Alright, basically every week or so I'm going to examine a theist argument, or a theists response to an atheist argument, and refute it. I'm mainly doing this for myself, the best way to defeat your opponent is to know their best arguments and have the ability to take them apart. Also, I'm a Philosophy major at Syracuse University, and I’ll probably end up using some of these blogs as essays. Please, if you think I am wrong, or have another point to add to the argument, respond to this. On to Pascal's Wager.

Pascal's Wager is basically an attempt by Pascal to prove that believing in God is more rational than not believing in God. Please note, Pascal is not trying to prove God exists, in fact, he did not believe it was possible to do so. He is attempting to give a reason to believe in God, which would make atheism or agnosticism, irrational.