Atheist's Wager

Many Christians attempt to persuade atheists to change by using Pascal's Wager (though many don't use that label and seem unaware of its origin). They argue that it's "safer" to "bet" on the existence of their god because, if it exists, then believers go to heaven and the rest go to hell. This is a very poor argument and there are many flaws, but can atheists offer an alternative?

According to Errorlevel:

Instead, my wager is that if there is a god, and it is a just god, then living a just and moral life will be acknowledged regardless of ones beliefs. If there exists an unjust or immoral god, then I could never satisfy both my conscience and such a god. My wager is that if the Christians are right about god being just and all-knowing and all-loving, I will be rewarded if I act in morally sound, justified ways.

I don’t know if there is a god. To me, the idea of a god, or even of an afterlife pales in importance to what we experience everyday. Life. Life is the only thing that I “know” I have and when that is gone, I doubt I’ll be around to care, however, others will. I must live my life as I please, and since I believe I will only ever get one chance at it, I want to live it in the best manner that I can and help others do the same.

I'v tried to make similar observations myself. A just and moral deity wouldn't condition "eternal bliss" or "eternal torment" on a single belief. Such infinite fates aren't even morally just consequences of a finite life and a finite set of actions, but how much less just are they for a single belief? There is no morally just system under which either reward or punishment would be imposed for a belief (or lack thereof) that isn't even chosen in the first place.

Read More:

• Atheism 101
• Defining Atheism
• News About Atheism and Atheists