The Existance Of God :: essays research papers

The Existance Of GodEither God exists or He doesnt. There is no middle ground, and any attempt to remain inert in relation to Gods existence is automatically synonymous with unbelief. It is far from a "moot" question, because if God does exist, then nonhing else really matters if He does not exist, then nothing really matters at all. This is kind of unfortunate for soul like myself, because Ive always lived on that nonexistent middle ground. Until now Ive neer been put in a position where it was questioned. The last couple of geezerhood Ive referred to myself as a recovering Catholic, but never redefined my religion (or deprivation thereof) since then. When I found out I had to take a fend in this reputation one way or another, yes or no, dismal or white, it was unsettling. At that point it became more than a term paper. burn I, with a clear conscience, write a 15 page paper denouncing the existence of God? I kind of cringed as I imagined organism struck down Indian a Jones style, and in that, I had my answer. So without march on adieu, the next 15 pages is me, making my case (I think) for the existence of God. What better home plate to start, than Pascals Wager.Pascals Wager takes this angle You must wager. There is no choice, he says, you be already committed. I liked the example he used of the tilt of the coin, he wants us to see this choice as the gamble that it is. forwards you put your money on either, examine the odds, says Pascal One on side of the coin, heads God exists and there is an immortal heaven to be gained and an eternal Hell to be avoided. On the flip-side of the coin God does not exist, no heaven and hell to look forward to or fear, no rewards and no wrath. Choose God, says Pascal, If you win you win everything if you lose you lose nothing, though the odds are even, the rewards are not. Choose heads and win, and in the words of Willy Wonka, you win the " sniffy and glorious jackpot." Is this true? Is it wrong f or me to take a theists approach to this paper, and barely still disagree with Pascals logic? Pascal says there is a in full and elated life to be won, but isnt there also a full and happy life to be lost, depending on your ideas of full and happy?