1 John 1: 1-4
I know someone who likes to explain to me his philosophy of religion every chance he gets. This is how he looks at it, he says. It’s better to believe in God than not believe in God. If God is real, you win! And if it turns out there is no God, what have you lost? Nothing. On the other hand, if you choose not to believe and it turns out you should have, then God might be pretty ticked off at you somewhere down the road. So, you should believe in God, because – really, what have you got to lose? It’s as safe as a bet can be.
My friend likes this argument and maybe even thinks he invented it. He didn’t. It’s called Pascal’s Wager, named after the 17th century philosopher. So it’s been around for a while. And it probably appeals to lots of people – including, maybe, you.
What I need to confess to you is that … this theory? it offends me. And I have never said that before, because it seems inappropriate for me to be offended by it.
All I can say is that it feels like a weird way for humans to convince themselves they have it all under control. Like you can choose to believe if you decide it’s in your best interest to believe. I find so many things about that troubling. And opposed to what I read in the scriptures. And the readings today from the Gospel of John and the first epistle of John really emphasize that for me. I will try to explain why that is, but first let me take a minute to talk about the books that go by the name John.
People used to assume that the gospel of John and the epistles of John were written by the same guy called John. When you look at them closely, you can see that the writings share some of the same ideas, language, and style. So it was reasonable to assume they were all written by the same hand. But scholars today tend to think this is unlikely. More likely, they think, that they are a part of something we call the Johannine community.
The story of the Johannine community is that it was made up of people who were originally Jewish Christians. They were a part of a Jewish synagogue and they believed that Christianity was continuous with Judaism. They believed there was nothing inconsistent with their beliefs about Jesus and their Jewish traditions. They felt perfectly at home within the Jewish community. Even though there were differences between them and their non-Christian Jewish brothers and sisters, they felt at home – for a while.
But then tension began to rise. Gradually everyone began to feel those differences as being more important than the similarities. And eventually the Christians were pushed out of the community – which was painful and traumatic. And maybe you see some of that pain reflected in the way John’s gospel has a tendency to disparage the Jews.
I suppose as a result of a traumatic rejection like that, you could become a person who decides that you just can’t trust anyone, that the most important thing is to be self-reliant. You could decide that your highest value is to make sure you are doing what serves you best. Take care of yourself and don’t worry about the rest.
But in reality, it seems like what really happened as a result of the break, was they became aware of how important community was to them. So they cherished it and nurtured it. They loved it, and all the people in it. This comes through very clearly in the epistles of John.
Notice in the few verses from the beginning of 1 John how many times the author uses the first-person plural: We, us, our. This pattern continues throughout this set of epistles. The person holding the pen is always conscious of the whole community standing with him. You get the sense that the whole community has made the decision that this is who they are, that their lives individually are all dependent on one another. The community is essential to them.
And to us as well. This is a foundational belief of the church – that we are followers of Christ together. That one cannot really be a Christian alone. It is not an independent pursuit; it is something we do together if we do it at all.
And this gets back to the fundamental problem I have with the “Pascal’s Wager” school of faith. It has underlying it an essential belief that faith is self-benefitting, that it is something you do out of self-interest. That the primary reason for believing is to take care of yourself. And that you simply choose to believe, the same as you might choose to put on lipstick or go to the gym. Because, it can’t hurt and it might help.
And while faith surely is beneficial to one’s well-being, Pascal’s Wager misses out on the reason why. It is beneficial because it is community. We need one another, and in the church, we are there for one another.
The Holy Spirit, that parting gift that Jesus gave his disciples before he left them, is how we receive the power to be together as a community. That first evening of the first Easter, when the resurrected Jesus looked in on a frightened and confused little group of disciples, he loved them and gave them what they needed – the Spirit – which would give them the power to love as he loved them – and would give them the power to remain together.
The power of the Spirit is still with us today and it is what enables us to keep on dancing this dance of faith together and making a difference in the world. Pascal’s Wager would have us choose the safe bet, but real Christian faith is about taking chances for the sake of the world God loves.
