Pascal's Wager Argument

In his argument for the existence of God, or for the reason to believe in existence of God Blaise Pascal brings up an idea of “Pascal’s Wager.” Pascal’s Wager is an argument which states that believing in God is just like gambling, in which if the product of possibility and outcome outweigh the risk, person should take it. In his argument Pascal says that if a man ought to believe in God, and he turns out to be right, the reward of eternity in heaven outweighs the loss (which is insignificant comparing to eternity in heaven) which man suffers when he spends his life believing in God, and God turns out not to exist. On the other hand, if a man does not believe in God, and he turns out to be right, the gain which he acquires is again insignificant to the eternity in hell, if God turns out to exist.

God Exists

God Does Not Exist

Believing In God

Heaven (everlasting joy)

Hell (everlasting suffering)

Not Believing In God

Minimal loss

If one is ought to believe in God, using the reasoning of Pascal’s Wager, one can believe in any religion, and it would be logical, due to Wager’s argument, because most of the religions (probably all except for Satanism, there is only hell there) have some concept for good and bad afterlife, and using Pascal’s Wager believing into any religion would grant you the good afterlife (heaven) of that religion, but considering the amount of religions the possibility of getting the right one is slim to none. And there is also no evidence that the right religion does exist, because out of all religions which do exist, there is still a very huge amount (maybe infinite) of religions which do not exist, and have just as much of a chance to be right in concern of what God is, and what he