I read an interesting article by Libby Anne, a young woman who runs her own blog. She says she was raised by Christian homeschoolers, but then went to college, which according to her, “turned her world upside down”. She is now an atheist, and wrote the article below, to which I'd like to respond.


Libby Anne's Wager

Have you ever heard of Pascal's Wager? It has been used for centuries as an argument against atheism. I believe it is fatally flawed, and I have actually devised my own wager in its place.

Pascal’s Wager

If you erroneously believe in God, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end), whereas if you correctly believe in God, you gain everything (eternal bliss). But if you correctly disbelieve in God, you gain nothing (death ends all), whereas if you erroneously disbelieve in God, you lose everything (eternal damnation).

Basically, you might as well believe in God, because if you believe in God and he isn’t actually there you’ve still led a good life, but if you don’t believe in God but he is there, you will suffer huge consequences: eternity in hell. In essence, you must bet on the side of safety.

There are two main problems with this argument. First, who is to say god cares about or values belief specifically? Perhaps he or she actually values good deeds, or animal sacrifices, and cares nothing about belief? Second, which God are we to believe in? There are hundreds to choose from. What if you choose to believe in Allah to hedge your bets, but it turns out that the Christian God is the real one, or vice versa? Pascal’s Wager, then, really is a silly argument.

After I became an atheist, I did quite a bit of thinking about Pascal’s Wager. I knew it didn’t hold water, but I wondered if there was a replacement I could find. After some time, I came up with one.

Libby Anne’s Wager

When it comes to the question of God, there are four basic options:

1. There is no God.
2. There is a God, but that God does not care about humans.
3. There is a God, and it is a good and loving God.
4. There is a God, and it is an evil and hateful God.

In the case of options one or two, what we do or do not do here on this earth does not ultimately matter in a cosmic sense and will have no consequences after death. In the case of option three, a truly loving God would care more about whether we live by love and help others than about whether or not we believe in him or her. In the case of option four, do we really want to serve a God who cares more about legalsm than love, a God who sentences humans to eternal torture for not worshiping him or her? Therefore, whether one believes in a God, or in the correct God, matters less than does whether one lives by love.

There you have it. My conclusion is that what actually makes most sense is to live by love, seek to help others, and leave the world a better place. If that includes believing in a deity, so be it, but it doesn’t have to. And that is why I think Pascal was wrong.

Now you may wonder what I will do if the fourth option is correct, and it turns out that there is a God who values worship and belief over love and service, a God who believes that condemning people to infinite torture in return for finite sins is “just.” I do have a plan. I will start a rebellion.


If what she says about her upbringing is true, her parents might say she already started a rebellion quite a long time ago, and she's hard at war right now. At any rate, I'd like to respond to her article, and I'd like to start by addressing her two main problems, but in reverse order.

Which God are we to believe in?

Pascal spoke categorically of the God of the Bible, no doubt, but even so, the question still stands. Let me give two main reasons why I believe the God of the Bible is the true God.

First, if we look at the pantheon of other gods in the world, what do we find in regard to their relationship to man? Well, all of them say something like this:

“I am (god name). I created you. If I like you, after you die, I will reward you by letting you live in (heaven name) forever. If I don't like you, after you die I will throw you into (hell name). You can get me to like you by doing things for me like following (religious rules). If you don't follow (religious rules) to my satisfaction, I will throw you into (hell name). There is no way for you to know whether I am satisfied until after you die and you see my smile or my frown. Good luck.”

That's it. Read of any religion with a god (who is not the God of the Bible), and you'll find those general principles repeated again and again. All the gods say the same thing in one form or another. All but One. Only the God of the Bible says this:

“I am God. I created you. I love you much more than you can imagine. I want a deep, and abiding relationship with you right now, and I want you to come live with Me forever in heaven after you die. However, you are tainted with sin and utterly unfit for my family. There is not anything you could do for me by yourself that would allow you a relationship with Me or entrance into heaven. Think of the absolute best, most noble, and unselfish thing you could do for Me to earn heaven. To My perfect eyes, it is like garbage because of your sin.

“No, my child, the only way we can have a relationship and you can enter heaven is if I do something for you, and I've already done it. I sent My Son on a mission to live the life you ought to live and pay the price for your sin. Good news! The mission was a complete and unqualified success! He lived a life perfectly pleasing to Me, and He suffered a horrible, painful death on a cross to pay for your sin. I am totally satisfied with My Son's work on your behalf. We can get together now, and I can allow you into My heaven because of what My Son did. If you will confess your sins, repent of them, and by faith, accept My Son as your Lord and Savior, you can claim His life and His death as your own, and you can come live with Me forever. All you need to do is believe, agree with Me that this is the state of affairs, and we can begin to cultivate a deep relationship right now.”

THAT is an offer unique in all the world. Of course, it doesn't prove He's the one true God, but it certainly sets Him apart from all other gods. There are none who say what He says.

Second, how do we explain fulfilled prophecy in the Bible? There are hundreds of clear, easy to understand prophecies unquestionably written before the prophesied events occurred, and they are 100% accurate 100% of the time. How did Moses know Jesus would come from the line of Seth, Abraham, and Jacob? How did David know the Messiah would come from his line? How did Micaiah know where Jesus would be born? How was the psalmist able to describe Jesus's death so minutely, down to the exact words He would cry from the cross? How did Isaiah know all he knew about Jesus? Or how did Daniel know all about the history of the world before it happened? How were the Jews able to show Alexander the Great Daniel's prophecy concerning him and say that was the reason they did not stand against him? All these men from different times, cultures, and stations in life were able to write of the future with a precision and accuracy never seen anywhere else on earth. These prophecies are so precise and accurate that Herod used them to try to kill Jesus. How do we explain that? There is only one explanation: the Bible is the Word of God. There is only One Who can foretell the future with that kind of ironclad certainty and clarity. There is no other book on the planet like the Bible. The God of the Bible is the one true God.

Who is to say God cares about or values belief specifically?

Answer: God. He says it all over the Bible many times and in many ways. However, it is not a simple belief in His existence that He desires, and that certainly isn't the kind of belief Pascal implies. The Bible says Satan believes in God and trembles in that belief. No, God makes it extremely plain that He values belief that results in obedience to His will based upon a love relationship. The Bible says without faith, it is impossible to please Him, and by grace we are saved, not by good deeds, lest any man should boast.