Pascal's Wager: A Good Argument?

Dr. Craig shares his thoughts on Pascal's Wager! You can see the full interview with Dr. Craig here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIJpJjGSU-k&t=417s

Having since studied Pascal and read the Pensées, I think that the Wager is a good argument. So I would defend it, and many other respectable philosophers also defend Pascalian wagering. It's an example of a truth-dependent pragmatic argument. Pragmatic arguments can be either truth-dependent or truth-independent. A truth-dependent pragmatic argument means that if the belief turns out to be true then there are great benefits accruing that out-balance any cost. If it's a truth-independent argument, then the great benefits accrue for holding the belief whether it turns out to be true or not. Pascal's Wager is an example of a truth-dependent pragmatic argument. If the belief turns out to be true, you have enormous benefits, and these outweigh any costs that would be incurred in case the belief turns out to be false.