Only Nontheists go to heaven
Posted: Sun May 21, 2006 2:26 am
This is most likely a fairly well known to you guys, but the original argument is here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... eaven.html
The argument was created as a counterargument to Pascal's Wager, and in a nuttshell, it says this:
- Only truly morally good people go to heaven
- Only people who try to find out the truth (as opposed to believing by opportunism ala "nothing to lose") are truly morally upstanding
- Therefore, only critical, intellectual theists and critical, intellectual nontheists meet the initial qualifications for going to heaven.
- This world is a test for who is actually good enough for going to heaven
- God is either evil, or he doesnt exist
- If god is evil, then a good person would reject worshipping such a diety
- Therefore, only people who, through logical reasoning, reject worship of this evil diety as is presented in the bible will gain admittance to heaven as decided by the true, good, non-biblical god (i.e. the bible is a test, in which god is intentionally depicted as evil)
So we established that the only way to gain access to heaven is by rejecting the Christian god. It doesnt say anything about rejection of non-Christian dieties. Wouldnt rejection of the Christian god lend validity to other dieties? Can we find similar arguments for other religions? If so, did the "true" god put ALL these religions out as a test, or is there actually one true religion already out there?
Basically, this argument has one identical fundamental flaw as Pascal's Wager: it assumes that there is only Christianity.
Interesting sidenote: As is presented here, the "true god" that made Christianity as the test for morally good people does NOT require belief in him for admittance to blissful eternity. All that is required is rejection of Christianity. Although this seems paradox in itself, it can be explained pretty easily: Since the original required quality is rationality, and this "true god" as presented did not provide us with proof of his existance, belief in him would be purely unempirical, which would likely be rejected by a rational being. Would belief in the "true god" therefore exclude one again from heaven, or could existance of this "true god" follow logically?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... eaven.html
The argument was created as a counterargument to Pascal's Wager, and in a nuttshell, it says this:
- Only truly morally good people go to heaven
- Only people who try to find out the truth (as opposed to believing by opportunism ala "nothing to lose") are truly morally upstanding
- Therefore, only critical, intellectual theists and critical, intellectual nontheists meet the initial qualifications for going to heaven.
- This world is a test for who is actually good enough for going to heaven
- God is either evil, or he doesnt exist
- If god is evil, then a good person would reject worshipping such a diety
- Therefore, only people who, through logical reasoning, reject worship of this evil diety as is presented in the bible will gain admittance to heaven as decided by the true, good, non-biblical god (i.e. the bible is a test, in which god is intentionally depicted as evil)
So we established that the only way to gain access to heaven is by rejecting the Christian god. It doesnt say anything about rejection of non-Christian dieties. Wouldnt rejection of the Christian god lend validity to other dieties? Can we find similar arguments for other religions? If so, did the "true" god put ALL these religions out as a test, or is there actually one true religion already out there?
Basically, this argument has one identical fundamental flaw as Pascal's Wager: it assumes that there is only Christianity.
Interesting sidenote: As is presented here, the "true god" that made Christianity as the test for morally good people does NOT require belief in him for admittance to blissful eternity. All that is required is rejection of Christianity. Although this seems paradox in itself, it can be explained pretty easily: Since the original required quality is rationality, and this "true god" as presented did not provide us with proof of his existance, belief in him would be purely unempirical, which would likely be rejected by a rational being. Would belief in the "true god" therefore exclude one again from heaven, or could existance of this "true god" follow logically?