Choice

[Philboid Studge]

This week saw the re-emergence of two of our more enthusiastic posters, John316 and veritas. (I for one appreciate their ongoing efforts to save my soul from hellfire.) I want to ask them and other theists and atheists about choice. My thesis goes something like this: theists (believe they) have seen God; atheists have not seen God. You can replace the verb "to see" with whatever revelation is applicable: a literal sighting, a vision, comfort in hard times, whatever.

My point is that I cannot choose to see God. Nor did I choose atheism -- it's more like my beliefs in the supernatural evaporated over time. Santa Claus gets dragged into a lot of these discussions, so why not here? Can anyone choose to believe in him? We could pretend, of course ...

If I saw God, I wouldn't have to "choose" to believe in Him. I simply would. This raises at least two points:

1) All the proselytizing from John316 and veritas is pointless

2) Why do some people see God but not others?

[Tulkas]

2) Why do some people see God but not others?
I'm no theist, so i apologize for the response before Veritas or John, however, i think i can predict the answer to this one. "It is because Vertas and John have faith!"

[Viole]

No, no, Philboid. I'm pretty sure that half the point of proselytizing is to make sure god is justified in tossing us into the infernal pits. They just want to make sure you can't use ignorance as an excuse for not worshiping YHVH properly.

[Philboid Studge]

"It is because Vertas and John have faith!"
Yeah, but why? Do they choose to have it? If so, why? Do I choose to reject it?

They just want to make sure you can't use ignorance as an excuse for not worshiping YHVH properly.
Maybe that's a motivation. I would still plead ignorance, though: they've seen God and I haven't. Why should I take their word for it?

[Tulkas]

"It is because Vertas and John have faith!"
Yeah, but why? Do they choose to have it? If so, why? Do I choose to reject it?
Good queston, maybe a theist can answer, because i dont know :/

[thomas]

I think one can choose what they believe, based on the evidence presented to them. Don't humans do this all the time ? Think about a jury deliberating on a criminal trial. They receive evidence about the facts at hand from witnesses and then they weigh the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence and form an opinion on what they believe happened. So at least part of what John, veritas and others are doing is being witnesses to what they've experienced and bringing you evidence. But you have to weigh it up and decide what to do with that evidence. The verdict is yours. It's a real choice in my opinion.

I believe it's possible to come to an intellectual conclusion about the existence of God without experiencing Him, just based on the available evidence. But really this misses the point, which is that God is interested in a relationship with you based on mutual free-will, not only or even based on your intellectual assent.

As to why you haven't experienced God yet, I think there are several possible explanations, some, all or none of which may apply to you. First, I think you can deny God even if he has already revealed himself to you. Secondly, God has his own timing, and maybe your time just hasn't come yet. Thirdly, I believe God will not over-ride your free-will, and it's pretty clear to me where your will is on this one.

[Spurius Furius]

....and it's pretty clear to me where your will is on this one.
So what are you saying thomas, that we are all somewhat disagreeable and just choose not to see god? We seek proof thomas, we don't take things on faith.

[veritas]

My point is that I cannot choose to see God. Nor did I choose atheism -- it's more like my beliefs in the supernatural evaporated over time.
Im not familiar with your religious background so Im going to kind of generalize. I guess the problem with belief is that if you have no reason to believe in God, then why would you? I guess that most people come to a point in there lives where they ask why do I believe in God? (Which Im assuming you once did from above statement). So if the only reason you have for a belief in God is the fact that you were told by your parents that He exists, and that you better be good or He'll send you to hell, then that makes it easy to be like, Oh what a bunch of crap my parents used to get me to behave and now that Im older and have come to realize this Im never going to be caught in that ridiculous trap again. This is extremely common so I'm using it as an example. The reason that most people end up rejecting God when they question their beliefs is because they just see God as some big buzz kill and a bunch of rules that they definitely can live without.

Now if you see God as someone who loves you, someone who came to earth in the form of man and died for your sins so that you could have a relationship with Him, God starts to sound a lot less like a tempermental judge and more like a really awesome friend. And who wouldn't want to have a relationship with someone who loves you no matter what, takes care of all your needs and you get to spend eternity with them. Its a little harder to reject this God than it is the other one.

And finally, the reason that I "see" God is because I want to have a relationship with Him. I want to talk to Him, read his word, and I want Him to be a part of my life. When you truly want God to be a part of you life and to have a relationship with Him, I guarantee that you will see God work in your life. This may take a little faith and a desire for God, but when you honestly open your heart and mind and give Him the chance, He will be there for you.

Revelation 3:20
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

[Another brick in the wall]

As to why you haven't experienced God yet, I think there are several possible explanations, some, all or none of which may apply to you. First, I think you can deny God even if he has already revealed himself to you. Secondly, God has his own timing, and maybe your time just hasn't come yet. Thirdly, I believe God will not over-ride your free-will, and it's pretty clear to me where your will is on this one.
Reality can't be denied. If the existence of god was as obvious as the fact that stones sink in water, there would be very few non-christians. If you ask 300 scientists from all over the world what the speed of light is, you get one answer. If you ask 300 theologians from all over the world what the one true religion is, you get 300 different answers. How could there be so much disagreement over such a vital piece of information?

[veritas]

Reality can't be denied. If the existence of god was as obvious as the fact that stones sink in water, there would be very few non-christians. If you ask 300 scientists from all over the world what the speed of light is, you get one answer. If you ask 300 theologians from all over the world what the one true religion is, you get 300 different answers. How could there be so much disagreement over such a vital piece of information?
Just because you get many different answers doesn't mean that there isn't one true answer. The reason there is disagreement between rieligions could be because of a number of reasons. What better way for Satan to turn people away from the truth than to use false religions and then get people to advocate religious tolerance? People add things to religion for their own benefit. This doesn't mean that there isnt truth about God. And Christians may have different interpretations for things, but the underlying basis is still the same. There is a God who loves us, who came down to earth in the form of many to die for our sins, and if we believe in Him and truly desire a relationship with Him then we will be reunited with Him when we die.

[Little Earth Stamper]

...
What better way for Satan to turn people away from the truth than to use false religions and then get people to advocate religious tolerance?
What better way for Tezcatlipoca to spread war and discord then by creating a false religion that advocates intolerence and violent conversion?

[Philboid Studge]

I think one can choose what they believe, based on the evidence presented to them. Don't humans do this all the time ? Think about a jury deliberating on a criminal trial. They receive evidence about the facts at hand from witnesses and then they weigh the credibility of the witnesses and the evidence and form an opinion on what they believe happened. So at least part of what John, veritas and others are doing is being witnesses to what they've experienced and bringing you evidence. But you have to weigh it up and decide what to do with that evidence.
I was on a jury for a murder trial a few years ago, and it wasn't pretty. Weighing the credibility of witnesses and the evidence was part of it, certainly, but there were also vague interpretations of "gut feelings," whether the defense attorney was "likeable," and I even heard one guy say the prosecutor was "hot," which influenced his judgment, I think. It's true what you say: we "form[ed] an opinion on what [we] believe happened." But our collective decision was not about guilt or innocence. I -- and most of the other jurors -- think the guy did it, but we entered a verdict of not guilty. Why? Because of reasonable doubt. So your analogy is rather apt for my sordid purposes: the guy on trial = the existence of God, and there was not enough credible evidence to come to a conviction. Man may have his baser moments, but he shouldn't have the presumption of guilt.

I believe it's possible to come to an intellectual conclusion about the existence of God without experiencing Him, just based on the available evidence.
Did you intend this to be ambiguous? I.e., most atheists have "come to an intellectual conclusion about the existence of God." To wit: He don't.

I think you can deny God even if he has already revealed himself to you.
I have a problem with this one. Why the hell would I do that? If He revealed Himself to me, I'd be onboard. There would be no upside to denial, that I can see. I appreciate what you've been saying about the value of free will (indeed, without it, there wouldn't be much value at all), but don't be so sure where my will is on this one. On the other hand, if "wanting to see God" is a prerequisite for actually seeing God (as veritas seems to be saying), then you're right: I'm probably sunk. My question about choice can be re-worded: why do some people want to see God, while others don't? At the end of the day, we are all agnostics in fact, but we believe what we want.

[Another brick in the wall]

Why does god let his adversary run around messing up his plans? Why did god even create Satan in the first place? Didn't he know that he would turn against him?

[Philboid Studge]

What better way for Satan to turn people away from the truth than to use false religions and then get people to advocate religious tolerance?
How about a Satan who poses as the Creator, thereby fooling gullible humans into thinking He is God. He then demonizes the real God, whose only crime is to teach humans the difference between right and wrong, as the Impostor had forbid them from touching of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil. (In fact, the Impostor is disinclined to reveal knowledge of any kind.) Many humans are fooled, for the Impostor promises them all sorts of fantastic, illusory things -- such as unconditional love and everlasting life. He reinforces the charade by creating a book that cannot possibly be discredited, since He plants the idea in humans' heads that it is divinely inspired, when in fact it's nothing more than a flowery text of carrot (NT) and stick (OT). He dupes the world into thinking they are cursed with Original Sin, when really the only sin they are born with is a predilection to act like sheep -- which is why they are so willing to accept a Shepherd as God. Diabolical, no?

[whoneedscience]

What better way for Satan to turn people away from the truth than to use false religions and then get people to advocate religious tolerance?
:o eh... this may be beating a dead horse, but tell me you're joking.

What makes your idea of religion at all different from anyone else's?

[thomas]

I was on a jury for a murder trial a few years ago, and it wasn't pretty. Weighing the credibility of witnesses and the evidence was part of it, certainly, but there were also vague interpretations of "gut feelings," whether the defense attorney was "likeable," and I even heard one guy say the prosecutor was "hot," which influenced his judgment, I think. It's true what you say: we "form[ed] an opinion on what [we] believe happened." But our collective decision was not about guilt or innocence. I -- and most of the other jurors -- think the guy did it, but we entered a verdict of not guilty. Why? Because of reasonable doubt. So your analogy is rather apt for my sordid purposes: the guy on trial = the existence of God, and there was not enough credible evidence to come to a conviction. Man may have his baser moments, but he shouldn't have the presumption of guilt.
OK, so you do think that we can choose what we believe based on evidence ?


I think you can deny God even if he has already revealed himself to you.
I have a problem with this one. Why the hell would I do that? If He revealed Himself to me, I'd be onboard. There would be no upside to denial, that I can see. I appreciate what you've been saying about the value of free will (indeed, without it, there wouldn't be much value at all), but don't be so sure where my will is on this one. On the other hand, if "wanting to see God" is a prerequisite for actually seeing God (as veritas seems to be saying), then you're right: I'm probably sunk. My question about choice can be re-worded: why do some people want to see God, while others don't? At the end of the day, we are all agnostics in fact, but we believe what we want.
One would deny Him because one valued ones own self above that of your creator. Because the requirement of God to place Him above your own will is more than one can bear. Because the requirements of God to change ones lifestyle and behaviour is a level of control over your life one can't bear to lose.

I don't think the key issues is about a desire to see God or not. I think the key issue is about your willingness to follow the evidence wherever it goes, regardless of the outcome.

[The Judge]

I think you can deny God even if he has already revealed himself to you.
I have a problem with this one. Why the hell would I do that? If He revealed Himself to me, I'd be onboard. There would be no upside to denial, that I can see. I appreciate what you've been saying about the value of free will (indeed, without it, there wouldn't be much value at all), but don't be so sure where my will is on this one. On the other hand, if "wanting to see God" is a prerequisite for actually seeing God (as veritas seems to be saying), then you're right: I'm probably sunk. My question about choice can be re-worded: why do some people want to see God, while others don't? At the end of the day, we are all agnostics in fact, but we believe what we want.
One would deny Him because one valued ones own self above that of your creator. Because the requirement of God to place Him above your own will is more than one can bear. Because the requirements of God to change ones lifestyle and behaviour is a level of control over your life one can't bear to lose.
Another possibility is that one would deny him not because you're so selfish, but because you hate him for how he's let you down - he can't possibly be all the things you've learned he is supposed to be as evidenced by the state ofthe world today?...

[Philboid Studge]

OK, so you do think that we can choose what we believe based on evidence ?
Okay, I'll concede the point -- to an extent. What I can't choose is the evidence. In your analogy I'm the juror, but John316 and veritas are eyewitnesses. What makes them so special, or chosen, as it were? I think veritas touched on it when he says one has to want to believe. I know you don't see that as a key issue, but I do, and it's not a very good precondition for determining truth. I mean, we wouldn't want jurors making judgments based on what they want to believe, would we? (I'm looking at you, O.J.)

I think the key issue is about your willingness to follow the evidence wherever it goes, regardless of the outcome.
From my point of view, I'm the one who has followed the evidence -- and continues to do so every day. It's theists who have decided they know the ultimate answers, and for them the search is over.

One would deny Him because one valued ones own self above that of your creator.
That presupposes a Creator. I know you can't help it, but ...

Because the requirement of God to place Him above your own will is more than one can bear.
I'm not sure I understand that one. I thought my will was one of the great gifts from God. I use mine to come to logical conclusions based on all the available evidence. But if I invert your statement, I think I can see the seeds of theism: the idea of one's will, alone in the universe without supreme (fatherly?) guidance, is more than one can bear.

Because the requirements of God to change ones lifestyle and behaviour is a level of control over your life one can't bear to lose.
I don't think my lifestyle or behavior would change one bit if I believed. Granted, I wouldn't be able to sleep in on Sundays, but that's about it. Really, do you think of atheists as debaucherous hedonists or something? I wish.

Another possibility is that one would deny him not because you're so selfish, but because you hate him for how he's let you down - he can't possibly be all the things you've learned he is supposed to be as evidenced by the state ofthe world today?...
I don't think so. The state of the world gets me down, but I don't blame God for it, I blame men. (And sometimes women, but not so much.)

[The Judge]

Another possibility is that one would deny him not because you're so selfish, but because you hate him for how he's let you down - he can't possibly be all the things you've learned he is supposed to be as evidenced by the state ofthe world today?...
I don't think so. The state of the world gets me down, but I don't blame God for it, I blame men. (And sometimes women, but not so much.)
I know so do I. I was just saying that IF "god" did suddenly exist I'd have a fuckin lot to say to him! The fact is of course that he/she/it does not and we are alone in this universe (except for a few bacteria on Mars). We are all responsible for our own actions.

[Philboid Studge]

I want to talk to Him, read his word, and I want Him to be a part of my life. When you truly want God to be a part of you life and to have a relationship with Him, I guarantee that you will see God work in your life. This may take a little faith and a desire for God, but when you honestly open your heart and mind and give Him the chance, He will be there for you.
V, Don't you see the problems an atheist would have with this? You're saying you believe what you want to believe. I see this as further evidence that God is a human construct. You want to believe in God, and Ghoulslime wants to believe in his rabbit, and Little Earth Stamper wants to believe in Huitzilopochtli, and I have my Sceaming Blue Ants. Where's that get us?

And what about the Catch-22 in your premise? If I have a little faith in God, then he will be there? Sorry, but He gets no faith out of me until I see Him.

[Another brick in the wall]

Hmmm... Maybe if I believe hard enough, I'll find a million dollars under my bed. See how stupid that sounds? I don't need to have faith in the sun. I can see the sun with my own eyes. Even if I tried to ignore the sun, it would shine on me anyway. This is because the sun is real.

[PissBoner]

Interesting how God exists to fulfull some need of humans.

God is made up, its beyond obvious for anyone who wants to be honest about it. Just like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.


Religion is so irrational the adherents should be diagnosed with mental illness.

[Another brick in the wall]

I don't think that's necessary. I do agree that gods are fictional. One of things that tipped me off to religion is that it humans have a desire to feel protected and special, and religion plays into this.

[veritas]

V, Don't you see the problems an atheist would have with this? You're saying you believe what you want to believe. I see this as further evidence that God is a human construct. You want to believe in God, and Ghoulslime wants to believe in his rabbit, and Little Earth Stamper wants to believe in Huitzilopochtli, and I have my Sceaming Blue Ants. Where's that get us?

And what about the Catch-22 in your premise? If I have a little faith in God, then he will be there? Sorry, but He gets no faith out of me until I see Him.
You know, if my entire reason for believing in God was only because I wanted to believe in Him and nothing else, there is no way that I or anyone would be a Christian. Lies never truly give you peace. There's always something deep down where you know that its a lie. I've tried lying to myself about all kinds of things. I've tried to make myself fall in love, telling myself over and over that its true, but deep down I always new that it wasnt. I tried to tell myself over and over that I should just be an engineer and get a good paying job and just live life like every normal person. But the more I told myself that was right, the worse I felt about it. There is just something missing in everything that this world has to offer. The only thing that I have ever found that feels right all the way down is God. I mean if I really need God so much, it seems to make a lot of sense that He created me this way. I know what it feels like to lie to myself and God is the complete opposite of that feeling.

Its like this, if there is a man standing behind you, and I tell you that there is a man behind you, then you could very well say "I dont believe you". My response would be "Turn around". And then you might say "Why would I want to waste the effort of turning around? If he touches me then Ill believe that he's there". So in reality the man truly is standing behind you. In order for you to know that hes there you can either make the effort to turn around and see him or you can just say that your not going to believe He's there until he touches you.

God is there. If you take the effort to turn and look youll see Him. If you say theres no way your gonna believe Hes there untill he touches you, then all your going to do is make excuses to explain away everytime he does touch you. You do have to want to turn around to see God, but when you make that small effort, He will be there, and you will understand why we are all looking for a purpose and a reason and that absolute happiness, and that God is the only one who truly fulfills those things...and nothing will feel more right.

[Another brick in the wall]

See my above post about the sun. Even if I ignore the sun, it shines on me anyway. I don't need to have faith in the sun in order to see it.

[veritas]

Hmmm... Maybe if I believe hard enough, I'll find a million dollars under my bed. See how stupid that sounds? I don't need to have faith in the sun. I can see the sun with my own eyes. Even if I tried to ignore the sun, it would shine on me anyway. This is because the sun is real.
Even if you ignore God He still gives you life. He still allows you to wake up every morning and take breaths of the air that He created for you.

You had to make the effort to go outside of your house to actually see that the sun was real. If you didnt, all you would see is the effects of the sun, and you could explain away the light with any theory you want. If you make the effort to see God then you will know that He is real.

[Another brick in the wall]

I have to make much less of an effort to see the sun than to see god. I've seen the sun and never looked for it. I searched for god and never found him. If god is so easy to find, why is it that there are so many conflicting descriptions of him? Why is it that some people look for him and never find him?

[Little Earth Stamper]

I'm still confused about whether my love of Tlaloc and Ehecatl count as properly seeing god.

Also, this theory ignores testimonies from numerous ex-Christians that they became atheists only after god failed to appear to them.