People Who Really Should be Hoping there is No God

For some, one of the more notable attributes associated with the idea of there being a God is the binary choice He is said to have offered mankind: be His friend and you’ll be blessed by Him for eternity; but, choose otherwise, and you’ll be left with an eternity that, at best, will be damned regrettable … to say the least.

Through the ages, many have wrestled with the rightness or wrongness of this concept, including the scientist and mathematician Blaise Pascal. It was he who put the real issue on the table with what has come to be known as the Pascal Wager: If you were to choose, would you bet that God exists or that He doesn’t?

Pascal concluded that betting on the former is an indication of one’s wisdom: if you’re correct, the benefits are immeasurable and eternal; and, if you’re wrong, the worst case scenario is that you become worm food.    

Conversely, Pascal said that to bet otherwise would be foolish: If you bet there is no God and are correct, your brightest hope after death is to become worm food but, if you lose the bet, you run the risk of being really wrong -- if, indeed, there exists an eternal hell.   

The pure genius of Pascal’s Wager is it provides a litmus test by which those who believe in God can evaluate the wisdom -- or lack thereof -- of others simply by observing whether how they choose to conduct their lives reflects their belief in a God … or not. And always remembering that the bet we may make today is not immutable … and, so long as we are alive, can be changed at will.

For example, consider those who openly champion the thought that somehow it is their “right” to murder, mutilate, sell, have sex with or market the body parts of our children. For the purposes of Pascal’s Wager, it matters not why they think they may have such rights -- whether it be for them to make a profit, for their convenience or to meet some distorted emotional need. It only matters that, by their claim to such a right, they are obviously overlooking the possibility that there really may exist a God who not only created the children at issue, but a God who, if He exists, will most certainly will be offended by their systemic abuse of His most vulnerable creations. When viewed through the lens of Pascal’s Wager, the bet made by these people most certainly lacks wisdom, and indeed, is foolish in the extreme. In time, will they change their “bet?” One can only hope.   

Then, consider next some pharmaceutical industry executives who work in conjunction with politicians and other government bureaucrats to increase their bottom line. Some might say, that’s “good business.” But not if it includes doing things like using politicians and executives at places like the Center for Disease Control to misuse both a pandemic and their official positions to mandate that all citizens be required to take an untested vaccine that these executives know in advance could quite possibly be injurious, and in some cases, lethal to many. Most certainly, that would be evil, and indeed, foolish to do, unless their taking of the foolish side of Pascal’s Wager is correct, and there really is no God that might hold them accountable.

The only thing that could be even more evil, and thus also foolish, is if one were to also discover along the way that many of these executives and bureaucrats knew that the pandemic that created the need for the vaccine they were selling was predicated upon the spread of a virus that, in fact, they had a hand in creating to generate future profits. Again, if there is a God, most would agree that such a course of action would be a textbook example of foolishness. Obviously these would be people who have made the choice to make money be their god for so long as they may be alive. Which again, can only be product of a fool who has chosen to bet that there is no God who will ever hold them eternally accountable. 

Such is a degree of foolishness that might only be equaled by that of an 83 year-old woman who chooses to abuse the powers of her office to orchestrate a fake insurrection that she knew at the get-go would be likely to ruin the lives of hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people solely for the purpose of disparaging a President she has always hated in a way she hopes will divert the public’s attention away from the unfathomable depths not only of her own corruption, but that her allies in her soon-to-be former political party -- i.e., those other foolish members of her cheering section in Congress who, no doubt, will quickly forget her forever soon after she is gone.   

Of what eternal value is that? And, in her case, what makes all this to be especially the acts of a true fool is the fact that she is still making decisions like this with complete disregard of the fact that she is very close to embarking by herself upon a voyage eternal -- a fact that apparently continues to elude her as she only continues to double down on her foolishness. In fact, just this week she dismissed a reporter’s question about whether Joe Biden’s age should be a concern in the upcoming election by responding, “Don’t bother me with such frivolity.”

Oh, indeed, your highness.   

One would think that, if she had any wisdom at all, she would be more concerned about her own age than the President’s. The undeniable truth is, if she would be willing to set the foolishness of her pride aside for even a moment and just listen, she probably would be able to hear the sounds being made by the grim reaper who, about now, is very likely to be eating a cracker on her front porch.   

Sadly, these are but a few examples of those who reveal by the lives they are living that, if they aren’t already hoping there’s no God … they really should be.   

What say each of you: Presidents Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden, Hillary Clinton, Dick Cheney, Dr. Albert Bourla, Anthony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky, Merrick Garland, Christopher Wray and Nancy Pelosi … et alia?

Clifford Nichols