Message from @Zavjeru

Discord ID: 479105518762328075


2018-08-15 01:47:37 UTC  

And I got nothing against you

2018-08-15 01:47:40 UTC  

Just curious

2018-08-15 01:48:22 UTC  

The answer is faith.

2018-08-15 01:48:36 UTC  

So you value faith over empiricism?

2018-08-15 01:48:47 UTC  

I’m not going to elaborate

2018-08-15 01:48:58 UTC  

Fair enough. I am honestly curious.

2018-08-15 01:49:08 UTC  

Values do matter very much to me.

2018-08-15 01:50:09 UTC  

If you are indeed curious either read a bible or attend a local church service. They would be much better at answering your questions in person than one can do online.

2018-08-15 01:50:45 UTC  

I've attended many, I used to be a Christian when I was young myself. I was curious why individuals here would still believe in it.

2018-08-15 01:50:57 UTC  

And I read the bible already

2018-08-15 01:51:08 UTC  

I used to be athiest, then i converted.

2018-08-15 01:51:22 UTC  

atheism is depressing

2018-08-15 01:51:25 UTC  

sad life

2018-08-15 01:51:43 UTC  

So you converted because you found it to be too much emotionally?

2018-08-15 01:51:59 UTC  

no

2018-08-15 01:52:11 UTC  

So why did you convert?

2018-08-15 01:52:18 UTC  

Why accept the void of nothingness? If I am wrong when I die I’ll never know. Yet if I am right and atheism is wrong well that sucks for atheist.

2018-08-15 01:53:02 UTC  

Pascal's Wager has been debunked

2018-08-15 01:53:38 UTC  

I converted after looking into the odds of humanity existing, and drawing correlations between the big bang theory and the biblical story of creation. Among hundreds of other correlations between scientific fact and biblical teachings. I think science is not anti-christian, quite the opposite.

2018-08-15 01:54:11 UTC  

Hello!

2018-08-15 01:54:17 UTC  

Intelligent design is a good thing to look into.

2018-08-15 01:54:45 UTC  

Gwyn, you are aware that Pascal's Wager has been debunked, correct?

2018-08-15 01:55:58 UTC  

Doctor Anon - Which creation story are you talking about?

2018-08-15 01:56:12 UTC  

its been DEBUNKED xdxdxd

2018-08-15 01:56:21 UTC  

🤣

2018-08-15 01:56:48 UTC  

Pray tell who came back from the dead and told us idiots?

2018-08-15 02:00:53 UTC  

It's simple rationality. You would have to apply it to all faiths, not just one. So there is the Pascal's Wager of Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Taoism, etc... Each one, by not believing in them, you are taking a risk. Pascal's Wager only applies to believing in some sort of afterlife-reward versus not, but the problem arises when you take into account that there are thousands of different possible ones to believe in, and most are quite exclusionary for receiving the ultimate prize.

This is without taking into account the fact that if one lives their life according to a religious code that prevents them from fully experiencing their short time on earth and they are wrong, then they have squandered precious years of a finite existence.

Therefore, Pascal's Wager, even from a superficial analysis, is quite flawed.

2018-08-15 02:01:31 UTC  

^^

2018-08-15 02:01:57 UTC  

No that just means it applies to other faiths as well as atheism. What kind of pseudointellectual garbage is this?

2018-08-15 02:02:01 UTC  

Using debunked is still not appropriate terminology 💁🏻‍♀️

2018-08-15 02:02:18 UTC  

You could have said "I'm full of shit" in fewer words.

2018-08-15 02:02:28 UTC  

I was using it in the manner of 'demonstrate the hollowness of', which is correct.

2018-08-15 02:02:46 UTC  

Which is fine if you believe in the void

2018-08-15 02:02:52 UTC  

It's not hallow though.

2018-08-15 02:02:57 UTC  

Boils down to subjective opinion.

2018-08-15 02:03:08 UTC  

☝️

2018-08-15 02:03:20 UTC  

Even if it could only apply to atheism you are still taking less of a chance.

2018-08-15 02:03:22 UTC  

But it is an irrational subjective opinion upon which to build your faith.

2018-08-15 02:03:27 UTC  

Again, pseudointellectual garbage.

2018-08-15 02:03:31 UTC  

Pascels wager was never "debunked", it's a fair critizism of that type of thinking. what's wrong with it

2018-08-15 02:04:28 UTC  

all it points out is "what if you're wrong you could go to hell" is an unsound argument for being religous