Zenarchy wrote:
> Pascal's Wager makes at least five assumptions:
> >>1) God rewards virtuous behavior.
> >>2) Faith is virtuous.
>
> 3. Only one god exists (or does not exist).
>
> 4. God accepts, recognizes, or acknowledges Pascal's Wager (i.e., "to choose
> to believe") as true belief rather than as blasphemous cunning deserving of
> punishment.
>
> 5. (a) The spiritual gambler prefers a surprise heaven to an anticipated
> oblivion.
> (b) The gambler dreads a surprise hell more than an anticipated oblivion.
>
> Moses, Jesus Christ, and Mohammed seem somewhat cheap, only providing one
> god among them. Krishna, in contrast, provided many gods, take your pick.
> A Super Intelligence (or a Lao Tzu, or a Siddhartha Gautama) wins Pascal's
> Wager by becoming a god.
>
Really? Then why did jesus say "My father has many houses...". While I'm not an adherent, christianity can be very open or closed, depending on the mind view of the beleiver. Considering the religious conflicts now going on in many buddhist sects over succession (what? violence over material issues in a buddhist group? how oxymoronic) I hardly think that the judeo christian arena has the patent on ignorant intolerance.
Mike