|
|
  
Probe Ministries
Blaise Pascal: An Apologist for Our Times
Rick Wade
Introduction
One of the tasks of Christian apologetics is to serve as a tool for evangelism. It is very easy, however, to
stay in the realm of ideas and never confront unbelievers with the necessity of putting their faith in
Christ.
One apologist who was not guilty of this was Blaise Pascal, a seventeenth-century mathematician,
scientist, inventor and Christian apologist. Christ and the need for redemption through Him were central
to Pascal's apologetics.
There was another feature of Pascal's thought that was, and remains, rare in apologetics: his
understanding of the human condition as both created and fallen, and his use of that understanding as a
point of contact with unbelievers.
Peter Kreeft, a modern day Christian philosopher and apologist, says that Pascal is a man for our
day. "Pascal," he says, "is three centuries ahead of his time. He addresses his apologetic to modern
pagans, sophisticated skeptics, comfortable members of the new secular intelligentsia. He is the first to
realize the new dechristianized, desacramentalized world and to address it. He belongs to us. . . . Pascal is
our prophet. No one after this seventeenth-century man has so accurately described our twentieth-century
mind."{1}
Pascal was born June 19, 1623 in Clermont, France, and moved to Paris in 1631. His mother died when
he was three, and he was raised by his father, a respected mathematician, who personally directed his
education.
Young Blaise took after his father in mathematics. In 1640, at age 16, he published an essay on the
sections of a cone which was much praised.{2} Between 1642 and 1644 Pascal developed a calculating
machine for his father to use in his tax computations. Later, he "invented the syringe, refined Torricelli's
barometer, and created the hydraulic press, an instrument based upon the principles which came to be
known as Pascal's law" of pressure.{3} He did important work on the problem of the vacuum, and he is
also known for his work on the calculus of probabilities.
Although a Catholic in belief and practice, after the death of his father and the entrance of his younger
sister into a convent, Pascal entered a very worldly phase of his life. Things changed, however, on the
night of November 23, 1654, when he underwent a remarkable conversion experience which changed the
course of his life. He joined a community of scholars in Port-Royal, France, who were known as
Jansenists. Although he participated in the prayers and work of the group, he didn't become a full-
fledged member himself. However, he assisted them in a serious controversy with the Jesuits, and some
of his writings on their behalf are considered "a monument in the evolution of French prose" by
historians of the language.{4}
In 1657 and 1658 Pascal wrote notes on apologetics which he intended to organize into a book. These
notes were published after his death as the Pensees, which means "thoughts" in French. It is this
collection of writings which has established Pascal in Christian apologetics. This book is still available
today in several different versions.{5}
Pascal was a rather sickly young man, and in the latter part of his short life he suffered from severe pain.
On August 19, 1662, at the age of 39, Pascal died. His last words were "May God never abandon me!"{6}
The Human Condition
To properly understand Pascal's apologetics, it's important to recognize his motive. Pascal wasn't
interested in defending Christianity as a system of belief; his interest was evangelistic. He wanted to
persuade people to believe in Jesus. When apologetics has evangelism as its primary goal, it has to take
into account the condition of the people being addressed. For Pascal the human condition was the starting
point and point of contact for apologetics.
In his analysis of man, Pascal focuses on two very contradictory sides of fallen human nature. Man is
both noble and wretched. Noble, because he is created in God's image; wretched, because he is fallen
and alienated from God. In one of his more passionate notes, Pascal says this:
What kind of freak is man! What a novelty he is, how absurd he is, how chaotic and what a mass
of contradictions, and yet what a prodigy! He is judge of all things, yet a feeble worm. He is
repository of truth, and yet sinks into such doubt and error. He is the glory and the scum of the
universe!{7}
Furthermore, Pascal says, we know that we are wretched. But it is this very knowledge that shows our
greatness.
Pascal says it's important to have a right understanding of ourselves. He says "it is equally dangerous for
man to know God without knowing his own wretchedness, and to know his own wretchedness without
knowing the Redeemer who can free him from it." Thus, our message must be that "there is a God whom
men can know, and that there is a corruption in their nature which renders them unworthy of Him."{8}
This prepares the unbeliever to hear about the Redeemer who reconciles the sinner with the Creator.
Pascal says that people know deep down that there is a problem, but we resist slowing down long enough
to think about it. He says:
Man finds nothing so intolerable as to be in a state of complete rest, without passions, without
occupation, without diversion, without effort. Then he faces his nullity, loneliness, inadequacy,
dependence, helplessness, emptiness. And at once there wells up from the depths of his soul
boredom, gloom, depression, chagrin, resentment, despair.{9}
Pascal says there are two ways people avoid thinking about such matters: diversion and indifference.
Regarding diversion, he says we fill up our time with relatively useless activities simply to avoid facing
the truth of our wretchedness. "The natural misfortune of our mortality and weakness is so miserable," he
says, "that nothing can console us when we really think about it. . . . The only good thing for man,
therefore, is to be diverted so that he will stop thinking about his circumstances." Business, gambling,
and entertainment are examples of things which keep us busy in this way.{10}
The other response to our condition is indifference. The most important question we can ask is What
happens after death? Life is but a few short years, and death is forever. Our state after death should be of
paramount importance, shouldn't it? But the attitude people take is this:
Just as I do not know where I came from, so I do not know where I am going. All I know is that
when I leave this world I shall fall forever into oblivion, or into the hands of an angry God,
without knowing which of the two will be my lot for eternity. Such is my state of mind, full of
weakness and uncertainty. The only conclusion I can draw from all this is that I must pass my
days without a thought of trying to find out what is going to happen to me.{11}
Pascal is appalled that people think this way, and he wants to shake people out of their stupor and make
them think about eternity. Thus, the condition of man is his starting point for moving people toward a
genuine knowledge of God.
Knowledge of the Heart
Pascal lived in the age of the rise of rationalism. Revelation had fallen on hard times; man's reason was
now the final source for truth. In the realm of religious belief many people exalted reason and adopted a
deistic view of God. Some, however, became skeptics. They doubted the competence of both revelation
and reason.
Although Pascal couldn't side with the skeptics, neither would he go the way of the rationalists. Instead
of arguing that revelation was a better source of truth than reason, he focused on the limitations of reason
itself. (I should stop here to note that by reason Pascal meant the reasoning process. He did not
deny the true powers of reason; he was, after all, a scientist and mathematician.) Although the advances
in science increased man's knowledge, it also made people aware of how little they knew. Thus, through
our reason we realize that reason itself has limits. "Reason's last step," Pascal said, "is the recognition
that there are an infinite number of things which are beyond it."{12} Our knowledge is somewhere
between certainty and complete ignorance, Pascal believed.{13} The bottom line is that we need to know
when to affirm something as true, when to doubt, and when to submit to authority.{14}
Besides the problem of our limited knowledge, Pascal also noted how our reason is easily distracted by
our senses and hindered by our passions.{15} "The two so-called principles of truth*reason and the
senses*are not only not genuine but are engaged in mutual deception. Through false appearances the
senses deceive reason. And just as they trick the soul, they are in turn tricked by it. It takes its revenge.
The senses are influenced by the passions which produce false impressions."{16} Things sometimes
appear to our senses other than they really are, such as the way a stick appears bent when put in water.
Our emotions or passions also influence how we think about things. And our imagination, which Pascal
says is our dominant faculty{17}, often has precedence over our reason. A bridge suspended high over a
ravine might be wide enough and sturdy enough, but our imagination sees us surely falling off.
So, our finiteness, our senses, our passions, and our imagination can adversely influence our powers of
reason. But Pascal believed that people really do know some things to be true even if they cannot
account for it rationally. Such knowledge comes through another channel, namely, the heart.
This brings us to what is perhaps the best known quotation of Pascal: "The heart has its reasons which
reason does not know."{18} In other words, there are times that we know something is true but we did
not come to that knowledge through logical reasoning, neither can we give a logical argument to support
that belief.
For Pascal, the heart is "the `intuitive' mind" rather than "the `geometrical' (calculating, reasoning)
mind."{19} For example, we know when we aren't dreaming. But we can't prove it rationally. However,
this only proves that our reason has weaknesses; it does not prove that our knowledge is completely
uncertain. Furthermore, our knowledge of such first principles as space, time, motion, and number is
certain even though known by the heart and not arrived at by reason. In fact, reason bases its arguments
on such knowledge.{20} Knowledge of the heart and knowledge of reason might be arrived at in
different ways, but they are both valid. And neither can demand that knowledge coming through the other
should submit to its own dictates.
The Knowledge of God
If reason is limited in its understanding of the natural order, knowledge of God can be especially
troublesome. "If natural things are beyond [reason]," Pascal said, "what are we to say about supernatural
things?"{21}
There are several factors which hinder our knowledge of God. As noted before, we are limited by our
finitude. How can the finite understand the infinite?{22} Another problem is that we cannot see clearly
because we are in the darkness of sin. Our will is turned away from God, and our reasoning abilities are
also adversely affected.
There is another significant limitation on our knowledge of God. Referring to Isaiah 8:17 and 45:15{23},
Pascal says that as a result of our sin God deliberately hides Himself ("hides" in the sense that He doesn't
speak}. One reason He does this is to test our will. Pascal says, "God wishes to move the will rather than
the mind. Perfect clarity would help the mind and harm the will." God wants to "humble [our] pride."{24}
But God doesn't remain completely hidden; He is both hidden and revealed. "If there were no obscurity,"
Pascal says, "man would not feel his corruption: if there were no light man could not hope for a
cure."{25}
God not only hides Himself to test our will; He also does it so that we can only come to Him through
Christ, not by working through some logical proofs. "God is a hidden God," says Pascal, " and . . . since
nature was corrupted [God] has left men to their blindness, from which they can escape only through
Jesus Christ, without whom all communication with God is broken off. Neither knoweth any man the
Father save the Son, and he to whosoever the Son will reveal him."{26}
Pascal's apologetic is decidedly Christocentric. True knowledge of God isn't mere intellectual assent to
the reality of a divine being. It must include a knowledge of Christ through whom God revealed
Himself. He says:
All who have claimed to know God and to prove his existence without Jesus Christ have done so
ineffectively. . . . Apart from him, and without Scripture, without original sin, without the
necessary Mediator who was promised and who came, it is impossible to prove absolutely that
God exists, or to teach sound doctrine and sound morality. But through and in Jesus Christ we
can prove God's existence, and teach both doctrine and morality.{27}
If we do not know Christ, we cannot understand God as the judge and the redeemer of sinners. It is a
limited knowledge that doesn't do any good. As Pascal says, "That is why I am not trying to prove
naturally the existence of God, or indeed the Trinity, or the immortality of the soul or anything of that
kind. This is not just because I do not feel competent to find natural arguments that will convince
obdurate atheists, but because such knowledge, without Christ, is useless and empty." A person with this
knowledge has not "made much progress toward his salvation."{28} What Pascal wants to avoid is
proclaiming a deistic God who stands remote and expects from us only that we live good, moral lives.
Deism needs no redeemer.
But even in Christ, God has not revealed Himself so overwhelmingly that people cannot refuse to
believe. In the last days God will be revealed in a way that everyone will have to acknowledge Him. In
Christ, however, God was still hidden enough that people who didn't want what was good would not
have it forced upon them. Thus, "there is enough light for those who desire only to see, and enough
darkness for those of a contrary disposition."{29}
There is still one more issue which is central to Pascal's thinking about the knowledge of God. He says
that no one can come to know God apart from faith. This is a theme of central importance for Pascal; it
clearly sets him apart from other apologists of his day. Faith is the knowledge of the heart that only God
gives. "It is the heart which perceives God and not the reason," says Pascal. "That is what faith is: God
perceived by the heart, not by the reason."{30} "By faith we know he exists," he says.{31} "Faith is
different from proof. One is human and the other a gift of God. . . . This is the faith that God himself puts
into our hearts. . . ."{32} Pascal continues, "We shall never believe with an effective belief and faith
unless God inclines our hearts. Then we shall believe as soon as he inclines them."{33}
To emphasize the centrality of heart knowledge in Pascal's thinking, I deliberately left off the end of one
of the sentences above. Describing the faith God gives, Pascal said, "This is the faith that God himself
puts into our hearts, often using proof as the instrument."{34}
This is rather confusing. Pascal says non-believers are in darkness, so proofs will only find obscurity.{35}
He notes that "no writer within the canon [of Scripture] has ever used nature to prove the existence of
God. They all try to help people believe in him."{36} He also expresses astonishment at Christians who
begin their defense by making a case for the existence of God.
Their enterprise would cause me no surprise if they were addressing the arguments to the
faithful, for those with living faith in their hearts can certainly see at once that everything which
exists is entirely the work of the God they worship. But for those in whom this light has gone out
and in who we are trying to rekindle it, people deprived of faith and grace, . . . to tell them, I say,
that they have only to look at the least thing around them and they will see in it God plainly
revealed; to give them no other proof of this great and weighty matter than the course of the
moon and the planets; to claim to have completed the proof with such an argument; this is giving
them cause to think that the proofs of our religion are indeed feeble. . . . This is not how
Scripture speaks, with its better knowledge of the things of God.{37}
But now Pascal says that God often uses proofs as the instrument of faith. He also says in one place,
"The way of God, who disposes all things with gentleness, is to instil [sic] religion into our
minds with reasoned arguments and into our hearts with grace. . . ."{38}
The explanation for this tension can perhaps be seen in the types of proofs Pascal uses. Pascal
won't argue from nature. Rather he'll point to evidences such as the marks of divinity within man, and
those which affirm Christ's claims, such as prophecies and miracles, the most important being
prophecies.{39} He also speaks of Christian doctrine "which gives a reason for everything," the
establishment of Christianity despite its being so contrary to nature, and the testimony of the apostles
who could have been neither deceivers nor deceived.{40} So Pascal does believe there are
positive evidences for belief. Although he does not intend to give reasons for everything, neither does he
expect people to agree without having a reason.{41}
Nonetheless, even evidences such as these do not produce saving faith. He says, "The prophecies of
Scripture, even the miracles and proofs of our faith, are not the kind of evidence that are absolutely
convincing. . . . There is . . . enough evidence to condemn and yet not enough to convince. . . ." People
who believe do so by grace; those who reject the faith do so because of their lusts. Reason isn't the
key.{42}
Pascal says that, while our faith has the strongest of evidences in favor of it, "it is not for these reasons
that people adhere to it. . . . What makes them believe," he says, " is the cross." At which point he quotes
1 Corinthians 1:17: "Lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power."{43}
The Wager
The question that demands to be answered, of course, is this: If our reason is inadequate to find God,
even through valid evidences, how does one find God? Says Pascal:
Let us then examine the point and say: "Either God exists, or he does not." But which of the
alternatives shall we choose? Reason cannot decide anything. Infinite chaos separates us. At the
far end of this infinite distance a coin is being spun which will come down heads or tails. How
will you bet? Reason cannot determine how you will choose, nor can reason defend your position
of choice.{44}
At this point Pascal challenges us to accept his wager. Simply put, the wager says we should bet on
Christianity because the rewards are infinite if it's true, while the losses will be insignificant if it's
false.{45} If it's true and you have rejected it, you've lost everything. However, if it's false but you have
believed it, at least you've led a good life and you haven't lost anything. Of course, the best outcome is if
one believes Christianity to be true and it turns out that it is!
But the unbeliever might say it's better not to choose at all. Not so, says Pascal. You're going to live one
way or the other, believing in God or not believing in God; you can't remain in suspended animation.
You must choose.
In response the unbeliever might say that everything in him works against belief. "I am being forced to
gamble and I am not free," he says, "for they will not let me go. I have been made in such a way that I
cannot help disbelieving. So what do you expect me to do?"{46} After all, Pascal has said that faith
comes from God, not from us.
Pascal says our inability to believe is a problem of the emotions or passions. Don't try to convince
yourself by examining more proofs and evidences, he says, "but by controlling your emotions." You want
to believe but don't know how. So follow the examples of those who "were once in bondage but who
now are prepared to risk their whole life. . . . Follow the way by which they began. They simply behaved
as though they believed" by participating in various Christian rituals. And what can be the harm? "You
will be faithful, honest, humble, grateful, full of good works, a true and genuine friend. . . . I assure you
that you will gain in this life, and that with every step you take along this way, you will realize you have
bet on something sure and infinite which has cost you nothing."{47}
Remember that Pascal sees faith as a gift from God, and he believes that God will show Himself to
whomever sincerely seeks Him.{48} By taking him up on the wager and putting yourself in a place where
you are open to God, God will give you faith. He will give you sufficient light to know what is really
true.
Scholars have argued over the validity of Pascal's wager for centuries. In this writer's opinion, it has
significant weaknesses. What about all the other religions, one of which could (in the opinion of the
unbeliever) be true?
However, the idea is an intriguing one. Pascal's assertion that one must choose seems reasonable. Even if
such a wager cannot have the kind of mathematical force Pascal seemed to think, it could work to startle
the unbeliever into thinking more seriously about the issue. The important thing here is to challenge
people to choose, and to choose the right course.
Summary
Pascal began his apologetics with an analysis of the human condition drawn from the experience of the
new, modern man. He showed what a terrible position man is in, and he argued that man is not capable of
finding all the answers through reason. He insisted that the deistic approach to God was inadequate, and
proclaimed Christ whose claims found support in valid evidences such as prophecies and miracles. He
then called people to press through the emotional bonds which kept them separate from God and put
themselves in a place where they could find God, or rather be found by Him.
Is Blaise Pascal a man for our times? Whether or not you agree with the validity of Pascal's wager or
some other aspect of his apologetics, I think we can gain some valuable insights from his ideas. His
description of man as caught between his own nobility and baseness while trying to avoid looking closely
at his condition certainly rings true of twentieth-century man. His insistence on keeping the concrete
truth of Christ at the center keeps his apologetics tied to the central theme of Christianity, namely, that
our identity is found in Jesus, where there is room for neither pride nor despair, and that in Jesus we can
come to a true knowledge of God. For apart from the knowledge of Christ, all the speculation in the
world about God will do little good.
Notes
- Peter Kreeft, Christianity for Modern Pagans: Pascal's Pensees Edited, Outlined and Explained (San
Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 13, 189.
- Hugh M. Davidson, Blaise Pascal (Boston: Twayne Publishers, 1983), 4.
- The New Encyclopedia Britannica Macropedia, 15th ed., s.v. "Pascal, Blaise."
- Davidson, 18.
- James Houston's translation, Mind On First: A Faith for the Skeptical and Indifferent (Minneapolis:
Bethany House, 1997), will be quoted extensively in these notes. This version was edited to retain only the
individual pensees which are pertinent for apologetics. Mind On Fire also includes edited versions
of some of Pascal's Provincial Letters, the ones he wrote against the Jesuits. The reader might also want to
refer to Peter Kreeft's version (cf. note 1 above) which includes Kreeft's comments on individual pensees.
- Davidson, 22.
- Houston, 91.
- Blaise Pascal, Pensees, trans. W.F. Trotter, 97.
- Kreeft, 187.
- Houston, 96.
- Ibid., 122.
- Kreeft, 238.
- Ibid., 124.
- Ibid., 236.
- Houston, 58.
- Ibid., 58.
- Ibid., 53.
- Trotter, 50.
- Kreeft, 228.
- Ibid., 229.
- Ibid., 238.
- Ibid., 120-26, 293.
- Trotter, 178; see also 130.
- Kreeft, 247.
- Ibid., 249.
- Ibid., 251.
- Houston, 147.
- Ibid., 149.
- Kreeft, 69.
- Ibid., 232.
- Houston, 130.
- Kreeft, 240.
- Houston, 223.
- Kreeft, 240.
- Houston, 151.
- Ibid., 152.
- Kreeft, 250-51.
- Ibid., 240.
- Houston, 205; Trotter, 52.
- Trotter, 52; Kreeft, 266.
- Houston, 116-17.
- Ibid., 221-22.
- Ibid., 223.
- Ibid., 130-31.
- Kreeft, 292.
- Houston, 133.
- Ibid., 133.
- Kreeft, 251, 255.
© 1998 Probe Ministries International
About the Author
Rick Wade graduated from Moody Bible Institute with a B.A.
in Communications (radio broadcasting) in 1986. He graduated
cum laude in 1990 from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School with
an M.A. in Christian Thought (theology/philosophy of religion) where
his studies culminated in a thesis on the apologetics of Carl
F. H. Henry. Rick and his family make their home in
Garland, Texas. He can be reached via e-mail at
rwade@probe.org.
What is Probe?
Probe Ministries is a non-profit corporation whose mission is to reclaim the
primacy of Christian thought and values in Western culture through media,
education, and literature. In seeking to accomplish this mission, Probe provides
perspective on the integration of the academic disciplines and historic
Christianity.
In addition, Probe acts as a clearing house, communicating the results of
its research to the church and society at large.
Further information about Probe's materials and ministry may be obtained by
writing to:
Probe Ministries
1900 Firman Drive, Suite 100
Richardson, TX 75081
(972) 480-0240 FAX (972) 644-9664
info@probe.org
www.probe.org
Copyright (C) 1996-2008 Probe Ministries
Email this to a friend
copyright
© 1995-2008
Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 14 July 2002
|