Pascals Wager From A Non-Believer.

[TAO]

Thanks, you're too nice.

Very sorry, tell me where this is incorrect:

Hughes, TheSometimesSaint was referring to 'non-believers' as in 'earthly non-believers'.

In any case, depending on the context of time we are looking at, you are both right =D.

I am now going to add that rep point! =)

Edited September 18, 2011 by TAO

[Calm]

I think the object of an event is a goal. You think it is the other way around. To me, goals are the reason we do things, they are our high standards.

One of my favourite talks: http://lds.org/general-conference/2000/10/the-challenge-to-become?lang=eng

[Eldwynn]

Think of Zeus as that which inspires us each, in our own personal way....& the subconscious/intuitive more expanded awareness.

Zeusis love... motivation toward what we think is best (except Zeusis the highest of all possibilities)... which we find through both intellect & intuition.

Denying this highest best, limits your potential.

Zeus is like the dark matter/energy that permeates 95% of the universe... Yet, your experience of Zeus is within you... (However you want to define that: emotions based on thoughts, "the kingdom of Zeus within," subconscious).

Not only do you have reasons to believe, much of your reasons are completely illogical, like the rest of us. (Just consider some of your strange dreams.)

We must learn to harmonize the subconsocious with the conscious... to get the most of LIFE NOW.

So, if you want Zeus to communicate a bit more... look within at your own psychology ("study of the soul").

I pretended like we are ~3000 years in the past, in ancient Rome.

My problem with your kind of reasoning, is that you can use it to basically justify belief in absolutely anything. You can use it to justify belief in Santa et al. Thus, it does little to convince me that you really are talking about something that exists in reality.

I don't care if belief in a god makes you "feel better". I also don't care if a belief in an afterlife "gives you hope". That's the kind of reasoning that justifies lying to children about Santa, but doesn't actually make Santa's existence any more likely.

Edited September 20, 2011 by Eldwynn

[Eldwynn]

Well, scriptural Mormonism is very Zion oriented. The D&C talks more about Zion than about the church. Zion is not predicted for the next life, it is coming in this life. And Zion is to be economically just. One good reason to accept Mormonism.

There is a real difference between what is known as "blind faith" and true faith. We all live continually "on faith".

Do you remember even one thing that happened to you in the first two years of your life? Probably not. But on faith you accept that you did live those two years. It may be "common knowledge" based on "universal experience" that we lived as infants even though we no longer remember it. But it still takes some faith to accept it.

Wow, you start off with an appeal to consequences (http://www.nizkor.or...nsequences.html)

You then act like believing that I existed for the first two years of my life takes just as much faith as believing I existed prior to being born. Meaning my consciousness (which is very much a consequence of my brain) existed prior to my brain being developed yet... a statement I have a difficult time just taking your word on, or some ancient bronze age prophets.

I mean... does this really seem reasonable to you?

Edited September 20, 2011 by Eldwynn

[LeSellers]

I pretended like we are ~3000 years in the past, in ancient Rome.

You know, of course, that Roma did not exist 3,000 years ago. It was not founded until ~750 BC, so your approximation is off by ~250 years, or ~9%.

Lehi

Edited September 20, 2011 by LeSellers

[thesometimesaint]

Eldwyn:

What a sad little world you live in.