Blaise Pascal and William Paley's Apologetics
Blaise Pascal
Pascal’s apologetic principle is commonly known as the “Pascal’s Wager.” This argument is a pragmatic belief that individuals and society should follow the teachings and principles of Christian doctrine because it would lead to more “good.” Pascal’s principles of apologetics were rooted in the belief that reason alone will not lead someone to Christianity but only through the heart.[1] His understanding of the dynamics of faith and reason is similar to that of St. Augustine, in which one must have faith first, then understanding will occur.[2] This is best exemplified through his statement, “The man who seeks stringent evidence for the truth of Christianity will not find it. God has so arranged things that there is enough light for those who desire only to see, and enough obscurity for those who have the contrary disposition. Those who are able to believe without proofs do so because God inclines their hearts.”[3] Therefore, the challenge of the wager is there is no way for one to know or prove God’s existence, but if one bets on God’s existence and wins, they win everything, and if they lose, they lose nothing. So, it is more profitable to gamble that God exists since you will gain everything. One of the clear advantages of this argument is the pragmatic benefit of individuals living by the Gospel doctrine; as Richard Dawkins and Elon Musk stated, they are cultural Christians. But, this is not authentic Christian conversion based on accepting Jesus Christ as your savior. Pascal recognized the deficiency of this technique in converting someone to Christianity indeed but argued that some would eventually convert over time. Another objection is which god does one wager? In Pascal’s wager, it is between the Triune God and naturalism, but in modern times, there are numerous religions where one can place their bets.[4] This objection does hold validity, but one can examine the various religious doctrines to determine which is more likely to be factual.[5]
William Paley
William Paley's apologetic argument is based on a traditional epistemic defense of the existence of God. His teleological argument is looking at the universe to see the natural signs of God. Paley is credited for advocating that when someone sees a watch, they know there was a watchmaker who created the watch. Paley’s beliefs concerning faith and reason were significantly different than Pascal's, where Paley's arguments were rooted in the concept that reason alone will lead an individual to the Christian faith. The teleological argument has been refuted by numerous historical figures such as Charles Darwin, David Hume and, more recently, Richard Dawkins. This refutation has become so dogmatic numerous college professors, like the one who taught me Biology, teach that evolution is a fact and must be accepted with no debate. Despite this claim, the teleological argument with the “Fine Tune Approach” is becoming a more accepted apologetic approach and scientific acceptance within the academic profession.
Pascal and Paley's model of apologetics represents two varying approaches that cannot be reconciled to form one coherent apologetic argument. Despite this, I do feel both approaches hold an important approach in defending the Christian faith and evangelical practice to convert individuals to the catholic body of Christ. (lower case catholic means a person who belongs to the universal Christian church) As I listened to the podcast between Jordan Peterson and Elon Musk, it was clear that both individuals do not hold Christian doctrine but both individuals expressed positive attributes of the Christian faith in one’s life. It is obvious that both individuals desire the fruit of Christianity but not the roots. Therefore, considering Pascal’s wager, it appears at least Jordan Peterson, who has made the statement multiple times, “Read the Bible, and follow its commandments." What else do you have to lose?” So, concerning which approach is the most affected today? Maybe we will see in those two individuals’ lives that Pascal’s wager was effective, but I know I have been successful using the teleological approach, the Fine-Tuning Model, in discussing with my fellow physicians.
[1] Avery Cardinal Dulles, A History of Apologetics, (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1999) 161.
[2] Ibid, 163.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Tyler Dalton McNabb and Michael R. Devito. “Wagering the Truthfulness of Christianity” in The History of Apologetics, Ed. By Benjamin K. Forrest, Joshua D. Chatraw, and Alister E. McGrath. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020) 320.
[5] Ibid.