The Implications of Probability Theory for the Theist/Atheist Debate

This is a pretty disturbing implication I just thought of while driving to one of my soirees this past couple of days for Thanksgiving.

What are we saying when we say something has a 90% probability? The longer phrase is, obviously, that this thing has a 90% probability of being "true". The implication being that if you decide to advocate some position that has a low probability, like say 10% probability, then you are essentially arguing for something that has a 90% probability of being false. Faith, of course, is believing in something that intrinsically has a low probability; arguing for something that is an extraordinary claim is essentially arguing for something that has a high probability of being a lie.

What this means is that people who think that faith is a virtue – people who think that believing in things that have a low probability is a virtue – are really saying that they think that believing in something that has a high probability of being a lie is a virtue. I guess this makes sense, given what I think is the nature of Christian faith.

 

If this is the case, then why not just only believe in things that have a high probability of being true? I don't think that would count as "faith" anymore.