Atheists and Agnostics risk infinite loss for no gain

[_xenu_]

I can only assume from your response that you did not read what I wrote, you completely ignored, or you didn't get my point.

Do you understand that pointing out an argument works equally for different god is not invoking the possibility of a god? Do you understand that being an atheist doesn't mean denying that god is a possibility?

You still are using a possible God to try to defeat Pascal's wager.

But the argument of multiple "believe or damned" claims does not help the atheists or the agnostic at all. The risk of infinite loss is the same and there is still no reward. So Pascal's wager still holds.

Pascal's wager would say look at all the claims and pick the right one. In reality, only one will not be self contradictory. Then that is the correct one.

You make the assumption that either a god or exists or it doesn't, like its a 50/50 shot. The truth is, the odds aren't even close to that. They're more like thousands to one. While much less important because of the previous, Pascal's Wager still fails in face of the many gods argument because religions tend to be mutually exclusive. Not that it matters, given the extremely long odds of any of them existing anyway.

In addition, if the above weren't already damning enough, Pascal's Wager is an appeal to fear and the unknown. You're not going to win any converts with it here, this whole thing is very old hat to us.