Atheist version of Pascal's wager

[brewer]

Money and power corrupted Christians.

I blame wall street and Santa Claus.

[LastPoet]

(...)That belief comes from God to a person who is open to it. (....)

Extracted this.

Should we blindly believe then? I see as much proof for all the gods. Zero. Nothing but the wiles of believers that just aren't happy with their own beliefs. There should be no problem, yet religious people tend to tell others what is right or wrong.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Pascal's wager is irrelevant.  It's true that you can't make yourself believe in Christ.  That belief comes from God to a person who is open to it.  Also, we don't follow Christ simply because we want to go to heaven, but because we believe he is the son of God, and as such we belong to him.  Even if there was no heaven we would still be bound to follow him.  Jesus spoke sparingly of hell and the writers of the new testament never preached "fire and brimstone".  If a person professes christianity simply to avoid hell, I would seriously doubt that he is a true believer.

None of which makes any sense at all.

[Nihilist Virus]

Pascal's wager is irrelevant.  It's true that you can't make yourself believe in Christ.  That belief comes from God to a person who is open to it.  Also, we don't follow Christ simply because we want to go to heaven, but because we believe he is the son of God, and as such we belong to him.  Even if there was no heaven we would still be bound to follow him.  Jesus spoke sparingly of hell and the writers of the new testament never preached "fire and brimstone".  If a person professes christianity simply to avoid hell, I would seriously doubt that he is a true believer.

No one on this thread seems to have read the OP, but since the rest are atheists it hardly applies to them.  As a Christian, I think you need to answer to the twist on Pascal's wager as I outlined in the OP.

[Lek]

(...)That belief comes from God to a person who is open to it. (....)

Extracted this.

Should we blindly believe then? I see as much proof for all the gods. Zero. Nothing but the wiles of believers that just aren't happy with their own beliefs. There should be no problem, yet religious people tend to tell others what is right or wrong.

No. We shouldn't blindly believe. We should be convinced. Atheists also tell people what is right and wrong.

[Lek]

Pascal's wager is irrelevant.  It's true that you can't make yourself believe in Christ.  That belief comes from God to a person who is open to it.  Also, we don't follow Christ simply because we want to go to heaven, but because we believe he is the son of God, and as such we belong to him.  Even if there was no heaven we would still be bound to follow him.  Jesus spoke sparingly of hell and the writers of the new testament never preached "fire and brimstone".  If a person professes christianity simply to avoid hell, I would seriously doubt that he is a true believer.

No one on this thread seems to have read the OP, but since the rest are atheists it hardly applies to them.  As a Christian, I think you need to answer to the twist on Pascal's wager as I outlined in the OP.

Okay. There is no set amount of works that one must do to 100% guarantee admission into heaven. We're saved because we accept the sacrifice that Jesus made for us because no amount of works will get us into heaven. One who has faith in Christ will do good works because he is a follower of Christ and also loves his neighbor. One who doesn't do any works is obviously not a follower of Christ. Also, one can do all the good works he wants, but if he denies Christ then he won't enter heaven. We don't need to give away everything we have. That was Jesus' command to the "rich young man" because his riches were keeping him from giving himself over to God. He walked walked away sad because he loved his riches. What we are required to do is acknowledge that everything we have belongs to God and to use our wealth to serve God and his creation. Part of that purpose is to take care of ourselves and our families and also to care for those in need. Do most of us keep too much for ourselves? Yes, even when we try not to. That's why we need Christ for our salvation - because we'd never make it otherwise.

[athrock]

Pascal's wager, for the one or two of you who don't know, says that because there is between a 0% and 100% chance of Christianity being true, and because the consequences of unbelief are infinite, one ought to believe in Christianity.  There are many rebuttals to this, but to me the most obvious one is that one cannot actually force oneself to believe in something that is irrational no matter what the stakes are.  Can you force yourself to believe in unicorns?

That's not exactly what Pascal's Wager is saying.

For the person who has examined the evidence but is undecided about how to proceed, Pascal's Wager proposes that it is wiser to bet on the truth of the Gospel than against it. Further, it is noted that when you begin to behave as a believer (attending church, praying, reading scripture, etc.) these activities tend to reinforce the faith position thereby enabling one to make a final step (not a blind leap) of faith.

But if you already believe in Christianity, then you have to answer to the atheist version of your own wager.  You should sell all that you own and give to the poor, then wander the world doing good works and preaching the gospel.  

And clearly, many Christians have done just this. St. Francis of Assisi, for example. Mother Teresa of Calcutta. And too many others to mention.

There is clearly a 100% chance you'll get into heaven if you do this (provided your heart is right and all that jazz),

That last bit is quite important, because we cannot BUY or EARN our way into heaven, so your caveat is spot on.

but there is NOT a 100% chance that Jesus will accept you into heaven if you sit on your wealth while children starve to death.  Jesus did say that many will do good works, thinking they're Christian, but yet will still be cast into hell.  So if you live like a king in your Western world, occasionally going to church and giving a manageable tithe, there's no guarantee you will get into heaven.

You are saved by grace through faith, but faith without works is dead... so there is no guarantee that you are doing enough unless you do all that you can.

Not bad, overall, Nihilist. Christians would, in general, agree with you. However, while Jesus did call one young ruler to sell all that he had, He did not call everyone to that life of poverty. The key is in knowing what God wants from you personally.

If this is the Atheist Pascal's Wager, then I think it's fair to say that you're simply asking the kinds of questions that Christians ask of themselves often if not daily: Am I doing enough? Am I doing what God wants of me?

Thanks for bring this up.

[athrock]

This is part of an article which appears to have evaporated, but I took the precaution of saving it to my "I'm sure I'll find a use for this one day" file:

I'm not sure why you bothered. It's pretty stupid. Let's go through it (at least until I get bored).

The flaws

Did the author also provide a list of The Strengths? Just curious. Seems like anyone being objective could find a few positives.

The most obvious problems with Pascal’s Wager are:

• How do you know which god to believe in?  There are plenty to choose from, and if you pick the wrong one, you could be in big trouble (e.g. what if you choose Jesus, but get to heaven only to come face-to-trunk with Ganesh?).  This is known as the ‘Avoiding the wrong Hell problem.’  If a dozen people of different religions came to you with Pascal’s Wager, how could you possibly choose between them?  After all, many religions are quite specific that they are the One True Religion, and not any others.  Jesus Christ is supposed to have said, “I am the way, the truth and the light.  None shall come to the Father except through me.”  [emphasis added] and no doubt most other religions make similar claims.  If a Christian considers the Wager as strong support for his faith, surely he must accept that it is equally valid for all other religions when presented to himself?

Well, this is pretty much crap and betrays the ignorance of its author.

Yes, Pascal's Wager IS valid for all other religions. BIG. FREAKIN'. WHOOP.

It is a common misunderstanding that PW is a stand-alone apologetic for Christianity. It isn't. It is a way of reasoning about a situation in which someone is undecided about which direction to take after having considered the OTHER Christian apologetics. So, yes, a person still has to have done his or her homework about Jesus v. Ganesh, and that's what apologetics is all about. PW is not that.

Heh...if the author considers this an "obvious problem" with PW, then I counter that the real "obvious problem" is with the author's understanding of what PW is all about. 

• God is surely not stupid.  Won’t it know that you’re just trying to get a free ride into Heaven?  How can you sincerely believe in a god simply out of convenience?

First, the ONLY ride to heaven is a free ride, bro, 'cause somebody else already paid the price for you. That's kinda the whole point of the cross.

Second, the idea is that once you begin to think and act like a believer (based on PW), it becomes easier to believe as a believer. IOW, there is round one and round two...or a second level of belief that is reached later. The author assumes that the believer stays stuck at level one, and here we might agree; God will not be mocked by anyone playing at Christianity.

• If there is no God, you have still lost something.  You have wasted a good portion of your life performing the various devotional rituals, attending Churches, praying, reading scripture and discussing your deity with His other followers.  Not to mention giving your hard-earned money to the church, wasting your intelligence on theological endeavours and boring the hell out of people who really don’t want to hear your Good News.

Sorry, sport. I'm not buying any of this tripe. Non-believers pay big money to learn Yoga and other meditation techniques in order to find peace and harmony. Christians achieve peace through prayer and scripture. You're into Zen, I'm into Jesus. We'll call that even. So, that's not a waste of a "good portion" of time, is it? Next, atheists love to harp on how they can care for others, make their lives meaningful and so on without God. Great. You work with the Boy Scouts; I work at a soup kitchen. Sorry, but giving of our time, talent and treasure to others is the same whether you're doing it for the Democratic National Committee or First Baptist. You make your life meaningful your way; I'll do it mine. But that doesn't make mine any less important or valid than yours. You're oh-for-two here.

• Can you get away with just sort of generally believing in a Supreme Being, without specifically believing in one particular Deity?  Probably not - God will still know what you’re up to.  Also, many gods are quite particular about how they should be worshipped.  Many born-again Christians will tell you that the only way to Heaven is through accepting Jesus Christ as your personal saviour - nothing more and nothing less.  General-Deity-Belief and being nice simply won’t do.  Many people believe that all the different religions are merely alternative routes to the same destination.  Nice and tolerant (if a little warm ‘n’ fuzzy) though this may be, there is no valid reason to accept this stance over the fire-and-brimstone fundamentalist position: if the fundies are right, then the un-Saved liberal theists are in just as much trouble as the nonbelievers.

Oh, you're basing this crap on the erroneous soteriology of Christian fundamentalists. What a pity that your theological foundations are not set upon a more solid rock (Petros).

That ought to be enough to demonstrate the flaws in this article, and I'm bored now.

Poor rob...he really, really believes that this is a "comprehensive takedown" of Pascal's Wager. Sadly, he's probably not alone in this mistaken opinion.

[Cyberman]

Now have a crack at the alternative "atheists' wager" proposed. I also want to reiterate that I am not the author of the piece and I have tried to track down the original, for a citation. Maybe someone else will have better luck.

[Mr Greene]

Pascal's wager, for the one or two of you who don't know, says that because there is between a 0% and 100% chance of Christianity being true, and because the consequences of unbelief are infinite, one ought to believe in Christianity.  There are many rebuttals to this, but to me the most obvious one is that one cannot actually force oneself to believe in something that is irrational no matter what the stakes are.  Can you force yourself to believe in unicorns?

That's not exactly what Pascal's Wager is saying.

For the person who has examined the evidence but is undecided about how to proceed, Pascal's Wager proposes that it is wiser to bet on the truth of the Gospel than against it. Further, it is noted that when you begin to behave as a believer (attending church, praying, reading scripture, etc.) these activities tend to reinforce the faith position thereby enabling one to make a final step (not a blind leap) of faith.

But if you already believe in Christianity, then you have to answer to the atheist version of your own wager.  You should sell all that you own and give to the poor, then wander the world doing good works and preaching the gospel.  

And clearly, many Christians have done just this. St. Francis of Assisi, for example. Mother Teresa of Calcutta. And too many others to mention.

There is clearly a 100% chance you'll get into heaven if you do this (provided your heart is right and all that jazz),

That last bit is quite important, because we cannot BUY or EARN our way into heaven, so your caveat is spot on.

but there is NOT a 100% chance that Jesus will accept you into heaven if you sit on your wealth while children starve to death.  Jesus did say that many will do good works, thinking they're Christian, but yet will still be cast into hell.  So if you live like a king in your Western world, occasionally going to church and giving a manageable tithe, there's no guarantee you will get into heaven.

You are saved by grace through faith, but faith without works is dead... so there is no guarantee that you are doing enough unless you do all that you can.

Not bad, overall, Nihilist. Christians would, in general, agree with you. However, while Jesus did call one young ruler to sell all that he had, He did not call everyone to that life of poverty. The key is in knowing what God wants from you personally.

If this is the Atheist Pascal's Wager, then I think it's fair to say that you're simply asking the kinds of questions that Christians ask of themselves often if not daily: Am I doing enough? Am I doing what God wants of me?

Thanks for bring this up.