Changes

[[Blaise Pascal]] reasoned that, given the relative gains and losses for each scenario, the only sensible course for a rational human being was to believe in God since the potentially infinite gains and losses which occur if God exists outweigh outweigh any possible loss in a finite situation if God does not exist.  This is true regardless of what probability one assigns to God's existence as long as some possibility is assigned. Pascal's wager as Pascal stated it is flawed within the context of [[Christianity]], because based upon Christian theology, mere belief in God does not ensure salvation.

[[Blaise Pascal]] reasoned that, given the relative gains and losses for each scenario, the only sensible course for a rational human being was to believe in God since the potentially infinite gains and losses which occur if God exists outweigh outweigh any possible loss in a finite situation if God does not exist.  This is true regardless of what probability one assigns to God's existence as long as some possibility is assigned. Pascal's wager as Pascal stated it is flawed within the context of [[Christianity]], because based upon Christian theology, mere belief in God does not ensure salvation.

Pascal's wager is also not geared for multiple competing god scenarios where various forms or selections of gods are given they may be mutually or partially exclusive.  Pascal's wager also contains the fallacy of the false dichotomy, because it implies that the only two possibilities are belief in God or condemnation to hell, with no grades in between.  

Pascal's wager is also not geared for multiple competing god scenarios where various forms or selections of gods are given they may be mutually or partially exclusive.

[[Category:Philosophy]]

[[Category:Philosophy]]

[[Category:Religion]]

[[Category:Religion]]