Is this the alternative to pascals wager ? And is it better to use the alternative ?

Question

"It makes more sense to believe in God than to not believe. If you believe, and God exists, you will be rewarded in the afterlife. If you do not believe, and He exists, you will be punished for your disbelief. If He does not exist, you have lost nothing either way. "
there is nothing to loose believing in God or
"It is better to live your life as if there are no Gods, and try to make the world a better place for your being in it. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, He will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in Him."

Dragontear's Im a true atheiest god doesnt exist he is a character from a book of fiction 2000 years old.

Answer 1

Definately not better to use

1) IIt does NOT make more sense to believe in god, due to lack of evidence.

2) It makes no sense to believe as if, as Christians claim, God is the fair entity that will judge people on their actions, not beliefs, anyone who lives a good life gets to heaven anyway.

Answer 2

I don't think Pascal thought he could get people to believe in God through this wager. Perhaps he thought he could make it more reasonable for people to seek God. Since Pascal died before he got his material together, we'll never know.

For Pascal, the reward for seeking God is to find God. Making the world a better place etc. is a mere byproduct.

Without God, there is no point (except to inflate our own egos) with some sentiment about making the world a better place.

Answer 3

You wrote that there is no God.... only in a book written 2000 yrs ago.
The concept of God or even gods have been around for much longer than 2000 years. And you choose to describe a "Benevolent God" which is one element of the one true God, but it doesn't cover the whole of who He is.
And if your wager is wrong.... you are back to square one.
I am not trying to argue you into further Atheism, believe me.
I would hope someday you would come to know Jesus Christ, that you would come to know a personal God.

Answer 4

The last line is the down fall. You assume a benovolent god or G-d who doesn't consider whether you believe in him or not a merit. That's a heck of an assumption.

Pascal's wager is also retarded, because it would call for you to know every system of reward and punishment in every religion, then chart them with a line or some sh*t and pick a faith based on energy expended for potential reward recieved.

By the time your done with the f*&cking graph, you'll be dead anyway.

Answer 5

The alternative is not better, for at least 2 reasons. one is that you cannot know if you are making the world a better place without some sort of guidance; and, two, because Pascal's is a starting point for thinking about God. With your version, you are supposing some things about God without any support-if you are wrong about these things, then your idea is invalid.

Answer 6

Of course the second is better, except that it's not so much about which plan gives the best result in a hypothetical afterlife.

It's as simple as which life has the most value in itself.

A God which punishes disbelief is not worth believing in, even if it did exist. It is obviously a psychologically manipulative fabrication by desperate religious apologists.

Answer 7

properly as an apologetic/evangelistic device (it fairly is what the wager replaced into meant to be), it type of feels centred on a threat/reward outlook, which isn't consistent to a real saving faith relationship in Christ. Jesus located obedience to His instructions as an data of love for Christ (John 14:23). in accordance to Pascal's wager, one is selecting to have faith and obey God on the inspiration of receiving heaven as a reward. that's to not decrease the certainty that heaven is a reward and that that is a few thing we'd desire to continuously wish for and prefer. yet while our obedience is in basic terms, or frequently, inspired via wanting to get into heaven and stay away from hell, then faith and obedience grow to be a potential of achieving what we'd like quite than the end results of a heart that has been reborn in Christ and expresses faith and obedience out of love of Christ. Pascal's wager, on an identical time as a fascinating piece of philosophical theory, might desire to don't have everywhere in a Christian’s evangelistic and apologetic repertoire. Christians are to proportion and proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, which on my own is the “power of God for salvation to each physique who believes” (Romans a million:sixteen).

Answer 8

If you don't believe in gods, you don't believe in gods. You can't force yourself to believe. If you follow Pascal's wager and pretend a belief in gods then the omniscient gods will know you are pretending. At least if you reject gods and the gods (if they exist) know you are being honest, they will treat you better than if you pretend a belief.

Answer 9

there it is you said it! BINGO! you said :

"It makes more sense to believe in God than to not believe. If you believe, and God exists, you will be rewarded in the afterlife. If you do not believe, and He exists, you will be punished for your disbelief. If He does not exist, you have lost nothing either way.


ITS FEAR! YOUR AFRAID TO NOT BELIEVE BECAUSE OF WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN WHEN WE DIE!? am i correct in saying that? is that why everyone chooses to believe theres a God? because there scared. like ive always said Religion plays on peoples fears you just said it your self pet. play it safe .

Answer 10

Either way it is bribes and threats, if there is such a god that punishes people for being earth based, logical and rational meaning they doubt the existence of anything other than what the senses detects we should destroy him because he sounds like a c.....