We can never know whether we have accumulated all the knowledge in the world or not. This is a general statement. For example, a powerful counterargument against the contingency argument might exist out there that could fatally cripple its usefulness. Again, a powerful counterargument against Pascal's wager might exist out there: maybe, we still just haven't thought of it yet.
Considering the fact that Pascal's wager is fallible, have any attempts been made to rid Pascal's wager of its fallibility? In other words, can Pascal's wager ever be declared to be incapable of being wrong?
Also, has any capable decision-theorist made endeavours to include this fallibility of Pascal's wager into the decision table and make a more complete statement about the decisions one ought to take? For example, assigning a probability p to the outcome that Pascal's wager is invalid (in some convoluted sense that we haven't thought of yet), and including that as a column in the decision table.