*** DEBUG START ***
*** DEBUG END ***

Prudential case for believing in God

by
05 October 2012

iStock

From Dr Tim Hudson
Sir, - In answer to Alan Bartley (Letters, 28 September), Blaise Pascal's wager proposed not that it was "more rational" for an atheist to accept God's existence, but more prudential. The Christian, if mistaken in his belief, would at least lose nothing by his choice; whereas the atheist who refused the wager would risk the possibility of eternal torture.

The theory, of course, supposes that God would approve the atheist's cynicism in choosing the right course for the wrong reason. And the atheist would, in any case, also need to "live a better life", to use Mr Bartley's expression; though to suggest, as he does, that that is possible only for Christians is surely insulting to atheists - and to others as well.

TIM HUDSON
7 Hawthorn Close
Chichester PO19 3DZ

Letters to the editor

Letters for publication should be sent to letters@churchtimes.co.uk.

Letters should be exclusive to the Church Times, and include a full postal address. Your name and address will appear alongside your letter.

Church Times: about us

The Church Times Podcast

Interviews and news analysis from the Church Times team. Listen to this week’s episode online

Welcome to the Church Times

​To explore the Church Times website fully, please sign in or subscribe.

Non-subscribers can read four articles for free each month. (You will need to register.)