Pascal's Wager

Pascal’s wager, in brief, says that it’s logical and rational to believe in God.  It is commonly used as an argument to convince someone that they are better off believing in God than not.

1)  God either exists, or he doesn’t.

2)  You can either choose to believe, or not.

Depending on what you choose, and whether God exists, there are some varying possible outcomes. 

If God doesn’t exist, then your choice doesn’t matter and nothing happens when you die.

If God does exist, and you are a believer, then you are rewarded with and infinite blissful afterlife.

If God does exist and you are NOT a believer, then you are punished with infinite suffering.

If you believe, than at worse, nothing bad happens.  At best, you win everything.  If you don’t believe, at best nothing good happens.  At worst, you get infinite punishment.

Nice.

There are some very basic problems with this.

First, “God exists or doesn’t” is actually shorthand for:  “The Christian God exists and is as described in the Bible, and no other gods exist”.  Clearly, there isn’t a direct opposite to that compound statement.  Either the Christian God doesn’t exist (but other gods do), or he does exist but isn’t necessarily as described in the Bible, or he is one of many gods that exist.

Suppose God isn’t as he’s described in the Bible?  Suppose he rewards skeptical thinking and rationality, rather than faith and obedience in the face of shoddy evidence?  Suppose the Bible was influenced by Satan himself as a trick to lead the gullible astray?  These are certainly in the realm of possibility.

Second is the notion that we can choose our beliefs.  This is a big one, because I’m not sure what it would take for me to actually believe that the Bible was true.  Literally and figuratively, it might take a miracle.  I suppose I could choose to pray, go to church (which one?!), and live a pious life, but I’m not sure I could honestly admit that I Believed.  If God designed me, then he designed my great big brain and wired skepticism into it.  And as a god, he should have KNOWN that ancient texts written in dead languages with vague interpretations isn’t the best way to attract followers.  Therefore, I can only conclude that he made things vague on purpose, and is purposefully weeding out skeptics like myself.  I find that to go against the grain of the message of Christianity as I’ve read it.

Finally, there is a hidden cost in the “believe in God when no gods exist” option that isn’t mentioned in the wager, which is how a person lives their life.  If Believers turn out to be wrong, it’s very possible that they have wasted a huge amount of their lives.  If their religious beliefs restrict them from certain foods or activities, then they are possibly denied a great deal of pleasure.  Hours spent in church could have been spent more constructively.  And maybe most importantly, it would be a shame if someone spent their lives implicitly or explicitly waging a war against things like homosexuality, evolution, etc, only to find out their Biblical argument didn’t hold any water.

I like to think that if there is a god, and he is who he says he is, then he knows me, and he knows my thinking.  The happy, fuzzy Christians say that “Jesus loves you no matter what”.  I hope that’s true.  If it somehow comes to pass that I find myself in the hot-seat of the afterlife, at least I can hold my head high and say “Look, man… I did the best I could with what you gave me to work with.”  And if that’s not enough to save me, then I guess I’ll hope that Satan appreciates skeptics and rational thinkers.