Pascal's Wager is a fallacy. Change my mind. (Page 4)

edmund_carey: Doesn't Pascal's Wager work regardless of what may or may not exist transcendentally? The point is that you only have one chance. IF the God Pascal believed in exists, and IF he relates to humanity the way Pascal believed he did, then firing off devotions in the right direction will get you what Pascal believed it would. IF Pascal's beliefs were wrong, whether that means some other form of transcendence is the truth, or whether it means that nothing transcendent exists at all, then, no deal. But the fact remains that you have, and only have, one chance.

If the stars fell: that is a lot of IFs lol

AbovetallAOTY: Not necessarily. What if the transcendent truth is reincarnation? We could get endless chances.

If the stars fell: hence the problem with the supposition...

zeffur: re: "If the stars fell: its called begging the question... your premise is predicated on an assumption.... you start with the conclusion then use the premise to prove the premise "because the world was created by god, god exists" a logical fallacy"

No. There are only 2 possibilities. Either God exists or He doesn't exist. The wager focuses you on making the better decision--there are no other valid decisions.

zeffur: re: "AbovetallAOTY: Not necessarily. What if the transcendent truth is reincarnation? We could get endless chances."

There is no credible evidence that that has ever happened. Jesus was the only being ever raised from the dead (i.e. truly dead--3 days dead).

zeffur: re: "If the stars fell: that is a lot of IFs lol"

It still boils down to a decision to accept/reject God.

zeffur: re: "AretoNyx: You know we all die , but really how do you know for sure you never will based on only what humans communicate? Good to know some one knows all and was there, but just let people choose whatever then. No skin off your nose."

Do some research on NDEs. Here's an interesting vid of an atheist who changed his beliefs. You can skip ahead to the middle of the vid for when it starts to become more interesting:

AretoNyx: Preachy but all religious sects of different dogmas do that. This converting native people throughout history even by force of government still did not always result in choice.
Are you trying to debate about only your version or every version of monotheism?

zeffur: How do you explain such a vivid experience & his conversion??

If the stars fell: easily... he is wrong and confused lol possibly lying to some degree...

If the stars fell: zeff misquoted himself by the way, and no there are multiple possible outcomes in that scenario.... more than one god could exist... for example... you could of course rephrase the point repeatedly if you so choice and narrow it down more and more, however, it still doesnt address the original point of the thread as that is not what pascals wager is

If the stars fell: zeff doesnt undestand the premise, the question... or the responses given lol
this will resulte in a perpetual argument where people will explain to him why he doesnt understand, and him claiming he does while pointing out irrelevant tangential points.... prove me wrong lol

zeffur: No need to---we both know the truth. The wager is a simple binary choice that everyone has the free will do make--your decision is obvious--so be it. Pretend all you want--it won't change anything.

If the stars fell: prove that you have free will and the choice actually exists lol

go

zeffur: re: "If the stars fell: easily... he is wrong and confused lol possibly lying to some degree..."

You don't know what you've asserted is true. You offer it because you wish to deny it is true.

If the stars fell: i could post a thousand videos from a thousand beliefs that make a thousand mutually exclusive claims, it proves literally nothing

zeffur: re: "If the stars fell: prove that you have free will and the choice actually exists lol go"

We all have free will--it is self-evident so no proof is required.
We are presented with many choices in life that we can accept or reject (e.g. will I have lunch today or will I wait until supper to eat again? My decision is I *will* eat lunch).

Pertaining to God, I can choose to accept/reject God. My decision is to accept God. Your decision is apparently to reject God.

If the stars fell: ah yes... its self evident lol quality argument.... the complexity of this topic far surpasses your ability to participate in any meaningful way... that much is clear

zeffur: Must it be written on 2 pieces of paper for you?
Paper 1: Accept God.
Paper 2: Reject God.

Then you decide. How is that not self evident to you?

If the stars fell: what you believe is not a choice.... its like if i told you to stop believing in god for 2 minutes.... do it... dont worry you can just change your mind whenever you want to right? lol

zeffur: re: "If the stars fell: what you believe is not a choice.... its like if i told you to stop believing in god for 2 minutes.... do it... dont worry you can just change your mind whenever you want to right? lol"

It is a choice. I could be just like you & believe in nothing or I could believe in God--my decision is to believe in God. How is that not a valid choice??

I believe in God because there is evidence that God exists.

Why would anyone stop believing in what they believe is true??

If the stars fell: to prove that you have a choice of course... prove me wrong and stop believing in god for 2 minutes, it doesnt matter you can just switch right back, right?

zeffur: Why would I stop believing in that which I believe exists??