For athesits,why i believe in god.Its simply more profitable.

[basics]

Augustine developed the fallacious concept of "original sin", one of the primary problems with post-Roman Christianity and one that no two churches in the Christian world have ever agreed upon. As well as the now popular Calvinist theory of predestination, that all human actions is directly or indirectly commanded by god. A pretty terrifying and totalitarian concept.

Admiral Piett,

As is written by Moses that Adam and Eve were the first human sinners then Augustine was right in his observation because it was the first and therefore original sin made by man. That everything has already been written in heaven then Calvin's assessment of predestination is also quite correct. Of course putting a totalitarian word as to the aspect of the Godhead is also quite correct because God in Three Persons is in total control of all things. Rather than disparage His name or abilities should make man more aware of His presence other than the opposite don't you think?

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

If predestination is a thing, then what is the point? So I'm predestined to question the thing that predestined me to question it? What?

[Diocle]

If predestination is a thing, then what is the point?..

The point is the Faith.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

But if everything is already "written in heaven" as basics said above, no one has faith because he chose to have faith, you are made to have faith which makes it pointless.

[Owlparrot3]

Hey EAM,Think of this in this way,you are but a part of god.Like you control your hands,the lord controls you,so worship him.

[Emperor Arcturus Mengsk]

-.-

[fkizz]

If predestination is a thing, then what is the point? So I'm predestined to question the thing that predestined me to question it? What?

That's Calvinism. Find a Calvinist and ask him, I have no idea about that one.

Augustine developed the fallacious concept of "original sin", one of the primary problems with post-Roman Christianity and one that no two churches in the Christian world have ever agreed upon. As well as the now popular Calvinist theory of predestination, that all human actions is directly or indirectly commanded by god. A pretty terrifying and totalitarian concept.

I agree that Calvinism has undesirable theology, but what's wrong with an idea of Original Sin?

Well applied it is a problem solver, rather than a problem.

Putting it roughly into practice, it basically translates that for the world to give you something, you have to get used to give something back to the world, whatever it is. It owes you nothing, it's actually the other way around, you're the one owing, so don't complain too much, be stoic, overcome your challenges and you may get something nice in return.

And also gets implied that without some form of discipline (either from outside or self discipline) it will be very hard to achieve well being. Also gets implied that people that enjoy good things aren't on that state simply by "being themselves", but that they also had to overcome plenty of problems or will have to, sooner or later, either in some more visible or concealed form.

Well this is putting it in a very rough pragmatic/simplified/earthly way, but do you see any problem with that mindset?

[chriscase]

Augustine developed the fallacious concept of "original sin", one of the primary problems with post-Roman Christianity and one that no two churches in the Christian world have ever agreed upon. As well as the now popular Calvinist theory of predestination, that all human actions is directly or indirectly commanded by god. A pretty terrifying and totalitarian concept.

I think that's fair, but in context it's also a very elegant solution to the problems of mortality. Reading something like the Phaedrus, it's clear the ancients were keenly aware (far more so than us) of the harsh everyday realities of death, disease and mortification. To a philosophical mind open to the abstractions of perfection, the reality poses a troubling conundrum, which Plato approaches in a variety of ways, but seems ultimately unable to answer. Augustine's injection of Biblical scripture as an assumed authority nicely answers the question via Original Sin.

[NorseThing]

Augustine developed the fallacious concept of "original sin", one of the primary problems with post-Roman Christianity and one that no two churches in the Christian world have ever agreed upon. As well as the now popular Calvinist theory of predestination, that all human actions is directly or indirectly commanded by god. A pretty terrifying and totalitarian concept.

I admit that I have never really understood original sin or inherited sin. If we have free will, then how can that be consistent with the inherited sin concept? It would seem that predestination and original sin would be compatible. I am not an expert.

Closer to the original post of the thread:

I do not think taking a profitable choice is really the point when it come to belief. Belief is taking the step towards an idea on faith in the idea but lacking any logical basis to agree or dispel the idea. Profit can thus not really be a factor for such a belief any more than logic. That is not to say that I lack such belief, but I admit it is a weak belief with in me. At my age and health, such a weakness in a belief may not be good, but I am what I am.

[basics]

Norse Thing,

Sin is passed from its origin all the way through conception so it's natural and logical to accept that a fetus will be an object for its passage simply because it has no concept at that point to know right from wrong. It is only in life as it passes that we build up a picture of what our past means to us. The older one gets adds to the evaluation of one's life and in some a desire to know if anything comes after thinking that their good will always outweigh the bad. Only by the cross can that be established for it is the measure, the scales of justice, that certify any passage into the next life.

[Gallus]

This table describes why i believe in god.Because i am a businessman.
What are your thoughts on the Pascal wager.

Pascal's wager never made sense to me. If you really believed in god you wouldn't need to rationalize it with Pascal's wager. If you are calculating risk and reward, that means that you don't believe.

So we know that you can't choose to believe based on risk/reward calculation, but you can choose to worship. However, since you don't believe, how do you know which god is the right one? Which one do you have to worship? There are hundreds of gods and I think we can all agree that not all of them exist. How do you know you have picked the right one?

It's pretty obvious that the universe is deterministic, as in subject to the laws of cause and effect. We can predict solar eclipses, calculate rocket trajectories to the moon and build cars. It'd be a superfluous conjecture to hypothesize that human activity is somehow magically exempt, would it not?

Total determinism implies that people don't have free will and that future has been determined in it's entirety at the beginning of the Universe. This can be a very dangerous thing to believe.

[Muizer]

I do not think taking a profitable choice is really the point when it come to belief.

Well, in a way it is, but the profit is gained in the here and now. If you're a member of a community with a predominant faith, it certainly is profitable to conform. Not just materially (the support network) but also psychologically (not having to defend/doubt your beliefs). Those are compelling considerations even without the promise/threats concerning an afterlife.

[NorseThing]

Well, in a way it is, but the profit is gained in the here and now. If you're a member of a community with a predominant faith, it certainly is profitable to conform. Not just materially (the support network) but also psychologically (not having to defend/doubt your beliefs). Those are compelling considerations even without the promise/threats concerning an afterlife.

Conforming may be even hardwired into our mammalian DNA. My cats go to even greater lengths in their efforts to conform and thus fit in. But then, such conforming would make the matrix calculation in the beginning of this thread no even needed. So is this a cold calculation or is it more of a wired in calculation? Of course I do not know how a cat will calculate 'profit', but calculate is undeniable.

[TheLeft]

My favourite part of the Bible is the bit that claims every single animal on earth lived within a short walk from Noah's house...

[fkizz]

My favourite part of the Bible is the bit that claims every single animal on earth lived within a short walk from Noah's house...

Splitting hairs on epic histories from thousands of years ago is a good way to get endlessly confused
Also you do realize that there are ways to describe an event using several figures of speech? You won't see scenes referring to for example, sex, described in literal terms for obvious reasons

[chriscase]

So when they say “Resurrection”, that’s just a figurative way to say someone lives on past his death in the thoughts and words of those who remember him. Right?...

[basics]

So when they say “Resurrection”, that’s just a figurative way to say someone lives on past his death in the thoughts and words of those who remember him. Right?...

chriscase,

Maybe in the minds of some but that was certainly not so in the case of Jesus Christ whose resurrection was witnessed by over four hundred people wherein He walked, talked and ate with many of them still bearing the scars of being pinned and speared whilst on the cross.

[Gaidin]

chriscase,

Maybe in the minds of some but that was certainly not so in the case of Jesus Christ whose resurrection was witnessed by over four hundred people wherein He walked, talked and ate with many of them still bearing the scars of being pinned and speared whilst on the cross.

"The Bible is symbolic except when I say so."

[fkizz]

So when they say “Resurrection”, that’s just a figurative way to say someone lives on past his death in the thoughts and words of those who remember him. Right?...

You know the answer to that rethorical question.
What kickstarted Christianism was that something utterly abnormal happened after the Crucification+Spearstabbing and burial of Jesus. Without that, it would have died there.

Reasoning a normal death for the Messanic Preacher was what the Pharisees and Romans did. A calculated response accidentally backfired the maximum possible, with said death row criminal becoming the maximum figure of the Empire and even Western world later on.

"The Bible is symbolic except when I say so."

Except there are parts that have to be symbolic/euphemistic almost by force, otherwise it would be forced to be a detailed erotic novel for the sake of autistic literalism in the story. You do realize many generations have offspring there, right?
People already freak out because psalms mentions breasts.. now imagine the rest.
There is only one Messiah-type birth, even if lyrical language makes it seem otherwise.

[Godfrey I of Leuven]

What are your thoughts on the Pascal wager.

If I am an atheist, and decide to reject God, then my lifetime here on earth is the equivalent of the believer's "eternal paradise". If I, now, would choose to believe in a deity solely for the sake of pragmatism, then I would be rejecting my current paradise for one that isn't even guaranteed. That, to me, is simply moronic.