Pascal’s Wager is an idea created by Blaise Pascal stating that it isn’t possible to prove whether God does or does not really exist. Since this is true, he thinks that it is better to believe that God exists, due to the reward being eternal happiness forever. If one doesn’t believe in His existence, they would be punished to eternal damnation. If God doesn’t exist, but you believed, you lose nothing whereas if you do not believe in a God that doesn’t exist, you gain nothing. His argument says that reason and intellect can’t decide whether God exists or not, and therefore it only makes sense to choose the option that has the highest payoff for the individual.
There are four options that follow this argument which explain the choices you have when waging between believing in God's existence or denying it. The first of these options being, you may live a religious life and be rewarded by…show more content… Pascal claims that we could either go to heaven or hell depending on our beliefs, but there are so many religions and sects with varying ideas about the concept of heaven and hell. If an individual goes about trying to avoid the hell their religion believes in, they are at risk from the hell of other religions hell that isn't theirs. The same way that we interpret hell in different ways, the same can be said for heaven. There are many interpretations of God, and you could easily end up worshiping him in the wrong way. In the grand scheme of things, we have no idea which perception of hell we are trying to avoid. Whether you are an atheist or a believer, we don’t actually know who is safe and who is in trouble. I would think that a God who is loving would not put eternal damnation on anyone who doesn’t believe or doubt in him within reason. A God who is morally righteous wouldn’t punish someone for doubting statements that come simply from other human beings similar to
