The only reason I said it was because that was your only point 'I would rather believe in God and be wrong...... etc.' which is both cowardly and cynical as its not based on any true belief at all. If I spent my entire life fearing an imaginary being and trying to do things I felt would please him on the off chance that he would be upset with me if I didn't then yeah, at the end of it I would feel in worse shape if only because I wouldnt have any self respect left.

You must read more closely, but really it's how you take the statement.  The whole statement revolves around those that don't believe.  As you can see in many of my statements before, that I "DO" believe.  That statement is directed at those that don't, which seems to include you.

I'm making the statement from the point of view of someone that doesn't believe.  Meaning why would a person not believe unless not believing has a reward at the end.  Do you see where I'm coming from now?

Now if believing means eternal life in heaven after, I don't see why someone would not believe unless not believing reaped benefits in the end.  You're starting to make me as confused as you.  I think I'll just believe and reap the fruits of my good deeds and let you wonder what if's for your whole life.

I think I'll leave this religous subject alone now.  At least Awesome had some intriguing thoughts.  Your's seem to be pointless and you seem bitter at the subject that there may be a God and if there is you would be left to burn eternally.

That's all if you believe though, feel me?  You probably don't.  Later man and good luck with life.

Mayor,  I respect your views, and yes, it is okay to believe or not to believe, is there any reward for believing or not believing?  I guess we will only discover that when we are dead.  I don't believe because I choose to use my own mind and the findings so far....God has not been proven to exist, nor do I believe that if there is a god, when I die I wouldn't go to heaven, doesn't god take all good people?  The 'big bang'  however, has been proven by science, hence the birth of our planet, unless  God created the big bang etc etc.  I guess some of us just live by the premise that seeing is believing.

My personal views of God are that, he/she in whichever religion, was created by kings and leaders to keep the masses under control, if we have something to fear by committing crime or sin and the consequences of that is hell and eternal damnation,  it would be far more worrying to some than spending a few years in the slammer, we are therefore less likely to sin if we are believers.

Religion and whether to believe it has a meaning or a reason, or indeed goal for us within our lives is totally up to the individual to decide.  I do respect those that believe in God, that is their choice.  I also choose not to sin, purely because of the consequences I would face on this earth i.e. if I kill someone I would go to jail, if I rob someone...I go to jail.  So just because I don't believe doesn't mean that I am a bad person or someone who sins.  I don't commit crime purely because, A. it isn't in my nature and B. I don't want to spend my life in jail, not because I'm afraid of hell.

I won't say anymore on the subject as it is a subject that could go on for ages and to be honest, I am not sure it is what the creator of this thread intended, or would help them in any way.

I think it's worth mentioning that one cannot choose to believe something. You either do or you don't, as influenced by any number of factors. But one cannot simply decide to stop believing in one thing and start believing in another.

Which is where I find a fatal flaw in Pascal's Wager (though there are indeed others).

Surely though, If I didn't believe in ghosts, but then saw a ghost surely my beliefs would change, so is it not possible in certain circumstances to change your beliefs?

Also, one can 'choose' surely if I choose not to believe in something, it means that I don't believe because I am influenced by the factors and evidence that I see or hear.  It is the factors that give us the choice, surely if it wasn't then I would be told what to believe or not to believe.

I am so confused!

Your beliefs can change, but you can't choose them. For example, if I wake up tomorrow I can't just decide to believe in fairies. I can only be influenced by factors external to my will. Seeing a ghost is an example of such an external factor.

- The Book of Genesis, like much of the old testament, is not a science book. It is a reflection and catalog of man's relationship with God and a people's search for truth. The vast majority of Christians do not believe that Adam and Eve were dropped out the sky- only strict Biblical Creationists deny evolution. I mean, come on, people. The Pope went on record saying that evolution is correct and that all Catholics are encouraged to embrace the particular light that science can shine on certain truths.

- Religion and Science are not mutually exclusive. You do not need to reject all logic and science to pursue religion just as you do not need to reject your religion to appreciate science. Science has been able to offer many truths to humanity, but these truths are amoral. And while science can trace back the beginning of our reckoning to the Big Bang and extrapolate some of the events of the last 10 billion or so years, it will never be able to reveal the cause of existence. The "unmoved mover", to borrow a phrase from Aquinas, which exists outside of time and set the universe in motion. A power that, in man's quest for understanding about his place in the universe, we have termed "God".

Religion and Science have both accomplish wonderful and terrible things in our world, but to cut yourself off from either is to deny the totality of the human experience.

Not being religious does not deny the totality of human experience. Although neither does not being scientific. Science is just a practical method with which we can learn the mechanics of how the universe behaves. If being religious helps you feel good about yourself, then fine. But not everyone needs religion to be happy. But everyone needs science to know how to make an aeroplane.

If we just use faith to try to describe something about the universe, such as the cause of its existence, then we have an infinite number of options to choose from. Yahweh, Allah, Ra, Zeus, Thor, the flying spaghetti monster, a transuniversal scientist, a retroactive causal event, and so on ad. infinitum.

I would argue that mankind's universally unique (as far as we know) ability for spirituality makes it an important part of human existence.

Not everyone needs religion to be happy, but not everyone needs science either. But my point is not to say that one is superior to the other- it's that to choose one is not to inherently reject the other and that both have much to offer.

Spirituality is different to religion.

And science isn't about being happy. Science is about finding the evidence to explain natural phenomena. Which also happens to allow us to do things which can make us happy.

Science has a practical application for everyone. Religion has a practical application for those who need religion for some end. When science and religion clash, because they sometimes do, you need to understand that although religious views make you happy, the scientific views are the more rational. And you're more than welcome to reject reason in preference to happiness; I would. But that does not mean you can claim science to be wrong. Because you'd be wrong, even if happier.

You guys are getting toooo into this lol the creator just needed some help to write a paper lol

And Awesome the Adam and Eve story has already been proven not to be true by a man named Charles Darwin

And why would God approve of incest?

And I never said God didn't exist just because I don't think he threw  people on Earth and said go have wild crazy sex.

So don't put words in my mouth

well you say I don't have much too say on the subject Mayor but that's only because its you who just keeps repeating pascal's wager again and again when I've already pointed out whats wrong with it. Too your other 'point' I'm not bitter, I really don't believe in God, its just your self satisfaction that you're going to 'heaven' that makes you view anything I say through this lense.

I already noted that you're 'putting yourself in the position' of someone who doesn't believe, you think I just didn't read you but I did. I just ignored it because you thinking that it makes sense for someone who doesn't believe to 'choose' to believe in the hope of a reward (even though he doesn't even really believe in that reward) shows how unable you are to empathise with an unbeliever - pascal's wager makes no sense to the believer or the unbeliever. Either you believe or you don't and to try and brainwash yourself into believing something in the hope of reward is just a betrayal of your own intellect.

Baby_FaceNelson, I apologize for my misunderstanding.

And Kates if playing Mafia Returns on the internet, amongst many many other things (basically 99% of what you do) makes you happy then yes you do need science to make you happy.

The point of life is to smoke some weed, get married, have kids, smoke some weed then retire then die