Pascal's Wager - Any Way to Live a Life

How does that manifest exactly? How does the almighty reply?

Maybe, but committing a terrible act like injuring a child would require positive action. Merely doing nothing would be morally preferable. Just because something requires great effort and determination, does not make it morally superior or guarantee accuracy in any associated objective claims. Indeed, if something requires extreme effort to believe, might that not be because it is untrue? OK, but that only really works if god exists. If religion was a wholly artificial creation, then I might reasonably suggest that I could out-think its human authors (or not). This I totally agree with. I am an outspoken atheist, but I do not believe that religious believers are stupid. That is insulting and easily disproved in any case. I think that belief in god (or other unprovable dogmas, such as an afterlife) is a little bit dumb, given the lack of evidence, but it is always the case that intelligent people can hold beliefs that others hold to be ridiculous. Reasonable people can disagree about such matters without undue rancour, or childish name calling. I often do stupid things or hold opinions which turn out to be hogwash, but I hope that I am not a stupid person.
Getting back to Pascal's Wager, I don't think that people can consciously decide to embrace a given belief, to order, so to speak. You could start to rationalise it to yourself, but opinions come from within, unbidden and often unwelcome, and I could never impose them upon myself in this way.This leaves the wager looking tawdry. Surely any god worth the name would see through such cheap chicanery.
I am reminded of the philosopher from one of Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, who espouses opinions identical to the wager. Upon his death, he enters the afterlife, only to meet a group of angry, club wielding deities, who tell him "We're going to show you what we think of Mr. Clever Dick in these parts." Quite.

Come on Mike, you don't really think that is the case do you? The main foundation of my personal disbelief in god is the simple fact that I DON'T know everything. That's why I value evidence based learning; I start out knowing nothing and then, using observation and evidence, move towards knowing (over the course of a lifetime)a pitifully tiny amount about our universe. What I (and you) know may be small, but that doesn't mean that I should attempt to compensate for this by deciding that my wishful thinking is fact. By assuming that there is a god, that you have picked the right one and that you have some idea of his/her/its motives and requirements, I'm afraid you are the one who is claiming knowledge which you do not possess.
The only people I can think of who seriously claim to know everything are religious fundamentalists.