As it is relevant to
my most recent post concerning the Existence of God, I had the idea of
discussing the thinking of a French mathematician and philosopher from the
1600's who many will be familiar with.
Blaise Pascal is
known of course for incredibly significant contributions to mathematics and
sciences, but lesser known is that he was also a bit of a philosopher and
apologist on the side. While he has written an entire book entitled Defense of the Christian Religion, right now I
intend to only look at one stream of thought he had. I don't call it an
argument per se, but I do think it relevant to the existence of God and to
one's thinking about whether or not God actually exists - and if I should
believe in Him or not.
You may or may not
have heard of "Pascal's Wager". It's a quite simple
"argument" (though again I use the term loosely), and is often put
forth in a simplified manner like so:
One
who believes in God has nothing to lose and everything to gain,
While
he who disbelieves in God has everything to lose and nothing to gain.
Now that is greatly
simplified, and deserves some explaining. Pascal would argue that all people,
whether they think they do or not, place a wager on one truth - whether or not
God exists. A wager, he would say, because of the life-changing implications (gains
or losses) that depend on the outcome. If God exists, then we have everything
to gain by believing in him and everything to lose by not; and yet if he does
not exist, I have nothing to lose if I believe in him (it changes nothing), and
there is simply no gain if he does not exist.
For I may lose everything if I have chosen to reject God, and I have
both wasted my current life and made no investment for the life to come.
Do you see the
point? It's almost like life is a game of probability (but since it is life,
this is a most serious game… and everyone plays!). As I assess my options, I
find that one could hold great eternal reward, and a small (though
disappointing) result if I lose (being: nothing to look forward to after death). But then I
see that the other has literally no positive benefit if I am right and yet
could have a host of great losses if I bet wrongly… The choice I make then, assuming that both are equally likely, should be an obvious one if I'm no fool. Of
course, I ought to bet that God exists! In fact, I think I would devote the entirety of my life to finding out the truth of who God is - it is the most important thing I can think of. It would not be simply enough to think that God exists - the implications are that I must find him also!
For me, this kind of
thinking is very supportive in rationalizing why one ought to believe in the
existence of God, though it is not itself evidence for the existence of God.
Nonetheless, I thought it a helpful thinking exercise and one worth giving you as
you contemplate the very important question of God's existence and what that
could mean for your life. Be sure to see my other posts arguing not just for
the existence of God but for the truth of the God of Christianity! It is then
when things get interesting.
Keep thinking
Corey
