Is there any argument for christianity more absurd than Pascal's Wager?

Question

I mean how could that guy have been so smart AND come up with that nonsense?

Why do people still constantly use it as justification even though it contains two obvious fallacies?

"Only the statement that someone is too smart to believe in God, or believing in God makes you less smart somehow. "
I didn't say either of these things.

KAL:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#5
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#4
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#3
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#2
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pascal-wager/#1

Answer 1

without respect i will go back to reading my book
we dont have to argue...im already born again...

Answer 2

I've yet to hear anyone give me a concise description of Pascal's Wager nor heard the two "obvious" fallacies explained in an "obvious" way. Please provide additional details and I'd be happy to provide a response...as it stands, I don't have a major problem with the basic premise of Pascal's argument...not saying I agree but I just haven't heard a fallacy-free counter argument!

Answer 3

There are many Pascal's wager was proposed to deal with a certain philosophy. If you do not hold to the philosophy it holds little meaning to you. If you want fairly good arguments try the works of Paul Maier or Gary Habermas. Or you could try the book "Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. That is if you are serious about finding answers rather than being a mere mocker. Well the thumbs down tells me that you are more interested in just snide comments than you are to having an "open mind" and looking for truth.

Answer 4

I don't know why people still use it.

However, I wouldn't blame Pascal for coming up with it. It's simply an attempt to apply rational decision theory to a belief. His analysis of it took less than a paragraph in his book "Pensees." Other people have blown it far out of proportion.

Answer 5

Only the statement that someone is too smart to believe in God, or believing in God makes you less smart somehow.

Answer 6

the Banana theory devised by Ray Comfort and the Cameron kid from growing pains......

Banana proves intellegent design because it is the perfect food for humans to eat..easy to digest, fits in the mouth well.
sits well in the hand, peel comes off easily....

just one problem....according to I.D. people were created in the Middle East....where the banana does not grow...so god forgot to put his perfect food, where anyone could actually FIND and EAT it.....

Answer 7

I answered a question about this two days ago in which i stated that any person who hangs their eternity on this most stupid argument will, ironically, end up in the very place they were trying to avoid. It's utter nonsense.

Answer 8

enormously irrelevant. no person i understand makes use of pascals guess in actual ministry. maximum folk say that they got here to Christ via relationships, via somebody they understand. yet #one million, Pascals guess could have come from Christians a protracted time in the past yet that doesnt advise that a individual accepting the guess could desire to pass Christianity. There are some monotheistic religions accessible. yet for the guy that does gamble on God, and have confidence, God will exhibit himself. The guess isnt approximately properly figuring out the excellent God from all the fake gods, its approximately acknowledging God era. 2. worry gets a foul rap. worry retains you from swerving over and hitting a truck head on. worry retains you from cheating on your spouse. worry prevents us from doing many things we shouldnt do because of fact we are terrified of the effects. Hell isnt lots different. no person is suggesting a pretend faith will save you, yet even no count if it incredibly is worry that first brings you to God, faith can take root later. in spite of gets closer to God isnt undesirable. in spite of separates you from God, is undesirable. 3. No such god has been revealed. The liklihood of even atheists accepting a god that for the period of trouble-free terms likes them wouldnt be suitable to them because of fact it violates what they have confidence to start with. So youre attempting to apply the "what if im incorrect approximately who god is" argument over again. yet it incredibly is the full ingredient of pascals guess. in case you're incorrect as a theist, and there is not any God, you're incorrect on your lifespan and then u are ineffective and go through no ill effects. in case you're incorrect as an atheist, you go through eternal effects. that's worse? Your arguments strengthen skill problems in exploring theism, yet no longer why we could desire to continually outright reject the guess. ill do you one extra suitable nevertheless, who's lots extra probably to get saved? somebody who tried to carry on with God the incorrect way yet commonly used him? Or somebody who flat out denied him and lived his very own way?

Answer 9

In Pascal's time, science was dangerous and could be lethal. He may have just be covering his tracks with a obliviously flawed argument that he knew would pacify his would-be executioners but be clearly petulant to a critical mind.

Answer 10

pascals wager is a joke thay keep trying to use it on the atheists and it gets spoted every time

Answer 11

In Pascal's defense, many have argued his wager was intended as tongue in cheek.