Who wants to accept Pascal's Wager?
Greg G.
a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
"rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
like.
Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
Eternity is a long, long time. If a third of the angels have already
been cast out, what chance do the others have of lasting forever? If
the angels can't last forever, why would humans do any better?
So Pascal's Wager is that if the atheist is right, neither the atheist
nor the Christian loses or wins anything after death. If the Christian
is right, the atheist loses big while the Christian gets to spend
perhaps several thousand years trying to not piss off God, then loses
big, too.
I would rather take Pasta's Wager for the FSM. If I'm right, I get to
spend eternity with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. The
Christian gets a similar deal, but the beer is stale and the strippers
have STDs.
ed wolf
You can´t look at it only from a Christian perspective. If they could
be right, Muslims could also be right. Muslim heaven seems a safer
place, but virgins and Cat Stevens music are a bore. Anyway
Christians will go to Muslim hell. Muslims, of course, go
to Christian hell. Atheist go to an ecumenic, joint venture hell. But
there are probably more creeds with hells. So even if you finally
make it to hell you might not meet all of the interesting people.
hasta la vista
ed
Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
Friedrich Nietzsche
ilbe...@gmail.com
> According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
> a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
> God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
> "rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
> God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
> like.
>
> Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
> Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
> or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
>
> Eternity is a long, long time. If a third of the angels have already
> been cast out, what chance do the others have of lasting forever? If
> the angels can't last forever, why would humans do any better?
>
> So Pascal's Wager is that if the atheist is right, neither the atheist
> nor the Christian loses or wins anything after death. If the Christian
> is right, the atheist loses big while the Christian gets to spend
> perhaps several thousand years trying to not piss off God, then loses
> big, too.
>
> spend eternity with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. Theof
> Christian gets a similar deal, but the beer is stale and the strippers
> have STDs.
Your post is an amusing one to say the least...however, its wrought
with a few misunderstandings ...probably accidental. The bottom
line is : Both evil Angelic Beings as well as fallen Humanity have
the same opportunity to get right with God and be freely forgiven of
ones many many sins including Rebellion against God either overtly or
covertly , so One can remain the King of his own throne making
virtually any lifestyle choice, a permissable one . Its not so much
the Ressurection of Christ that removes our Sin..but rather the
enormous suffering and ultimate death thru the shedding of blood on
the Cross , that removes our sin. The Ressurection was PROOF that the
crucifixion was adequate payment and since Christ conquered death by
rising again, we too will conquer death and live with God
forever...IF... we want to . If you want to, then you stop the
charade that the Universe doesnt display intelligent design for a
specific purpose, that accidental chemicals popped into existence and
accidental piece of Pond Scum which eventually became a 206 bone human
being with 60 major anatomical systems all working in unison so you
can daily live, and that there are no absolute moral laws to live by
(even though you EXPECT OTHERS to treat you according to them, all the
time and in every circumstance, so you dont feel slighted) . Then you
tell God that you are sincerely sorry for making up excuses not to
admit he is real and not wanting to follow him because YOU were more
important...then you recieve the finished work of Christ done on your
behalf which cleanses you of all sins . You then distance yourself
from 'atheism' which was a fallacy anyway..and ask God to give you the
power to live for him. Your life will be different for the better,
and, you can have real hope and joy of spending eternity with God in
heaven, instead of in utter regret for not taking the issue
seriously. Hope to see you there.
ilbe...@gmail.com
> hasta la vista
> ed
>
> Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
eas>
> - Show quoted text -
This is why you need to find out about the personhood of Christ, so
you can accurately decide who is telling the truth and who is the
Fraud with eternal consequences. Start here if you desire :
www.impactapologetics.com for the book :" The 12 Reasons Why
Christianity is true" which lists all the scientific and rational
reasons to put your trust in Christ . If Christ is true and real,
then every other way and Religion, is a counterfiet even though it may
teach some morality. I hope you will WANT to be an honest Seeker
instead of coming to the table with your mind made up cause atheism
offers a more funfilled lifestyle. Been there, done that. Regards.
Syd
Neither are telling the truth.
Next lie.
PDW
Nomen Publicus
Pascal's Wager assumes that there is only one god. If there are two or more
gods Pascal is probably screwed no matter what he does.
--
Isaac Asimov: Properly read, the Bible is the most potent
force for atheism ever conceived.
Davej
> [...]
> This is why you need to find out about the personhood of Christ, so
> you can accurately decide who is telling the truth and who is the
> Fraud with eternal consequences.
No, if the Gawd of the Bible is portrayed as a vicious, vain, jealous,
and cruel old bastard then there is NO need to learn MORE about him or
CARE about him. He can be discarded in the trash bin.
duke
>According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
>a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
>God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
>"rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
>God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
>like.
>
>Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
>Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
>or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
Now there's a bunch of hokey. Earthly sin is the very sin for which subject
humankind will spend all eternity in hell, not heaven.
The Dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
duke
Nope, not for those that continue to sin.
Hebrews 10:26-27 (New International Version)
26If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of
the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, 27but only a fearful expectation of
judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God.
Nomen Publicus
> The 12 Reasons Why
> Christianity is true" which lists all the scientific and rational
> reasons to put your trust in Christ.
Surely one should be sufficient?
Seriously, an almighty god should not have to depend on the witterings of a
sad minority of ignorant loud mouths to demonstrate his/her/its existance.
Would it be impossible to encode a long message in esperanto within DNA?
That would be pretty convincing evidence that we were designed. Doesn't
prove the existance of a supernatural god, but it's a step in that
direction.
As fully sequenced DNA data is now available, how long before the bible
code lunatics invent a coding scheme and "discover" all kinds of messages in
DNA :-)
--
Voltaire: Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities
Christopher A. Lee
<zza...@buffy.sighup.org.uk> wrote:
>IlBe...@gmail.com <ilbe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The 12 Reasons Why
>> Christianity is true" which lists all the scientific and rational
>> reasons to put your trust in Christ.
>
>Surely one should be sufficient?
These imbeciles imagine that truckloads of bullshit are somehow better
than one single demonstration that stands up to scrutiny.
Mike Painter
>
> Your post is an amusing one to say the least...however, its wrought
> with a few misunderstandings ...probably accidental. The bottom
> line is : Both evil Angelic Beings as well as fallen Humanity have
> the same opportunity to get right with God and be freely forgiven of
> ones many many sins including Rebellion against God either overtly or
> covertly , so One can remain the King of his own throne making
> virtually any lifestyle choice, a permissable one . Its not so much
> the Ressurection of Christ that removes our Sin..but rather the
> enormous suffering and ultimate death thru the shedding of blood on
> the Cross , that removes our sin. The Ressurection was PROOF that the
> crucifixion was adequate payment and since Christ conquered death by
> rising again, we too will conquer death and live with God
> forever...
For anyone with a vague idea od what real suffering with or without death
is, the minor discomfort this myth describes is a joke.
If there was a god and if it had half the power and glory that the
Christians claim then the angels who revolted were completely insane.
No sane thing would believe it could conquer the christian god.
No sane thing would want to revolt against the goodness this thing is
supposed to have.
Dr Loomis
Syd
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 06:42:19 -0700 (PDT), "Greg G." <ggw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
> >a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
> >God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
> >"rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
> >God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
> >like.
>
> >Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
> >Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
> >or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
>
> Now there's a bunch of hokey. Earthly sin is the very sin for which subject
> humankind will spend all eternity in hell, not heaven.
>
No.
Prove it, Dork.
PDW
Ben Kaufman
wrote:
>Greg G. <ggw...@gmail.com> wrote:
That's because Pascal did not support multi-threading. Java does.
Ben
Witziges R�tsel
"Mike Painter" <md.pa...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wTr3m.1809$cl4...@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...
> IlBe...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
[skip]
> If there was a god and if it had half the power and glory that the
> Christians claim then the angels who revolted were completely insane.
> No sane thing would believe it could conquer the christian god.
> No sane thing would want to revolt against the goodness this
> thing is supposed to have.
>
Maybe those revolting angels had iron chariots.
Judges 1:19: "So the Lord was with Judah. And they drove out
the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants
of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron."
Witziges R�tsel
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:llcs45hinlnac8g8o...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 06:42:19 -0700 (PDT), "Greg G." <ggw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
>>a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
>>God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
>>"rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
>>God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
>>like.
>>
>>Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
>>Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
>>or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
>
> Now there's a bunch of hokey. Earthly sin is the very sin
> for which subject humankind will spend all eternity in hell,
> not heaven.
>
Tim McGaughy
Imagine what COBOL's wager would have been like. Thousands of lines of
verbose code just to make a simple decision.
Enkidu
That's still not as bad as Christianity or Islam. They each have tens of
thousands of lines of the buggiest code imaginable. Written in BASIC, it
would be
10 print "It sucks to be you!"
20 goto 10
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
"Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color."
--Don Hirschberg
Christopher A. Lee
wrote:
>>> Pascal's Wager assumes that there is only one god. If there are two or more
>>> gods Pascal is probably screwed no matter what he does.
>>
>> That's because Pascal did not support multi-threading. Java does.
>
>Imagine what COBOL's wager would have been like. Thousands of lines of
>verbose code just to make a simple decision.
Did you ever meet Grace Hopper? She talked just like COBOL.
But in spite of that she was a genius with a knack of making things
simple. She asked what a nanosecond was. After various answers from
the audience she held her hands a little more than a foot apart saying
that was how far light traveled in one.
I did a rough calculation and she was right.
Smiler
Assembler's wager: short, fast and accurate, but inscrutible to all but a
very few.
--
Smiler,
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all individually tailor
made to perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer.
XaurreauX
Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an idiot.
Mike Painter
>>>> Pascal's Wager assumes that there is only one god. If there are
>>>> two or more gods Pascal is probably screwed no matter what he does.
>>>
>>> That's because Pascal did not support multi-threading. Java does.
>>
>> Imagine what COBOL's wager would have been like. Thousands of lines
>> of verbose code just to make a simple decision.
>
> Assembler's wager: short, fast and accurate, but inscrutible to all
> but a very few.
APL's wager. What the F are you trying to do here?
Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian
> I would rather take Pasta's Wager for the FSM. If I'm right, I get to
> spend eternity with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. The
> Christian gets a similar deal, but the beer is stale and the strippers
> have STDs.
Ramen!
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove, and gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer, and fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
My personal judgment of monotheism:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus
Tim McGaughy
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2009 16:31:12 -0500, Tim McGaughy <tee...@toast.net>
> wrote:
>
>>>> Pascal's Wager assumes that there is only one god. If there are two or more
>>>> gods Pascal is probably screwed no matter what he does.
>>> That's because Pascal did not support multi-threading. Java does.
>> Imagine what COBOL's wager would have been like. Thousands of lines of
>> verbose code just to make a simple decision.
>
> Did you ever meet Grace Hopper?
I don't really look THAT old, do I?
> She talked just like COBOL.
I think it's more a matter of COBOL talking like at least one of its
more influential creators.
> But in spite of that she was a genius with a knack of making things
> simple. She asked what a nanosecond was. After various answers from
> the audience she held her hands a little more than a foot apart saying
> that was how far light traveled in one.
>
> I did a rough calculation and she was right.
I remember seeing a show about her once. If I remember correctly, she
got into the habit of carrying pieces of wire a nanosecond long and
passing them out at her speaking engagements.
Tim McGaughy
OOP's wager. Pick your language of choice, and descend into madness.
Ben Kaufman
Cobols's wager: I'll be around for another 10 years.
Ben Kaufman
wrote:
APL made a wager but no one has figured it out yet.
Ben
Don Martin
<zza...@buffy.sighup.org.uk> wrote:
And how _else_do mathematicians get screwed?
aa #2278 If you can't be a dirty old man, what is the point of being an old man?
Fidei defensor (Hon. Antipodean)
The Squeeky Wheel: http://home.comcast.net/~drdonmartin/
Dr. Smartass, Troll Veterinarian
7fde1d...@y9g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:
> Subject: Who wants to accept Pascal's Wager?
Pascal was my least-favorite programming language in college. The wager
then was "I bet I fail this class."
--
Doc Smartass, BAAWA Knight of Troll Medication
aa # 1939
Book reviews: http://jw-bookblog.blogspot.com/
Diploma Mill: a religious facility where minds are ground into powder.
duke
Tell that to God when you stand before him in judgment.
Syd
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 16:17:08 -0400, "Witziges Rätsel" <z...@roer.invalid> wrote:
>
> >"duke" <duckgumb...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >news:llcs45hinlnac8g8o...@4ax.com...
> >> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 06:42:19 -0700 (PDT), "Greg G." <ggw...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
> >>>a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
> >>>God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
> >>>"rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
> >>>God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
> >>>like.
>
> >>>Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
> >>>Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
> >>>or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
>
> >> Now there's a bunch of hokey. Earthly sin is the very sin
> >> for which subject humankind will spend all eternity in hell,
> >> not heaven.
>
> > The bible; now there's a bunch of hokey.
>
> Tell that to God when you stand before him in judgment.
>
I will, Dork.
And I'll kick him in the balls for being such a arrogant bastard.
PDW
panam...@hotmail.com
> On Jul 3, 9:25 am, ed wolf <eduartw...@gmx.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 3 Jul., 15:42, "Greg G." <ggw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > According to the Christian theology that I am familiar with, Satan and
> > > a third of the angels were cast out of Heaven for rebelling against
> > > God. In Matthew 5:28, Jesus says that lust is the same as adultery, so
> > > "rebelling" against God might be just having a momentary thought that
> > > God doesn't like. The Bible has a great list of things God doesn't
> > > like.
>
> > > Christian theology tells us that the Resurrection absolves us of
> > > Earthly sin, but it doesn't seem to work for sins committed in Heaven
> > > or the devils and demons would get back to angel status.
>
> > > been cast out, what chance do the others have of lasting forever? If
> > > the angels can't last forever, why would humans do any better?
>
> > > So Pascal's Wager is that if the atheist is right, neither the atheist
> > > nor the Christian loses or wins anything after death. If the Christian
> > > is right, the atheist loses big while the Christian gets to spend
> > > perhaps several thousand years trying to not piss off God, then loses
> > > big, too.
>
> > > I would rather take Pasta's Wager for the FSM. If I'm right, I get to
> > > spend eternity with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. The
> > > Christian gets a similar deal, but the beer is stale and the strippers
> > > have STDs.
>
> > be right, Muslims could also be right. Muslim heaven seems a safer
> > place, but virgins and Cat Stevens music are a bore. Anyway
> > Christians will go to Muslim hell. Muslims, of course, go
> > to Christian hell. Atheist go to an ecumenic, joint venture hell. But
> > there are probably more creeds with hells. So even if you finally
> > e make it to hell you might not meet all of the interesting people.
> > hasta la vista
> > ed
>
> > Is man one of God's blunders? Or is God one of man's blunders?
> > Friedrich Nietzsche- Hide quoted text -
> eas>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> This is why you need to find out about the personhood of Christ, so
> you can
snip
Ridiculous. Even if some sort of "Jesus" existed, it is a practical
certainty that the "Christ" as described in Christian mythology did
not.
http://tinyurl.com/2kg43d
http://tinyurl.com/3ay5hm
http://tinyurl.com/2wskdr
http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/christian.htm
http://www.pocm.info/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/
http://www.jesuspuzzle.com/
-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/Member, Knights of BAAWA!
"..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."
-Mark Twain
Religious societies are *less* moral than secular ones:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
tirebiter
doll...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 20:14:22 -0700, "Mike Painter" <md.pain...@sbcglobal.net>
That's harsh. I made a pretty good career writing APL code for about
15 years during the 70s and 80s.
---
a.a. #2273
tirebiter
> This is why you need to find out about the personhood of Christ, so
> you can accurately decide who is telling the truth and who is the
> Fraud with eternal consequences.
"eternal consequences", otherwise known as "the hollow threat". There
isn't a single person who can provide a single shred of evidence of
any "consequences" that follow death.
---
a.a. #2273
Lisbeth Andersson
news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
m:
>
> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
> idiot.
>
:-)
Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
Seconds?
Lisbeth.
----
The day I don't learn anything new is the day I die.
*What we know is not nearly as interesting as *how we know it.
harsha
> XaurreauX <Xaurre...@gmail.com> wrote innews:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
I second the nomination.. but not the point of it being the best
refutation..
This picture, I think, is the best refutation of Pascal's wager
http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/uncyclopedia/images/b/b0/Andrew_Drake_copy.png
Christopher A. Lee
<Xaur...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an idiot.
Short, succinct and to the point.
dougberry
mysterious Lisbeth Andersson <lis...@bredband.net> spoke thusly in
alt.atheism:
>XaurreauX <Xaur...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
>m:
>
>>
>> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
>> idiot.
>>
>
>
>:-)
>
>Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
>I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>
>Seconds?
Seconded.
--
Douglas E. Berry dberryOB...@gmail.com
http://gridlore.livejournal.com
http://www.facebook.com/douglas.berry
Do the OBVIOUS thing to email.
"Well I'm not evil, I'm just good looking." - Alice Cooper
duke
>XaurreauX <Xaur...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
>m:
>
>>
>> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
>> idiot.
>>
>
>
>:-)
>
>Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
>I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>
>Seconds?
Nobody, but NOBODY, has ever refuted the PW.
duke
>The scrolls speak of the day, Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:38:27 GMT, when the
>mysterious Lisbeth Andersson <lis...@bredband.net> spoke thusly in
>alt.atheism:
>
>>XaurreauX <Xaur...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
>>m:
>>
>>>
>>> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
>>> idiot.
>>>
>>
>>
>>:-)
>>
>>Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
>>I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>>
>>Seconds?
>
>Seconded.
Wrong, I think you should second Calee-fornia always having a balanced budget.
tirebiter
> XaurreauX <Xaurre...@gmail.com> wrote innews:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
Yes certainly. After all, what god would accept a "believer" who is
simply hedging a bet?
---
a.a. #2273
panam...@hotmail.com
> On Jul 3, 8:42 am, "Greg G." <ggw...@gmail.com> wrote:
snippy
> > I would rather take Pasta's Wager for the FSM. If I'm right, I get tone
> > spend eternity with a beer volcano and a stripper factory. Theof
> > Christian gets a similar deal, but the beer is stale and the strippers
> > have STDs.
>
> Your post is an amusing one to say the least...however, its wrought
> with a few misunderstandings ...probably accidental. The bottom
> line is : Both evil Angelic Beings as well as
snip
Not as amusing & "misunderstood" as your continued insistance that
such creatures actually exist...
Sanity's Little Helper
posteth:
:-D Seconded
--
David Silverman
aa #2208
Defender of Civilisation
"God" is a casual and intellectually sparse rationalisation of nerve
impulses within the human brain, conflated with social and societal
expediencies, such as the division of labour and the wielding of authority,
resulting in a formal definition of a personification of an authority that
must not be questioned.
Not authentic without this signature.
Syd
> m:
>
>
>
> > Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
> > idiot.
>
> :-)
>
> Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
> I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>
> Seconds?
>
I'll second, fourth, fifth that.
It's quite true.
PDW
Syd
> On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 11:38:27 GMT, Lisbeth Andersson <lis...@bredband.net> wrote:
> >news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
> >m:
>
> >> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
> >> idiot.
>
> >:-)
>
> >Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
> >I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>
> >Seconds?
>
> Nobody, but NOBODY, has ever refuted the PW.
>
That's true, only if you don't actually research the thing.
Like You, Dork.
PDW
Smiler
Apart from becoming worm food and no longer being in existence :-)
--
Smiler,
The godless one
a.a.# 2279
All gods are bespoke. They're all individually tailor
made to perfectly fit the prejudices of their believer.
XaurreauX
> >news:eb951e57-dca4-4252...@37g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
> >m:
>
> >> Pascal's Wager works very nicely if you assume that "God" is an
> >> idiot.
>
> >:-)
>
> >Short, succinct and to the point. I think this is the best refutation
> >I have ever heard of Pascal's wager.
>
> >Seconds?
>
> Nobody, but NOBODY, has ever refuted the PW.
>
> The Dukester, American-American
> *****
> "The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
> Pope Paul VI
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nobody, but NOBODY has ever proven that God is not an idiot.