Abstract: The Jamesian Wager has as a premise: the proposition that theistic belief is more rewarding than non-belief in this life, whether or not God exists. This proposition provides the Pascalian a way of circumventing the many-gods objection, which states that the Wager fails because it proves too much. Any number of incompatible religious options can be supported by a wager relevantly like that of Pascal. Three versions of the many-gods objection are examined.

Keywords: many-gods objection, Kantian gap, Leslie Stephens,