What is OmniNerd?

Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by you, the reader. Through voting and moderation we strive to highlight the nerdiest of what's around and provide content that's a little more thought provoking than other sites.

Submit New Content

Voting Booth

Choosing Sarah Palin as a Vice Presidential running mate was?

View Results, All Polls
42 votes, 9 comments
1
Nerd-It
+ -

RE: Pascal's Wager

Comment comment by Brandon on 29 April 2007

Before I get started, I must agree with you; Pascal's Wager is a cop-out.

Moving on...

You have many assumptions about things like hell, damnation, the nature of God, etc. that don't reflect my beliefs, so (although I'm Christian) I don't feel as if you're arguing against me. In fact, many of the issues you have which question the justice and motivations of God given the circumstances of life seem to play directly into my "religious hand," so to speak. I won't get deep into them right now, but here are a couple of thoughts:

  • God had a purpose in organizing the earth and sending us here. If you're going to comment on whether or not an action of God "makes sense," you'll have to tie it back to God's motivations if you want to have a coherent discussion.
  • Not every Christian accepts the Nicaean Creed view of God's nature. Such may be common/popular, and may even be the belief set to which you were exposed growing up, but it is extra-biblical and non-essential to the Christian view. If you're going to argue against Christianity, much less against the existence of God, in general you must address them generally. Such isn't easy, so I might suggest you argue against particular divine attributes with which you take issue, rather than attempting to show faith is irrational by creating a specific straw-God.
  • Earth life is only one part of existence. Thus, if you want to understand earth life in this construct, you must widen your scope to include existence before we were born and after we die. Granted, you don't hold similar beliefs, but if you want to understand those who do, you need to put yourself in their shoes (i.e., If God existed and had X motives, it wouldn't make sense to do Y.).

That's all for now, I guess. There are a lot of other things I'd like to say about specific doctrines, but I think laying this foundation is important.

You are a viewing a subset of a larger discussion.
View Full Discussion
Star This to Save in Your Profile Favorite
Thread parent sort order:
Highest Voted : Lowest Voted : Oldest : Newest
Thread verbosity:
Expand All : Minimize Replies to Comments
1 Nerd-It - +
RE: Pascal's Wager by Occams :: NR6

Sensible comment and a good start, but still a long way from answering the question posed.

I think you are saying that the idea of God's omnipotence was created at the Council of Nicea - which was in about AD 400. Certainly a lot of things were decided at that particular multi-lateral meeting because it is said that Constantine locked the delegates in a room and refused to let them out until their disputes were settled. That is where they narrowed down to allowing only the familiar four (apostle ?) gospels in the New Testament.

Thanks, this is news to me. I really did think that all Christians believed that He is omnipotent. Of course I accept the constraint on him (expressed so well in another response) that He cannot do something that contradicts itself - trivially; like making a stone that is too heavy for Him to lift. That is not a reflection on the Power of God but on the limitations of of language.

However, a very simple question was posed. Why was it necessary to sacrifice Jesus. Who made that rule? No answers forthcoming yet!

Posted 30 April 2007, Hide, Parent, Reply