You don't believe in Pascal's wager

Commander Xenophon

Member of the Admiralty
Jan 18, 2016
533
515
47
St. Louis, MO
✟3,959.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Because that is the way of attaining perfection UNDER THE LAW.

But we are not under the LAW, we are under GRACE, and our perfection comes by Jesus Christ.

Forgive me, but I am not sure that is quite correct. Under the Law, under the Torah, we find many very wealthy individuals, and we do not see quite the same exhortation to charity as found in the Gospel. This is not to imply Christians must avoid wealth; I think you do have a point, in that it is the grace of our Lord that saves, but for some people, it is their calling to gove their possessions away, and we see this in the lives of many of the saints of the early church.

To put it another way: accumulating earthly wealth will not save, whereas giving it away can be salvific.
 
Upvote 0

St_Worm2

Simul Justus et Peccator
Site Supporter
Jan 28, 2002
27,523
45,449
67
✟2,930,846.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
...accumulating earthly wealth will not save, whereas giving it away can be salvific.

:scratch: - please elaborate for us a bit about how generosity "saves". IOW, what does being generous or having a giving nature save us from?

Thanks!

--David
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
You're sneaky. I just re-read my OP and actually I'm not wrong. The Vatican has around $1 billion US of its own documented money plus whatever it has lurking off the books. They are not a normal bank so they can do things like that.

It is true that I was thinking that the Vatican was hoarding valuable pieces of art, but I didn't say so here.

While I commend you for educating me on this matter, I find it regrettable that you deliberately avoid issues as a common habit on my other threads.
Why don't you focus on yourself, instead of other people or other institutions.

You are not going to be able to stand before your Maker and make any impressions by pointing out others faults.

Pascal is right on target. You, personally have 1 of 2 choices. Make the best choice for you, eternity is waiting.
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Why don't you focus on yourself, instead of other people or other institutions.

You are not going to be able to stand before your Maker and make any impressions by pointing out others faults.

Pascal is right on target. You, personally have 1 of 2 choices. Make the best choice for you, eternity is waiting.

If your point is that I'm going to hell, my point is that you're going there with me.
 
Upvote 0

Peter1000

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2015
7,876
488
71
✟124,865.00
Faith
Mormon
Marital Status
Married
If your point is that I'm going to hell, my point is that you're going there with me.
If you believe there is a possibility we are going to hell, you must then believe there is a possibility that heaven and God exist. You are right of course, and I agree with you.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Pascal's wager actually makes certain sense, it is not the way of seeking truth though.

OK. Let me know when you've read my post, and then let me know why you haven't sold all of your possessions and devoted your life to helping the poor.
 
Upvote 0

Hawkins

Member
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2005
2,570
394
Canada
✟238,750.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
OK. Let me know when you've read my post, and then let me know why you haven't sold all of your possessions and devoted your life to helping the poor.

That remains my sin not to do so. I am so weak that I won't be able to do that. That's actually why I have to rely on Jesus for my sin to be forgiven.

This is not a weakness of me alone. Humans as a whole won't be able to do that with a godly standard. The Bible simply mentioned this standard actually to illustrate that we can't get pass the judgment of Law. However God can make us the righteous through our weaknesses. It is because we are no longer measured by our works alone. Instead we are redeemed by our faith alone.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
That remains my sin not to do so. I am so weak that I won't be able to do that. That's actually why I have to rely on Jesus for my sin to be forgiven.

This is not a weakness of me alone. Humans as a whole won't be able to do that with a godly standard. The Bible simply mentioned this standard actually to illustrate that we can't get pass the judgment of Law. However God can make us the righteous through our weaknesses. It is because we are no longer measured by our works alone. Instead we are redeemed by our faith alone.

Yes but Jesus is going to tell some people to depart from him because he never knew them, even though they believed themselves to be Christians. Even though they professed faith. How do you know 100% that Jesus will be OK with you owning a TV while children starve?

Do you even understand that the point of the wager is that our lives are meaningless in the face of eternity, so as long as you are not 100% sure of your own salvation, your behavior needs to change. Period.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mindlight

See in the dark
Site Supporter
Dec 20, 2003
13,631
2,677
London, UK
✟824,604.00
Country
Germany
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If you truly believe that Pascal's wager is a good argument, shouldn't you sell all that you own, give to the poor, and wander the world doing good works and preaching the gospel? After all, there is a 100% chance Jesus would approve of this, and there is NOT a 100% chance Jesus approves of you living a life of luxury while children starve to death. Also Jesus clearly said that some people who think they are Christians will nevertheless go to hell (Matthew 7:22-23).

Most Christians who do sell all that they own subscribe to the Catholic Church, but I don't think Jesus would be too fond of an organization that (1) hoards wealth while the world starves and (2) systematically orchestrated and concealed thousands abominable crimes (not to mention a long, long history of unspeakable cruelty). Jesus took it to the pharisees at every opportunity, so I think there is at least the possibility that he would expect any member of the Catholic church to be equally (if not more) opposed to those in power.

The point of the wager is that if there is a chance, however small, that God exists, then we ought to act accordingly. Well I'm telling you now that there is a chance, however small, that Jesus doesn't approve of YOUR lifestyle. It is quite clear that at most a handful of people on this earth take the wager seriously, so Pascal's wager is a dead philosophy.

I do not remember a time when I ever did not believe in God. I have had bad times and fallen times but I have always believed he was there. So Pascals wager never made sense to me for the simple reason that I never understood how a person could lack faith in the first place. Of course with age and experience of numerous atheists I have come to the realisation that people actually exist who doubt the existence of God and you appear to be one of them.

So my first point is that both of us have completely different starting points about how the world is and how we should view it. God does not animate and add meaning to all things in your worldview but you may not even be aware of what you are missing. Something like a black and white tv owner in the age of high definition TV.

Pascals wager in this context is comparing one black and white film with another and asking which is better. If you never saw the film in HD colour then you really do think there is an equivalence between the 2 stories. In that context the choice does not seem as stark and the consequence of the wager holds little risk either way.

The second point seems to imply that if Pascals wager is really the reason why Christians are Christians then its extremity demands that we give up everything of this world in order to relate to Christ. I do not really understand this conclusion though it clearly applies to some Christians ( e.g. the rich young man who had a problem with covetousness and who had great wealth was urged to give up everything he owned and follow Christ). Other believers in the gospel times clearly continued to own property after coming to know Jesus and he never rebuked them for that. If the world and everything in it Is from God then what we have we hold by trust and in accordance with our callings. I guess in one sense every Christian does give up everything they have when they become a Christian to God. But you seem to neglect the fact about what God gives back and what God allots to our stewardship. So in real terms while some are called to a penniless and homeless existence not all are. Committing our lives to God does carry the real and worthwhile risk of losing everything we currently have to gain a treasure of eternal value even to the point of our lives but it is statistically more likely to leave most Christians better off and with that eternal treasure also.
 
Upvote 0

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,132
3,089
✟405,713.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
OK. Let me know when you've read my post, and then let me know why you haven't sold all of your possessions and devoted your life to helping the poor.

Let me know when you read post #19 where I answered your question. Then again, you tend to give the impression that you really do not want an answer to your question.
Pascal's Wager is named after 17th-century French philosopher and mathematician Blaise Pascal. One of Pascal’s most famous works was the Pensées (“Thoughts”), which was published posthumously in 1670. It is in this work that we find what is known as Pascal's Wager.

The gist of the Wager is that, according to Pascal, one cannot come to the knowledge of God’s existence through reason alone, so the wise thing to do is to live your life as if God does exist because such a life has everything to gain and nothing to lose. If we live as though God exists, and He does indeed exist, we have gained heaven. If He doesn’t exist, we have lost nothing. If, on the other hand, we live as though God does not exist and He really does exist, we have gained hell and punishment and have lost heaven and bliss. If one weighs the options, clearly the rational choice to live as if God exists is the better of the possible choices. Pascal even suggested that some may not, at the time, have the ability to believe in God. In such a case, one should live as if he had faith anyway. Perhaps living as if one had faith may lead one to actually come to faith.

Now there have been criticisms over the years from various camps. For example, there is the argument from inconsistent revelations. This argument critiques Pascal's Wager on the basis that there is no reason to limit the choices to the Christian God. Since there have been many religions throughout human history, there can be many potential gods. Another critique comes from atheist circles. Richard Dawkins postulated the possibility of a god that might reward honest disbelief and punish blind or feigned faith.

Be that as it may, what should concern us is whether or not Pascal's Wager can be squared with Scripture. The Wager fails on a number of counts. First and foremost, it doesn’t take into account the apostle Paul’s argument in Romans 1 that the knowledge of God is evident to all so that we are without excuse (Romans 1:19-20). Reason alone can bring us to the knowledge of God’s existence. It will be an incomplete knowledge of God, but it is the knowledge of God nonetheless. Furthermore, the knowledge of God is enough to render us all without excuse before God’s judgment. We are all under God’s wrath for suppressing the truth of God in unrighteousness.

Second, there is no mention of the cost involved in following Jesus. In the gospel of Luke, Jesus twice warns us to count the costs of becoming His disciple (Luke 9:57-62; 14:25-33). There is a cost to following Jesus, and it is not an easy price to pay. Jesus told His disciples that they would have to lose their lives in order to save them (Matthew 10:39). Following Jesus brings with it the hatred of the world (John 15:19). Pascal's Wager makes no mention of any of this. As such, it reduces faith in Christ to mere credulity.

Third, it completely misrepresents the depravity of human nature. The natural man—one who has not been born again by the Holy Spirit (John 3:3)—cannot be persuaded to a saving faith in Jesus Christ by a cost-benefit analysis such as Pascal's Wager. Faith is a result of being born again and that is a divine work of the Holy Spirit. This is not to say that one cannot assent to the facts of the gospel or even be outwardly obedient to the law of God. One of the points from Jesus’ parable of the soils (Matthew 13) is that false conversions are going to be a fact of life until the time Christ returns. However, the sign of true saving faith is the fruit it produces (Matthew 7:16-20). Paul makes the argument that the natural man cannot understand the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Why? Because they are spiritually discerned. Pascal's Wager makes no mention of the necessary preliminary work of the Spirit to come to the knowledge of saving faith.

Fourth and finally, as an apologetic/evangelistic tool (which is what the Wager was intended to be), it seems focused on a risk/reward outlook, which is not consistent to a true saving faith relationship in Christ. Jesus placed obedience to His commands as an evidence of love for Christ (John 14:23). According to Pascal's Wager, one is choosing to believe and obey God on the basis of receiving heaven as a reward. This is not to diminish the fact that heaven is a reward and that it is something we should hope for and desire. But if our obedience is solely, or primarily, motivated by wanting to get into heaven and avoid hell, then faith and obedience become a means of achieving what we want rather than the result of a heart that has been reborn in Christ and expresses faith and obedience out of love of Christ.

In conclusion, Pascal's Wager, while an interesting piece of philosophical thought, should have no place in a Christian’s evangelistic and apologetic repertoire. Christians are to share and proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ, which alone is the “power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Romans 1:16).
 
Upvote 0

Nihilist Virus

Infectious idea
Oct 24, 2015
4,940
1,251
40
California
✟156,979.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
The second point seems to imply that if Pascals wager is really the reason why Christians are Christians then its extremity demands that we give up everything of this world in order to relate to Christ. I do not really understand this conclusion though it clearly applies to some Christians ( e.g. the rich young man who had a problem with covetousness and who had great wealth was urged to give up everything he owned and follow Christ). Other believers in the gospel times clearly continued to own property after coming to know Jesus and he never rebuked them for that. If the world and everything in it Is from God then what we have we hold by trust and in accordance with our callings. I guess in one sense every Christian does give up everything they have when they become a Christian to God. But you seem to neglect the fact about what God gives back and what God allots to our stewardship. So in real terms while some are called to a penniless and homeless existence not all are. Committing our lives to God does carry the real and worthwhile risk of losing everything we currently have to gain a treasure of eternal value even to the point of our lives but it is statistically more likely to leave most Christians better off and with that eternal treasure also.

I'm only addressing this paragraph as you are off topic until you get here.

I think it would be foolish and arrogant to suggest that one knows for 100% certainty that Jesus is content with your decision to own things far and away above your bare necessity (TV, golf clubs, etc) while children are starving to death. I'm an atheist, yet I don't claim to know for 100% certainty that God doesn't exist. In fact, that is the whole point behind the Flying Spaghetti Monster. You, on the other hand, seem to know the entire mind of God, or at least you seem to think you know God's mind well enough to be 100% confident that he will not tell you to depart from him, since you never knew him.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 14, 2015
6,132
3,089
✟405,713.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm only addressing this paragraph as you are off topic until you get here.

I think it would be foolish and arrogant to suggest that one knows for 100% certainty that Jesus is content with your decision to own things far and away above your bare necessity (TV, golf clubs, etc) while children are starving to death. I'm an atheist, yet I don't claim to know for 100% certainty that God doesn't exist. In fact, that is the whole point behind the Flying Spaghetti Monster. You, on the other hand, seem to know the entire mind of God, or at least you seem to think you know God's mind well enough to be 100% confident that he will not tell you to depart from him, since you never knew him.

Well, why don't you tell us why you haven't given up all your possessions? You know...just in case.
 
Upvote 0