Atheist version of Pascal's wager

[Mr Greene]

Mother Teresa left poor to suffer and die untreated because she thought it was more picturesque, whilst she fraudulently had her charity pay for expensive private medical treatment when her health failed. Propaganda does not accurately reflect reality.

[Nihilist Virus]

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.

If Jesus was only talking to the rich young ruler, then why is the conversation in the Bible?  After all, John was not there to witness it.  Therefore the Holy Spirit revealed to John that this conversation had occurred, or else Jesus deliberately told John personally.  Why involve John if the conversation was meant to be just between Jesus and the rich young ruler?

Also you aren't addressing what the actual wager is saying.  You don't know for 100% that Jesus is OK with you keeping your big screen plasma TV while children are starving.  You simply DON'T KNOW that Jesus is OK with this.  Jesus also said that many will come to him saying they did good works in his name and etc but that they're still headed for the flames.  Why would Jesus do that?  Because their heart wasn't right.  So you tell me how your heart is right if you're hoarding wealth while children starve.

Works are not required because you're on the honor system with the grace of the New Testament.  Everyone in the Western world is pissing all over the grace provided to them.  Every Christian in the Western world as is lukewarm as piss.  If you truly had the faith that you're going to heaven for all eternity, you wouldn't give two shits about your TV. It's literally as if you just won the lottery, but you immediately start playing Angry Birds because you're too bored to be excited about the riches that await you.

---

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.  

I'm going to copy/paste what I said to Lek because it applies here:


If Jesus was only talking to the rich young ruler, then why is the conversation in the Bible?  After all, John was not there to witness it.  Therefore the Holy Spirit revealed to John that this conversation had occurred, or else Jesus deliberately told John personally.  Why involve John if the conversation was meant to be just between Jesus and the rich young ruler?


You don't know for 100% that Jesus is OK with you keeping your big screen plasma TV while children are starving.  You simply DON'T KNOW that Jesus is OK with this.  Jesus also said that many will come to him saying they did good works in his name and etc but that they're still headed for the flames.  Why would Jesus do that?  Because their heart wasn't right.  So you tell me how your heart is right if you're hoarding wealth while children starve.

Works are not required because you're on the honor system with the grace of the New Testament.  Everyone in the Western world is pissing all over the grace provided to them.  Every Christian in the Western world as is lukewarm as piss.  If you truly had the faith that you're going to heaven for all eternity, you wouldn't give two shits about your TV. It's literally as if you just won the lottery, but you immediately start playing Angry Birds because you're too bored to be excited about the riches that await you.

[RobbyPants]

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

Ah, the old "put your money where your mouth is approach". Very nice. I'm sure most Christians will just dismiss this or will come up with justifications why they're allowed to hoard material wealth, but his is good. The goal isn't to prove yourself 100% right; just that there's the chance that you'd be right.

[robvalue]

Well, either your bible/quran is the perfect word of god or it isn't.

If it is, you're not following it, bucko. Not even close. If you were, you'd be DEAD, in jail, or in ISIS.

If it isn't, it should be subjected to the same scrutiny as any other man made book. And it fails instantly as being obvious fiction. At absolute best it's primitive man's description "of god", using their extremely limited language and knowledge. I wish people would use this latter description for it, so they could at least be honest about why they ignore most of it.

[The Grand Nudger]

My thoughts exactly.  I;m gonna go out on a limb here and state that whenever anybody talks about what they believe, with respect to those "great books"....theyre only referring to what they know of them.  Likely a small portion no matter who they are.  They don't believe in the rest of the shit they don't know about, or haven't yet considered.  Those chapters left to be memorized.  Or even those chapters ignored.

It's a point of commonality between atheists and theists, really.

[robvalue]

Indeed, I have shocked both atheists and theists with the contents of the bible. With theists, you can see the eyes glaze over and the information shooting right out the other ear.

[Lek]

If Jesus was only talking to the rich young ruler, then why is the conversation in the Bible?  After all, John was not there to witness it.  Therefore the Holy Spirit revealed to John that this conversation had occurred, or else Jesus deliberately told John personally.  Why involve John if the conversation was meant to be just between Jesus and the rich young ruler?

We're supposed to take the message that Jesus was giving him. That message is that if something is keeping you from following God, then you need to get rid of it. The rich young man loved his riches more than he loved God.

Also you aren't addressing what the actual wager is saying.  You don't know for 100% that Jesus is OK with you keeping your big screen plasma TV while children are starving.  You simply DON'T KNOW that Jesus is OK with this.  Jesus also said that many will come to him saying they did good works in his name and etc but that they're still headed for the flames.  Why would Jesus do that?  Because their heart wasn't right.  So you tell me how your heart is right if you're hoarding wealth while children starve.

This is a valid question. How much of your wealth does God want you to keep to care for the needs of you and your family? Probably most of us are keeping more than we should. With me it's been a growing process. I've gradually been letting go of more and more to help those in need, but I believe I have a long way to go. If we all followed Christ to a "t", we could eliminate most of the poverty in the world.

Works are not required because you're on the honor system with the grace of the New Testament.  Everyone in the Western world is pissing all over the grace provided to them.  Every Christian in the Western world as is lukewarm as piss.  If you truly had the faith that you're going to heaven for all eternity, you wouldn't give two shits about your TV.  It's literally as if you just won the lottery, but you immediately start playing Angry Birds because you're too bored to be excited about the riches that await you.

I can't argue with you on this. Western christians have had it too easy. Most western christians these days aren't even familiar with the bible. That's one reason we're in decline. Christianity has always been more vital during times of persecution. It weeds out the pretend christians from the real ones. I keep trying to become a more perfect christian, but I must rely on grace for salvation.

[RobbyPants]

We're supposed to take the message that Jesus was giving him.  That message is that if something is keeping you from following God, then you need to get rid of it.  The rich young man loved his riches more than he loved God.

Are you 100% sure that's the correct interpretation?

[Ravenshire]

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.

Some of us may tell others what we believe is right or wrong. But, we don't tell people that they must believe as we do or they'll be tortured for all eternity.

[Lek]

We're supposed to take the message that Jesus was giving him.  That message is that if something is keeping you from following God, then you need to get rid of it.  The rich young man loved his riches more than he loved God.

Are you 100% sure that's the correct interpretation?

No. I'm not 100% sure about anything, but I also don't know anybody else who thinks it means that everyone should give away every single material possession and give it to the poor. Then we would be poor and we would have to take from others' material goods.