Please do tell us which religions have the most evidence-just the top 5 would be sufficient, but 10 would be great!
… where “cultural hearsay” is the only “evidence.” Your culture’s hearsay.
Nah. Pascal isn’t forcing you to do anything. You are doing what your culture has taught you to do, and you are using some re-written form of Pascal’s wager to convince yourself that it’s necessary.
In my opinion: Judaism and Christianity are in a league of their own. Islam and Mormonisn (this is just a guess) are next since they at least offer the “could an illiterate person write such a book?” argument.
And then all other religions (I am not an expert in religions, as this post will make you aware.)
Most of us were aware of that fact by the time you made your third post, but thanks for the timely reminder.
What evidence do you believe exists for Judiasm and Christianity that does not exist for other religions?
In one sentence: What, in your opinion, is the greatest flaw in pascal’s wager?
(I will be back 2morow. Got to run.)
I am sure it’s a complete coincidence that he finds the religions he is most familiar with to be the most likely.
Since you have yet to show that you even understand what Pascal’s Wager is, I don’t see why I should bother.
The greatest flaw (though not the only one) is that it’s predicated on a false dichotomy. it presumes only two choices when there are actually infinite choices.
It also makes unsupported assumptions about the risks/rewards of those choices (the reality is that no information about the risk/reward of any choice is known).
And, of course, it presumes that belief is volitional. I know you say that belief is not required to practice a religion, but that’s a Jewish position. Some other religions (Christianity, I’m looking at you) are not as sensible and require actual belief above all.
Which, of course, was pointed out starting in post #2.
Remembering Einstein’s definition of insanity, I think I’ll just bow out of any further discussion of this topic with you, abele derer.
It reminds me of my father asserting once that the King James Version was the best translation of the Bible; his confidence was not bothered by the fact that he’d never read any other translation.
Can he read the original languages? By what metric does he believe he can judge the quality of a translation?
Oh, you’ll be back 
No, I won’t!
Damn!:smack:
He would say his metric is divine revelation. Well, he’d phrase it as being led by the Holy Spirit. No, make that Holy Ghost – he has an odd opposition to the former term.
And no, he cannot read Greek or Aramaic. His true method relies on his arrogance and self-righteousness.
Neither my Rabbi nor any of my Hebrew School teachers ever said that I was going to have a better afterlife for being Jewish. None of them said I was going to have a worse afterlife for eating lobster. I was in a Conservative shul, on the Reform side, so none of my friends kept Kosher. A privilege? I was born into it, and luckily my grandparents and great-grandparents left Russia and Germany long enough ago so that my parents didn’t have to die for the privilege. And I’m not of the priestly tribe.
I’m not complaining. God may not exist, but Jewish history does exist, (though not back to Moses) and that is good enough for me.
The variant of the Wager saying you should believe in the nastiest god is extortion. If there is a god who punishes nonbelievers despite creating a world where nonbelief is the only logical option, I’m quite willing to tell him to go screw himself after I’m dead and suffer the consequences. Any God who I’d like to stick around with in heaven would be outraged at the thought of this. And the Wager doesn’t work if none of the gods up for consideration care if you believe or not.
in order to reach pascal’s conclusions, one must already believe the very thing he is attempting to convince us is rational.
All you have to accept is that there is at least tiny, tiny amount of evidence for the truth of at least one of the religions.
*“Non-belief is the only logical option.” * You haven’t taken the time to look at the evidence; you haven’t, I presume, read through the Bible. You haven’t evenly applied your uber-skepticism that you apply to Jewish history which you claim doesn’t go back to Moses, when studying biblical criticism. Why? Why when it comes to our unanimous national history, you find it to be false. And when you read biblical criticism - i.e., that Moses didn’t write the Torah - you shut down all your skepticism. Indeed, why do you think that Moses didn’t write the Torah?
I’m quite willing to tell him to go screw himself. You sound very brave and full of bravado. But you aren’t being realistic. To give up an infinite afterlife simply because you think that God is not fair, is silly. Where else are you so brave? Did you fight in the military? Are you a cop, or a fireman? No, because you are a pussy-cat. And I don’t blame you for being a pussy-cat. But be honest with yourself.
Also, I don’t really care whether your conservative/reform rabbi said this or that. I’m too skeptical to take whatever they have to say on mere whim.