What do you think of this passage?

[truth_seeker]

That's still utterly illogical.  That god's threats are static.  They've remained unchanged for thousands of years.  There's also nothing to verify that this god is actually behind those threats, or that, again, this god actually exists.

What does it matter that the same message has been repeated over and over?  Repetition doesn't lend reality to fiction.

Again: provide evidence.  If you have none for your god, that means you also have none for your hell.

I completely agree. It is illogical and there is no evidence. 100% agree

My entire discussion was only based on evaluating the high risk involved, that's all. As in **if** it turns out to be true, then I'm f*cked. And it would be a high risk gamble.

I guess I can clarify what I'm trying to say in this fashion:
the risk that Mr. Unicorn well own my a$$ in hell is pretty low (1%??) because I didn't find consistent corroborated claims from Mr. Unicorn telling me about it.
but the risk that this particular god has the capacity to deliver on these warnings seems a bit higher (20%? 50%?) due to the presence of many consistent corroborated claims

SO ... I'm not saying believing is right or wrong.

I'm only saying the risk is pretty steep