Pascal's Wager of Resurrection: When Reason Chooses Faith in the Resurrection of Christ

Introduction

The resurrection of Jesus Christ—
this may be the boldest and most scrutinized claim in human history.

The idea that "a person rises from the dead" seems unrealistic. It is therefore natural that many people find it difficult to believe in the resurrection of Christ.

However, what if this really happened?
How should we think about its authenticity?

Here, I would like to explore the "possibility of the resurrection" together through rational, probabilistic reasoning, in a way that is accessible even to those who do not hold the faith.

Fine-tuning of the Universe: Rationality as a Premise for "Miracles"

First, I believe we must acknowledge that there is a harmony in the natural world that can only be described as a "miracle."
Modern physics suggests that life could not have existed if the structure of the universe (such as physical constants, gravity, and the balance of electromagnetic forces) had not been extremely finely tuned.

This is called the "fine-tuning of the universe," and it is said that the probability of its occurrence is1 in 10 to the 40th power(1 in a trillion × 1 in a trillion × 1 in a trillion × 1 in 10,000).

Given this background, the premise that "there is a miraculous background to the birth of the universe and our lives" does not seem irrational.

The Focus of the Argument: Why Did the Disciples Begin to Speak of the Resurrection?

In considering the resurrection of Christ, this is the question I want to place at the center:

“What happened that caused the disciples to begin saying, "Jesus has risen"?”

According to the accounts in the Gospels, immediately after Jesus was executed, the disciples fled and lost hope. However, according to the Acts of the Apostles, from the day known as Pentecost, 50 days after his death, they began to publicly proclaim that "Jesus has risen" and started to preach at the risk of their lives.

A Complementary Event Approach: What Explanations Are Possible Other Than Resurrection?

In considering this question, I will compare both the "possibility that the resurrection actually occurred" and "explanations other than the resurrection."

As for "explanations other than the resurrection," the following hypotheses can be considered:

1. Falsehood Hypothesis
Someone began to tell a lie, so to speak, that "he has risen," and everyone believed it.

2. Hallucination Hypothesis
The disciples collectively experienced hallucinations or wishful thinking.

3. Misidentification Hypothesis
Someone emptied the tomb, and the mystery was interpreted as a "resurrection."

4. Theological Construction Hypothesis
A "resurrection faith" was formed in later years in some theological or cultural way.

Even including all of these,the probability that such an event actually occurred, that people believed it from the bottom of their hearts, and even went to their martyrdom, does not feel very high.

Looking at the current spread of the Christian population in the world, the Christian faith, which started with the resurrection, seems to still have a continuous influence.
To reach this current situation, let us tentatively assume that the probability of all explanations other than the resurrection is "50%."

Academic Perspective: Intellectuals Who Have Discussed the Historicity of the Resurrection

Furthermore, the question of whether the resurrection of Christ is a "rationally believable event" is said to be seriously examined by many scholars even today.

For example, philosopher of religion Richard Swinburne (born December 26, 1934), an emeritus professor at the University of Oxford in the UK, is said to highly evaluate the probability that Christ's resurrection actually occurred, based on probability theory and philosophical analysis. In his book "The Resurrection of God Incarnate," he reportedly concluded, based on rational inference assuming the existence of God, that "the probability that Christ is the Son of God and rose from the dead is 97%." However, it should be noted that this "97%" is not a scientific measurement but rather the professor's own philosophical and logical estimation. Swinburne acknowledges the uncertainty of his own premises and estimations, stating clearly that "this is an inference based on certain premises" and that the results would change if the reader were to adopt different premises. In other words, it is thought that he is not arguing for a "high probability of 97%," but rather that "the possibility of believing even rationally is extremely high."

Additionally, British New Testament scholar Tom Wright (born December 1, 1948) emphasizes, through the scrutiny of historical documents, the facts that Jesus' tomb was empty and that the disciples acted out of a genuine belief in the resurrection. In his major works "Surprised by Hope" and "The Resurrection of the Son of God," he argues that "the resurrection is the most persuasive explanation as a historical fact."

As you can see, faith in the resurrection is not merely a myth, but a subject that is seriously discussed in the fields of philosophy, history, and theology.

The Framework of the Argument: The Rationality of Believing in the Resurrection

Based on the above premises, I believe the following inference holds:

If all "explanations other than the resurrection" combined only have a 50% chance, could the remaining 50% be considered the "probability that the resurrection truly occurred"?

This can be said to be a way of thinking that borrows from probability theory in mathematics regarding "events and complementary events." Because the real world is complex, I think it can also be called an estimate of reliability based on rational inference rather than strict probability theory.

Philosophical Auxiliary Lines for Faith: Combining with Pascal's Wager

If we assume it is "worthy of about 50% reliability" in this way,
here we can apply the famous "Pascal's Wager" to add even more weight:

Also, while I use the expression "little to lose" here, there is also the view that even if one gives up some time, the practice of a life of faith, or a portion of one's freedom, the peace of mind and hope gained are by no means small, meaning that even in this life, what is gained is greater than what is lost.

In other words, when combining the rational estimation of the resurrection above with Pascal's Wager (for the resurrection), the choice to believe in the resurrection can be considered a choice that cannot be called a loss even when thinking rationally.

Conclusion: How Do You Judge?

What I have presented here is one way of thinking. The final "weighting" of the probability is left to your own heart as the reader.

• Among believers, there are those who see the possibility of anything other than the resurrection as less than 1%.

• On the other hand, from a skeptical standpoint, there are those who see more than 99.9% as something other than the resurrection.

This article serves as a midpoint. It was an attempt to make a rational estimation under the premise of a 50:50 probability. I hope it serves as an aid to your own contemplation.

Afterword

The "Resurrection of Christ" is one of the greatest questions in history. While understanding its weight, I believe it is necessary for us to face this question.