Originally posted by twhitehead
I actually don't think he is going for Pascals Wager. His OP says nothing about benefits if you believe and are right vs not believing and being wrong.

I think he is trying another popular fallacy: "What I believe offers benefits, therefore if you believe as I do you will gain those benefits". The flaw in that is obviously that believing something does ...[text shortened]... the benefits exist/don't exist regardless of whether your believe it. (unlike in Pascals wager)

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
What If God Doesn't Exist? What if He Does?

.............................................................................................. (human history................................. ?... ¿

God)....................................................................................... [human history]............................. (eternity

What do you think? (OP)
___________________________

Hey, twhitehead. Always enjoy your inimitable play of mind; and, yes, you're correct in your first observation yet incorrect with the second. You've read and replied to enough of my points of view during the past two years to realize that this skeletal thread assiduously attempts to present two stark visual scenarios sans comment and nothing more. Your view?