Adivi
Regular Member
This is known as Pascal's Wager, and every freshman philosophy student can tear it to shreds. As an unbeliever since age 14, this is probably at least the hundreth time I've heard this as if it had never been refuted before.
To put it succinctly, there are two main logical problems:
1) You assume there are only two possibilities. This is false. There are a number of other religions which contradict your own, and also offer the same claim of infinite reward and infinite punishment. In fact, I can make up any number of mutually contradictory claims, each of which promises infinite reward for belief and infinite punishment for rejection, and you cannot say that any one of these has zero probability. That makes the wager equation undecidable.
2) The concept of infinite payout is an absurdity. If you offer an infinite payout for belief, then the payout remains infinite even if you make belief conditional on some event with arbitrary (but non-zero) probability. In other words, I could say "I'll believe in God when wild monkeys fly out of my rear", and that position has exactly the same payout as outright belief.
You forgot 3: that God will accept someone into heaven who believes in him not because he truly believes down to the bottom of his heart, but because he figures he might as well.
Upvote
0
