My answer is, I will deal with that when it comes time. Even if he were real I would never worship an a** hat and would have no problems telling him so if we ever met.

Pascal wager is horrorable in my opinion.
It basely a scare tactic.
Pascal can be used for just about anything.

Truth based in desperation/ fear of reprisal is not suitable for a belief structure.

So you're agnostic? Or why would you profess belief in an omniscient being that you believe is dumb enough you can fool?

1. any omniscient god that you believe in for the sake of hedging your bets won't be fooled by your selfish cowardly motives in the first place.
2. the existence of a god isn’t an either/or proposition. There are many possible gods; upon which one did you expect me to take the bet, and what makes the odds of that one any greater than the thousands of others? The location I’m born? That’s funny.

Losing the wager is not quite as extreme. Only that you get to live this life and have fun and enjoy its myriad pleasures that religions forbid. Their basic scheme is to sacrifice this life for the sake of the next. Quite a price to pay also.

I've always considered the possibility that Paschal was joking.

I usually tell them they are gambling, there are so many different Gods and religions. What makes you think you picked the right one? Do you worry about other religions heaven or hell? Do you think your faith is different from one who belongs to a different religion?

Logically just the sheer range of possible gods makes it a losing game. But my favorite take is to say, ok, you chose right and now this god lets you into its personal club for all eternity.

Have you never seen any of the Saw movies?

You can't truly "believe in" something that you don't believe in. If you die a fake believer, do you think God would accept that at the pearly gates?

This has been asked and answered multiple times on here.

Here's the wiki answer:

Criticism of Pascal's Wager began in his own day, and came from both atheists, who questioned the 'benefits' of a deity whose 'realm' is beyond reason, and the religiously orthodox, who primarily took issue with the wager's deistic and agnostic language. It is criticized for not proving God's existence, the encouragement of false belief, and the problem of which religion and which God should be worshipped.

I will not comment on the two options where god exists for it is a waste of time. The two options where god doesn't exist: 1- No god and you believe = Pascal says "no gain" but it is really a complete life of fear and the angst of not knowing if you are one of the only 144,000 chosen who go to heaven. 2- No god and no believe = life of happiness and no worries!

It's logically flawed because it posits only two possibilities, the christian god and nothing, when there is no more evidence for the christian god than there is Zeus or Ahura Mazda or whatever. You might say, you have denied thousands of gods, I go one further.

So live in hell now in order to avoid it later? Pretend to believe something to avoid being punished by an all knowing God that knows you are pretending anyway? It is a useless bet in my opinion and not worth the wager. It is not logical!

Here are 2 good thoughts:

as an agnostic, and this being an agnostic site, people are simply missing the point. a believe in god does not get you to heaven, but a submission to that believe, after all, supposedly, the devil/satan believed in god, he just opposed him and where did that get him ?

Obviously the vast number of possible gods and their associated texts contradict each other in many ways, so rejecting all is similarly risky as picking the wrong one.

I don't think theres really a need for a rebuttal as whoever is doing the wager is doing it with themselves its their bet, let them get on with it . Thats what life is all about - learning and fun-

For me I don't think winning is the part of the game that I play for.

I don't have to... Like to keep it simple

I can't make myself believe something I don't believe. That's, like, not "belief". That's self-delusion.

I either believe something or I don't. So couldn't "wager" with my beliefs if I tried.

Wasting your life with piety.

@AmorousAdam

Pascal's Wager is just a way of avoiding the descriptive basis for whether a God(s) exists or not-why should the nature of such a dispute warrant Pascal's Wager? It makes no sense, because a course of action has interrupted a train of well-reasoned thought. Should action govern thought, or should a person think about the facts first, and then decide a course of action? Which is the better method? People who think that Pascal's Wager is a good argument are not recognizing that.

It isn't an argument (of the existence of god), isn't it more a suggestion (to believe regardless of existence)? Suggestions don't require rebuttal.

If pushed to it, I'd appeal to dignity and self respect. There could be plenty of things useful to believe, but criteria for believing something can't be how useful it is. We can do better than that!

Only believe in God if you feel that belief benefits you today. In the end we all go to the same place regardless. This was the overriding theme of Ecclesiastes. It's in the bible.