Is belief a choice?

[JudyJudyJudy]

For me, belief is not a choice. There are plenty of supernatural things I would really like to believe in. I just don't.

Yep. I love the idea of believing in an afterlife and believing that I will be with my family again after I die, but I just can't believe it.

[Mosaicmind]

Yep. I love the idea of believing in an afterlife and believing that I will be with my family again after I die, but I just can't believe it.

 

Then aren't you choosing to not believe it? I am confused :confused:

[Audrey]

Then aren't you choosing to not believe it? I am confused :confused:

 

 

It isn't "choosing not to believe" when it is something that simply doesn't exist. We could spend the rest of lives "choosing not to believe" in an infinite number of things. Acknowledging a fact of nonexistence of a thing is not the same as a choice.

 

On the other hand, you can CHOOSE to believe in it, even though you have no concrete proof of it. That's where the whole faith thing comes in -- a willing suspension of disbelief, so to speak.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Audrey

[keptwoman]

God exists whether or not I choose to believe it. His existence could be termed "an axiom."

 

A philosophical system could be constructed upon the "counter-axiom" that God does not exist.

 

. . . yet to make use of the concept at all is to grant Him existence, even if only hypothetical.

I disagree, it's giving them existence, even if it's theoretical. Him, not so much.

 

Then aren't you choosing to not believe it? I am confused :confused:

No, there is no choice.

 

What I think I am seeing here is Christians saying it's a choice, and pretty much everyone else saying it's not. Now if you consider that the basic tenet of Christian faith is that you choose to take Jesus as your saviour, then I suppose I can see their concept that it's a choice. But for those of us who have been in that belief system and slowly left it, there is no choice. Belief is or is not, there is no try.

[lovelaughs_times_three]

Okay. I've been avoiding this thread because I'm not sure I have the right words to express how I feel, and I'm not really sure I have any answers! But here goes my feeble attempt. ;) (oh, and I haven't read all the posts, so forgive me if I'm repetitive or off-base! :001_smile:)

 

Maybe the difference for me comes down to the difference in belief and faith. I wonder if those who talk about trying to believe mean that they can't convince their minds of what does not make sense to them. My faith/belief does not come from an intellectual place, or an emotional place either. It comes from the cliche "a leap" (of faith). I believe in God even when I can't make sense of it intellectually.

 

It is also not a set of doctrine or philosophy for me. But a relationship that I pursue. I don't "believe" intellectually in God. I pursue Him relationally. I think it would look like this: "God, I don't always understand, or even see how you are, but I am choosing to trust that you are there. I am asking that you meet me where I am in my understanding. I would like to know you, trust you and place my life in your hands."

 

Often, the "feelings" and the "understanding" come after the leap, not before. I don't think it is a choice. But I do think it is a leap. And I think it is a pursuit.

 

At this point in my journey, I believe because I have truly felt His presence. I've heard His voice. (NOT LITERALLY - before you all start calling the mental hospitals for me! :D) His voice comes to me in inspirational thoughts and sudden bursts of insights that I know I could have never reached on my own. I have seen the wonderful results of following what I believe He is leading me to do. I've seen what trusting in Him has done, not only in my life, but inside of me too. I have more peace and better perspective when I am living out that trust.

 

But, I get what you all have been saying, and I'm thinking a lot about it. That you have tried to believe and just can't. I am not sure I understand why everyone who is truly seeking a relationship with God with all their hearts, can't find Him. It baffles me and I have no answers for it.

[JudyJudyJudy]

Originally Posted by JudyJudyJudy

Yep. I love the idea of believing in an afterlife and believing that I will be with my family again after I die, but I just can't believe it.

 

Then aren't you choosing to not believe it? I am confused :confused:

Liking the idea of believing something is a far cry from actually believing it. Heck, I like the idea of believing I have a million dollars in the bank, but it's not reality, so I don't believe it.

[C_l_e_0..Q_c]

What I think I am seeing here is Christians saying it's a choice, and pretty much everyone else saying it's not.

 

The above doesn't describe me. So the simple fact that we found an exception means it doesn't work, at least not as stated.

 

I was an atheist. I didn't choose to believe in God. He made Himself known to me in a very very direct way. Honestly, I felt I had hit a brick wall while running a Formula 1 race car. It was that painful. And that sudden. It definitely wasn't a choice. And it's something I tried for months to disbelieve.

 

I had no choice. Now I did choose to go back to the Catholic Church, but I didn't choose to start believing. Trust me, my life would be much simpler had I stayed atheist. But I don't regret it.

[Laurie4b]

I grew up in a home with a father who was agnostic (for lack of a better description) and mother was a practicing astrologer (who "got" true information that she had no way of knowing when doing her readings sometimes. There were all kinds of occult books in our house, which I read.

 

When I was out of college and happily living a hedonistic lifestyle, I had a dream that made me decide that I needed to decide whether Christianity was true or not. I didn't want it to be true because I knew that had direct implications for my lifestyle and that I would need to give up things I really didn't want to. But I sought out and sifted through the evidence and decided that Jesus really did rise from the dead. It was a very dry, very intellectual decision. No emotion. No sense of connection with God. I did make lifestyle changes and began to live in accordance with my belief. Later, I did begin to experience real relationship with God, but that took some years. At this point, there has been so much happen that I would have absolutely no explanation for apart from God, that it would seem like choosing to ignore reality to not believe. That doesn't mean I don't still question things, but underneath is a solid reality.

 

As far as God having human characteristics, another explanation is that the directionality goes the other way around. The very first chapter of the Bible teaches that people are made in the image of God--we are like him in many ways. We are not clean images of him because of sin and that image can be distorted like in a convex or concave mirror, but it is there in every human being. Interestingly, the Bible also talks about people making false gods in their image.

 

Calvinism was a huge obstacle for me. In high school, I was linked up with a group that made Calvinism equivalent to being a Christian. I was horrified at such a god as I was taught in that group. Dh refers to the dangers of being "more systematic than the Bible". That's how I think of Calvinism now. I was glad to find that the two are not equivalent and while most Calvinists are Christians, most Christians are not Calvinists. Not to pick a bone with Calvinists at all--but to sympathize with those who can't go there. It's not required to be a Christian.

[texasmama]

Calvinism was a huge obstacle for me. In high school, I was linked up with a group that made Calvinism equivalent to being a Christian. I was horrified at such a god as I was taught in that group. Dh refers to the dangers of being "more systematic than the Bible". That's how I think of Calvinism now. I was glad to find that the two are not equivalent and while most Calvinists are Christians, most Christians are not Calvinists. Not to pick a bone with Calvinists at all--but to sympathize with those who can't go there. It's not required to be a Christian.

 

I really love the bolded quote from your dh. Calvinism has always hurt my heart, even when I belonged to a Calvinistic church. I never accepted it. I felt much relieved when I walked away from it.

[Joker]

I disagree, it's giving them existence, even if it's theoretical. Him, not so much.

 

 

No, there is no choice.

 

What I think I am seeing here is Christians saying it's a choice, and pretty much everyone else saying it's not. Now if you consider that the basic tenet of Christian faith is that you choose to take Jesus as your saviour, then I suppose I can see their concept that it's a choice. But for those of us who have been in that belief system and slowly left it, there is no choice. Belief is or is not, there is no try.

 

I'm a Christian and I said early on in this thread that I don't believe it's a choice.

[Marylou]

I really love the bolded quote from your dh. Calvinism has always hurt my heart, even when I belonged to a Calvinistic church. I never accepted it. I felt much relieved when I walked away from it.

 

I can understand why people have a problem with Calvinism. After all, he was human. But how can/do you explain what is written in Romans 9? Do the statements that have to do with election bother you as well? If you consider Romans 9 part of God's Word, how do you explain what it says there? I'm interested in your reply since you have been in a Calvinist denomination.

[Laurie4b]

It doesn't work for me either. I really, really want to believe. I even talk to God hoping he is actually there and will let me know it. But I just don't believe. I would give my right arm to have the faith that I see some of the people on this board have. Why on earth would I choose to be unhappy and so spiritually lonely?

 

I've had a couple of Christian ladies tell me that the reason they believe is because of a fear of hell and eternal d*mnation. I do not see that as true belief. If God is there, and if he really knows our hearts, how on earth is someone like that better spiritually than I am? At least I'm honest with God!

 

This is a very moving post to me. I'm a Christian of the theologically conservative kind. Pretty much a generic brand. ;)

 

When I read this post, I think you might actually be describing faith here. I don't think the issue is do you believe this set of facts as much as it is about a relationship with God. You are, as I read it, describing a rather tenacious faith , that continues to engage in relationship even when you are not sure you are hearing anything back. I agree with you that being honest with God is critical to spiritual integrity and to a true relationship with God. You might be surprised at some of the things that were said to God by heroes of the faith--in scripture. They are pretty raw in their honesty.

 

I wonder if your spiritual status is what you think it is.

 

I also am sad that you were hurt by the Calvinist post. Calvinism nearly kept me from becoming a Christian. I agonized in the same place myself for a long time, feeling like I had been or would be rejected , then turned my back on it and was kind of agnostic and hedonistic. Later, I came to an intellectual decision without any sense of the relationship aspects of faith . Now I'm in a place where I experience that relationship with God. (As I shared further down, most Calvinists are Christians, but most Christians are not Calvinists.) Just sharing my experience.

[Marylou]

Jesus : No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:44

 

I think it is a combination of no choice (the drawing of God) and declared choice (as for me and my house . . .)

[Marylou]

You might be surprised at some of the things that were said to God by heroes of the faith--in scripture. They are pretty raw in their honesty.

 

 

 

Very true, I think that's also why so many people enjoy reading or singing the psalms.

[simka2]

That is funny. Not in a "ha ha" kind of way. Lucifer is just a fallen angel of God.

 

How can someone choose not to believe in God but believe in Lucifer? It isn't logical.

 

 

asta

 

I do not think in these types of family dynamics "logic" is playing a huge a part. That probably sounds really judgemental of me, but I am inferring that Mosiacmind's family of origin wasn't the healthiest.

[8circles]

Oh my, I can't believe I'm posting this, but I'm going to anyway because I am absolutely positive there must be at least one other person reading this thread who reacted the same way I did, so I'm going to be a voice for others.

 

I wasn't the one who posted about God bring cruel, but I must admit that when I read your note about how God picks and chooses people, my heart sank. And having others suggest not to give up hope because it will happen to me someday seems absolutely ludicrous. When a person is crying out for belief, faith, love, and acceptance, it seems downright cruel to ignore them. I wouldn't expect that from a human. Why on earth would I accept that from a supposedly merciful deity? I hate to bring people down but this just made me cry. Really, not just feeling like crying but real actual tears. This hurts more than just thinking he doesn't exist. This isn't general. This is personal. It's been haunting me for 2 days since you posted it.

 

I'm not looking for sympathy. I'm sharing my feelings so that you may know how this type of belief can come across to others and how it can actually push people away. I don't usually like the pushy evangelistic approach, but at least that approach shares the message that God is ready when you are. That seems better than saying that God doesn't want you yet but maybe he will some day, and that I should be gratefully waiting to be deemed good enough.

 

:grouphug: but not in sympathy, in solidarity. I'm a Christian & I share your feelings.

[Ester Maria]

God exists whether or not I choose to believe it. His existence could be termed "an axiom."

 

A philosophical system could be constructed upon the "counter-axiom" that God does not exist.

 

. . . yet to make use of the concept at all is to grant Him existence, even if only hypothetical.

I think you are confusing the *essence* with the *label*.

 

A-theism, *as a label*, may be viewed as a reactionary ideology: based on the negation of theism. So, to build a negation, it basically affirms the concept (of theism) first.

However, it is a very tricky label exactly because of that, because *in essence*, it may also not be reactionary ideology, but a worldview which simply lacks the hypothesis of intention / design / inherent purpose / God in the world. A lack of a hypothesis is not automatically a counter-hypothesis. You can notice it even anthropologically - the textbook example are the Piraha. Religious belief is not 100% universal, and even in societies in which it exists (the vast majority), it is possible to abstract the situation and construct a worldview which simply lacks that hypothesis.

 

So, many people use the *label* atheism to describe worldview where the hypothesis is absent and/or to "speak the same language" as others when religious matters are discussed. But just because the label is linguistically derived from the opposing concept, it does not mean that in effects that is what is always the case.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I think you are confusing the *essence* with the *label*.

 

A-theism, *as a label*, may be viewed as a reactionary ideology: based on the negation of theism. So, to build a negation, it basically affirms the concept (of theism) first.

However, it is a very tricky label exactly because of that, because *in essence*, it may also not be reactionary ideology, but a worldview which simply lacks the hypothesis of intention / design / inherent purpose / God in the world. A lack of a hypothesis is not automatically a counter-hypothesis. You can notice it even anthropologically - the textbook example are the Piraha. Religious belief is not 100% universal, and even in societies in which it exists (the vast majority), it is possible to abstract the situation and construct a worldview which simply lacks that hypothesis.

 

So, many people use the *label* atheism to describe worldview where the hypothesis is absent and/or to "speak the same language" as others when religious matters are discussed. But just because the label is linguistically derived from the opposing concept, it does not mean that in effects that is what is always the case.

I love this post.

[mirandahoops]

Okay. I've been avoiding this thread because I'm not sure I have the right words to express how I feel, and I'm not really sure I have any answers! But here goes my feeble attempt. ;) (oh, and I haven't read all the posts, so forgive me if I'm repetitive or off-base! :001_smile:)

 

Maybe the difference for me comes down to the difference in belief and faith. I wonder if those who talk about trying to believe mean that they can't convince their minds of what does not make sense to them. My faith/belief does not come from an intellectual place, or an emotional place either. It comes from the cliche "a leap" (of faith). I believe in God even when I can't make sense of it intellectually.

 

It is also not a set of doctrine or philosophy for me. But a relationship that I pursue. I don't "believe" intellectually in God. I pursue Him relationally. I think it would look like this: "God, I don't always understand, or even see how you are, but I am choosing to trust that you are there. I am asking that you meet me where I am in my understanding. I would like to know you, trust you and place my life in your hands."

 

Often, the "feelings" and the "understanding" come after the leap, not before. I don't think it is a choice. But I do think it is a leap. And I think it is a pursuit.

 

At this point in my journey, I believe because I have truly felt His presence. I've heard His voice. (NOT LITERALLY - before you all start calling the mental hospitals for me! :D) His voice comes to me in inspirational thoughts and sudden bursts of insights that I know I could have never reached on my own. I have seen the wonderful results of following what I believe He is leading me to do. I've seen what trusting in Him has done, not only in my life, but inside of me too. I have more peace and better perspective when I am living out that trust.

.

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

I absolutely relate to everything you just said. It's like you were writing my own thoughts and experiences. :)

[Orthodox6]

Well said. One also could posit that "theism" is the accretion pasted onto the "lack of hypothesis of intention" which you note.

 

At any rate, I'm not at ease with taking the Living God and speculating about Him as if He were nothing but a concept or construct of the flawed, very imperfect human mind. For similar reasons, I always found philosophy to be "the dead science", in contrast to religion.

 

Replied just to "give a nod" to your well-expressed version of God as a construct. In general, I enjoy your careful posts!

 

I think you are confusing the *essence* with the *label*.

 

A-theism, *as a label*, may be viewed as a reactionary ideology: based on the negation of theism. So, to build a negation, it basically affirms the concept (of theism) first.

However, it is a very tricky label exactly because of that, because *in essence*, it may also not be reactionary ideology, but a worldview which simply lacks the hypothesis of intention / design / inherent purpose / God in the world. A lack of a hypothesis is not automatically a counter-hypothesis. You can notice it even anthropologically - the textbook example are the Piraha. Religious belief is not 100% universal, and even in societies in which it exists (the vast majority), it is possible to abstract the situation and construct a worldview which simply lacks that hypothesis.

 

So, many people use the *label* atheism to describe worldview where the hypothesis is absent and/or to "speak the same language" as others when religious matters are discussed. But just because the label is linguistically derived from the opposing concept, it does not mean that in effects that is what is always the case.

Edited July 13, 2011 by Orthodox6

[Mosaicmind]

I do not think in these types of family dynamics "logic" is playing a huge a part. That probably sounds really judgemental of me, but I am inferring that Mosiacmind's family of origin wasn't the healthiest.

 

 

You aren't being judgmental but i did edit my original post and reply to the posters who were questioning my "logic".

[Heather in Neverland]

 

I wasn't the one who posted about God bring cruel, but I must admit that when I read your note about how God picks and chooses people, my heart sank. And having others suggest not to give up hope because it will happen to me someday seems absolutely ludicrous. When a person is crying out for belief, faith, love, and acceptance, it seems downright cruel to ignore them.

 

.

 

Somehow I missed this post. I didn't realize the thread was still going. I could give a big, long answer but somehow I don't think it would make you feel any better so all i will say is, if you are crying out to God asking for faith then he has already given it to you. It might not be as strong as you would like it to be yet but all you need is a mustard seed and it will grow. Having faith does not mean you never doubt. The fact that you cry out to God means he has given you a measure of faith which means he is also not ignoring you. :grouphug:

[Laurie4b]

I can understand why people have a problem with Calvinism. After all, he was human. But how can/do you explain what is written in Romans 9? Do the statements that have to do with election bother you as well? If you consider Romans 9 part of God's Word, how do you explain what it says there? I'm interested in your reply since you have been in a Calvinist denomination.

 

Romans 11 among other passages. It's all one long argument of a rabbinical kind, which we don't always follow as westerners.

[annandatje]

...I wasn't the one who posted about God bring cruel, but I must admit that when I read your note about how God picks and chooses people, my heart sank. And having others suggest not to give up hope because it will happen to me someday seems absolutely ludicrous....

 

Sounds like an eternal middle school gym class. :lol:

[texasmama]

I can understand why people have a problem with Calvinism. After all, he was human. But how can/do you explain what is written in Romans 9? Do the statements that have to do with election bother you as well? If you consider Romans 9 part of God's Word, how do you explain what it says there? I'm interested in your reply since you have been in a Calvinist denomination.

 

I have accepted that there are many mysteries which we as humans are not expected to understand/explain. I don't fault those who attempt to find answers, but I am not not among them. Anything which is not a "salvation issue" for me personally I feel free to put it in the "mysteries I won't know until heaven" category. I have become quite comfortable living with many "I don't knows", but I am a very gray person anyway (not black and white). The longer I live, the more this is true.

 

To answer your question, I don't attempt to understand or explain it. I am open to it being literal, and I am open to being wrong in my interpretation. I am also open to there being meaning in it that is unknowable to the human heart and mind.

[Mosaicmind]

It isn't "choosing not to believe" when it is something that simply doesn't exist. We could spend the rest of lives "choosing not to believe" in an infinite number of things. Acknowledging a fact of nonexistence of a thing is not the same as a choice.

 

On the other hand, you can CHOOSE to believe in it, even though you have no concrete proof of it. That's where the whole faith thing comes in -- a willing suspension of disbelief, so to speak.

 

 

Ok...I am trying to understand and respect you for explaining what you mean. Thanks.

[OH_Homeschooler]

I don't know. I'm an atheist, but I would generally say that my disbelief was not a choice, but many other choices I made led to the conclusion that I do not believe God exists. As others have described, I was raised Catholic, was exposed to many different religions (through my own volition, I WANTED to find a religion that fit). Then my studies led me to pursue science and become a critical thinker, and I believed in the scientific method, and that is based on empiricism. And I also observed a lot of stuff I didn't agree with in the name of religion at the same time, and by that point my mind was made up.

 

I think many people are raised in a particular religion and never really choose that religion, it's just how they're raised and that's what they believe. That's why I find it offensive when religious folks try to tell me I just haven't been properly enlightened, and that's all it would take to bring me back to the right side of things. Sorry but I really believe I have followed a long road to get to where I am today. I think I am probably more generally enlightened about religion than many of these people who try to convert me.

[lovelaughs_times_three]

I don't know. I'm an atheist, but I would generally say that my disbelief was not a choice, but many other choices I made led to the conclusion that I do not believe God exists.

 

I think there is a lot of wisdom in what OH_Homeschooler says here. We often think of choices as being the BIG ones. Who to marry, what career path to follow, what to believe. I think we underestimate and MISS that the reality is, it is in the small choices that we become who we are. And the "who" we become from these small choices changes how we decide on the big ones.

[Bang!Zoom!]

For me, my belief was something of a choice. I'd been in my early life exposed to Roman Catholic as the primary religion. As I grew, I attended churches that were different with friends with different faith statements.

 

Where I am at now, it is the very conscious act of "believing" in belief that is hard work. That is to say pushing away doubts, instilling in sheer faith my actions and thoughts. To believe is more a hyper-verb of active thinking and behavior than anything else.

 

It's about acting the way that is in alignment with the sensation and knowing of peace.

 

It's hard work.

[Lady Florida.]

It isn't "choosing not to believe" when it is something that simply doesn't exist. We could spend the rest of lives "choosing not to believe" in an infinite number of things. Acknowledging a fact of nonexistence of a thing is not the same as a choice.

 

On the other hand, you can CHOOSE to believe in it, even though you have no concrete proof of it. That's where the whole faith thing comes in -- a willing suspension of disbelief, so to speak.

 

Thank you. I think this is what I was trying to say.