Believing in God is a free will choice

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #1

Post by rikuoamero »

What exactly does the title mean? I'm on another website right now, and in a debate, a Christian said

Believing in God or Jesus is completely voluntary. (for those who are curious, the topic of conversation there is "Why are you convinced God is real?")

To which I want to ask...what does that mean? Is it possible to choose to believe in things, even if all the evidence points in that direction? Is it possible to see Andy point a gun at Bob, see the bullet leave the gun, see the wound, the blood loss, see Bob stop breathing and moving, see Bob being buried/cremated...and yet choose to believe that Andy didn't shoot and kill Bob, as in make a choice that that didn't happen in your mind?

Does the phrase mean that belief is ultimately divorced from evidence?
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
1213
Savant
Posts: 11342
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:06 am
Location: Finland
Has thanked: 312 times
Been thanked: 357 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #2

Post by 1213 »

rikuoamero wrote: … Is it possible to choose to believe in things, even if all the evidence points in that direction?
Evidence is not proof. It may have been interpreted wrongly. Evidence often seems to be very subjective and not necessary enough for believing something.
rikuoamero wrote: Does the phrase mean that belief is ultimately divorced from evidence?
I don’t think so. Evidence needs that people believe it, else it will be ignored and it is pointless. I think evidence requires belief, before it has any meaning.

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #3

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 2 by 1213]
Evidence is not proof. It may have been interpreted wrongly. Evidence often seems to be very subjective and not necessary enough for believing something.
Have you watched the BBC series Sherlock, starring Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch?
Assuming yes...could Dr. Watson have chosen to believe or not to believe that Sherlock committed suicide?
[YOUTUBE][/YOUTUBE]

Would Watson have been able to make a choice, like choosing which flavour of ice cream he'd like (strawberry or mint chocolate) to eat, that Sherlock is dead?
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
PinSeeker
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2920
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #4

Post by PinSeeker »

rikuoamero wrote: What exactly does the title mean?
I agree it's a choice, and we make it of our own free will. But God is also completely sovereign over His creation, of which we are a part. The Bible affirms both; Romans 9-11 is the clearest exposition of this.

I can do it on behalf of myself, of course, based solidly on Biblical Christianity, but for discussion's sake -- just for the sake of congenial conversation -- let's say you believe both of the above, that 1. God is completely sovereign and 2. man's belief in God is a choice made of his free will. Let's just say -- for the moment -- you have unwavering belief in both of those things. Again, I know you don't, but let's just say for the moment you do. How would you resolve the two?
rikuoamero wrote: I'm on another website right now, and in a debate, a Christian said

Believing in God or Jesus is completely voluntary. (for those who are curious, the topic of conversation there is "Why are you convinced God is real?")

To which I want to ask...what does that mean? Is it possible to choose to believe in things, even if all the evidence points in that direction?
You mean, "even if all the evidence..." -- in your opinion -- "... points in a different direction"? Because otherwise, if we leave it as is ("points in that direction"), you seem to be unwittingly answering your own question.

Is it possible to see Andy point a gun at Bob, see the bullet leave the gun, see the wound, the blood loss, see Bob stop breathing and moving, see Bob being buried/cremated...and yet choose to believe that Andy didn't shoot and kill Bob, as in make a choice that that didn't happen in your mind?[/quote]
LOL! Yes, you mean in a different direction, or the opposite direction. Do you think you're being subtle in your tack, here, Rik? Because if you do... Maybe you just phrased that the wrong way, but I doubt it.

In answer to your question, the fact is that you have to have "eyes" of faith, to "see" with a changed (reborn of the Spirit) heart, the irrefutable evidence that's actually everywhere you look. You don't have to dispute that; I know you think it's foolishness. But that's it.
rikuoamero wrote: Does the phrase mean that belief is ultimately divorced from evidence?
No. Absolutely not.

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #5

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 4 by PinSeeker]
The Bible affirms both
As an aside, I want to ask (this is unrelated to the topic of this thread). Do you use "affirm" here as a synonym for "confirm", or do you mean "The Bible says this", which ultimately doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things, as in the text of the Bible says X and Y?
but for discussion's sake -- just for the sake of congenial conversation -- let's say you believe both of the above, that 1. God is completely sovereign and 2. man's belief in God is a choice made of his free will. Let's just say -- for the moment -- you have unwavering belief in both of those things. Again, I know you don't, but let's just say for the moment you do. How would you resolve the two?
I can speak from my state of mind back when I was a Christian. I wouldn't have been able to explain it and would have said it was a mystery of God, something that God would reveal, most likely after we die.
You mean, "even if all the evidence..." -- in your opinion -- "... points in a different direction"? Because otherwise, if we leave it as is ("points in that direction"), you seem to be unwittingly answering your own question.
Let's take my example then, of Andy shooting Bob. That wouldn't leave much room for opinion now would it? Am I or you or anyone else able to choose, like one would choose between strawberry or chocolate mint ice-cream, that that didn't happen, even if we see it ourselves? Or we don't see it ourselves?

If you look above at the Sherlock clip, all the evidence, both in the Sherlock universe and without, points to Moriarty being dead. But in universe, characters didn't believe Sherlock had died and as the narrative shows us, they were vindicated, with Sherlock revealing he had indeed staged the whole thing with Mycroft.
But what about Moriarty? Is he dead? Can you choose to believe Moriarty is dead or still alive?
In answer to your question, the fact is that you have to have "eyes" of faith, to "see" with a changed (reborn of the Spirit) heart, the irrefutable evidence that's actually everywhere you look. You don't have to dispute that; I know you think it's foolishness. But that's it.
How can the evidence be "irrefutable" if I am able to, right now, reject it? By definition, it cannot be denied...and yet what do I do on this website every day?
Also isn't what you're saying just another way of saying that one has to believe in it before believing in it? e.g. you say to me to see with a "reborn of the Spirit" heart...but how can I have that if I don't believe there is such a thing as a Holy Spirit beforehand?
What you say here smacks of presuppositions.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #6

Post by William »

[Replying to post 1 by rikuoamero]
What exactly does the title mean? I'm on another website right now, and in a debate, a Christian said

Believing in God or Jesus is completely voluntary. (for those who are curious, the topic of conversation there is "Why are you convinced God is real?")

To which I want to ask...what does that mean?
First up it would be referring to the general Abrahamic idea of GOD and means people use the relative freedom of their individual will to make the call to believe in this idea of GOD.
Is it possible to choose to believe in things, even if all the evidence points in that direction?
With circumstantial evidence, if the evidence points in that direction then belief is based on the interpretation of certain knowledge. This in itself does not mean that the interpretation of the knowledge should be regarded as The Truth of the matter.
Is it possible to see Andy point a gun at Bob, see the bullet leave the gun, see the wound, the blood loss, see Bob stop breathing and moving, see Bob being buried/cremated...and yet choose to believe that Andy didn't shoot and kill Bob, as in make a choice that that didn't happen in your mind?
This example is not about circumstantial evidence. The evidence does not 'point in that direction' but positively shows that this is what occurred. No belief required. The knowledge is complete.
Does the phrase mean that belief is ultimately divorced from evidence?
No. It is about circumstantial evidence that points to the possibility - or put another way - the same evidence interpreted differently - and then belief attached to that either way - for to claim "GOD exists" or "GOD does not exist", based on the interpretation of the same circumstantial evidence is, all belief-based.

Belief is never divorced from evidence. It is evidence which promotes belief.

Organised religion takes it a step further by not only believing the interpretation of the circumstantial evidence to support the idea of a creator GOD, but to also make claims as to the character, nature, demands, et al as to 'who and what GOD is' sometimes/often contrary to the circumstantial evidence.

Which is why there are two opposing GODs in the Abrahamic telling of it. Without the devil the god is redundant. Every exciting story needs a villain and every victim demands a savior.

Beliefs are powerful and carry over to the next [afterlife] phase. There is a deeper layer of truth to the saying 'be careful what you ask for.' :)

User avatar
rikuoamero
Under Probation
Posts: 6707
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 2:06 pm
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #7

Post by rikuoamero »

[Replying to post 6 by William]
means people use the relative freedom of their individual will to make the call to believe in this idea of GOD.
Can you give me an example of where else people do this?
With circumstantial evidence, if the evidence points in that direction then belief is based on the interpretation of certain knowledge.
I am not talking about circumstantial evidence, I said "even if all".
This in itself does not mean that the interpretation of the knowledge should be regarded as The Truth of the matter.
For the purposes of this thread, I am not concerned as to whether or not X is the Truth (capital T). I am interested in whether or not believing in X (in this case God) is a voluntary or free will choice, as the Christian on the other website said.
This example is not about circumstantial evidence.
Good. It wasn't meant to be. I gave that example for a reason. The thinking behind this thread is related to the thinking of my other recent thread, the one about Christians having faith in the authors of the New Testament documents. All that we have today, and I am speaking with regard to people alive in 2018, is this volume of documents called the Bible. No-one for the last 1900 years has first hand knowledge of anything that happened that day in 33 AD (or thereabouts).
The evidence does not 'point in that direction' but positively shows that this is what occurred. No belief required. The knowledge is complete.
So one cannot help but believe that Andy shot Bob? There is no choice to make? Everyone who sees Andy shoot Bob believes Andy shot Bob?
No. It is about circumstantial evidence that points to the possibility - or put another way - the same evidence interpreted differently - and then belief attached to that either way - for to claim "GOD exists" or "GOD does not exist", based on the interpretation of the same circumstantial evidence is, all belief-based.
That seems to me to be the vibe I get, however. Earlier, I was told that a Holy Spirit (whatever that is) is necessary in order to believe. Christians on that other website, some of them said they had been in communication with God (phrases like "God told me" were said).
So the actual evidence supporting the Bible doesn't matter, it seemingly all comes down to whether or not what these people think is an all knowing God talks to them and confirms something to them, and after this communication...they believe.
Image

Your life is your own. Rise up and live it - Richard Rahl, Sword of Truth Book 6 "Faith of the Fallen"

I condemn all gods who dare demand my fealty, who won't look me in the face so's I know who it is I gotta fealty to. -- JoeyKnotHead

Some force seems to restrict me from buying into the apparent nonsense that others find so easy to buy into. Having no religious or supernatural beliefs of my own, I just call that force reason. -- Tired of the Nonsense

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 14003
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 906 times
Been thanked: 1629 times
Contact:

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #8

Post by William »

[Replying to post 7 by rikuoamero]
Can you give me an example of where else people do this?
Generally where one would expect to find examples...coming from the Abranites themselves.
I am not talking about circumstantial evidence, I said "even if all".
But that assumes the evidence is not circumstantial. Are you saying that in relation to the Abramite idea of GOD, we are to presume the evidence is not circumstantial, but empirical?
For the purposes of this thread, I am not concerned as to whether or not X is the Truth (capital T). I am interested in whether or not believing in X (in this case [the Abrahamic idea of] (ftfy) God) is a voluntary or free will choice, as the Christian on the other website said.
Well some say that they are compelled through some mysterious set of events which are for the most part purely subjective and one could perhaps argue then that in such cases 'voluntary or free will choice' is not required? I don't think it is cut and dry, but get the gist that ordinarily if one were not compelled by any such thing but chose to believe through fear of consequences of not believing or emotional response to a sermon and what have you, then one can say it is possible.

Generally speaking, when it comes to belief, people do so by act of their own will.
This example is not about circumstantial evidence.
Good. It wasn't meant to be. I gave that example for a reason. The thinking behind this thread is related to the thinking of my other recent thread, the one about Christians having faith in the authors of the New Testament documents. All that we have today, and I am speaking with regard to people alive in 2018, is this volume of documents called the Bible. No-one for the last 1900 years has first hand knowledge of anything that happened that day in 33 AD (or thereabouts).
Right. Thus the bible presents - at best - circumstantial evidence.

Was Jesus (Yeshua) a fictional character or real? Was the story as presented in the bible (centuries after 33 AD by some accounts) about Jesus, loosely based upon a real life individual and real life events or do such things represent expressions of individuals spicing things up to generate/attract a wider/larger audience?

"Are such things as virgins births and resurrections of 3-day (and more) dead bodies something that CAN be believed, IF the [relative] free will of the individual was truly active in the process"?

I would answer 'yes' in regard to circumstantial evidence both within the bible stories and within the history of human cultural development. I do not discount the possibility of 'inter-dimensional entities/ETs having a hand in making those stories real.

Indeed, the Abrahamic religions all believe in - if not ET interventions, then certainly inter-dimensional ones.
So one cannot help but believe that Andy shot Bob? There is no choice to make? Everyone who sees Andy shoot Bob believes Andy shot Bob?
No. They have no requirement to BELIEVE. They KNOW. The evidence is simply not refutable or anything which can be debated.

They would likely vary on their subjective points of reference but not on the overall outcome of the event.
That seems to me to be the vibe I get, however. Earlier, I was told that a Holy Spirit (whatever that is) is necessary in order to believe. Christians on that other website, some of them said they had been in communication with God (phrases like "God told me" were said).
So the actual evidence supporting the Bible doesn't matter, it seemingly all comes down to whether or not what these people think is an all knowing God talks to them and confirms something to them, and after this communication...they believe.
Well in relation to Christians specifically, the evidence is accepted through the presumption that the bible is 'the word of god' and that it is they who are coming from a position of ignorance into that particular knowledge through accepting this tenet as The Truth (Two Capital T's) of the matter .
Thus in learning (through being told) about 'what the bible means' they begin to gain knowledge and anything related to their subjective experiences (such as GOD talks to them) has to align with that book in order for it to count as genuine.

If, for example, the voice that only they can hear tells them something contrary to what the bible claims, they would have to assume the 'voice of the enemy' somehow got through and pretended to be the voice of GOD...perhaps as some form of test in order to gauge how much bible they believe and understand etc...rationalizing everything based upon 'the word of god' as they are lead to believe the bible to be.

Essentially this amounts to the bible being 'the voice of GOD' and any 'voice' they subjectively might 'hear' in their thoughts and feelings takes second/third place to the bible and those in organizations they attend, interpretations of the bible.

Essentially this amounts to such believers as allowing external events to dictate to them what they should and should not believe and never to rely or trust in ones own internal intuitions, knowing right from wrong, alternate experiences which give insight contrary to some biblical writ etc et al.

As Bob once sung...
[font=Comic Sans MS]"Preacher was talking there's a sermon he gave
He said every man's conscience is vile and depraved
You cannot depend on it to be your guide
When it's you who must keep it satisfied"
[/font]

...for many, that is apparently easy to swallow...

So the question is...are they really operating with their own [relative] free will or are they actually forgoing that natural attribute in order to place organized religions interpretations of life the universe and everything as the best instructional authority to place ones trust in?

More succinctly still, are they abandoning their own will for the belief that they are replacing that with what they are told is GODs will?

Is that the requirement of the belief?

If so, then the last act of ones use of will in this regard, is to willfully renounce that will. :idea:

User avatar
ttruscott
Site Supporter
Posts: 11064
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
Location: West Coast of Canada
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #9

Post by ttruscott »

… Is it possible to choose to believe in things, even if all the evidence points in that direction?
If the evidence points in a direction of course it is possible to believe in what it points to. It is also possible to believe the evidence without needing proof, ie, while you hold your need for proof in abeyance.

The English word believe is also used to mean to accept what is proven as a true fact but in Christian terms the Greek word pisteuo which should be translated as 'to have faith in, to trust' is often translated as believe which messes up the secular materialists interpretation of the word.

I suggest Christians do not let this confusion go by and use belief their way while ignoring that materialists are not using it that way but differently. Then we would only refer to all references to belief with a reminder we are using it to mean faith, an unproven hope, and trust.
PCE Theology as I see it...

We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.

This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.

User avatar
PinSeeker
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2920
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:07 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: Believing in God is a free will choice

Post #10

Post by PinSeeker »

rikuoamero wrote: As an aside, I want to ask (this is unrelated to the topic of this thread). Do you use "affirm" here as a synonym for "confirm", or do you mean "The Bible says this", which ultimately doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things, as in the text of the Bible says X and Y?
You can use either term. The Bible affirms both (states them both as facts) and confirms both (establishes the truth and correctness of both). Again, I know you don't believe that, and therefore, I know your stance (that it doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things"). For the sake of this discussion, what you really believe or disbelieve is quite irrelevant. Try to keep yourself out of it for the time being. I know how difficult that is for you; it's difficult for all of us.
rikuoamero wrote: I can speak from my state of mind back when I was a Christian. I wouldn't have been able to explain it and would have said it was a mystery of God, something that God would reveal, most likely after we die.
Mmmmm -- I agree, at least to a certain point. It is a mystery of God, and God does reveal it, but in this life. The problem is that our human (and thus finite and limited) minds can't fully comprehend it. But it can certainly be resolved, and quite easily. What you gave me is a non-answer, and possibly just a cop-out. Think about it. How would you resolve it?
rikuoamero wrote: If you look above at the Sherlock clip, all the evidence, both in the Sherlock universe and without, points to Moriarty being dead. But in universe, characters didn't believe Sherlock had died and as the narrative shows us, they were vindicated, with Sherlock revealing he had indeed staged the whole thing with Mycroft. But what about Moriarty? Is he dead? Can you choose to believe Moriarty is dead or still alive?
Yeah, yeah, seeing is believing; I getcha. But you're still thinking on a lower, purely natural plane. There's nothing wrong with that, and I'm not saying that's "dumb," or that anybody is "more intelligent" than anybody.
rikuoamero wrote: How can the evidence be "irrefutable" if I am able to, right now, reject it? By definition, it cannot be denied...and yet what do I do on this website every day?
You're combining two separate things into one. You are able to reject it and rest in that rejection because that -- as of now, anyway -- is your nature.

At some point in the future, it may become irrefutable and your ability to truly deny it may cease to exist because you may be given a new nature -- by God by His Spirit. If that happens, you would then realize and confess, "Hey, there is a God, and Jesus is His only begotten son, and I need to repent of my sin, die unto myself, and live unto Him." Your new nature would drive that.

It works the same way the other way around. You say you were a Christian once. And I believe you fully believe you were. But at some point, you became more fully aware of your inner self, your nature. You came to a point where you said (or realized), "Hey, that's just not right." You're nature, which has always been in you since birth, drove that. And so you renounced your "belief" in God and Jesus. My extended family is full of folks like you. That doesn't make you or them "lesser people," or "not as good as PinSeeker," or "not as smart as PinSeeker." It's just who you are at the core of your being, since birth all the way up to right now. But like I said, that may change.

In either case, who you are in your inner self, your core being, drives your mind and causes you to make the decisions you make.
rikuoamero wrote: Also isn't what you're saying just another way of saying that one has to believe in it before believing in it? e.g. you say to me to see with a "reborn of the Spirit" heart...but how can I have that if I don't believe there is such a thing as a Holy Spirit beforehand?
One must be born again, Nicodemus:

Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews; this man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, “Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.� Jesus answered and said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.� Nicodemus said to Him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born, can he?� Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit.� (John 3:1-8)

A person's mind follows that person's nature, or inner self. He cannot deny who he is. He may override that from time to time because he may see it as beneficial in some way to do so. But he still is who he is.

The inner nature of all of us from the time we are born is basically to be selfish. We all want what we want, whether we're one day old or one year old or one decade old or one century old. Therefore, if left to our natural state, we will never believe in God, because that would mean giving up ourselves and our selfish desires.

Hey, your signature says it, doesn't it? "Your life is your own; rise up and live it." Well, from a humanistic standpoint, that's true. But really, ultimately, it's not.

So something outside us must give us a new nature so that then, subsequently, we will believe -- of our own free will -- in God. And if we are given that new nature, we will not fail to at some point, in a very reasoned and evidence-based decision, believe in God.
Last edited by PinSeeker on Wed Jul 11, 2018 6:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply