I remember reading about the Pascal Wager during my first year of college. I was impressed by his reasoning and thought it was a good tool for apologetics. I even used it once or twice while witnessing.
While there are actually several corollaries to his argument, the most well known is his “wager” argument. Simple put, it consists of two choices (belief and unbelief). If you do not believe and are wrong you will suffer eternal punishment, but if you are right you will enjoy eternal happiness. So, it is in your best interest to believe because if you are wrong you do not loose anything, and if you are right you gain everything.
As you can see, this is primarily a practical argument. One that I believe has several shortcomings.
First, if you approach God on the basis of skepticism, will he not know? Your motives are insincere at best, and sincerity is an important if not a vital aspect of religion.
Secondly, this argument is for a belief in the “theos”. It does not help one know which religion to choose. Since the motive is based on pragmatism, why not be a pantheist polytheist? Better to worship everything, then to pick the wrong one and thereby anger the god(s) you are trying to please.
Lastly, this argument is only moderately effective for works based religions. It is worthless to Christianity. This is because Christianity is based on belief (faith) not works.
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. (Heb 11:6)
Salvation by grace is vital. There is nothing that we can do to be right before God. He sent his Son, Jesus Christ, to die for our sins so that we could be judicially righteous before Him.
Salvation does not occur through pragmatic belief. It can only be realized through sincere faith.
