Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist

[HelenRose]

Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.

It doesn’t make sense to decide to be a Theist on a bet if one does not believe in God

 

[tonyrey]

Evidence however, tends to have varying degrees of ambiguity. And so it is that men disagree.

What I said was that there’s no way that you can EVER be certain that God exists. This has as much to do with the nature of you, as it does with the nature of God. There are certain things that you simply cannot know. Such things will always be a matter of faith. Remember, you’re trying to convince people that things are true, which you cannot possibly know are true. You cannot know that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, no matter how diligently you try to rationalize it. And so there’s a point where reason ends, and faith begins. What people fail to realize, is just how much of what they believe, is based upon the latter, and not the former.

The evidence is not perfectly balanced. Atheists have failed to explain how mindless molecules become capable of love, self-control and insight.

In the end, men believe what they choose to believe. And what’s reasonable for one man, may not be reasonable for another. The challenge therefore doesn’t lie in finding the most reasonable answer, but in finding the most reasonable way to live, without the answer.

It is impossible to live without an answer. Sartre pointed out that in life we cannot sit on the fence. We have to be committed for or against. Either we behave as if God exists or we don’t. We cannot keep asking ourselves "Should I do this if God does or doesn’t exist?

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Atheists have failed to explain how mindless molecules become capable of love, self-control and insight. . .

Mind is said to emerge from the subatomic. How this happens is one of those lacunae in our knowledge base that supposedly will be filled by a science that is believed to resemble that of today. However, when we do figure it out, and we will, it will be pretty much in line with what religion teaches. Thinking ahead to what needs to be done in describing how thoughts and perceptions and feelings are related to matter, we would have to postulate some sort of force or principle that organizes simple being into something more complex. Simply contemplating the experience of the world around us in this moment, we’d have to say very, very, very much more complex. And that is just at the level where we would be talking about illusions or hallucinations that more or less correlate to reality. But, we can actually know. It’s all pretty mind-boggling stuff.

 

[PRmerger]

Based on probability, if one had to make a choice, is it more reasonable to be an Atheist or a Theist. Which is more likely to be true given human experience and the evidence.

Which way does the pendulum of probability swing and why.

Theist.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Wouldn’t acting as if God exist but without sincere belief yield the same result as nonbelief?

No.

Opponents of Pascal’s Wager often miss the fact that there are actually two steps to the process of moving from practical reason to true faith.

In Stage 1, the considerations of self-interest predominate. It is logical to do what is good for you, and reason alone can spur you to wager on God’s existence.

(In the world of dating and marriage, self-interest may move you to take a pretty girl you do not really know on a date.)

In Stage 2, the effect of taking actions (such as reading the Bible, praying, attending Church, fellowshipping with other believers) based on Stage 1 reasoning is the development of genuine belief!

(In the world of dating and marriage, the interests of the one whom you love outweigh one’s own self-interests.)

IOW, act as if you have faith by investing your time into seeking God, and faith in God and love for Him will develop.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Maybe you could give us a quick run down on all the information for theism that you investigated. The resurrection only refers to Christianity.

Not all Christians have a conversion experience like Paul. Most of us are more like Timothy.

I, too, was blessed to have been born into a believing family. Therefore, like Timothy, I was taught about Jesus Christ from an early age.

My “conversion” experience came after not attending Church for several years, however. So, you might say that my own experience was that of being rejuvenated as well as converted from Protestantism to Catholicism.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Given that neither the Atheist nor the Theist can EVER know if they’re right, the only reasonable position would seem to be agnosticism, because unlike the first two, the agnostic will ALWAYS be right.

So if your goal is to make the reasonable choice, then there really is only one. But then again, people usually decide what’s right, first, and only afterward do they decide what’s reasonable.

I disagree.

I think that it is possible (and common) that people have a personal experience of God enabling them to know with confidence that God is real.

Agnosticism ought to be at most a temporary state of the one who is searching for God.

 

[Bradski]

I, too, was blessed to have been born into a believing family. Therefore, like Timothy, I was taught about Jesus Christ from an early age.

How do you think you would have turned out if your parents had been Hindu?

 

[PRmerger]

How do you think you would have turned out if your parents had been Hindu?

If my parents had been Hindu, then if I were the same inquisitive person as Hindu as I am as a Catholic, then, upon inquiring and searching, I would have converted to Catholicism.

 

[PRmerger]

Please point out where I stated that there’s no evidence for the existence of God. Evidence however, tends to have varying degrees of ambiguity. And so it is that men disagree.

What I said was that there’s no way that you can EVER be certain that God exists.

Disagree completely.

We CAN have certainty of God’s existence.

We just don’t have ABSOLUTE certainty.

But, then again, ABSOLUTE certainty of anything is practically nonexistent.

 

[Randy_Carson]

How do you think you would have turned out if your parents had been Hindu?

The odds are that I would have been Hindu - a polytheist, but a theist nonetheless.

This will not lead where you hope to take me, but continue.

 

[Bradski]

The odds are that I would have been Hindu - a polytheist, but a theist nonetheless.

This will not lead where you hope to take me, but continue.

We’re not going anywhere. We’ve already arrived.

I would have been a Hindu as well. And if we had been born in outback Australia into an Aboriginal community then we would believe in the Dreamtime. If in Bali, we’d be leaving small presents for the gods in the street and burning incense. In Iraq we’d pray five times a day. In Tel Aviv…well you can fill in the rest.

 

[Randy_Carson]

We’re not going anywhere. We’ve already arrived.

I would have been a Hindu as well. And if we had been born in outback Australia into an Aboriginal community then we would believe in the Dreamtime. If in Bali, we’d be leaving small presents for the gods in the street and burning incense. In Iraq we’d pray five times a day. In Tel Aviv…well you can fill in the rest.

Probably. But not certainly.

You see, Bradski, I believe in a God who is interactive with His creation and who still calls people to Himself.

So, while it is very likely that the person who is not a true seeker of God may simply follow the herd, it is also very possible that by God’s grace you or I might have actually been converted to the true faith and the true Church.

I was. So, yes, I HAVE already arrived. It appears you still have some distance to travel.

 

[tonyrey]

We’re not going anywhere. We’ve already arrived.

I would have been a Hindu as well. And if we had been born in outback Australia into an Aboriginal community then we would believe in the Dreamtime. If in Bali, we’d be leaving small presents for the gods in the street and burning incense. In Iraq we’d pray five times a day. In Tel Aviv…well you can fill in the rest.

People often choose to reject what they have been taught…

 

[Aloysium]

Does “safe” mean “reasonable”?

.

In terms of action, yes; by most people’s standards, the safest route is the most reasonable. But, Interestingly, it appears that for some, belief does not boil down to a choice. They appear to have swallowed a secular world view hook, line and sinker. I suppose that’s why the question arises, “What if you had been born a Hindu?” It is through the grace of the Holy Spirit that we can hear the truth. It’s important to open the door when He knocks.

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

In terms of action, yes; by most people’s standards, the safest route is the most reasonable. But, Interestingly, it appears that for some, belief does not boil down to a choice. They appear to have swallowed a secular world view hook, line and sinker.

I suppose it would be like asking you not to believe. That would be unthinkable. To some extent I think that God makes sense to all but 3-10% of people. But for people like me such a drive just doesn’t exist.

 

[lemondiesel]

It’s a lot easier to get motivated when a guy has a point to his existence.

Must God exist for that motivation?

 

[Trident_H]

Choosing via Pascal’s Wager sounds like an agnostic hedging her bets and leaning to one side to be safe or accepted or etc.

But…if you are not certain there is a God, but decide to believe there is a god anyway to be on the safe side…wouldn’t an all-knowing god know you don’t truly believe?

And if this all-knowing god still gives you the benefits of hedged-bet believing…then wouldn’t this same all-knowing god give the same benefits to the atheists?

.

God would know your motivations sure. And He’d sort of notice that you chose hope over despair. Faith over rejection of faith. And positive action over apathy.

So yeah. He’d notice.

Peace.

-Trident

 

[Trident_H]

??
A lot of atheists have points to their existence.
There are points that exist that are not God-related ones, ya know.

.

What’s the point of an atheist existence? I mean what do all the choices the atheist takes. And all the work the atheist does. And all the goals the atheist has total up to in the end?

The atheist dies and is forgotten. The atheist’s works all fall to pieces. The atheist’s great hopes fade out.

So what was the point?

I mean if I believe in God I’m also saying every tiny thing I do matters to Him. If I say I don’t believe in Him than I’m saying nothing that I do matters in any eternal way.

So that’s the difference I was reaching for. I guess.

Peace.

-Trident

 

[Trident_H]

Must God exist for that motivation?

For a guy like me? Yeah. Pretty much. I mean I don’t think I’d have fought as hard to get over my addictions if I hadn’t had the idea there were real consequences in store for not doing that. I mean I wouldn’t have ever bothered just so I could live the life I’ve got now. So I could live in this place I’m in and know I’m headed for the big dark whether I struggle hard the whole way or take it easy and slide down into it.

So yeah. It can make a big difference.