Atheist view on life v. Christian view on life


#1

First read it top to bottom for an Atheist’s view on life, then read bottom to top for a Christian’s view on life…

I will live my life according to these beliefs
God does not exist
It is just foolish to think
That there is a God with a cosmic plan
That an all-powerful God brings purpose to the pain and suffering in the world
It’s a comforting thought however
Is only wishful…thinking
People can do as they please without eternal consequences
The idea that
I am deserving of Hell
Because of sin
Is a lie meant to make me a slave to those in power
The more you have the happier you will be
Our existence has no grand meaning or purpose
In a world with no God
There is freedom to be who I want to be
But with God
Everything is fine
It is ridiculous to think
I am lost and in need of saving

Now…read from bottom to top and you will have A Christian’s View on Life


#2

Very entertaining indeed. That goodness the Lord bless us with Her Majesty to look over us.


#3

I think you are trying to be cleaver, I don’t quite get your point. However, if it makes you happy believing in the abyss then peace be with you. In the end people chose to believe in God or not to believe in God depending on which one makes a happier life and gives them hope. In the end there is no way to “know” with certainty there is a God or we are just “dust in the wind.” Death will lift the vail of this world and answer the question for both of us.
Finally, I intuite God exist and see that there are inferences that he exist in the world so in that I am confident he exist.


#4

It is better to live as if there is a God, rather to live as if there is not One, only to find out too late


#5

Thats true, Blaise Pascal (Pascle’s wager) said something similar to that affect. Pascle was not only one of the great fathers of modern mathmatics and physics, he also had some interesting ideas as to his reasoning behind his Christian faith:

Blaise Pascal: apologist to skeptics - Charles Sherrard MacKenzie - Google Books

A little background of Pascle if interested:

Blaise Pascal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kinda squelches the idea that only people outside the scientific community can believe in God and Christ. That those closest to the study of science find themselves furthest from the belief in God.


#6

Hi there,
I was just wondering who wrote this clever poem? This is the earliest place I could find it online.


#7

The problem I find with Pascal’s Wager is, it’s not moral. When I die and go before this Creator who is omniscient. I only believed in this Creator because what did I have to loose? So, I am not intellectually honest about my belief in this Creator. I only did it to hedge my bets like a bookie or a casino. I do not think this Creator is going to be to favorable towards me for being dishonest about my belief in it.


#8

What’s immoral about it? The fact that he worded it as a “wager”? Did you not know that just before the day of Pentecost, the disciples cast lots to see who should take the place of Judas? To be sure, it was between two men who were both qualified for the position, but that’s neither here nor there.


#9

…which is why you must have FAITH.


#10

Susanna this had nothing to do with just drawing straws. This is about truly believing in a Creator or God. Pascal’s Wager is about believing in it just to CYA, not because you actually believe it.


#11

`

Paschal’s Wager can be very moral because the motive does not have to be self gain. You incorrectly assume it must be self-interest, but the motive can be much higher than benefit to the self:

[Pascal’s Wager]

"To the high-minded objector who refuses to believe **for the low motive of saving the eternal skin of his own soul, we may reply that the Wager works quite as well if we change the motive. ** Let us say we want to give God his due if there is a God. Now if there is a God, justice demands total faith, hope, love, obedience, and worship. If there is a God and we refuse to give him these things, we sin maximally against the truth. But the only chance of doing infinite justice is if God exists and we believe, while the only chance of doing infinite injustice is if God exists and we do not believe. If God does not exist, there is no one there to do infinite justice or infinite injustice to. **So the motive of doing justice moves the Wager just as well as the motive of seeking happiness.__Peter Kreeft

Argument from Pascal’s Wager by Peter Kreeft

Here are the key phrases [colored blue] from the passage up there denoting possible non-selfish motives.

  • our motive is: “we want to give God his due”

  • our motive is: “we [do not want to] sin maximally against the truth”

  • our “doing justice” is the motive

You’ll have to give the passage up there a careful read in order to understand the higher motives.


Also, you seem to be unaware of another important element within Pascal’s Wager:

"The most powerful part of Pascal’s argument … is not his refutation of atheism as a foolish wager (that comes last) [SIZE=4]but his refutation of agnosticism as impossible. Agnosticism, not-knowing, maintaining a skeptical, uncommitted attitude, seems to be the most reasonable option. The agnostic says, “The right thing is not to wager at all.” Pascal replies, “But you must wager. There is no choice. You are already committed [embarked].”__Peter Kreeft[/SIZE] (emphasis by Jack)

Argument from Pascal’s Wager by Peter Kreeft

You’ll have to go read the article to find out fully why Kreeft said agnosticism was impossible.

:spades: ♫ ♪ :spades:

`