To All Non-Christians(I beg you, please give this five minutes)
I guarantee this is worth five minutes of your time. Regardless of what you believe, please listen to what I have to say. I'm not asking you to do anything unreasonable or insane. Just give me a chance. Hear me out.
I want to talk briefly about a brilliant man by the name of Blaise Pascal. This man was extremely intelligent, but most people don't recall that he lived a very short life. He died at the age of 39. Another interesting tidbit, at the age of 31 he became a Christian. In a night he would later refer to as "the night of fire", Pascal's entire belief system was flipped upside down and he began to follow Jesus earnestly. Pascal still loved science and continued to devote his life to it as well as Christ. He offered his coworkers a wager (later known to many as Pascal's Wager).
Pascal proposed this:
Christianity claims exclusivity, the only way to be with God is through his son Jesus Christ. If Christianity is true and one is not a believer then they will have to pay the consequences for their own sins. If Christianity is wrong, and one is a follower of Christ, then they receive the same fate as the rest of the world. Both the believer and non-believer would receive the same eternal outcome. He said that if one were playing the odds, gambling on which path would lead them to the best outcome, one would be foolish not to choose Christ. This being said he proposed that this theory be test scientifically. It is only reasonable to find out for one's self if Christianity is indeed true.
That is Pascal's Wager.
With that said, here are some things proposed as application to undertaking his challenge.
For One Month do the following
1. Regularly Attend Church
2. Investigate Christ and his story
3. Read the Bible
If one did this, he/she would be able to determine whether or not this Christianity would be worth following. If it really is a lie, then nothing matters. But what if it is true?
If you are a non-Christian reading this, please give this a chance. Whether you are Atheist, Agnostic, Mormon, Jewish, Islamic, or anything else. God wants you to know him desperately. Take up Pascal's challenge and give it a serious try for a month. If you find Christianity to be wrong then so be it. But there is a chance that the Truth will become real, just give it a chance.
Faithbridge, the church I attend, has just started a sermon series entitled Doubt which would be great in answering any questions you have. I will also be here to help in any way I can.
That goes for the second part of the wager as well. Ask me questions. If I don't know the answer or can't adequately explain something I will show you to people who can.
Thirdly, if you need a Bible just ask me and I will give you one for free, no strings attached.
Even if you are 100% positive that Christianity is a lie, or at least that you don't need Jesus, or even that God doesn't exist, I beg you. Give this a shot. It could be all wrong. But if it is true, and I do believe it is, you would be missing out on Eternity. I wan't to see you in Heaven with me. My number is 281-770-9275, my email is mbartlett250@yahoo.com, my facebook is www.facebook.com/matt.bartlett1. contact me anyway you can and I will do everything I can to help you really take this wager seriously. How can you know Christianity is not true without investigating? I'm giving you Pascal's Wager. Accept the challenge.
Luke 19:10
"For the Son of Man(Jesus) came to seek and to save the lost."
I'm praying for all of you. I love you all.
-matt
"If Christianity is wrong, and one is a follower of Christ, then they receive the same fate as the rest of the world"
ReplyDeleteunless of course one of the other religions is correct, then all the christians would receive the same fate as the rest of the nonbelievers of that religion.
I do concede this. Pascal's challenge was authored in Europe during a time of when Deism was extremely prevalent and the idea in one true God was very unpopular. Pascal's audience was that of those who did not seek other religions but instead sought philosophies.
ReplyDeleteI also understand completely that I cannot force anyone to give Christianity a shot. If someone is completely sold out to the fact that another religion is true then mere words are often not enough to persuade them.
Being to be a follower of Jesus the Christ is the only way to God. Most do not ever understand this, Jesus himself said that the path was narrow and that few would find it.
What religion, if I may ask, do you follow?
I'd love to learn more about what you believe sometime as well.
With Love, in Christ,
matt
You believe that Jesus is the only way to God because that's what your religion professes. However, people in other religious faiths feel as strongly that their way is correct as you do that your way is correct.
ReplyDeleteI gave up on religion about a year ago. Something just felt wrong about it. Although I don't affiliate myself with any organized religion, I do however have my beliefs, but I wouldn't call them religious. I believe in what I call interdimensionalism. It's hard to explain, so here's a video on the 10 dimensions (if you care to watch it).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkxieS-6WuA
Basically quantum physics teaches that there are up to 10 dimensions that exist as opposed to just the 3 that our locked physical senses perceive. The 10th dimension includes all realities and possibilities that could have ever taken place from the beginning of time to the end of time. Since we can only perceive 3 dimensions, we only perceive our limited string of existence based on the choices and actions of people within our line of possibility. Now, you believing in Christianity probably think that all other religions were manmade since A, to you, christianity is the only way to heaven/god, and B, if the other religions weren't manmade that makes them equally as valid as christianity, making all religions correct. I, believing in no religion, believe that all religions, including Christianity, are manmade. Everything that was created in our existence only exists within our dimension of existence and not the infinite amount of other possible existences. Basically, the trillions and trillions of other possible existences don't include christianity because it was created within our line. So that means that the only people who can get to heaven are the people that exist within the dimension in which christianity was created, meaning that all the trillions of other people in other dimensions don't get access to heaven. I know this is all hard to understand, but isn't that just unfair that only a certain amount of people can even possibly experience christianity? With that in mind and through the use of various alternate spiritual devices and techniques, I have realized that there is indeed a God, however he isn't the God taught by any religion. God isn't a humanoid lifeform floating in a sky castle watching over the world. God is everything. God is the universe. God is matter, energy, life. God is love and positivity. At the quantum level, everything in existence is one. We all came from energy, we are all made of energy, and when we die we will return our body to the ground to use as energy for the ground. God is every conscious being that ever existed. We are God in a sense. Every living thing is an extention of God. We are all one consciousness (God) observing itself subjectively.
I'm sure that to you, this all sounds like crazy talk, but if you're interested, i would recommend watching this video called What the Bleep do we Know Anyway? It's close to 2 hours long, but it's extremely interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSk51Lp-vHU
Anyway, thanks for taking the time to read all of this.
I can honestly say I find your viewpoint very interesting. You do raise interesting points. Mind if I clarify/ask more?
ReplyDelete"Now, you believing in Christianity probably think that all other religions were manmade"
Christianity was not man made. It couldn't have been. Jesus Christ came into earth without our forcing him to do so. If God is something you can control then he cannot be sovereign. Thus, God conceived the basis of Christianity, which is based on loving the one true God and loving others. Jesus didn't come up with the name, man named it. But the entire belief system is God-made.
I also have a response to your latter definition of God, but I have to go and will reply more later tonight.
Godbless, I appreciate talking to you.
I assume you are very intelligent, because I am struggling to grasp exactly what interdimensionalism is. I'd propose a trade of sorts, so that we both could be mutually informed.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you have heard of C.S. Lewis, but he is a brilliant philosopher who converted to Christianity. His book Miracles discusses your statements about everything being God. He discusses what Nature is and it was very challenging and interesting.
Is there any textual material that you could point me to? I'd really like to understand more of where you're coming from. I have no intentions of changing any of my beliefs, as I would assume you do. But intelligent conversation can only make us wiser.
I also would like to know what felt "wrong" about religion and why you walked away from it entirely.
In Christ Jesus,
-matt
I have heard of C.S. Lewis and read several of the Narnia books in elementary school. A lot of what I believe comes from watching various interviews on YouTube with quantum physicists like Michio Kaku and Stuart Hameroff and from various experiences including deep meditation.
ReplyDelete"Christianity was not man made. It couldn't have been. Jesus Christ came into earth without our forcing him to do so. If God is something you can control then he cannot be sovereign."
I was talking about other religions because for them to be false, which you believe they are, then they had to be manmade correct? If they weren't manmade then they had to come from some other source...like God. But you believe them to be false therefore they had to be manmade. But for a nonbeliever like me, the manmadeness of religion applies to Christianity as well.
Controlling God? I never said anything about controlling God nor do I think you can. That's just absurd. I don't even like to call it God. God is a manmade word and you're talking about a non-manmade accumulation of everything living in existence. By referring to it with the manmade word "God" you demean it by trying to humanize it. Furthermore, "God" holds too religious a connotation. When I refer to "God" I refer to the natural balance to all flow of energy, not some religious, we-were-made-in-his-image deity.
cs lewis has done much greater things than allegorical children's stories. i'll google these two scientists you mentioned and see if i can better understand.
ReplyDeletei do feel though, that i am understanding more of what you are describing. but now it begs this question, how can this belief of interdimensionalism be anything more than a man made constraint on our subjective experience? how can it exist in the other dimensions?
out of curiosity, how can we know what the 10th dimension contains? how can we know what any of them does or does not contain? except to declare it to be so?
how did these dimensions come to be? have they simply always existed since the beginning of time? did they evolve from only one or two into ten? how do we know this?
No offense is meant at all, i am merely interested in how this works.
"how can this belief of interdimensionalism be anything more than a man made constraint on our subjective experience? how can it exist in the other dimensions?"
ReplyDeletei don't think i understand what you're asking exactly.
although we cannot perceive these dimensions, they were theorized in the first place through mathematical equations. i don't have those answers for you. man was not meant to understand. how can we understand something that we can't even perceive? if we were supposed to understand how the universe works we wouldn't have brains that can process 200 billion bits of information per second while having a conscious mind that only processes 2000 of those 200 billion bits. so to answer your questions, i can't answer your questions. i don't fully understand how it all works and i never will be able to. so i accept the world as it is and leave it at that. questions only lead to contradiction and more questions.
i can respect your answer to that, but if that is so then why is it irrational for me to believe as i do?
ReplyDeleteit seems like either way we can't empirically prove each other wrong. or at least thats the conclusion i'm reaching. i guess what it really boils down to how much faith we have in human intelligence. right?
i mean what do you think? i know i don't have all the answers about Jesus. guess there really is only one way to find the answer?
although i guess if you are right we won't have any time to discuss it afterward will we? i'm gathering that you belief the body just ceases to be, what about the spirit?
Well, I just don't agree with your beliefs...or those of any other religion.
ReplyDeleteThere's no way to know ABSOLUTELY what happens after death. I would like to think that consciousness continues after death, but I don't know. No one does. I don't believe in a heaven or hell. To me, heaven and hell are states of mind, metaphors, archetypes.
I have a few ideas of what could possibly happen after death, but I'm not willing to say I believe any of them to be true, as saying such would be ignorant.
1. Death is enlightenment. When you die it is the balance of your life and energy spent on earth. You see things and yourself as they truly are - that everything is one. Since time is a perception created by our brains and doesn't actually exist, death allows you to transcend time and you reside in the eternal oneness of everything, experiencing complete peace and tranquility. Your ego and sense of self are completely dissolved.
2. Reincarnation. The soul leaves the body and searches for a fetus to incarnate with life.
3. Nothing. When a cell dies, it dies. Nothing happens to it. It doesn't have a soul. It doesn't go anywhere. It does it's job in the body then fades away so that newer, healthier cells can replace it. In the same way, humans have a role in the universe that we play and when we get old, we fade away so that newer, healthier humans can replace us and continue our role.
so what is the point? why live?
ReplyDeleteAh, now that's the real question isn't it? Everyone has their own purpose and it's the job of the individual to discover that purpose. I have yet to discover mine, but I'll keep trying to figure it out until I do.
ReplyDeleteConcerning the earlier conversation: In Ray Bradbury's epic novel "The Martian Chronicles" he displays humanity's perception of the meaning of life versus Bradbury's own fictional martians, who have the meaning he proposes humans have: the meaning of life is to live.
ReplyDeleteAnd I am familiar with the quantum physics theories of dimensions. I myself have studied it a bit. If God exists, then He most likely exists as the final dimension,being able to interact with them all and in control of them all. I won't go into much detail, unless one of you so desires.
And sorry to but into this conversation, but I know a bevy of things about Pascal - he's one of my heroes. But I've never heard this part of Pascal's wager before. The Pascal's wager with which I am familiar is a precursor to modern economic game theorgy. That is there are two options: either God exists or God does not exist.
If God exists,
- and I do not believe, then I lose everything.
- and I do believe, then I have infinite gain.
If God does not exist,
- and I do not believe, I lose nothing.
- and I do believe, I still lose nothing.
Could you please cite where you found the following:
"For One Month do the following
1. Regularly Attend Church
2. Investigate Christ and his story
3. Read the Bible"
part of Pascal's wager. I would find it very inspiring to learn more about this amazing man.
P.S.: Pascal was a Catholic Christian - you forgot to mention that. In my opinion, if one is going to be a Christian, then Catholocism is the truest, most sure way to follow Christian principles because it is the church that Jesus founded on earth. All oother Christian churches are breaks in what Catholics call "salvation history" from the true church. Think of it as sort of an evolutionary tree. There is the L.U.C.A. and from whence all other life forms evolved. In this Christian example there is the Catholic Church from whence all other churches came. It's not a perfect comparison because obviously evolution gets better with time, but the Catholic church holds their own truth. I would recommend that any individual seeking to be Christian be Catholic.
-Anonymous 2
Pascal became a believer after a radical experience with God. In his wager, he expressed the risk/reward ratio in relevance to God's existence. Initially his proposal did not include specific precepts such as what I have included. He was however, a practicing Christian. He had not merely accepted his own wager, but altered the trajectory of his life.
ReplyDeleteI apologize if I misrepresented the wager, but I do not believe that I have. Picking a side based on odds and probability doesn't necessarily make one a Christian. Although I can't directly cite any official source, I do know that this man didn't half way do things. His faith would have been lived out the same way.
So if one accepts Pascal's Wager as a "get out of jail free card", they must reach further in order to comprehend the entirety of what he is proposing.
And how can you say that Catholicism is the truest form of Christianity if you are not a Christian? I have attended both Protestant and Catholic churches, and I am curious as to why you would declare this.
-matt
I also disagree with your statement about Catholicism being the only true form of Christianity. They misinterpret the Bible in so many ways.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 1
No, I'm not saying you misrepresented Pascal's wager, however, I just want a citation to where exactly he said to try those three things for one month and see what happens. I had never heard of him coming up with such an idea. It may be a later addition to his wager, as a way to test his wager, but maybe Pascal himself came up with the test. I don't know. All I want is a citation as to where you got the 3 conditions for a month as a test of Pascal's wager.
ReplyDeleteAs for Catholicisim being the only true form of Christiniaty - I didn't say that. I said it's the truest. For example, if one was located at Cheeburger Cheeburger in the Vintage, and wanted to get to willowbrook mall. The most direct route would be to take 249. However, you could also take the feeder road. Or you could go take the feeder to methodist willbrook, go behind and around methodist to reach the academy on 1960 and then to willowbrook mall. Or, if you wanted to avoid feeder roads and 249 all together you could go back to champion forest, drive to 1960 and down to willowbrook mall. In this analogy, 249 is like the Catholic church and all the other routes are like protestant churches. Besides, even the Catholic church acknowledges in Vatican II that some protestant churches have possess the graces necessary to save its members, because ultimately these graces come from God.
As for the Catholic church misinterpreting the Bible in many ways, well, first of all an interpretation is nothing but a reader's opinion of a text. And all of Catholic doctrine can be backed up scripturally from the Bible, so really thats a nonissue here. And I can that Catholicism is the truest form of Christianity because its the church that Jesus Christ established. The Catholic Church has an unbroken line from Jesus Christ to now, with protestant reforms branching off of the line. This seems like the truest form to me - the church started by Jesus.
Also, I know many Catholics well and have had their theological points presented to me so many times (and Protestants ones from Protestants, so I'm not having a one-sided conversation here) that I can even explain what most of protestant-American believes is a "misinterpretation" of the Bible by Catholics. Their arguments make sense - better sense than the ones my protestant friends have made. And Catholic arguments are consistent with the entire Bible, not just parts of it.
-Anonymous 2
P.S.: I never said I wasn't Christian - you just assumed that. Maybe I am, maybe I'm not, but you shouldn't assume that I'm not without good reason, which I don't think I gave.
ReplyDelete-Anonymous 2
If you are a Christian, then I could quote John 15:1-8. Jesus does not declare a particular branch more righteous, but says that they must bare fruit or will be cut off.
ReplyDeleteAs far as all of Catholic doctrine being correct, that is impossible. Just as it is impossible for all of Protestant doctrine to be correct. After all we are dealing with humankind here who messed everything up in the beginning by eating the fruit. That also goes for direct ties to Christ. Jesus didn't really give much stock in lines of ancestry. Read his genealogies in the Gospels. Rahab the prostitute is citing in the one in Matthew, along with Ruth who wasn't an Israelite and was raised under Pagan gods.
As long as man is in control, we're never going to have a church that is good enough. Personally, I don't agree with many of Catholic doctrines, and also some Protestant doctrines. I'm still a Christian though, aren't I? I get treated just the same by God as all other Christians regardless of affiliation to a particular church.
You're example leads me to believe that you mean Catholics have the "quickest route to heaven", is that what you intended for it to convey? just clarifying.
Point taken with the John verse, but that's exactly why I said an interpretation is nothing but an individual's opinion of a text. Anyone can make it sway their way for their purposes. We're humans - we're intelligent creatures.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for the quickest route thing - eh - sortof, they just have the most logical route was more of what I was trying to say.
But I'm not so much concerned with that as I am with the reason for which I originally posted - a citation to that part of Pascal's wager.
-Anonymous 2
I don't know of a specific reference for the latter part of Pascal's Wager, although I do think it acts in accordance to the purpose of his question.
ReplyDelete