As it applies to Pascal's wager, it may be phrased as philosophical statement, but math is a core consideration,
Really? Did Pascal "show his work" ? LOL. What were his calculations exactly?
And it is a sound one where the fixed number of choices is two,
For him it was two. Belief in G-d vs. atheism/irreligiosity. You are rewriting Pascal in order to "mathematically disprove him." This is a silly exercise that atheists engage in in order to sell books about it (to the simplistic or otherwise) and then get religious people to question themselves (not necessarily bad things, but certainly a waste of our time here, and beneath the level of discussion we should be having).
one being a specific faith and the other Atheism. But that not being the case, it ceases to make sense.
Even if we assume Pascal is talking about a myriad amount of faith-choices (which he obviously wasn't), so why does it have to be specifically Pascal? His philosophical point still stands. And to Judaism, there does not have to be one "religion" in order to get into "heaven." Non Jews can believe in many different things/ideas, and there is room for different types of religion. There is less flexibility for Jews, but Jews do have to believe in G-d and follow G-d's precepts. That really is 2 choices. Either believe and do what He says, or not believe and don't do. The "believing" is tied to keeping commandments. (this aside from the fact that there are good things and good experiences about keeping the religion as Dr. Dan pointed out. Of course that is true. But we're talking bare necessities here). The belief is necessary as a means to building a good relationship with G-d, and following the commandments of G-d which is supposed to produce positive effects in society. Thus I conflate the two things, belief in G-d, with the more important keeping G-d's commandments for better life on earth. Heaven is more of an after affect, but also is a factor.
In terms of religious testimony, the Christian tradition is all about Jesus revealing his divinity to a group of followers,
How does one reveal their divinity? According to Jewish belief a man cannot be divine, by definition. Even if said man DID perform miracles of some kind. Now as to the miracles themselves (is this what you mean? He did miracles? And people witnessed it?), you are talking about a handful of people at most. It's NOT the same thing as the Jewish
national claim. If 2 or 3 or 5 people wrote documents that became incorporated to the Christian bible, making various claims about a certain person, that is not the same thing as saying thousands of people stood on a mountain and received supernatural communication from G-d. It may be a stronger claim than Islam, but it's still not the same claim as Judaism.
with there being multiple, separately authored testaments about him that closely mirror each other.
I have sent you a message about this.
Islam, though based on testimony of Muhhamad, is reliant in its early days on others, chiefly Ali, claiming to having also personally experienced signs from the divine that Muhhamad was a prophet.
That is merely Ali making the same SINGULAR claim that Muhammad made. Some spirit whispered in his ear, or he got a sign, or fell down in a cave and saw a vision, etc etc. It's one person experiencing some thing (supposedly) and then coming back and reporting it. That is NOT the same thing as the Jewish national claim. I don't know how you can't see that. We are talking about thousands of Jews all collectively experiencing something. NOT one guy in a cave comes out hooting and hollering. And then some other guy claims an angel came to him and told him the original guy was true. In any case, the claim of the KORAN is not about Ali. The claim of the Koran is focused on one individual who supposedly convened with the angel gabriel. That individual is Muhammad. It does not "corroborate itself" with Ali having a parallel encounter by himself, and even if it did, that would be laughable because it does not add to the claim.
Ali said Muhammad was reliable, ok thousands of jewish people who Muhammad slaughtered for refusing his religion, they all said he was not reliable. So did lots of pagans. It's ridiculous to say it's a "group revelation" when it was one guy by himself in a cave. Please deal with the facts, not just the wishful thinking and simplistic thinking of atheistic anti-religious tomes.
So I am correct in my earlier assertion about group testimony.
No, you are not. You have not shown a group testimony for either religion, certainly not for Islam. Please do not ignore the facts. You cited one person.
My point about Hell was not specific to Judaism. Islam is rather clear that Jews are doomed to Hell.
Really? Cite a source. Koran does not speak positively about Jews, but it also does not say all Jews and christians go to hell. It is more about sincerity and good deeds vs bad deeds from what I understood.
Most streams of traditional Christianity agree.
So?
And I'm sure many smaller religions do too.
Really? Name some.
At the end of the day, a good many faiths are specific in condemning followers of rival faiths to hellfire. So what the means is practicing any faith that is the incorrect one, is likely to be worse.
I notice you like to speak in general terms but never get into specifics, why is that? I find similar things in the "atheist literature." It becomes very tiresome.
I assume anti-semitism is a constant because history verifies as much.
Logical fallacy. Was hunter-gathering lifestyle a constant because history verified that it existed since early humans lived? Of course it was not a constant because human lifestyle at some point shifted. Was slavery a constant because history verified it used to be ubiquitous in human society (at least starting at some point)? No. In many places it wiped away with the passage of time. Something is only a "constant" until it changes. The fact that something currently exists does not make it a constant, and there is no rational way to claim that it is destined to always exist as it does currently without some sort of dogmatic principle regarding it. Added emphasis to show that you are making assumptions, and you readily admit that.
Moreover, as any number of things demonstrate, our world is full of idiots. And stupidity breeds anti-Semitism. So I need not believe in some religious explanation to expect it to continue.
Really, so what happens when people get smarter? People have come to live longer. Scientific fact, life expectancy has risen. People can also come to grow smarter over time. Many scientists expect heads and brains to grow larger in the human race with time. What if people change attitudes drastically in 100 years because of watershed events that take place? Think about how different the world is in 2000 compared to 1900 and 1800? Things never change? You are not speaking rationally but dogmatically.