The Investigation into Two Objections to Pascal’s Wager
In his essay “Wagering belief: examining two objections to Pascal’s wager,” D. Groothuis (1994) provides two explanations of objections to Pascal’s wager. He first begins to explain the basic structure of Pascal’s wager and then proceeds to critique two objections against it. The first of these examinations is whether Pascal’s guide for invoking belief involve a forced brainwashing. The second is why a theistic belief for salvation may or may not be sufficient for a theological argument. As a basic structure for his argument, Pascal’s wager attempts to make the reader want to believe in God despite whatever their current belief may be. Groothuis shares how the wager claims it is ‘safer …show more content…
483). As critics John Hick, William James and others point out, ‘a deity demanding belief is egotistical and not worthy of religious consideration’ (p. 483). Pascal’s argument for this however, is that those who make the wager and are given faith end up being able to receive certain spiritual and ethical benefits they may not otherwise be able to access. Groothuis provides an example of a violinist that regardless of ability, will need a master tutor to become better. A teacher is needed and the student must believe in the ability of the teacher to teach and so the violinist can advance (p. 484). To find faith one has to recognize their need for salvation and grace; they have to believe in the mediator, Jesus, in order to receive said grace. Groothuis then notes that Pascal seems to direct all of his explanation towards Christianity, as can be seen by his explicit examples of engaging in Christian religious practices. This is because we only know God through Jesus, and that without him, all communication with God would be broken off (p. 485).Belief in the deity is necessary, but not a sufficient condition for eternal
In his essay “Wagering belief: examining two objections to Pascal’s wager,” D. Groothuis (1994) provides two explanations of objections to Pascal’s wager. He first begins to explain the basic structure of Pascal’s wager and then proceeds to critique two objections against it. The first of these examinations is whether Pascal’s guide for invoking belief involve a forced brainwashing. The second is why a theistic belief for salvation may or may not be sufficient for a theological argument. As a basic structure for his argument, Pascal’s wager attempts to make the reader want to believe in God despite whatever their current belief may be. Groothuis shares how the wager claims it is ‘safer …show more content…
483). As critics John Hick, William James and others point out, ‘a deity demanding belief is egotistical and not worthy of religious consideration’ (p. 483). Pascal’s argument for this however, is that those who make the wager and are given faith end up being able to receive certain spiritual and ethical benefits they may not otherwise be able to access. Groothuis provides an example of a violinist that regardless of ability, will need a master tutor to become better. A teacher is needed and the student must believe in the ability of the teacher to teach and so the violinist can advance (p. 484). To find faith one has to recognize their need for salvation and grace; they have to believe in the mediator, Jesus, in order to receive said grace. Groothuis then notes that Pascal seems to direct all of his explanation towards Christianity, as can be seen by his explicit examples of engaging in Christian religious practices. This is because we only know God through Jesus, and that without him, all communication with God would be broken off (p. 485).Belief in the deity is necessary, but not a sufficient condition for eternal