Pascal's Wager is true.

It seems from that perspective, there is a terrible negation for the option of not jumping. Although an illogical order is given, it disregards the option of not adhering to that order. There are various alternatives to adhering to this absurd notion of believing and acting upon the illogical orders of someone or something that may or may not be true. The three alternatives I will list to disprove your nonsensical view are in direct relation to the three premises I stated earlier. The first alternative is to give a contrary order of your own that is as equally illogical. This can represent the opposing theism argument; that if you had to adhere to this order, there may be another thing or person who has given the contrary order. Therefore, your belief or disbelief in the order that has been given to you, may be held for or against the origin of that order which may be incorrect or nonexistent (e.g. the origin is the subject that gave that order - you telling me to jump, God ordering not to murder, Allah ordering to obliterate infidelity etc.). The second alternative is to understand your ability to explore other actions, beliefs and outcomes that are either derivative forms or contrary forms to the order given. Understanding that there is possibility of other orders or subjects giving that order that are just as equally illogical (it can be noted that logical presentation of the order or subject giving the order does not matter when understanding the second and third alternative), there is greater skepticism for the validity of that order and subject(s) giving the order which inspires us to explore endless possibilities of other orders and subjects of giving those orders that in turn, inspire the discovery of better order and they're corresponding beliefs, actions and outcomes. For example, I tell you that if you sit down, you will fall and snap your neck, the differing subject to jumping makes changes the validity of jumping to fall and snap your neck because we may never know which one is true until experienced. This leads to the third and final alternative; there is no possible way to empirically experience God (or Gods) and to know if the orders it gives are true or false. Without listing the thousands or atrocities orders of faith and deities of faith have caused for the human race, it is imperative to understand that we can never be 100% sure that the order and the subject giving the order is correct and true. We can never fully know our belief or disbelief in a theism is true or correct (or at least more correct than any other theism) because we cannot experience the finite gain or loss Pascal says we will experience once we pass and understand which God exists. Millions upon millions have claimed in the past and present (and sadly the future I assume) that they have had many visions and experienced apparitions, awakenings and rebirths of faith which sealed their belief in one God or the other. In doing so, they are limiting themselves to the prior two alternatives I have mentioned and have total belief in illogical orders and the subject giving that order which cannot be fully explained or empirically experienced in our waking consciousness (without delusion or mental illness). Understanding that there are differing orders and subjects giving those orders, we can negate the possibility of one order or subject giving that order being more or less logical and 'better', 'true' or 'more correct'. This skepticism would lead to quarreling subjectivity (which can be cited to almost any religious quarrel - must I name them ALL?) for belief or disbelief of these differing orders or subjects giving those orders. In order to abolish this quarreling and take a harmless objective stance, we must choose to understand the first premise and that there must be other orders (or no orders) and subjects(or nonexistence of the subjects/deities) giving those orders. Drawing from what we can empirically experience without the use of skeptical intuition that may stray our consciousness away to making drastic generalizations about how everything works (divine command), will lead us towards a higher age of agreeable reasoning without relying on outdated faith that forces us in believing something not existing in a physical manner that we may never be able to fully comprehend until death.