< No. By using Pascal's wager, they are actually quite safe.
The truth is, God EITHER exists OR doesn't exist. In addition, if God in fact doesn't exist, despite all the good reasons to believe in His existence, then no one, NOT even the atheists are better off, for every one dies at the end. But if God does exist, then those who are put right with God (namely through Christ or something else), are better off than those who haven't.
This is a form of the Pascal's wager.
>> But what about other religions?
Since there have been many religions throughout history, and therefore many potential gods, some assert that all of them need to be factored into the wager, in an argument known as the argument from inconsistent revelations. This would lead to a high probability of believing in the wrong god, which destroys the mathematical advantage Pascal claimed with his Wager
Flor example, Denis Diderot, when asked about the wager, said "an Imam could reason the same way".[13]
- Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager (1/14/010)
< But all the other religions don't offer infinite bliss vs eternal punishments.
Christianity states that if people are put right with God, then they receive infinite bliss where as almost no other religion states that except for Islam and maybe Judaism. The religions that believe in reincarnation (like Buddhism and Hinduism) don't have this extreme. If you didn't believe in their system, then you won't get to be as punished, so long you life a good life.
And also, Christianity states that those not put right with God, will receive eternal condemnation. Judaism and Islam may state similar, and fine those are exceptions. But the other religions, especially those that believe in reincarnation don't have this other extreme, and so it's not something to worry about.
In addition, from Wikipedia:
Apologists of this wager counter that, of the rival options, only the ones that award infinite happiness affect the Wager's dominance. They claim that neither Odin's nor Kali's finite, semi-blissful promise could contend with the infinite bliss offered by Jesus Christ, so they drop out of consideration.[15] Also, the infinite bliss the rival god offers has to be mutually exclusive. If Christ's promise of bliss can be attained concurrently with Jehovah's and Allah'sGod of Abraham), there is no conflict in the decision matrix in the case where the cost of believing in the wrong god is neutral (limbo/purgatory/spiritual death), although this would be countered with an infinite cost in the case where not believing in the correct god results in punishment (hell). [15]
- Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager (1/14/010)
>> But that shows how Christianity is a false religion... why would a loving God punish His children eternally?
This shows God can't exist.
< Let's examine the possible reasons why.
>> But you can still live a worthwhile life even if there's a small chance that God exists.
Richard Dawkins argues for an "anti-Pascal wager" in his book, The God Delusion. "Suppose we grant that there is indeed some small chance that God exists. Nevertheless, it could be said that you will lead a better, fuller life if you bet on his not existing, than if you bet on his existing and therefore squander your precious time on worshipping him, sacrificing to him, fighting and dying for him, etc." [22]
- Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascal%27s_Wager (1/14/010)
< Not completely, since nothing matters if God doesn't exist.
There's no value in anything else, like a fuller life, since God gives values to what we do. Say if the world exploded and there is no God to meet afterward... what good would it do if you have done all the "good" things on earth, helping people, curing diseases, etc? The world is dead, and nothing happens... none of your actions count.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
