Ask a Catholic

[Simon Moon]

“Let us then examine the point, and say, ‘God is , or He is not.’ But to which side shall we incline? Reason can decide nothing here. There is an infinite chaos which separated us. A game is being played at the extremity of this infinite distance where heads or tails will turn up. What will you wager?” (Blaise Pascal, Pensees, 233)

I don’t think you’re really asking me which is the right direction, Stimbo. In our hearts, we all know what is right and what is wrong because we were created in the image of God who is not merely good but who is Goodness itself.

He has planted an understanding of these things deep within us and we cannot shake free from it. We also have the capacity to choose between good and evil, right and wrong, because He gave us a conscience which feels the happiness of a choice well-made but also informs us by the pangs of guilt we feel over a poor choice.

You know these things because this is how you were made, Stimbo. But the question remains as to how you will choose to live. 

Sure, there are lots of religions and lots of arguments, but you are no stranger to them all; you know the evidence and the choice before you: either Christianity is true or nothing is.

The clock of your lifetime is running, and you must make your choice. 

1. If God does not exist, and you do not believe He exists, you lose nothing.
2. If God does not exist, and you believe He does, you lose nothing.

Not bad.  But there’s more:

3. If God exists, and you do not believe He exists, you lose all.
4. If God exists, and you believe He does, you win everything.

Where will you place your wager?

If atheists are correct (1 & 2), then nothing you do can cause you any loss. However, if Christians are correct (3 & 4), and you guess wrong, you lose all. 

Only by believing as a Christian are you guaranteed not only that you will never suffer loss, but that you will possibly enjoy infinite gain.

So, what is the right direction for you, Stimbo? 

It is to move in the direction of faith in Jesus Christ.

I am really disappointed. 

You came here with the attitude that you were a philosophically sophisticated Christian, and you were really going to challenge our disbelief. Now you post this laundry list of flawed and fallacious arguments. 

Special pleading, question begging, false dichotomy, unsupported assertions, followed by the mother of all flawed arguments, Pascal's Wager. What a joke.

Pascal's Wager was flawed in the 17th century, and it is no less flawed in the 21st. If you are unable to understand why, I really don't know what to say.

Here's a hint on why PW is flawed. There was an almost identical version of Pascal's Wager, from over 500 years before Blaise Pascal, authored by Muslim philosopher, Al-Ghazali, but the subject of belief was Allah, not the Christian god. So, how convincing is the Muslim version of the argument to you? 

[robvalue]

God = my god

Rookie mistake and rather telling.

Pascal's Wager particularly makes no sense for christianity because it assumes that the god of the bible is a reasonable being who will make decisions in a sensible way. This is clearly not the case. He's a total maniac. If he is in charge, we are all fucked and subject to his mad random acts of sadistic violence and ridiculous arbitrary kingmaking.

Unless of course, the god of the bible is not accurately portrayed by himself in his own book. If that's your opinion, I don't know why you're even reading it.

[Crossless2.0]

Either Christianity is true or nothing is? Pascal's Wager? Really?!?

And thus, in jumping the philosophical shark, another Christer reveals himself to be the shallow, manipulative twat I always suspected he was. Good job, Randy. You're a hell of an endorsement for your faith. If you like, I can try to rustle up some pre-schoolers and frightened seniors with dementia to try Pascal's Wager on. You might find them more receptive to your brand of 'reasoning'.

[Cyberman]

I've given you plenty of time and opportunity to give me a direct answer to a direct question, Randy. Now I'm done with you, as promised. You've got nothing. You're no different to any other rabid theist we've ever had. The same vague handwaving and snippets of biblespam, the same passive-aggressive threats, the same injured innocence. I'll leave you to your cat-hole-lick superstitions. And the very best of luck.

[Longhorn]

I for one think Pascals Wager is pretty convincing.

---

SAID NOONE EVER LOL

---

[Dystopia]

I for one think Pascals Wager is pretty convincing.

---

SAID NOONE EVER LOL

---

I think proponents of Pascal's wager consider the argument very convincing - It can be, not out of rationality, but fear and hope.

[abaris]

It can be, not out of rationality, but fear and hope.

Which ultimately is the oil that keeps the whole faith machine running.

[emjay]

I just really don't get it. I don't get why someone would go to all these lengths in life to defend and protect their belief in an afterlife I don't get what's so scary about non-existence... It's not existing in a black, terrifying void for all eternity. It's not existing full stop. No joy, no pain, no loss, no gain.

[nihilistcat]

I just really don't get it. I don't get why someone would go to all these lengths in life to defend and protect their belief in an afterlife   I don't get what's so scary about non-existence... It's not existing in a black, terrifying void for all eternity. It's not existing full stop. No joy, no pain, no loss, no gain.

Although I'm an atheist, I do understand the fear and apprehension of our mortality. Just look at our society, look at all the resources we spend to make our society a safer place. We don't do this because we relish the thought of death, we do this because we don't want to die. 

Even lower animals will recoil (or attack) in the face of danger, it's a survival mechanism. You might say that we're hard wired to fight for our survival (as most species are). 

So I think religion will always have that draw. The problem for me wasn't that I was angry with religion (honestly, religion never did anything wrong to me personally), or that I started liking the idea of death (I hate the fact that we die), it's just that it became clear to me that religion is bullshit. It's not as easy as some may imply to reach this conclusion. There's all sorts of things that make us want to believe in some sort of afterlife, and so we have a very powerful bias that clouds our reasoning. But once you really really come to understand that religion is bullshit, there's really no going back. Fortunately, for whatever reason, I have a pretty good disposition. I've been through all sorts of crazy shit in life. I served in the Iraq war, I witnessed dozens of soldiers get shot (and in some cases killed) when I was stationed at Ft. Hood in 2009 (try being an atheist in that situation, it wasn't easy), which is enough to make many people go nuts (and many of my fellow soldiers who witnessed the same things, did go crazy). But somehow I didn't, and I think that disposition makes it much easier for me to accept reality, as bleak as it may be. But everyone is different, and this is easier for some than it is for others. 

Honestly, I have no idea what would spur a devout theist to debate this topic with seasoned atheists? Most atheists on boards like this have a decent education, they've been atheists for many years, and they tend to know more about religion than most people who practice religion (and we're generally pretty well tuned into science). So what will a theist get out of this exercise besides maybe making themselves depressed and angry? But really, I do know why they're here. For the religionist, it's not enough that they have the right to practice their religion, they want to impose their views on everyone else. For whatever reason, religion induces authoritarianism. And it's true in pretty much every case (Abrahamic traditions, eastern traditions, and so on). It bothers the religionist that there's people on earth who disagree with them. It's an almost colonialist attitude. 

[robvalue]

I don't know why they are here either. I'm happy we do have theists here, but I'd love to know their real reasons.

I hear this weird argument a lot, "Why don't you want there to be an afterlife?" As if the existence of an afterlife depends on whether or not I believe in it, or claim knowledge about it, before it happens.

This seems to be how things work in religion. "Well, I don't believe in a literal Hell." Either there is a literal Hell or there isn't, and either way it doesn't toggle between them every time someone states their belief about it. This is where evidence comes in.