Pascal's Wager Revisited

[Esquilax]

So... you are comparing fairy tales to see which one is more "realistic"? I'm afraid you've abandoned that tool long ago after the huge number of assumptions necessary to believe in any kind of afterlife at all.

Here's what I did: I described a part of the general structure of a plausible afterlife. The Valhalla afterlife fails to fit into it, while the Christian afterlife does fit into it; as a result, the latter is judged (again if there is an afterlife at all) reasonable, while the former, not reasonable.

Aha, ahaha, no. What you actually did was arbitrarily decide that an afterlife that doesn't "transcend," whatever that means, is implausible, and then you similarly arbitrarily decided that a plausible afterlife must necessarily "transcend," and then come to a conclusion based on those utterly unjustified premises that you just pulled out of your ass, which oh so conveniently, happens to reinforce the afterlife you already believed in.

If you disagree with that assessment then I absolutely invite you to explain how you determined which afterlife is plausible versus implausible, without relying on simple assertions, as you don't exactly have any afterlives with which to draw plausibility from. Because you didn't exactly do any of that in your initial post.