Do We Choose Our Beliefs?

[Unveiled Artist]

Do you know that Tasmania exists, or do you believe it does ? Have you been there, or have you just seen video's, pics, or read about it ? Can acquired knowledge be in error ?

I'm not sure what you're getting at, though. That's like saying

Do you know that god exists, or do you believe it does? Have you seen it or have you just hear people say it in church or read it on the internet? Can you acquired knowledge be in error?

The last part, acquired knowledge can be in error, yes. A lot of people are convinced that what they believe is true that, unless they were presented with evidence they would take into consideration, it won't do anything. Tasmania and god are no different.

 

[shmogie]

I'm not sure what you're getting at, though. That's like saying

Do you know that god exists, or do you believe it does? Have you seen it or have you just hear people say it in church or read it on the internet? Can you acquired knowledge be in error?

The last part, acquired knowledge can be in error, yes. A lot of people are convinced that what they believe is true that, unless they were presented with evidence they would take into consideration, it won't do anything. Tasmania and god are no different.

The point being that knowledge and belief can be equal in "Value".

You believe that Tasmania exists because a plethora of evidences have convinced you to the point that you know it exists, as a result of your belief. Strong numerous bits of evidence leads to belief, without contradicting evidence over time, belief turns into knowledge.

 

[Trailblazer]

Getting requests to start a thread that breaks a rule doesn't absolve one from moderation.

I know that. I just do not know what the rule is regarding starting a thread presenting evidence for Baha'u'llah. Besides that, I do not think anyone really wants to know what the evidence is. They will just say “It’s not evidence.” Been there, done that, for seven years on this forum and other forums.

That said, if you have actual objective evidence, feel free to start a thread. Just bear in mind that "God told Baha'u'llah that he was a Messenger of God, Baha'u'llah passed this knowledge in his words in writing, and this Baha'i writing says Baha'u'llah was a Messenger of God, so Baha'u'llah is a Messenger of God" is circular reasoning, not evidence. Just as "the Bible says is the word of God, God is infallible, therefore the Bible is infallible, therefore the Bible must be the word of God."

As I must have already said about 100 times, there is evidence that indicates that Baha’u’llah was a Messenger of God, but there is no proof, because such a claim can never be proven. Since the existence of God cannot ever be proven, how could we ever prove God spoke to a Messenger?

To be clear, the evidence that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be is not that Baha’u’llah claimed to receive a message from God because that would be circular reasoning.

The evidence that Baha’u’llah was who He claimed to be is everything that surrounds the Revelation of Baha’u’llah, including who He was as a Person (His character); His mission on earth; the history of His Cause, from the time He appeared moving forward; the scriptures that He wrote; what His appointed interpreters wrote; what others have written about the Baha’i Faith; the Bible prophecies that He fulfilled, as well as prophecies of other religions that He fulfilled; predictions He made that have come to pass; the religion that He established (followers) all over the world and what they have done and are doing now.

So, IF I started a thread, that is what I would be saying, and people could take it from there.

Finally, the staff isn't going to accuse you of proselytizing if you don't proselytize.

But since I cannot always know what you consider proselytizing that puts me in a rather awkward position.

 

[Trailblazer]

Start that thread! We don't need a 20th thread where you rationalize divine hiddenness.

I am considering starting it but if I do it won't be until I have time to respond to posts. That won't be any sooner than next Friday, since I have Friday-Tuesday off from work.

 

[syo]

Did you choose to want to be a pagan?

As a side note, I'd love to see a thread giving the evidence for paganism.

My experience made me to want to be a pagan.

 

[Left Coast]

My experience made me to want to be a pagan.

Oh, ok, so you didn't choose it.

 

[syo]

Oh, ok, so you didn't choose it.

I choose it. I could have denied it.

 

[Left Coast]

I choose it. I could have denied it.

Living in denial wouldn't mean you choose your desires or your beliefs.

Do you believe paganism is true? Could you choose not to believe that? I don't mean to pretend or fake it, I mean actually decide, right now, that you don't believe paganism is true anymore.

 

[syo]

Living in denial wouldn't mean you choose your desires or your beliefs.

Do you believe paganism is true? Could you choose not to believe that? I don't mean to pretend or fake it, I mean actually decide, right now, that you don't believe paganism is true anymore.

I used to believe that paganism is false. Then I decided to become a pagan. And then I learned about paganism. Now I know paganism is correct and I'm glad it is correct.

 

[Left Coast]

I used to believe that paganism is false. Then I decided to become a pagan. And then I learned about paganism. Now I know paganism is correct and I'm glad it is correct.

That didn't actually answer my question.

 

[syo]

That didn't actually answer my question.

I didn't become pagan because paganism is correct. First I chose paganism and later I learned about paganism. Now I am a pagan and I will never abandon paganism. It's my choice.

 

[Left Coast]

I didn't become pagan because paganism is correct. First I chose paganism and later I learned about paganism. Now I am a pagan and I will never abandon paganism. It's my choice.

So your decision to identify as pagan has nothing to do with your belief in paganism. Got it. So your example is irrelevant to whether we choose our beliefs.

 

[1213]

...
What do you think? Do we choose our beliefs?

I have chosen to believe what the Bible tells. Why, because I think it is good and the only hope. But actually, this is not that simple. Bible has many different matters. It is a book of good and right, history of this world and also the future. So, there is three main views on it.

For me, right and wrong are matters of understanding, not belief. I understand that Bible is correct about what is good and right (righteousness) and I want to keep that. And that is to me the important part.

History and future are not that important. But I have chosen to believe the history, because things seem to have gone as the Bible tells, and because Bible has good teaching about good and right.

And the future, basically Biblical view is that love, good, truth and righteousness wins in the end. I want to believe that, because the other option is not nice and I believe it also because I think I know love.

 

[halbhh]

Several times recently in conversations with theists, they have said things about choosing what we believe. It's almost as though in their minds beliefs are like clothes in the closet. I go to the closet, and I could pick the red t shirt or the green t shirt, so I'll pick the red. Or perhaps, I know my significant other likes the red more than the green, so I'll pick the red one to please him.

In my experience, this is not how belief works at all. If to believe means to be convinced something is true or real, then we don't choose our beliefs at all. We are presented with evidence and whatever interpretation of that evidence is most convincing to us is what we believe. We can't stop believing that until something intervenes - we see new evidence, or we realize our thought process was illogical before, etc. I can't simply wake up and choose a different belief this morning. I am genuinely convinced of what I believe (and don't).

What do you think? Do we choose our beliefs?

At times. Such as choosing to look or notice, versus choosing not to look or notice

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I have chosen to believe what the Bible tells. Why, because I think it is good and the only hope. But actually, this is not that simple. Bible has many different matters. It is a book of good and right, history of this world and also the future. So, there is three main views on it.

For me, right and wrong are matters of understanding, not belief. I understand that Bible is correct about what is good and right (righteousness) and I want to keep that. And that is to me the important part.

History and future are not that important. But I have chosen to believe the history, because things seem to have gone as the Bible tells, and because Bible has good teaching about good and right.

And the future, basically Biblical view is that love, good, truth and righteousness wins in the end. I want to believe that, because the other option is not nice and I believe it also because I think I know love.

I don't think you have "chosen" to believe this at all. You approached the Bible in the first place very likely as it were a special Godly book. IOW you very likely had a preconceived notion that you had been taught.

 

[halbhh]

I don't think you have "chosen" to believe this at all. You approached the Bible in the first place very likely as it were a special Godly book. IOW you very likely had a preconceived notion that you had been taught.

For me, so very different than that. The very first time, I read because I expected (and not without justification) that the people saying what was in there had it wrong.

I thought they had it wrong, and read to find out where they were wrong. (of course, that was correct in that any sermon or representation is likely to be at best (at best) an oversimplification).

Later, as an atheist, I read for a very different motive: to find out if the teacher, Jesus, was onto something of value anywhere, say like Lao Tzu (the Tao), or other teachers. What did he have that I could take for my own gain, to add to my collection of good advice about how to live.

Anything? A couple of things?

So, both of those ways of reading were quite different than me reading to believe what any other people had said.

Consider: would you rather think your own thoughts, or merely have the viewpoint someone else has told you?

For me, I very strongly wanted no 2nd hand opinion to repeat. I wanted my own thoughts instead.

 

[1213]

I don't think you have "chosen" to believe this at all....

Why do you think so?

 

[Muffled]

I believe as children we believe everything although some may have preconceptions from a previous life. As we mature we tend to question beliefs that appear to lack evidence or have conflicting facts. At some point people start questioning the evidence as well. When a person questions evidence then they are choosing what evidence to believe and what evidence not to believe.

 

[Muffled]

We do? I don't choose what makes most sense to me at all, it spontaneously becomes apparent as I evaluate and learn about an idea whether it makes sense to me.

I believe that sounds a lot like my wife who had common sense. (I do not and have to reason things out). Thing is; that only works for what is common. She did not believe in a spirit world and that makes sense because it isn't all that common. However she contacted a demon through a Ouija board and that changed her belief. She could have denied the evidence as many do but she chose to believe it..

 

[Muffled]

Ah, interesting. I'd say some beliefs work this way, e.g., through hard experience and evidence we come to believe that when a stove is turned on, we shouldn't put our hands on it. But, given that this is a religious forum, I think most of us were thinking about beliefs with weak or no evidence, like believing in heaven and hell.

I believe if the only evidence one will accept is personal experience then the fact you haven't been in either place makes the evidence nonexistent for you. The reason you see the evidence as weak is that it comes from another person and you are not willing to accept that person's testimony.