| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" |
| Date: |
13 Jan 2004 04:27:59 PM |
| Object: |
Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), was renowned as the "Father of the Science of
Hydrostatics." He helped to found the principles of hydrodynamics and made
invaluable contributions in the areas of the mathematical treatment of conic
sections, the theory of probability and differential calculus, with the
invention of Pascal's triangle for calculating the coefficients of a
binomial expansion. He also helped in developing the barometer through his
discoveries in fluid mechanics, knows as "Pascal's Principle." He wrote his
Lettres provinciales in 1656-57, and in 1670, his highly influential
religious work, entitled Pensees sur la religion, was published. In it,
Blaise Pascal wrote:
"Men blaspheme what they don't know." - 1670, in Pensees, no. 556. John
Bartlett, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
1855, 1980), p. 300.
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
"How can anyone lose who chooses to become a Christian? If, when he dies,
there turns out to be no God and his faith was in vain, he has lost
nothing - in fact, he has been happier in life than his nonbelieving
friends. If, however, there is a God and a heaven and hell, then he has
gained heaven and his skeptical friends will have lost everything in
ell!" - Wager of Pascal. Henry M. Morris, Men of Science - Men of God (El
Cajon, CA: Master Books, Creation Life Publishers, Inc., 1990), pp. 15-16.
In his work, Thoughts , Letters, and Opuscules, Blaise Pascal declared:
"We know God only through Jesus Christ. Without this Mediator, is taken
away all communication with God; through Jesus Christ we know God. All
those who have pretended to know God, and prove Him without Jesus Christ,
have only had impotent proofs."
But, to prove Jesus Christ we have the prophecies which are good and valid
proofs. And those prophecies, being fulfilled and truly proved by the
event, indicate the certainty of these truths, and therefore the truth of
the divinity of Jesus Christ. In Him, and by Him, then, we know God.
Otherwise, and without Scripture, without original sin, without a necessary
Mediator, we can not absolutely prove God, nor teach a good doctrine and
sound morals."
"But by Jesus Christ and in Jesus Christ, we prove God and teach doctrine
and morals. Jesus Christ, then, is the true God of men. Not only do we
know God only through Jesus Christ, but we know ourselves only through Jesus
Christ."
"We know life, death, only through Jesus Christ. Except by Jesus Christ we
know not what life is, what our death is, what God is, what we ourselves
are. Thus, without Scripture, which has only Jesus Christ for its object,
we know nothing, and we see not only obscurity and confusion in the nature
of God, but in nature herself. Without Jesus Christ, man must be in sin and
misery; with Jesus Christ, man is exempt from sin and misery. In Him is all
our virtue, and all our felicity. Out of Him, there is nothing but sin,
misery, error, darkness, death, and despair." - O.W. Wight, translator from
the French Language, Thoughts, Letters, and Opuscules, pp. 334-335. Stephen
Abbott Northrop, D.D., A Cloud of Witnesses (Portland, OR: American Heritage
Ministries, 1987), p. 352-353.
After His death, Pascal left in his effects this writing:
"The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob," not of
philosophers and scholars." - 1662, in a writing of his found in his
effects after his death. John Bartlett, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations
(Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1855, 1980), p. 300.
See http://michaelnewdow.com for more!
--
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org
Over 60,000 web pages!
John 8:36 reads, "Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free
indeed."
Galatians 5:1 reads, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ
has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."
ICQ#: 20731140
AIM: MrJasonGastrich
YIM: Jesus_Saved_Jason
MSN:
.
|
|
| User: "Cheezits" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 01:59:43 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> spake unto us:
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
Albert Einstein was a brillaiant, Jewish scientist:
"A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy,
education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would
indeeded be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment
and hope of reward after death."
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a
lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal
God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If
something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded
admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal
it."
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm
not sure about the former."
Sue
--
"It's not smart or correct, but it's one of the things that
make us what we are." - Red Green
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Geoff" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 11:20:07 AM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message
news:iCrMb.58716$C87.36515@twister.socal.rr.com...
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Or "Rationalizing the Irrational"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 05:34:06 PM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in news:iCrMb.58716$C87.36515
@twister.socal.rr.com:
<snip>
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Also known as "Fallacy of Exclusion, Textbook Case."
It does, however, lend invaluable insight into the thought process of the
religious, and how some can ignore obvious problems with their irrational
beliefs and yet function, sometimes very well, in what they believe to be
unrelated fields.
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Friar 386sx" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 11:47:37 PM |
|
|
Eric Gill writes:
Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
<snip>
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Also known as "Fallacy of Exclusion, Textbook Case."
It does, however, lend invaluable insight into the thought process of the
religious, and how some can ignore obvious problems with their irrational
beliefs and yet function, sometimes very well, in what they believe to be
unrelated fields.
<snip>
Actually, I think perhaps what Pascal was trying to do was face the problems
head on. If there was anybody who ever ignored obvious problems with their
religious beliefs, it wasn't Pascal; although it is true that in the end he
may have merely tried to resolve a problem with a problem. (Although, in
fairness, it seems that the Pensees were never finished. ;-)
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-3.html
"Who then will blame Christians for not being able to give a reason for
their belief, since they profess a religion for which they cannot give a
reason? They declare, in expounding it to the world, that it is a
foolishness, stultitiam; and then you complain that they do not prove
it! If they proved it, they would not keep their word; it is in lacking
proofs that they are not lacking in sense. 'Yes, but although this
excuses those who offer it as such and takes away from them the blame of
putting it forward without reason, it does not excuse those who receive
it.' Let us then examine this point, and say, 'God is, or He is not.'
But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here.
There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played
at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will
turn up. What will you wager? According to reason, you can do neither
the one thing nor the other; according to reason, you can defend neither
of the propositions."
To him, it was not possible to logically reach the conclusion of "God," so
for Pascal the most persuasive argument, in general, would be that one would
be foolish not play the safest bet.
"Do not, then, reprove for error those who have made a choice; for you
know nothing about it. 'No, but I blame them for having made, not this
choice, but a choice; for again both he who chooses heads and he who
chooses tails are equally at fault, they are both in the wrong. The
true course is not to wager at all.'"
"Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional. ..."
He doesn't tell us why it isn't optional, other than to say things such as
"The heart has its reasons, of which reason knows nothing." And that's a
problem; because anybody could say that about anything, period. Why
Mr. Gastrich would want to use this when the good Dr. apparently believes
there are no logical problems with his religion, I dunno.
--
meme-complex \meem kompleks\, n. The freedom to worship god his way.
"You are perfectly welcome to worship God your way, I will worship Him
His way." -- Roberts
.
|
|
|
| User: "386sx" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 06:24:53 PM |
|
|
Eric Gill writes:
Friar 386sx wrote:
[...]
Actually, I think perhaps what Pascal was trying to do was face the
problems head on. If there was anybody who ever ignored obvious problems
with their religious beliefs, it wasn't Pascal;
Hmm - since the main problem with Pascal's Wager is that of exclusion,
He addresses that too.
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-4.html
"Other religions, as the pagan, are more popular, for they consist in
externals. But they are not for educated people. A purely intellectual
religion would be more suited to the learned, but it would be of no use
to the common people. The Christian religion alone is adapted to all,
being composed of externals and internals. It raises the common people
to the internal, and humbles the proud to the external; it is not
perfect without the two, for the people must understand the spirit of
the letter, and the learned must submit their spirit to the letter."
This is of course chauvinistic nonsense, I agree.
I cannot see how you can form that opinion. Care to elaborate?
He doesn't ignore the problems, he revels in them!
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-4.html
"It is an astounding fact that no canonical writer has ever made use of
nature to prove God. They all strive to make us believe in Him.
David, Solomon, etc., have never said, 'There is no void, therefore
there is a God.' They must have had more knowledge than the most
learned people who came after them, and who have all made use of this
argument. This is worthy of attention."
More nonsense.
--
meme-complex \meem kompleks\, n. The freedom to worship god his way.
"You are perfectly welcome to worship God your way, I will worship Him
His way." -- Roberts
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 06:53:51 PM |
|
|
386sx <386sx@email.com> wrote in
news:m28ykagim6Xx386xX.fsf@jms.localhost.localnet:
Eric Gill writes:
Friar 386sx wrote:
[...]
Actually, I think perhaps what Pascal was trying to do was face the
problems head on. If there was anybody who ever ignored obvious
problems with their religious beliefs, it wasn't Pascal;
Hmm - since the main problem with Pascal's Wager is that of
exclusion,
He addresses that too.
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-4.html
"Other religions, as the pagan, are more popular, for they
consist in externals. But they are not for educated people. A
purely intellectual religion would be more suited to the learned,
but it would be of no use to the common people. The Christian
religion alone is adapted to all, being composed of externals and
internals. It raises the common people to the internal, and
humbles the proud to the external; it is not perfect without the
two, for the people must understand the spirit of the letter, and
the learned must submit their spirit to the letter."
I've seen it. But even if true, this wouldn't apply to the Wager, which
considers none of these things.
This is of course chauvinistic nonsense, I agree.
Yes. A thorough and complete lie, too; Christianity doesn't fulfill that
criteria, either, and there are plenty of pagan religions that have as
strong a claim as it does.
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Wilkins" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 08:42:51 PM |
|
|
Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote:
386sx <386sx@email.com> wrote in
news:m28ykagim6Xx386xX.fsf@jms.localhost.localnet:
Eric Gill writes:
Friar 386sx wrote:
[...]
Actually, I think perhaps what Pascal was trying to do was face the
problems head on. If there was anybody who ever ignored obvious
problems with their religious beliefs, it wasn't Pascal;
Hmm - since the main problem with Pascal's Wager is that of
exclusion,
He addresses that too.
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-4.html
"Other religions, as the pagan, are more popular, for they
consist in externals. But they are not for educated people. A
purely intellectual religion would be more suited to the learned,
but it would be of no use to the common people. The Christian
religion alone is adapted to all, being composed of externals and
internals. It raises the common people to the internal, and
humbles the proud to the external; it is not perfect without the
two, for the people must understand the spirit of the letter, and
the learned must submit their spirit to the letter."
I've seen it. But even if true, this wouldn't apply to the Wager, which
considers none of these things.
This is of course chauvinistic nonsense, I agree.
Yes. A thorough and complete lie, too; Christianity doesn't fulfill that
criteria, either, and there are plenty of pagan religions that have as
strong a claim as it does.
<snip>
In my opinion, the one that has the best claim in that respect is Zen
Buddhism. But now the Wager fails to apply, since the *only* payoff is a
good life/lives
--
John Wilkins
"And this is a damnable doctrine" - Charles Darwin, Autobiography
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gill" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 12:28:06 AM |
|
|
Friar 386sx <386sx@email.com> wrote in
news:m2y8sbdqniXx386xX.fsf@jms.localhost.localnet:
Eric Gill writes:
Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
<snip>
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Also known as "Fallacy of Exclusion, Textbook Case."
It does, however, lend invaluable insight into the thought process of
the religious, and how some can ignore obvious problems with their
irrational beliefs and yet function, sometimes very well, in what
they believe to be unrelated fields.
<snip>
Actually, I think perhaps what Pascal was trying to do was face the
problems head on. If there was anybody who ever ignored obvious
problems with their religious beliefs, it wasn't Pascal;
Hmm - since the main problem with Pascal's Wager is that of exclusion, I
cannot see how you can form that opinion. Care to elaborate?
<snip>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Routerider" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 05:01:57 AM |
|
|
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote...
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
I thought Pascal was Catholic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 05:42:20 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:01:57 +0000 (UTC) in free.christians,
Routerider ("Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com>) said, directing
the reply to free.christians
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote...
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
I thought Pascal was Catholic.
Sort of. A Jansenist, and Jansenists were considered to be heretics by
the RCC though the founder, Jansen considered himself obedient to the
Pope and said so in the work, "Augustinus," (1640) that gave rise to
the sect (he died pre-publication).
More generally, I think it worth pointing out that Pascal did not
consider the wager to be an argument suited to use when attempting to
persuade a sceptic, but rather as something that could bolster the
faith of someone who already believed.
It's also worth noting that Pascal considered that there was a
considerable difference between mere intellectual consent to the idea
of belief in a God, and the "fire in the heart" of the true believer
(tm).
Karen Armstrong in "A History of God" suggests that there are some few
grounds for suspecting that Pascal got the wager idea from Islam, and
if that's so (there's not much evidence, IIRC) it sheds an interesting
light on the equivocation fallacy mentioned in many other replies.
--
"Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You."
- Attrib: Pauline Reage.
Inexpensive VHS & other video to CD/DVD conversion?
See: <http://www.Video2CD.com>. 35.00 gets your video on DVD.
all posts to this email address are automatically deleted without being read.
** atheist poster child #1 ** #442.
.
|
|
|
| User: "386sx" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
15 Jan 2004 07:04:40 AM |
|
|
Therion Ware writes:
[...]
More generally, I think it worth pointing out that Pascal did not consider
the wager to be an argument suited to use when attempting to persuade a
sceptic, but rather as something that could bolster the faith of someone
who already believed.
On the contrary!
http://www.leaderu.com/cyber/books/pensees/pensees-SECTION-3.html
<quotes>
Let them give to reading this some of the hours which they otherwise
employ so uselessly; whatever aversion they may bring to the task, they
will perhaps gain something, and at least will not lose much. But as
for those who bring to the task perfect sincerity and a real desire to
meet with truth, those I hope will be satisfied and convinced of the
proofs of a religion so divine, which I have here collected, and in
which I have followed somewhat after this order...
<snips>
Do not, then, reprove for error those who have made a choice; for you
know nothing about it. [Hypothetical skeptic:] "No, but I blame them
for having made, not this choice, but a choice; for again both he who
chooses heads and he who chooses tails are equally at fault, they are
both in the wrong. The true course is not to wager at all."
Yes; but you must wager. It is not optional.
</quotes>
I don't think he ever explains why it's "not optional."
[...]
--
meme-complex \meem kompleks\, n. The freedom to worship god his way.
"You are perfectly welcome to worship God your way, I will worship Him
His way." -- Roberts
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "rogue" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
15 Jan 2004 03:16:31 PM |
|
|
"Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message news:<iCrMb.58716$C87.36515@twister.socal.rr.com>...
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), was renowned as the "Father of the Science of
Hydrostatics." He helped to found the principles of hydrodynamics and made
invaluable contributions in the areas of the mathematical treatment of conic
sections, the theory of probability and differential calculus, with the
invention of Pascal's triangle for calculating the coefficients of a
binomial expansion. He also helped in developing the barometer through his
discoveries in fluid mechanics, knows as "Pascal's Principle." He wrote his
Lettres provinciales in 1656-57, and in 1670, his highly influential
religious work, entitled Pensees sur la religion, was published. In it,
Blaise Pascal wrote:
"Men blaspheme what they don't know." - 1670, in Pensees, no. 556. John
Bartlett, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
1855, 1980), p. 300.
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
<snipped the logical fallacy that is "Pascal's Wager"
JERRY
Hi Jason,
I know you look down on "cut and paste jobs" (which is very silly in
your case since you simply post a long list of URL's you haven't read
that don't help your case at all and expect me to read them and rebut
them for you) but this I feel is too good for you to miss.
Pascal's Wager
"God can't be proved. But if God exists, the believer gains everything
(heaven) and the unbeliever loses everything (hell). If God doesn't
exist,
the believer loses nothing and the unbeliever gains nothing. There is
therefore everything to gain and nothing to lose by believing in God."
This argument, first formulated by French philosopher Blaise Pascal,
is
sheer intimidation. It is not a case for a god's existence: it is an
argument for belief, based on irrational fear. With this kind of
reasoning
we should simply pick the religion with the worst hell.
It is not true that the believer loses nothing. We diminish this life
by
preferring the myth of an afterlife, and we sacrifice honesty to the
maintenance of a lie. Religion demands time, energy and money,
draining
valuable human resources from the improvement of this world. Religious
conformity, a tool of tyrants, is a threat to freedom.
Nor is it true that the unbeliever gains nothing. Rejecting religion
can be
a positive liberating experience, gaining perspective and freedom of
inquiry. Freethinkers have always been in the forefront of social and
moral
progress.
What kind of person would eternally torment an honest doubter? If
their god
is so unjust, then theists are in as much danger as atheists. Perhaps
god
will get a perverted thrill from changing his mind and damning
everyone,
believers and unbelievers alike. Or, inverting the gamble, perhaps god
will
only save those who have enough courage not to believe!
Pascal was a Catholic and assumed that the existence of god meant the
Christian God. However, the Islamic Allah might be the true god, which
turns
Pascal's wager into a riskier gamble than intended.
In any case, a belief in a deity based on fear is not a belief that
produces
admiration. It does not follow that such a being deserves to be
worshipped.
From
http://www.ffrf.org/lfif/refute.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thore Schmechtig" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 04:59:27 PM |
|
|
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Indeed, famous for his logical error.
His "reasoning" fits any faith of the world. If we were to follow is
wager, we just would have to pick the faith with the worst "hell" for
the unbelievers. Contrary to what "christians" delude themselves into,
Pascal's wager is useless to them.
UNWRITTEN RULES OF (PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN) FUNDAMENTALISM
1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical,
psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
4a. Specific example for 4.: Cry for "freedom of religion", but
whenever followers of other faiths want the same freedom and courts
agree, scream "Persecution!"
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of God's personal plan for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to God himself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of God's plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of Gods will
for
the betterment of mankind.
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information
in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as left wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything unless you purport to
forgive on behalf of other people unconnected with you for whom you
don't
have that right anyhow.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Louann Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 09:34:08 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:59:27 +0000 (UTC), "Thore Schmechtig"
<WRITETOcommoner@carcosa.de> wrote:
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Indeed, famous for his logical error.
His "reasoning" fits any faith of the world. If we were to follow is
wager, we just would have to pick the faith with the worst "hell" for
the unbelievers. Contrary to what "christians" delude themselves into,
Pascal's wager is useless to them.
Sometimes summarized as Homer's Rebuttal: "What if we picked the wrong
religion? Every week, we're just making God madder and madder."
--
The full text of the 2003 evolution debate between Nowhere Man and Lilith
can be found at http://www.geocities.com/chastity403/debate/nm-lilith-1/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cheezits" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 01:39:31 PM |
|
|
[Dr. Jason's pet newsgroup deleted because my server doesn't recognize it]
"Thore Schmechtig" <WRITETOcommoner@carcosa.de> wrote:
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Indeed, famous for his logical error.
His "reasoning" fits any faith of the world. If we were to follow is
wager, we just would have to pick the faith with the worst "hell" for
the unbelievers.
Or the one the promises the best rewards: "Eternal life? Shoot, our
religion will give you eternal life, free beer, and season tickets to every
football game ever played! What have you got to lose?"
Pascal's Wager is just a way for Christians to feel good about believing
something that they probably suspect, deep down inside, to be pure fantasy.
And I haven't seen much evidence that they really *are* happier than non-
Christians. I certainly wasn't happy when I was one.
Sue (not into wagering)
--
"It's not smart or correct, but it's one of the things that
make us what we are." - Red Green
.
|
|
|
| User: "phy" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Feb 2004 11:41:36 AM |
|
|
Cheezits <cheezits32@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:Xns947095E38FD87cheezitsnetzeronet@129.250.170.85:
"Thore Schmechtig" <WRITETOcommoner@carcosa.de> wrote:
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
Indeed, famous for his logical error.
His "reasoning" fits any faith of the world. If we were to follow is
wager, we just would have to pick the faith with the worst "hell" for
the unbelievers.
Or the one the promises the best rewards: "Eternal life? Shoot, our
religion will give you eternal life, free beer, and season tickets to
every football game ever played! What have you got to lose?"
That is why I am a Subgenius. Plus, it is the only religion with a triple
your money back guarantee. Plus sex goddessess...
-phy
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Wise" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 08:17:10 PM |
|
|
Ah, yes, "Pascal's Wager". Years ago in a face-to-face conversation
with a creationist, he offered practically no defense nor comment to
the several creation-science errors I asked him about. Then he hit me
with what he thought would blow me away: "after-life insurance",
Pascal's Wager dressed up as a car insurance analogy. Since I was
familiar with the Wager, I was able to point out the several things
wrong with his argument, namely that we are being asked to pay
outrageously exorbinant premiums on a policy that will only pay off in
the most improbable circumstances -- using his car insurance analogy,
it would only pay if you were hit by a green Edsel -- on the
northbound side of the Santa Ana Freeway -- while it was exceeding the
speed limit -- backing up -- at night -- with its lights off -- being
driven by a one-armed Lithuanian midget.
You can read my page on that encounter and discussing the Wager at
http://members.aol.com/dwise1/cre_ev/wager.html .
Share and enjoy.
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <news@jcsm.org> wrote in message news:<iCrMb.58716$C87.36515@twister.socal.rr.com>...
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), was renowned as the "Father of the Science of
Hydrostatics." He helped to found the principles of hydrodynamics and made
invaluable contributions in the areas of the mathematical treatment of conic
sections, the theory of probability and differential calculus, with the
invention of Pascal's triangle for calculating the coefficients of a
binomial expansion. He also helped in developing the barometer through his
discoveries in fluid mechanics, knows as "Pascal's Principle." He wrote his
Lettres provinciales in 1656-57, and in 1670, his highly influential
religious work, entitled Pensees sur la religion, was published. In it,
Blaise Pascal wrote:
"Men blaspheme what they don't know." - 1670, in Pensees, no. 556. John
Bartlett, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
1855, 1980), p. 300.
Blaise Pascal was well-known for his famous "Wager of Pascal":
"How can anyone lose who chooses to become a Christian? If, when he dies,
there turns out to be no God and his faith was in vain, he has lost
nothing - in fact, he has been happier in life than his nonbelieving
friends. If, however, there is a God and a heaven and hell, then he has
gained heaven and his skeptical friends will have lost everything in
ell!" - Wager of Pascal. Henry M. Morris, Men of Science - Men of God (El
Cajon, CA: Master Books, Creation Life Publishers, Inc., 1990), pp. 15-16.
In his work, Thoughts , Letters, and Opuscules, Blaise Pascal declared:
"We know God only through Jesus Christ. Without this Mediator, is taken
away all communication with God; through Jesus Christ we know God. All
those who have pretended to know God, and prove Him without Jesus Christ,
have only had impotent proofs."
But, to prove Jesus Christ we have the prophecies which are good and valid
proofs. And those prophecies, being fulfilled and truly proved by the
event, indicate the certainty of these truths, and therefore the truth of
the divinity of Jesus Christ. In Him, and by Him, then, we know God.
Otherwise, and without Scripture, without original sin, without a necessary
Mediator, we can not absolutely prove God, nor teach a good doctrine and
sound morals."
"But by Jesus Christ and in Jesus Christ, we prove God and teach doctrine
and morals. Jesus Christ, then, is the true God of men. Not only do we
know God only through Jesus Christ, but we know ourselves only through Jesus
Christ."
"We know life, death, only through Jesus Christ. Except by Jesus Christ we
know not what life is, what our death is, what God is, what we ourselves
are. Thus, without Scripture, which has only Jesus Christ for its object,
we know nothing, and we see not only obscurity and confusion in the nature
of God, but in nature herself. Without Jesus Christ, man must be in sin and
misery; with Jesus Christ, man is exempt from sin and misery. In Him is all
our virtue, and all our felicity. Out of Him, there is nothing but sin,
misery, error, darkness, death, and despair." - O.W. Wight, translator from
the French Language, Thoughts, Letters, and Opuscules, pp. 334-335. Stephen
Abbott Northrop, D.D., A Cloud of Witnesses (Portland, OR: American Heritage
Ministries, 1987), p. 352-353.
After His death, Pascal left in his effects this writing:
"The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, the God of Jacob," not of
philosophers and scholars." - 1662, in a writing of his found in his
effects after his death. John Bartlett, Bartlett's Familiar Quotations
(Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1855, 1980), p. 300.
See http://michaelnewdow.com for more!
--
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org
Over 60,000 web pages!
John 8:36 reads, "Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free
indeed."
Galatians 5:1 reads, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ
has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."
ICQ#: 20731140
AIM: MrJasonGastrich
YIM: Jesus_Saved_Jason
MSN:
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "R. Dunno" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 06:14:09 PM |
|
|
Dr. Jason Gastrich <news@jcsm.org> wrote:
[snip Pascal's Wager]
Yeah, but if you're in the game because of Pascal's Wager, you're in
because of reward, not belief.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 08:36:13 PM |
|
|
Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
<snip history of Pascal's Wager>
See http://michaelnewdow.com for more!
Jason,
You won't see this 'cause you've got me killfiled; but perhaps
others would be intrigued to learn that Jason has quoted from
Michael Newdow's site about the Founders of the US of A.
Curiously, Blaise Pascal is listed (along with other
non-Founders) as a Founder of the US of A. Blaise, of course,
was a brilliant, if decidedly odd, man. A Frenchman. Who lived
over 100 years before the Declaration of Independence.
But then again, Mr. Newdow has to come up with a Founder a Week
who he can quote (or quotemine) as supporting his proposition
that the US of A is a Christian nation, and ought to formally
recognize that. Nice man, huh?
Tom McDonald
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tom McDonald" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
13 Jan 2004 08:40:39 PM |
|
|
Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
<snip>
See http://michaelnewdow.com for more!
Whoops. My mistake. Jason is responsible for the web page, and
hosts it on his oft-flacked site.
Michael Newdow is the atheist who wants to get the recent
addition (during the McCarthy years) 'under God' taken out of the
Pledge of Allegiance, to make it read as it did when it was
originally adopted.
Sorry.
Tom McDonald
.
|
|
|
| User: "David" |
|
| Title: Re: Blaise Pascal (Yep, You Guessed It) |
14 Jan 2004 12:27:47 AM |
|
|
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote:
Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
Blaise Pascal was a brilliant, Christian scientist.
<snip>
See http://michaelnewdow.com for more!
Whoops. My mistake. Jason is responsible for the web page, and
hosts it on his oft-flacked site.
Michael Newdow is the atheist who wants to get the recent
addition (during the McCarthy years) 'under God' taken out of the
Pledge of Allegiance, to make it read as it did when it was
originally adopted.
Well I wonder what Jason's motive could be for slandering Michael Newdow
(sarcasm off).
Pascal was a founding father? Jason you have so many to choose from,
can't you put a few more 'real' founding fathers on that site to make it
look legitimate? A reasonable person would assume you are picking random
people out of the encylopedia.
Also shouldn't you be picking Christians to be making your point? Or is
your point to display your ignorance to the world? It's enough to make
anyone think your book is a pile of .....pick your foul smell.....
David
.
|
|
|
| User: "dave e" |
|
| Title: famous non-Christian founders |
13 Feb 2004 04:30:26 PM |
|
|
(David) wrote in message news:<1g7iznf.1upakdq6ukh1sN%>...
Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2672@nohormelcharter.net> wrote:
Well I wonder what Jason's motive could be for slandering Michael Newdow
(sarcasm off).
Pascal was a founding father? Jason you have so many to choose from,
can't you put a few more 'real' founding fathers on that site to make it
look legitimate? A reasonable person would assume you are picking random
people out of the encylopedia.
Also shouldn't you be picking Christians to be making your point? Or is
your point to display your ignorance to the world? It's enough to make
anyone think your book is a pile of .....pick your foul smell.....
David
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that 95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
.
|
|
|
| User: "Routerider" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
13 Feb 2004 04:57:39 PM |
|
|
"dave e" <dgenglish@hotmail.com> wrote...
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that 95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
I'm blown away [at Jason's ability to deceive himself] by the fact that
Jason categorizes Thomas Paine as a Bible believing Christian. Trust me
though, there are honest Christians out there...and I find them so
respectable because they are able to retain their faith w/o resorting to
deception and dishonesty. I know that some of our founding fathers were
Christian, some were Deists and/or "religious" in nature.
Maybe Jason will show us how he can be honest. I ask each and every one of
you to read some writings of Paine and decide whether Paine "trusted" the
Bible as the authority on God and whether Paine believed Christ was God. Go
ahead, read for yourself:
An essay from Paine
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/dream.htm
Another essay entitled "Biblical Blasphemy"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/essay2.htm
Another essay about Biblical prophecies:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/proph.htm
Uncle Davey, I'm curious what you think...very curious.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Davey" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
13 Feb 2004 07:22:05 PM |
|
|
Użytkownik "Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:BO2dnX71w43ly7DdRVn-ug@comcast.com...
"dave e" <dgenglish@hotmail.com> wrote...
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that 95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
I'm blown away [at Jason's ability to deceive himself] by the fact that
Jason categorizes Thomas Paine as a Bible believing Christian. Trust me
though, there are honest Christians out there...and I find them so
respectable because they are able to retain their faith w/o resorting to
deception and dishonesty. I know that some of our founding fathers were
Christian, some were Deists and/or "religious" in nature.
Maybe Jason will show us how he can be honest. I ask each and every one
of
you to read some writings of Paine and decide whether Paine "trusted" the
Bible as the authority on God and whether Paine believed Christ was God.
Go
ahead, read for yourself:
An essay from Paine
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/dream.htm
Another essay entitled "Biblical Blasphemy"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/essay2.htm
Another essay about Biblical prophecies:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/proph.htm
Uncle Davey, I'm curious what you think...very curious.
I think I've said all along that it matters little to me, as a European,
what the US founders thought, other than general knowledge.
It wouldn't make the Gospel any less valid if the founders of the US had all
been muslim Pakistanis.
Uncle Davey
.
|
|
|
| User: "Routerider" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
13 Feb 2004 08:29:09 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
news:c0jtko$472$0@pita.alt.net...
Użytkownik "Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:BO2dnX71w43ly7DdRVn-ug@comcast.com...
"dave e" <dgenglish@hotmail.com> wrote...
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that 95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
I'm blown away [at Jason's ability to deceive himself] by the fact that
Jason categorizes Thomas Paine as a Bible believing Christian. Trust me
though, there are honest Christians out there...and I find them so
respectable because they are able to retain their faith w/o resorting to
deception and dishonesty. I know that some of our founding fathers were
Christian, some were Deists and/or "religious" in nature.
Maybe Jason will show us how he can be honest. I ask each and every one
of
you to read some writings of Paine and decide whether Paine "trusted"
the
Bible as the authority on God and whether Paine believed Christ was God.
Go
ahead, read for yourself:
An essay from Paine
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/dream.htm
Another essay entitled "Biblical Blasphemy"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/essay2.htm
Another essay about Biblical prophecies:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/proph.htm
Uncle Davey, I'm curious what you think...very curious.
I think I've said all along that it matters little to me, as a European,
what the US founders thought, other than general knowledge.
It wouldn't make the Gospel any less valid if the founders of the US had
all
been muslim Pakistanis.
Uncle Davey
Exactly, but some American Christians NEED to be able to say "Our country
was founded by Bible believing Christians"...they think that make some sort
of difference.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Leonard Caillouet" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
13 Feb 2004 08:39:08 PM |
|
|
"Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Ge6dnbP2JJuXFbDdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
Exactly, but some American Christians NEED to be able to say "Our country
was founded by Bible believing Christians"...they think that make some
sort
of difference.
So are you saying that there was not a mostly Christian perspective among
the founders of our nation? That is as extreme as much of the *****
propogated by the religious right. Why can't we accept that Christianity in
many variants has had a great impact on our society and still respect the
rights of those who follow a different path? Why is there so much
intolerance and denial among those who criticize Christians for trying to
force their perspective upon the rest of us?
Leonard Caillouet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
14 Feb 2004 12:48:16 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:29:09 -0500, "Routerider"
<oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
news:c0jtko$472$0@pita.alt.net...
Użytkownik "Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:BO2dnX71w43ly7DdRVn-ug@comcast.com...
"dave e" <dgenglish@hotmail.com> wrote...
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that 95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
I'm blown away [at Jason's ability to deceive himself] by the fact that
Jason categorizes Thomas Paine as a Bible believing Christian. Trust me
though, there are honest Christians out there...and I find them so
respectable because they are able to retain their faith w/o resorting to
deception and dishonesty. I know that some of our founding fathers were
Christian, some were Deists and/or "religious" in nature.
Maybe Jason will show us how he can be honest. I ask each and every one
of
you to read some writings of Paine and decide whether Paine "trusted"
the
Bible as the authority on God and whether Paine believed Christ was God.
Go
ahead, read for yourself:
An essay from Paine
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/dream.htm
Another essay entitled "Biblical Blasphemy"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/essay2.htm
Another essay about Biblical prophecies:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/proph.htm
Uncle Davey, I'm curious what you think...very curious.
I think I've said all along that it matters little to me, as a European,
what the US founders thought, other than general knowledge.
It wouldn't make the Gospel any less valid if the founders of the US had
all
been muslim Pakistanis.
Uncle Davey
Exactly, but some American Christians NEED to be able to say "Our country
was founded by Bible believing Christians"...they think that make some sort
of difference.
RR,
Men who doubt themselves and what they know quote men. Men who know
God and His Word, quote the Word,
As Davey said, what the founder's believed has no affect on the
Gospel. In this country what they believed is used to tear apart the
Consitution by changing it from a static to a living document that can
be changed by the courts.
BB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Leonard Caillouet" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
14 Feb 2004 10:14:21 AM |
|
|
"Bible Bob" <biblebob@saintly.com> wrote in message
news:rvgr20hnbki2mq8emqqhk9kfg6sr2rkbcg@4ax.com...
Men who doubt themselves and what they know quote men. Men who know
God and His Word, quote the Word,
Hardly. The Word that you attribute to God is so much the work of men that
you have to be conpletely deluded to take it for anything more than inspired
metaphor and prose. I think it show disrepspect for God to presume that you
know and understand His intent and meaning so precisely. Those who do not
doubt themselves are indeed fools and I suspect would be a good laugh for
your God. Those of us who have respect for the great mysteries of creation
and for the God who may be recognize the value in the wisdom of men, just as
we have perspective on the value of the Bible.
As Davey said, what the founder's believed has no affect on the
Gospel. In this country what they believed is used to tear apart the
Consitution by changing it from a static to a living document that can
be changed by the courts.
And what makes you think that the founders intended the Constitution to be
static? Why would the process for amendment and prosecution of its intent
be so explicitly defined to allow for interpretation and change? Your
arguments are thin, BB, and hold water only for those with faith of your
particular persuasion, not even for others who believe slightly differently
in the Bible that you seem to think you have the only valid interpretation
of.
Leonard Caillouet
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "dave e" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
15 Feb 2004 08:46:33 PM |
|
|
Bible Bob <biblebob@saintly.com> wrote in message news:<rvgr20hnbki2mq8emqqhk9kfg6sr2rkbcg@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:29:09 -0500, "Routerider"
<oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
Men who doubt themselves and what they know quote men. Men who know
God and His Word, quote the Word,
As Davey said, what the founder's believed has no affect on the
Gospel. In this country what they believed is used to tear apart the
Consitution by changing it from a static to a living document that can
be changed by the courts.
BB
ALL written documents are "living" documents, in that each new person
who reads them takes away a subtly different meaning. The farther you
are (in time and cultural context) from the people who wrote the text,
the more significantly different your interpretation becomes.
There is no such thing as "universal literal interpretation" of any
written material.
Dave
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Davey" |
|
| Title: Re: famous non-Christian founders |
14 Feb 2004 04:28:17 AM |
|
|
Użytkownik "Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:Ge6dnbP2JJuXFbDdRVn-gw@comcast.com...
"Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com> wrote in message
news:c0jtko$472$0@pita.alt.net...
Użytkownik "Routerider" <oneznzeroz@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w
wiadomości
news:BO2dnX71w43ly7DdRVn-ug@comcast.com...
"dave e" <dgenglish@hotmail.com> wrote...
I too wondered what any of the people on his (badly misnamed) list
of
Christian founders have in common. Well, other than the fact that
95%
of them are men of European descent. And an astounding number of
them
were active Freemasons (Is Jason Gastrich secretly a member of the
Illuminati?).
So I did a Google search, and discovered one thing that at least
seven
of the people on the list have in common: At least seven of them
are
profiled on the infidel.com website as historically important
non-Christians
Paine, Franklin, Jefferson, Lincoln and Grant are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/john_remsburg/six_historic_americans/intro.html
John Adams and James Madison are profiled here:
http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/extra/founding-fathers.html
Dave
I'm blown away [at Jason's ability to deceive himself] by the fact
that
Jason categorizes Thomas Paine as a Bible believing Christian. Trust
me
though, there are honest Christians out there...and I find them so
respectable because they are able to retain their faith w/o resorting
to
deception and dishonesty. I know that some of our founding fathers
were
Christian, some were Deists and/or "religious" in nature.
Maybe Jason will show us how he can be honest. I ask each and every
one
of
you to read some writings of Paine and decide whether Paine "trusted"
the
Bible as the authority on God and whether Paine believed Christ was
God.
Go
ahead, read for yourself:
An essay from Paine
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/dream.htm
Another essay entitled "Biblical Blasphemy"
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/essay2.htm
Another essay about Biblical prophecies:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/paine/proph.htm
Uncle Davey, I'm curious what you think...very curious.
I think I've said all along that it matters little to me, as a European,
what the US founders thought, other than general knowledge.
It wouldn't make the Gospel any less valid if the founders of the US had
all
been muslim Pakistanis.
Uncle Davey
Exactly, but some American Christians NEED to be able to say "Our country
was founded by Bible believing Christians"...they think that make some
sort
of difference.
I'm afraid that one thing that does make a very big difference to your
country is the masonic involvement in all institutions from the get-go.
These weren't the ones doing the forty-niner trek across the desert and
founding california, they were the ones sitting back and laughing while
others did their dirty work.
The skulls you can still find in the deserts of Nevada aren't illuminati
skulls, that's for sure. They would have been working out what they were
gonna pay for those nuggets if those other skulls had ever found them.
And so the West was won.
Uncle Davey
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
