As Above, So Below - the religion thread (formerly: People of California, beware)

I still think it's still the same from a different perspective. You are talking about illogicalities, but I think, as I put many times in this thread and other religious discussion, there is no logical fallacy for a person who agrees with what is assumed.

Pascal lived in the 17th Century, when hardly any intellectual was rejecting the existence of God. God's existence was as obvious as the fact that 2 + 3 = 5 (a favourite Cartesian example, this and the fact that the sum of the angles in a triangle is equal to two right angles; he repeats those almost obsessively). One of the 18th Century biggest French rationalists Voltaire reputedly seriously believed in the existence of witches, though didn't believe in God's prevalent presence in everyday life (he didn't reject God's existence at all - "the clock needs its maker"). There are things we regard as obvious and any logical fallacy is about the assumption we take. God is obvious as basic math. Or not. This, really, is what we are discussing here.

An example of heavily logical interpretation of reality with assuming God's existence is the culture of Middle Ages. Everything was connected (and again, with logics put almost to a fault there!) to the fact that God created the world in a very specific way. God was the perfect Artist who created a perfect world (knowing that somewhere until the Romanticism, art was regarded as the highest craft possible - that's the original meaning of the Latin ars and Greek tekhne anyway, this may be present even in Voltaire's defense of God's existence!), spoilt by humans after Eve's sin. Earth wasn't only the CENTER of the universe, but the lowest POINT of it - above the Moon (a symbol of human passing, lots of meanings here). Sun was in the middle of the world, that is what made it so special. Above Earth, the four Elements and the Moon, the world still had God's perfect harmony and project. On Earth, humans destroyed that by becoming self-aware.

Here a point, not sure if discussed by medieval theologians AND philosophers. When God created the world, everything was His creation, including the Serpent which led to humanity's demise. Also the tree. Human being, created by God as the perfect being, representing him in the Garden of Eden. Assuming that, we have to also assume that God knew his prohibition will be broken. Becoming aware of good and evil (thus, deciding on their own fate!), being given mortality and pain, constitued human existence in the world. It doesn't mean that we are defined as being mortal and full of pain in life (that was the part of the bargain), but that gave us the responsibility - also if not prevalently moral responsibility - for our lives. Here I am in complete agreement with atheists. A human being is completely responsible for his own deeds. Even if I believe in God, I don't believe he will live my life for me. As much as I accepted Pascal's wager, I also can't reject the atheist wager and I seriously believe they can be accepted at the same time!