What if pascal's wager is false and there is a random probability that you'll end up in hell anyway after you die?

As the number of mutually exclusive gods tends to infinity, the odds of picking the right one tends to zero, and so the benefit.

Though eternity lasts forever, the infintesimal (zero) benefit to believing in any particular god cancels out hell.

if you take into account that you can make up an infinite amount of religions then pascal's wager fails, regardless you lose absolutely nothing by believing (and I mean genuinely believing) in a religion.

>the neil gaiman approach to theology

k
y
s

The difference is that any benefit that religion offers is also offered by agnostic spirituality, without any bullshit to go with it.

As woo-y as a lot of Alan Watts and Bhuddist and Tao philosophy is, when you realize that it is metaphor for subjective experience rather than objective reality, it becomes much more meaningful and much more digestible.

Their cornerstone is that your "self", your ego, whatever you call it, doesn't exist. Rather, its a function of your ability to remember, and created as an abstraction to associate your body and your current state of mind with what's happened in the past. By thoroughly recognizing this, you also recognize that your only existence is the present moment. By eliminating the self, one experiences a kind of insight and union with the universe that old religions called godhead.

The most interesting thing about this is that it has no dogma. Its purely an exploration of one's one experience and insight through it. Close examination and study of your own direct experience and absolute doubt to all things leads one directly to this.

to each his own, bar certain demanding religions you dont lose much and it all comes down to personal preference. Based off of the religions that grow fast such as Mormonism or Islam one can infer that people like a little religion in their religion, a form of strictness and dogma to tell them what to do. I might have expressed the desire and feeling wrong but I feel like I fundamentally got it down

>not defining a more powerful god who doesn't care what you do

I see what you mean, but personally, fuck each to his own. I don't understand why anybody would ever hold themselves to a belief for which there was not reason or logic or evidence, aside from "my mommy and daddy said so" or using it as a form of escapism from their own incomprehensible meaninglessness. There's no evidence, there's no justification, and so they all deserve as much respect as some lunatic running down the street claiming a giant flying spaghetti monster spoke to him.

Yeah, I know I sound like a intolerant, ignorant bastard. But I don't understand why the religious aren't considered the ignorant ones. Its not personal preference. Its about what constitutes a logically justified belief.

heyzeus actually forgave me and I accepted his forgiveness so I can bitch bitches and worship worships and still heaven. Get played scicokid

Nice OPINION poster.
NOT

NOPE

>and so the benefit.
People always forget the cost, losing one of every 7 mornings, or forskin, or $$ etc. All needs to be factored into the equations.

and even if there was such a thing as true randomness, you still would not be making any decisions.

Elaborate.

By focusing on your current self only you undermine all your past success, growth and failures, which leads to your character, which leads to your future actions. If everyone focused on themselves all the time, we would be like monkeys living in a zoo. Christianity on the other hand teaches you to follow Christ and disregard yourself.

Well you can look at the results. Religious people more often than not lead stable lifes, raising families etc.