Skeptics say that we cannot know whether God exists, and in a sense they are right. The Bible says in Hebrews 11:1 that faith is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." If the believer knew, there would be no question of faith. Consider this: I don't have faith that my daughter is in the seventh grade; I know my daughter is in the seventh grade. I haven't been to heaven, and so I cannot say that I know there is such a place. But I believe that there is. Faith is a statement of trust in what we do not know for sure.
But is such faith reasonable or is it, as the atheists frequently allege, "blind faith"? This central human conundrum is the subject of Pascal's famous wager. Pascal did not invent the wager. It was offered by the Muslim theologian Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali in his medieval work The Alchemy of Happiness. Pascal was familiar with Ghazzali and probably derived the argument from him. But Pascal gave the wager its current classic expression, and in doing so he places an unavoidable choice before all believers and unbelievers.
Pascal argues in his Pensees that in life we have to gamble. Let's say you are offered a new job that may take your career to new heights. It looks extremely promising, but of course there are risks. There is no way in advance to know how things will turn out. You have to decide if you will go for it. Or you are in love with a woman. You have been dating for a while, yet you cannot be certain what marriage to her is going to be like for the next several decades. You proceed on the basis of what you know, but what you know is, by the nature of the matter, inadequate. Yet you have to make a decision. You cannot keep saying, "I will remain agnostic until I know for sure." If you wait too long, she will marry someone else, or both of you will be dead.
In the same way, Pascal argues that in making our decision about God, we will never understand everything in advance. No amount of rational investigation can produce definitive answers, since what comes after death remains unknown. Therefore we have to examine the options, and we have to make our wager. But what are the alternatives, and how should we weigh the odds? Pascal argues that we have two basic choices, and either way we must consider the risk of being wrong.
If we have faith in God and it turns out that God does not exist, we face a small downside risk: metaphysical error. But if we reject God during our lives, and it turns out God does exist, there is much more serious risk: eternal separation from God. Based on these two possible outcomes, Pascal declares that it is much less risky to have faith in God. In the face of an uncertain outcome, no rational person would refuse to give up something that is finite if there is the possibility of gaining an infinite prize. In fact, under these conditions it is unreasonable not to believe. Pascal writes, "Let us weigh up the gain and loss involved in calling heads that God exists. If you win, you win everything. If you lose, you lose nothing. Do not hesitate, then: wager that He does exist."
The ingenuity of Pascal's argument is that it emphasizes the practical necessity of us making a choice. This necessity is imposed by death. There comes a day when there are no tomorrows, and then we all have to cast our votes for or against the proposition on the ballot. The unavoidability of the decision exposes the sheer stupidity of agnosticism and religious indifference. These are people who refuse to choose when there is no option to abstain. So the refusal to choose becomes a choice--a choice against God.
Pascal also exposes the pose of the atheist who fancies himself as a brave and lonely man facing the abyss. We admire a man who is steadfast in the face of unavoidable adversity. If we knew we were alone in the universe and that death was the end, then there is no alternative but to stand tough in our mortal skins and curse the darkness. But what would we think of a man who stands ready to face a horrible fate that he has a chance to avert? If you are trapped in the den with a hungry lion, and there is a door that may offer a way out, what sane person would refuse to jump through the door? Viewed this way, the atheist position becomes a kind of reckless intransigence, a foolish attempt to gamble with one's soul.
With their trademark venom, atheists typically condemn, although they cannot refute, Pascal's wager. Christopher Hitchens can do no better than to launch an ad hominem attack on Pascal as a "hypocrite" and a "fraud." Attempting condescension, Richard Dawkins proclaims Pascal's argument "distinctly odd." And why? Because "believing is not something you can decide to do as a matter of policy. At least, it is not something I can decide to do as an act of will." Dawkins is right about this, of course, but the real issue is whether he wants to believe and whether he is open to the call of faith.
Pascal writes that there are two kinds of reasonable people in the world: "those who serve God with all their heart because they know Him, and those who seek Him with all their heart because they do not know Him." Pascal recognizes that faith is a gift. We cannot demand it but only ask God to give it to us. In the meantime the best thing to do is to live a good and moral life, and to live as if God did indeed exist.
And pray the prayer of the skeptic, which I get from the philosopher Peter Kreeft. "God, I don't know whether you even exist. I think you may be only a myth. But I'm not certain....So if you do exist, you must be hearing me now. So I hereby declare myself a seeker, a seeker of the truth, whatever and wherever it is. I want to know the truth and live the truth. If you are the truth, please help me." It is the claim of Christianity that all who seek God in this way with earnest and open hearts will find Him.
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 44)
31. brian,
DD addresses all nonbelievers, which makes our topic the 18%.
Mokele Mbembe at 9:10AM on Apr 11th 2008
32. mo,
The flaw of Pascal's wager, statistically, is that it is a heads/tales weighting. That's only for completely blind wagers.
"
you are implying you KNOW something more? you know how we got here and why and what our purpose is? how do you know thse things? you cannot. you cannot know god does not exist simply because you say so
brian at 9:10AM on Apr 11th 2008
33. brian,
Just because you have 2 choices doesn't mean it's 50/50.
Mokele Mbembe at 9:12AM on Apr 11th 2008
34. mo,
actually a larger % than that does not believe in jesus and the christian doctine world wide. but the survey said 2% were strictly atheist. these are no my figures. and besides what does it matter? 2% or 18% your major in the minority which should tell you something
brian at 9:13AM on Apr 11th 2008
35. mo,
well your mathi is interesting. you have 2 choices what does you math tell you? please don't bet with this math
brian at 9:14AM on Apr 11th 2008
36. brian; it matters because Mokele and I are agnostics, not atheists. Yet you lump us in with the atheist because you believer there is no difference.
If you believe all versions of non-belief are essentialy atheist, then you need to drop the 2% and use the 18%.
It's very simple.
Ryan Anderson at 9:15AM on Apr 11th 2008
37. brian writes actually a larger % than that does not believe in jesus and the christian doctine world wide. but the survey said 2% were strictly atheist. these are no my figures. and besides what does it matter? 2% or 18% your major in the minority which should tell you something
brian at 9:13AM on Apr 11th 2008
The majority has been trying to tell you something on this blog, and you have refused to listen. Enough about your argument about the majority.
Jerry Brown at 9:17AM on Apr 11th 2008
38. brian; you either believe or you don't. But the fallacy to Pascal's Wager is that Pascal assumes the results of your belief or non-belief will only lead to one of two results. In reality, there are thousands of possible scenerios and in some of those scenerios, a particular belief in god will lead to damnanation in another scenerio.
There are probably some decent reasons to believe in god. Pascal's wager is not one of them.
Ryan Anderson at 9:20AM on Apr 11th 2008
39. ryan,
of the thousands of possible scenarios please tell me one that you are certain of based on historical,scientific, evidence. in recorded histroy only one person, jesus christ has risen from the dead. that is the choice. the biblesays your destiny is one place or the other. it does not care nor ask you opinion about what you think. fair or not. there are only two choices. being a typical atheist you would like to invent your own choice, your own reality. last time i checked every soul ever born has died save two.thats the truth
brian at 9:25AM on Apr 11th 2008
40. "of the thousands of possible scenarios please tell me one that you are certain of based on historical,scientific, evidence."
None of them. That's why I'm agnostic.
Ryan Anderson at 9:31AM on Apr 11th 2008
41. brian,
From a similar pattern of evidence Dracula Vlad Tepes has been rumored to have risen from the dead. His tomb was found empty! OoOoOoOohh...
Mokele Mbembe at 9:31AM on Apr 11th 2008
42. "last time i checked every soul ever born has died save two"
I'm going to regret asking... I know who you think one of them was. Who was number 2?
Ryan Anderson at 9:32AM on Apr 11th 2008
43. brian's universe demography:
Good Christians
Evil Atheists
Superevil Muslim Terrorists
Unimportant Animals
Mokele Mbembe at 9:33AM on Apr 11th 2008
44. This may not be the best place for what follows, but if you have a few minutes I'll share the search I undertook many years ago with Pascal's Wager - unknowingly - in tow.
My grandfather was a minister and for years I believed my calling was to the clergy. During my mid teens and up to about age 22 I went off in search of different denominations views of Christianity. Now I didn't spend all that time doing this (I took stop-overs to get married, maintain my job. You know - trivial stuff) and I am not an authority on any denomination, but I did learn a few things.
My goal was to be a more complete Christian. I failed.
You see, I also sought out information on non-Christian ideals and I learned to look at Christianity with a critical eye. I guess that's where I made my mistake. I couldn't accept the fact that in pursuing only one ideal, that ideal should be adopted as the "true path".
I tried to think of Christianity as only a religion and as such its followers could devise - or believe - anything they wanted. But as my search continued I realized Christians wanted more. (Though I write in past tense, not much has changed).
They wanted everyone, it seemed, to be Christian so that they could avoid dissent. They didn't want to preach "The Word", they demanded its acceptance.
I hadn't had a problem with the Bible. I'd always thought it a fine source of inspiration, an intriguing book of parables and life lessons. But when Christians took it literally (and I suppose they have that right) but condemned me for not accepting it as the only possible "gospel" I guestioned their tolerance. When they wanted me to state that no matter how good a person may be he or she can only get to heaven by believing in God (don't just be a good person be a good person for our particular diety) I decided complete power must be their motivation.
When I witnessed different denominations cursing another for its inadequacies, declaring morality was of them alone, bragging about putting a non-Christian business in financial jeopardy, displaying prejudice and self-righteous behavior, as well as many other things, I'd had all the "learning" I could any longer tolerate.
Ultimately, even though I came to realize that the fault of Christianity is its corruption by Christians - my calling was gone.
Pascal's Wager may have some value but if it is a gamble for Christianity - it's betting on a dark horse gone lame.
Roglo at 9:34AM on Apr 11th 2008
45. Joe Bob's Wager:
There is a very small but non-zero probability that within the next 30 seconds zillions of quantum events of just the right sort will cause the Empire State Building to vanish. If it does, I pay you $100,000. If it doesn't, you pay me $1.
Joe Bob at 9:38AM on Apr 11th 2008