Pascal's wager

Is it rational to follow Christianity merely based on fear of damnation?

>rational

There's plenty of other reasons to follow Christianity even without the fear of damnation.

>pascal's wager
>believe in God because the benefits are tremendous
>God is omnipotent and all knowing
But then
>God knows you only faux believed in him to get the benefits of heaven and a peaceful afterlife
>your years of praying and believing all in vain

Nevertheless his works are pretty good.

please elaborate. the ethics of Christianity seem to me, to be a mass of contradictions and absurdities mixed with profound insights

if God/Christ didn't consider the fear of hell a legitimate motivation for action, why was Jesus constantly threatening people with hellfire?

The wealth and breath of Catholic theology and philosophy is bar none the most developed of any system and has influenced many canonical writers.

I'm sorry but that is just an unbelievably ideologically blinkered statement.
Moreover
developed=/=correct

God didn't create Hell to punish people, he created Hell to make Heaven, which is Himself, a meaningful option. Hell is not a distinct realm in its own right but simply the lack of Heaven.

Is it better than the pali canon?

It wasn't meant as a serious philosophical reason to be a theist, rather it was intended to be a criticism of the thinkers of the time who claimed to deal only in reason whilst still rejecting God (not that I believe they aren't compatible but Pascals wager is a good criticism of it) . In terms of probability it's correct, but the wager itself won't create any true worshippers so it's self defeating.

I'm not talking about Jesus, Mohamed or Moses, I'm talking about God.
If he does exist, what qualifies as being good person?
For example, is it really my belief in God and his ways that led me to become a Christian and a believer?
Or is it the fact that I'm calculating the ifs and maybes, that's basically Pascals argument.

so we're in hell right now?

what is there to wage? there's no life after death

>
>so we're in hell right now?
What's afterlife?

>that's the wager

you didn't answer the question. this thread is implicitly about Xianity.
If the conventional vision of the Xian God is correct it would seem rather churlish for Him to say fear of hell is an illegitimate motivation for obedience since He's constantly threatening us with it.

I have long since learned, as a measure of elementary hygiene, to be on guard when anyone quotes Pascal.

there's nothing to wage
there isn't life after death
it's literally impossible

I think you're a little confused there buddy, why did you name this thread Pascals wager?

Guys i'm supposed to call my girlfriend who lives overseas in a few hours. should i go to sleep and 95% likelihood fuck it up and oversleep or stay up the rest of the night which i've already started to do?

What time is it?
What are you watching?
Anything important to do tomorrow?

4 in the morning in my time zone
watching?
No, I don't leave the house
>don't ask

you're choosing to believe and therefore act in a Christian manner based on the ifs and maybes.

Text your gf you're tired but send her warm kisses and a picture of you in bed, the go to sleep, sleep is better than sex.
Also lucid dream.

>Not assimilating both Buddhist and Christian Philosophy into a far-right imperialist ideology

if you can be convinced of the reality of hell, than yes

>it's literally impossible
[citation needed]

You say it's possible you'll go to heaven or hell for literally any reason. Maybe God will send you to hell for not believing in him. Maybe he'd send you to hell for believing in him. Maybe he'll send you to hell for not being a vegetarian. Maybe he'll send you to hell for wearing socks with sandals. These all carry equal weight because we're talking about infinite stakes here.

*You can say

>pledge your loyalty to yahweh
>get your soul devoured by ammit
oops

>Pascal's Wager

Why are people reading and talking about such a blatant case of sophistry again?

>amiserable
>embarassement
etc etc
irvine welsh would stone cold kill whoever made that fucking picture

the fact that christianity circled the old world and kept near true to its roots should stand testament to its integrity, and never said it was the right religion, you were jumping the gun on a discussion that hadnt even begun.

>kept near true to its roots
this statement is...dubious.

Should everyone have their own unique god, with the only thing these gods have in common is that they all let everyone into heaven? Kind of like a lottery syndicate.

why exactly is it sophistricated

I'll tangentially answer this question with a person anecdote. I went through a stage of about a year and a half where I was suicidal. I watched a video by Teal Swan (a real Devil) that said you won't go to Hell if you kill yourself. Thanks GOD I found some religious articles on the web from every religion saying that you definitely will. I am no longer suicidal.

for you it is, meat

are people on Veeky Forums starting to larp as vampires and zombies now...

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you don't necessarily go to hell for suicide.

>is it rational to base it on fear?
wow...im speechless

No.

You're missing the point entirely

>start studying the greeks last week
>learn what a sophist is
>see the word sophisticated

Fuck

DESU anecdotes like these and my personal experiences with church (quaint, rural northern protestants, nice people), are why I'm not explicity antitheist.

>Is it rational to follow Christianity merely based on fear of damnation?
No, because following Christianity precludes following any of the other myriad competing religions, each of which could potentially be the "right" one.

tl;dr - Christianity is no guarantee against damnation.

By that logic you'd be justified in jumping off a cliff because so your friends don't call you a pussy.

So no, that's retarded.

But I'm a Christian and believe in God.

But some are more likely to be corect than others.