No, it doesn't. I'll explain.
According to Wikipedia (at the time of this writing), the Atheist's Wager states that if one were to analyze their options in regard to how to live their life, they would arrive at the following possibilities:
(A) You may live a good life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
(B) You may live a good life without believing in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
(C) You may live a good life and believe in a god, but no benevolent god exists, in which case you leave a positive legacy to the world; your gain is finite.
(D) You may live a good life without believing in a god, and no benevolent god exists, in which case you leave a positive legacy to the world; your gain is finite.
(E) You may live an evil life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to hell: your loss is infinite.
(F) You may live an evil life without believing in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to hell: your loss is infinite.
(G) You may live an evil life and believe in a god, but no benevolent god exists, in which case you leave a negative legacy to the world; your loss is finite.
(H) You may live an evil life without believing in a god, and no benevolent god exists, in which case you leave a negative legacy to the world; your loss is finite.
But this is inaccurate. Out of these eight supposedly rational possibilities, only two can actually be rationally affirmed. And of those two rational possibilities, through observation of the world around us, and consideration of our own character, we each experientially know for ourselves that only one of them is actual.
WHAT IS "GOOD"?
First, leading a "good" or "evil" life needs to be defined. "Evil" actions are actions that people ought not do because they violate authoritative prescriptions or goals for human behavior. "Good" actions, on the other hand, conform to these authoritative goals for human behavior. Now, note that any set of goals can properly be called a "will," and thus authoritative goals over humans are an authoritative will over humans. But, any authoritative will over humans simply is a god. Therefore, as soon as we describe human behavior as "good" or "evil," we are claiming that a god of some kind exists.
Further, when we consider that every time we use our minds, we are implicitly asserting that whatever made our minds not only (1) knew what it was doing, but also that it (2) had good intentions toward us... we are left with a precondition for rationality that the god that necessarily exists is also benevolent.
Therefore, we can completely rule out options (C), (D), (G), and (H), which claim that "no benevolent god exists," as they are rationally impossible.
THE NONEXISTENCE OF DISBELIEF
Since we all believe that a benevolent god exists, and we rely upon this belief every time we use our minds, no thinking person, analyzing their options, would ever rationally conclude that it's rationally possible to not believe in a god. Given this, we can also rule out (B) and (F), which claim that we can disbelieve in a god, as also being rationally impossible.
At this point, we see that only (A) and (E) appear to be rationally possible:
(A) You may live a good life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to heaven: your gain is infinite.
(E) You may live an evil life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to hell: your loss is infinite.
THE PURPOSE OF RELIGIONS
However, religions exist to instruct people on how to become right with the god or gods of that religion. This strongly indicates that no one is already right with their god, and also that everyone knows this about themselves. In other words, no one is good, no, not one (Psalm 14:3, 53:3; Romans 3:12).
This leaves exactly one option out of the eight Martin suggests for rational people being honest about their own lives and their own wickedness:
(E) You may live an evil life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, in which case you go to hell: your loss is infinite.
THE PROBLEM RECOGNIZED, AND RESOLVED
And this is exactly what Christianity teaches (Romans 1:18-25, 3:23, 6:23). God exists. You believe he exists. You've led an evil life. You're going to hell. Your loss will be infinite.
However, because God is not merely "benevolent," but also gracious, loving, all-knowing, all-powerful, and unthinkably merciful, he has provided another option in contrast to the one we all deserve -- something better than hell. As Romans 6:23 states, "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." As Romans 10:9 puts it, if you "confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."
REPENT AND TURN TO CHRIST
Rationally and experientially, of the eight options Michael Martin suggests, only one option can be affirmed, and it isn't pleasant. However, historically, Jesus conquered death to atone for our sins, so that we can be right with the God who created us, not through our own good works, but by means of his mercy.
In other words, God presents us with this additional option:
(I) You may live an evil life and believe in a god, and a benevolent god exists, and he gives you a heaven you don't deserve: your gain is infinite.
No better offer exists.
The only wager I see is to either bet on hell, or to bet on Jesus.
Comments