Can we choose to believe?

[McCulloch]

Can we choose to believe? Is belief a choice?

You don't have to believe me as you don't have to believe scripture. The choice is yours. Freewill.

This is a fundamental philosophical question. Why do we believe what we believe? I think that there are a number of factors which lead us to believe those things which we believe. Some rational, some less than rational. But I do not understand how to choose to believe something.

For instance, I believe that risotto cooked in a pressure cooker is just as good as risotto cooked the traditional way. There are some rational reasons for this belief. I have successfully cooked risotto both ways and have not noticed a difference in the result. My family does not show a preference for either method. And there are some irrational reasons. I am often in a hurry and the pressure cooker method is significantly quicker. So, I want to believe that it produces as good a result.

Given the facts, can I arbitrarily choose to believe that the traditional method is better, as some culinary purists claim? Or must I be swayed by evidence or influence before my belief changes?

Can I simply and arbitrarily choose to believe one or another particular set of religious dogma?

[Beta]

Proof of the Pudding is in the eating.
Prior to that we only have opinions.

But having said that everything a person experiences is only PERSONAL and can't possibly be applied to everyone.
We don't all see things the same.
That also applies to belief in God , it is entirely a personal matter.

[McCulloch]

Proof of the Pudding is in the eating.
Prior to that we only have opinions.

But having said that everything a person experiences is only PERSONAL and can't possibly be applied to everyone.
We don't all see things the same.
That also applies to belief in God , it is entirely a personal matter.

You are wrong. Appreciation of Dmitri Shostakovitch' 15th String Quartet is entirely a personal matter. God, on the other hand, either exists or not. If he exists, then those who disbelieve are delusional. If he does not, then those who believe are delusional.

[Beta]

McC , whether God exists or not IS entirely personal in belief. My belief does not affect you nor your belief me. Every person is responsible for their own belief and not for another's.
Human reasoning will never establish God's existence or non-existence.
One has to accept it in order to understand it, this very principle applies even to our human activities. No one can be a Pro in anything unless he is trained and educated in it. Make sense ???
Scripture tells that the spiritual will not be judged by the natural. I should think it pointless to quote scripture but I will if it makes a difference to you.

[Confused]

Proof of the Pudding is in the eating.
Prior to that we only have opinions.

But having said that everything a person experiences is only PERSONAL and can't possibly be applied to everyone.
We don't all see things the same.
That also applies to belief in God , it is entirely a personal matter.

So based on this, then all Christians can't possibly experience God in the same manner. So what groups them as Christians then? The belief structure they have been led to believe. I think we can choose to beleive anything, but that doesn't make it true. The truth is the truth regardless of our beliefs. Whether it is nature or nurture that instills our beleifs, I think they are absolute, not relative to each individual experience.

[PaulJJ]

McC , whether God exists or not IS entirely personal in belief. My belief does not affect you nor your belief me. Every person is responsible for their own belief and not for another's.

Whether one believes that god exists is a personal matter, but whether god actually exists cannot possibly be. If he exists, he does so independently of every human being, and he pre-dates humanity itself. It would be the ultimate in arrogance for any individual to assume that his/her belief can determine the actual existence or non-existence of the creator of the universe!

[McCulloch]

Whether God exists or not IS entirely personal in belief. My belief does not affect you nor your belief me. Every person is responsible for their own belief and not for another's.

But if your belief is true, you should be able to explain why you believe what you believe. If your explanation is rational and based on evidence, your explanation should be able to convince an unbiased rational person. If your belief is irrational, then I am not terribly interested in it.

Human reasoning will never establish God's existence or non-existence.

Are you admitting that faith is irrational?

One has to accept it in order to understand it, this very principle applies even to our human activities. No one can be a Pro in anything unless he is trained and educated in it. Make sense ???

No, it does not make sense. I do not have to believe in astrology in order to study its principles and make a rational determination based on evidence about whether it is a valid discipline. Same for Mathematics, Psychology, Biology, Geology, Sociology. Why not Theology?

Scripture tells that the spiritual will not be judged by the natural. I should think it pointless to quote scripture but I will if it makes a difference to you.

Here you and I agree. It would be pointless for you to quote scripture as proof of your position until first you establish that the particular scripture is a valid source of information.

[Beta]

Why do I believe ? Because I choose to.
Btw , it is not my responsibility to open your eyes to understanding but God's , so I do not have to convince you of anything. I am merely giving you a witness of God which you are free to accept or refuse.
I do not admit to your interpretation of what I have written. You are responsible of how you perceive it.
I was not making a comparison with all the different branches of science but of practical professional occupations that show the necessity of training and prolonged studies to make perfect.
But our debate is pointless as I speak from scripture and you obviously from human reasoning. The two are incompatible.

[McCulloch]

Why do I believe? Because I choose to.

Really? I beg to differ. Why do you believe that pi is an irrational number (if you hold to that belief)? Because you choose to? No. If you believe, like all mathematicians do, that pi is an irrational number, you do for certain reasons. You may have been shown a proof. You may have heard it from someone that you have reason to believe is an expert and is therefore reliable in this matter. But you do not believe that pi is an irrational number simply because you choose to believe that.
Why do you believe that there is a God? Because you choose to? This answer is very close to the definition of insanity. Do you really think that something is true because you believe it to be? I would hope that you believe that there is a God for better reasons than you choose to believe. Perhaps you have been persuaded by one or several of the philosophical or theological proofs of God's existence. Perhaps people who you trust to tell you the truth in these areas has told you. Perhaps God has talked to you from a burning bush. You don't just simply choose to believe, unless you are not sane.

Btw , it is not my responsibility to open your eyes to understanding but God's, so I do not have to convince you of anything.

This is a debate site. If you make an assertion, you are responsible to support it with evidence. If you wish to present that belief in God is a rational belief, then by all means do so.

I am merely giving you a witness of God which you are free to accept or refuse.

No you are not. You are providing baseless assertions about God. By any definition, a witness gives evidence.

I do not admit to your interpretation of what I have written. You are responsible of how you perceive it.

I have given reasons why what you have written leads me to the conclusion that you hold that belief in God is irrational. I am sorry if I have misinterpreted what you wrote. Is belief in God rational or irrational?

I was not making a comparison with all the different branches of science but of practical professional occupations that show the necessity of training and prolonged studies to make perfect.

In that case, I have studied the Bible.

But our debate is pointless as I speak from scripture and you obviously from human reasoning. The two are incompatible.

What other kind of reasoning is there available to us? Am I to cast aside human reasoning and accept your scripture as divinely revealed truth? Or maybe I should accept the Qur'an or the Gita? How to choose? I am not allowed to use human reason. Cast lots maybe. Pray.

[Beta]

Why do I believe? Because I choose to.

Really? I beg to differ. Why do you believe that pi is an irrational number (if you hold to that belief)? Because you choose to? No. If you believe, like all mathematicians do, that pi is an irrational number, you do for certain reasons. You may have been shown a proof. You may have heard it from someone that you have reason to believe is an expert and is therefore reliable in this matter. But you do not believe that pi is an irrational number simply because you choose to believe that.
Why do you believe that there is a God? Because you choose to? This answer is very close to the definition of insanity. Do you really think that something is true because you believe it to be? I would hope that you believe that there is a God for better reasons than you choose to believe. Perhaps you have been persuaded by one or several of the philosophical or theological proofs of God's existence. Perhaps people who you trust to tell you the truth in these areas has told you. Perhaps God has talked to you from a burning bush. You don't just simply choose to believe, unless you are not sane.

Btw , it is not my responsibility to open your eyes to understanding but God's, so I do not have to convince you of anything.

This is a debate site. If you make an assertion, you are responsible to support it with evidence. If you wish to present that belief in God is a rational belief, then by all means do so.

I am merely giving you a witness of God which you are free to accept or refuse.

No you are not. You are providing baseless assertions about God. By any definition, a witness gives evidence.

I do not admit to your interpretation of what I have written. You are responsible of how you perceive it.

I have given reasons why what you have written leads me to the conclusion that you hold that belief in God is irrational. I am sorry if I have misinterpreted what you wrote. Is belief in God rational or irrational?

I was not making a comparison with all the different branches of science but of practical professional occupations that show the necessity of training and prolonged studies to make perfect.

In that case, I have studied the Bible.

But our debate is pointless as I speak from scripture and you obviously from human reasoning. The two are incompatible.

What other kind of reasoning is there available to us? Am I to cast aside human reasoning and accept your scripture as divinely revealed truth? Or maybe I should accept the Qur'an or the Gita? How to choose? I am not allowed to use human reason. Cast lots maybe. Pray.

You are right McC , perhaps I should not be on a debating forum since I am a woman of few words. So I will try to wind this up now and find a less agressive place.
Of course you can use your personal reasoning to make your point but if you are not prepared to change the whole point of debate is a waste of time and nothing more than entertainment. We are to conform to the image of his Son, not he to subscribe to ours. As script.tells us the natural and spiritual can not co-exist and were never intended to.
Telling people and reminding them of scripture is my witness to God and if asked will suppy chapter and verse as evidence. To a natural-minded person this is foolishness and meaningless 1 Cor.2 v 14.

[McCulloch]

You are right McC , perhaps I should not be on a debating forum since I am a woman of few words. So I will try to wind this up now and find a less aggressive place.

Please don't leave. Debate is a wonderful way to challenge your thinking and your assumptions. Unless you have decided that you are completely correct and have no possibility of any false understanding and that no one here is willing to learn. Do not leave on my account alone. There are many Christians, other theists and agnostics here.

Of course you can use your personal reasoning to make your point but if you are not prepared to change the whole point of debate is a waste of time and nothing more than entertainment.

How did you conclude that I am unwilling to change? I can and I have changed my viewpoint. I would like to think that I am a rational person. Rational people change their minds given reason and evidence.

Do you hold that belief in God is rational or irrational?

We are to conform to the image of his Son, not he to subscribe to ours. As script.tells us the natural and spiritual can not co-exist and were never intended to.
Telling people and reminding them of scripture is my witness to God and if asked will suppy chapter and verse as evidence. To a natural-minded person this is foolishness and meaningless 1 Cor.2 v 14.

That approach is good only as far as it goes. To those who accept your scripture as God breathed, all you have to do is provide the appropriate scriptural text to prove your point. But there are many who do not accept your scripture, how do you intend to witness to them? The truth of the scripture is not self-evident.