of pascals and nudity
The original title was going to be of pascals and the unseeable clothes, however, it struck me that the word nudity might get me some random hits… 😉
I was recently asked to reconsider Christianity (in all its splendor) in another Pascal’s Wager type argument: I was asked to consider it from a risk-benefit analysis. (hell fire of course being the risk)
Imagine a child growing up, in a village and being taught about the Emperor’s new clothes. Told by everyone from birth that they are real, (and how wonderful and beautiful they are). And in fact everyone in the village wears the same, putting them on every morning.
The child puts the “clothes” on too, but sometimes wonders about the weird feeling that they cannot see or feel the clothes. She looks around at the others and wonder if they truly cannot see too, and if they can’t, why would they say they can?
I fully realize that the flip side to this (for those who believe) is like a scene in Hook. That if one believes they will begin to see. (Bangarang)
However, if one tries to believe, in god, and prays and talks to him (and spent a large amount of their life attempting to do so)
And it is a bit like the child in the village venturing out and seeing the next village and seeing them call her “naked” and laugh at her as she sees clothes for the first time. The child begins asking fervently about their clothes. All sorts of questions. Could they really not see hers either?
The child grows up, and wonders…how many really see the clothes? was it just her that had the problem?
In the above scenario compared to my own life, I am quite willing to admit there are more than one possibility.
The first, being there were no clothes to begin with.
Another being, the clothes can only be seen by certain people. Those elected and called to see them. Others can try but will fail.
Then there is the Divine Hiddenness theory: that one must seek to find. (bangarang)
However, with this theory: for one who HAS sought, prayed, fasted, asked, hoped, and still not seen….
Would a good/loving/compassionate/benevolent God prevent reasonable non-belief?
Or as Nietzsche’s asked: “a god who is all-knowing and all-powerful and who does not even make sure his creatures understand his intentions — could that be a god of goodness?”