“You have a lot to lose if Christianity is true”

Why Pascal’s wager does not work

Good-natured Christians tell me “If Christianity is true, you have a lot to gain.” Annoying Christians tell me, “You have no idea where you are headed after you die, but I know.”

They are both applying the same utilitarian reasoning: If you become a Christian, and it turns out there is no afterlife, you lose only a little. But if you remain an atheist, and there is indeed an afterlife, you are toast.

This is what Pascal’s wager is about.

In this article, I give three reasons why Pascal’s wager does not work.

Don’t kid yourself; you lose a lot by becoming a Christian

In evangelism, many Christians talk as if believing in Jesus costs just a little. They conveniently forget that Jesus teaches that whoever follows him should be prepared to leave everything behind, including one’s own family.

Of course, not all Christians go to remote villages to be missionaries. You are not required to do that in order to be saved. But it is expected that all working Christians submit tithe to the church they attend. They are also expected to attend church services at least once a week. The time and money one puts into the Christian faith can add up over time, and become a sizable “investment”. All this for “just in case God is real”?

Furthermore, given the notorious sexual scandals happening in the church all around the world, one is actually risking their children being molested by sexual predators in the church. Talking about the cost!

I was a fervent Christian for many years. I spent every weekend attending church services and engaging in ministries. After I stopped going to church, I suddenly realized how much time I have on Saturdays and Sundays. Sometimes I lament the time and money I had wasted in church and the opportunities I lost as a result.

Nonetheless, I am glad I walked out of Christianity. Many are still trapped inside. I now use the extra time I have to do more meaningful activities, like learning how to code. I am even taking French classes.

So don’t tell me “You don’t have anything to lose by believing in Jesus, even if it turns out there is no afterlife.” It’s BS.

Which God?

Pascal admits that human intellect can never be sure whether God exists or not, so his wager is meant as a practical guide to push people to believe in God. However, Pascal assumes that if God exists, He will reward his believers with eternal life.

Yet, there is no justification for that assumption. And without it, Pascal’s wager is worthless.

Even if one wants to place a bet on belief in God, there are so many options out there it is impossible to determine which god will give you the best expected return or investment value.

Suppose the real God is a funny one, rewarding atheists with eternal life while punishing anyone who believes in God by hellfire, what then?

In short, there are not just two options, but possibly thousands. Is it really worth it to pick the Christian option and sacrifice so much time in church, giving out a tenth of your income, singing praise songs, and praying to someone who may not even be there?

I would argue that when you understand what’s going on with Pascal’s wager, the most prudent choice is to ignore the advertised spiritual benefit of all those religions, and focus on determining if there is any rational ground to believe that any of them is true.

Ask yourself, “Given the amount of evidence we have so far, what is the probability that Christianity (or any other religion) is true?”

One useful methodology is to compare the claims of religions with alternative explanations. For example, is it more probable that natural laws were violated so Jesus indeed resurrected or is it more likely that there was some sort of unfortunate mistakes or misunderstandings that led to early Christians believing something happened but in actuality did not?

Miracle, by definition, is the least possible explanation. One does not have to assume there is no God to arrive at that conclusion. Even if God exists, we hardly see Him performing miracles that are empirically verifiable. Whether you hypothesize God exists or not, miracles are very rare occurrences, if at all.

But we do know people can see things that are not there, exaggerate their experiences intentionally or unintentionally, and information can get twisted when it is communicated from one person to the other. They are all natural explanations with plenty of antecedents.

Christian doctrines do not allow you to apply Pascal’s wager to it

What? You think the almighty God is so stupid that He would see you as His faithful servant when you are just placing a bet, an investment strategy that would yield the highest expected return for you?

Hebrews 11:6 states very clearly:

And without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.

If you wish to have any chance of being approved by the Christian God, you need to first believe He exists.

The attitude that “I know God probably does not exist, but just in case He does, I will become a Christian so I can go to heaven if God turns out to be real” does not work in Christianity.

People don’t have to believe that they will get into a car accident for them to wear seat belts.

People don’t need to believe they will actually win the top prize for them to purchase lottery tickets. In fact, any lottery ticket buyer can tell you that the chance of winning the top prize is minuscule.

But Christianity requires you to believe God is real in order to become a Christian.

The attitude of risk management is not accepted as a genuine belief.

Last thoughts

The whole idea of using this marketing strategy to get people to believe in Christianity without demonstrating that it’s real strikes me as odd.

When scientists explain a scientific theory, they don’t say “You should accept this theory as real because if you do, and it is real, it will give you lots of benefits.” Instead, they give you objective data and evidence.

So it might be that when some Christians appeal to Pascal’s wager, this act betrays the fact that they don’t have good objective evidence to support their faith. Hence they resort to activating people’s FOMO (fear of missing out), trying to influence them to make emotional decisions.

Do you like being manipulated?