets that some random vague God that loves all theist but hates atheists exists?
<respectfully snipped>
No, I'm hedging my bets that if it makes no difference to me (and it doesn't) to believe that a God exists, then it's better to believe that a God exists. Denying that a God exists is a sure screw-up if it's incorrect. Why choose to be incorrect when it makes no difference?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just you, drool-down-the-chin God and a bunch of liars, sheisters and tricksters who don't really know what they think or believe, but they sure are out for their own, whatever that takes.
