rhutchin

A person cannot address the "many possible hells" problem until he (1) understands that hell is described in religious books (and maybe elsewhere), (2) admits to uncertainty about whether hell exists, and (3) decides that he should seek to discover an escape from hell. When he seeks to discover an escape from hell, he also discovers the "many possible hells" problem. If the person does not decide to seek to escape hell, it would be because he is certain that there is no hell and he would never face the "many possible hells" problem.

Person A is doomed only because he determined that there was no hell so he decided not to seek to escape hell and then he finds out that he was wrong. Person A, because he is certain that there is no hell, never considers the wager. Ultimately, his problem is that he falsely considers it certain that there is no hell when neither he nor anyone else can be certain of that.

rhutchin

Of course, God is not concerned about the Wager. Pascal devised it to show the hypocrisy of those who did not seek to escape that which they could not prove not to exist. Also sad by true, No gospel; No salvation.

Adam and Eve did not have to use the Wager because they knew God and knew that He does not lie. They knew that eternal torment was certain.

Mageth

1 amu is one atomic mass unit. Protons and neutrons have a mass of 1 amu. Electrons, 1/1837 amu.

So, what is that little bit of trivial information that one should learn in high school chemistry or physics (and your question) supposed to prove? It certainly doesn't show any extensive knowledge or understanding of QM.

Mageth

What irony? Are you saying I've somewhere constructed a strawman? If so, please show where.

Dlx2

Rhutchin, I'm beginning to think this thread is not the appropriate venue for this discussion. Would you be willing to take this to the debate forum?

Mageth

A task at which Pascal failed miserably, and at which you have equally failed. Which is understandable, because there is no rational reason for one to "seek to escape that which they cannot prove not to exist." That, rhutchin, is simply absurd, as has been shown to you over and over again.

Again, "eternal torment" remains a superstition. And, despite your protestations, "eternal torment" is imagined. It is, thus, imaginary. It cannot be shown to be concrete; it cannot be shown to be real; it is thus only possible to imagine it. It thus is, and remains, in the realm of imagination. Neither you nor anyone else can demonstrate that it is anything more than the product of human imagination. It can't be done, and so it is perfectly and completely rational to classify it as imaginary.

There is no need for anyone to prove that it is a superstition or to prove that it is in the realm of imagination for them to act rationally by not seeking to escape it. It clearly is in the realm of imagination. No such proof is necessary.

Seeking to escape what cannot be shown to not be imaginary, that cannot be shown to not be a superstition, is irrational.

Again, if you really think it is the case that you should "seek to escape that which you cannot prove not to exist", there are countless things that you should be doing that I am certain that you are not, as there are countless superstitions, gods, devils, etc. that you cannot prove not to exist. Superstitions to be heeded, other gods to be appeased, vampires to be feared, etc etc etc.

If you are not doing all those things, if you are not heeding every superstition you cannot disprove and appeasing every god that you cannot disprove, then it is you, rhutchin, that is being hypocritical.

aa5874

Rhutchin , are your saying only your hell exist? Are saying do not worry about the other hells, my hell is the real thing. That is absurd.
Again, rhutchin, uncertainty in eternal torment means uncertainty in the truth of the Biblical Gods. Pascal erroneously claims one must wager on the Christian Gods, when uncertainty creates infinite scenarios.

Rhutchin, you fail to take in consideration Persons B,C,D....... to the Nth number who was uncertain about hell and ended up in hell because they wagered on the Christian Gods.

You cannot prove your Gods exist. Pascal's Wager is garbage.

aa5874

Rhutchin, your Gods must be proud of you. That's how you prove your Gods exist! You have completly failed to show the relevance of the wager. You have shown without doubt that your Gods do not exist. Your Gods have not once intervened on your behalf to clarify any of your statements. Pascal's Wager is your only hope of salvation. Uncertainty is your key to salvation.
Pascal's Wager is rubbish.

MRM

Well someone can notice the many hell proplem first, just by thinking about it, before he try to seek escape from any hell

Or because he noticed that he can not do anything about it anywhere - or he may just ignore the problem without being certain that he won't face the problem - why do you assume otherwise ?

And besides - read my example again, it doesn't matter why person B don't seek escape from hell ( not aware of or frustrated because Person B can not solve the many hell problem )


you are confused rhutchin - I guess because this example don't fit into your worldview -

No - Person A is uncertain about hell - Person A make the wager - Person A seek escape from hell, and because he do so, he is doomed ( in this case ). Someone can try something and achieve the exact opposite. Shit like this happens in real life - why should it be different in a potential afterlife ?

And person B avoided hell without even trying to do so - such things happen in real life too ...

aa5874

Rhutchin, a person who is uncertain of eternal torment, is also uncertain of who will be tormented and how to escape torment. Such a person will not be certain which Gods actually will be able to carry out the threat.

The premise that the Christian Gods are the only Gods capable of torment is not valid to a person who is uncertain. Uncertainty demands a person examines an infinite number of possibilities.

Rhutchin, if we examine the local lotto, no-one is certain to win and of the millions that wager, in general ,only one wins. We are reasonably certain the lotto will be played and the winner will receive the reward, however almost everyone will lose money and be worst off after every game. Some will lose their savings, some will lose their families but at the end of the day virtually everyone would lose money. So we can say virtually all the people that did not play the lotto did not lose any money because they did not wager. Virtually all the people who did not play the lotto are better off. Every lotto game , millions of people will lose money and the reverse is true for those who did not play.

There are hundreds of religions, no-one is certain which God is true or which one is the most powerful. Nobody is certain that any Gods exist, no-one is certain that they can live a life of truth and no-one is certain what happens when you die. No-noe is certain if judgement day will occur and which God will carry out the judgement.

Rhutchin, with all that uncertainty, Pascal's Wager postulates that belief in an uncertain God will prevent one from being tormented in an uncertain place.

Rhutchin, Pascal's Wager is garbage, useless. Pascal erroneously jumps to the coclusion that if eternal torment exist those who did not believe would be doomed. Uncertainty disqualifies such conclusion.

To guarantee to win the lotto one has to buy all the tickets but that may cost more than the reward. It is not possible to guarantee a safe position in Pascal's Wager since it is highly unlikely that anyone can truly believe in every single God or be sure any God can actually save any one from eternal torment. Perhaps everyone will be eternally tormented whether one believes in Gods or not, since all Humans are not perfect.

Pascal's Wager is garbage.