Is belief in God a choice

[fr0d0]

SO you don't "believe" in a truck bearing down on you; you have full "knowledge" that the truck will hit you. It is a purely gnostic event whereas belief is something that falls between gnostic and agnostic.

And Hume said that. Blimey. I can see the ground beneath Evie's feet crumbling now!

---

Well... alright... how would you like to go? Any last words?

Shagged to death please. Last words: I loved you Kyu!!!

[Edwardo Piet]

you're happy to discuss it if I provide what I have stated very many times is not possible. You want me to discuss choice but not as part of my belief!? To me this directly equates to a refusal to discuss the subject. I'd love to hear how you possibly think it couldn't.

No - I'm happy to discuss it in any way at all, but we've gotta be actually discussing. And what I'm asking you, non rhetorically as I've stated on a few occasions is: if then you are unwilling to evidence your position, and you're just going to keep saying that only yourself and other Christians can understand that belief in God=a 'choice' somehow. Then how are we going to discuss it? I genuinely want to know, how we are supposed to discuss this, if I can't question you for evidence....how else are we supposed to discuss this matter.?? I want to know!! And ideas?!

Let me get this straight then... you want me to answer the question of evidence. You don't remember how very many frikkin times I've answered that question for you to blandly repeat the exact same question over and over again in response, with no retort, ad infinitum

[...]

I am not asking for evidnece for God. I'm asking for evidence for why belief in the Christian God is a choice for you, and why it's different to other beliefs. And if you're not going to give any and unwilling to defend your position...I'm genuinely asking where the discussion is and how we are going to discuss: How do you suggest we discuss this if you're not going to back up your position?!

THIS IS FUCKING BORING EVIE.

Does that make my points irrelevant? No. Yes I'm being repetitive, because you repeatedly ignore me...and all I'm saying now is, how are we going to discuss if you won't answer them? We know you wont' provide evidence for God, that's more obvious than anything...but that doesn't stop me questioning why - and that's not even what I'm questioning here! I'm questioning not your belief in God, but your belief that belief in God is a choice, and if you're not going to evidence this...then, as I said - how do you suggest we discuss this if you're unwilling to back up your postion?

You can't discuss choice... understand how I can say there is a choice because you can't step out of your tiny mind and listen to another POV for a change.

I can listen to your view, but I can't credit it in anyway untill you support it! And that is just another way of saying untill you evidence it. And since it seems you're not only unwilling to evidence God, but also unwilling to evidence this belief you have that belief in God is a 'choice', then as I have said many times (and I hope you will have actually spotted it this time considering I've repeated it enough in this post!!): How do you suggest we discuss then, if you won't support your postion?!

There is a difference between A. Listening and B. Agreeing or crediting your position as having any merit whatsoever. 'A.' I will do gladly, but how the fuck am I supposed to credit your position in anyway if you're unwilling to support it? And if you're unwilling to support it - in other words, evidence it - and I have no reason to credit it therefore, then how does the debate take place? Or what are we discussing here?

It's like you're afraid that by listening and trying to understand it'll be seen as some kind of weakness in your position, but what it actually shows is the exact opposite.. that you're frightened to even consider anything outside your comfort zone because you have that weak a grasp on it.

Well if you actually believe that then that's funny because you couldn't be more wrong there. I'm not the slightest bit afraid and I am completely willing to listen and am doing so. There is a difference between listeing and agreeing with you. I'm not going to accept anything you say as in anyway true without evidence, I am aware that you don't accept evidence for God, but that doesn't stop me questioning the wherefore, and in this matter of your belief that belief in God is a choice - I didn't know you don't expect evidence for that either! (although I can't say I'm suprised)....because how the fuck do you expect us to discuss this if you won't back up your position (hopefully you will address this point considering the amount of repetions now, and since this is the 2nd time I've repeated now that I hope you will address it!!!)

I could sum up your entire argument in one simple statement. There's no need for such a stream of meaningless waffle that pours from your fingers.

Evie's statement of belief: "There is no choice of belief because the dictionary definition of belief is wrong: Belief is only possible through evidence."

Lol, you're quite obviously taking the piss there...right? You know very well that I never said that the dictionary definition of belief is wrong, so why would you believe I believed that?

The dictionary definition of belief has the normal definition that applies to all things, and the Webster one you showed me, the religious belief defnition is just defined as 'religious faith', so that's faith as in belief without evidence....but this + the definition of religious does not explain why belief in God is in anyway a choice! So either you 1. Back your position up or 2. Explain how we're going to discuss this if you won't back your position up.

Now stick that in your sig and SHUT THE FUK UP.

---

How about "No"? And how about "No" because it's a midly amusing and utterly ridiculous and pathetic strawman on your part?

Belief with evidence makes no sense whatsoever. Belief without evidence is sorta the point.

Okay, so you have faith (belief without evidence) in God, (as we know) but you also have faith that belief in God is a choice...so you won't back this up...so how are we going to discuss this?

As far as the EvidenceVsFr0d0 debate goes, am I right in remebering that fr0d0's position is that there can be no empirical evidence for God and therefore logic is the only way to imply God's existence? Am I right fr0d0, or have I completely misrepresented everything you stand for in life?

That is correct. But his belief in God is not the topic here, the topic is about his belief that belief in God is a matter of choice. I was not sure that he also expects no evidence for this. He believes this only 'on faith' as well! In which case I am now proceeding to ask him how he suggests we discuss this then, if he is unwilling to backup his position!

EvF

[LukeMC]

As far as the EvidenceVsFr0d0 debate goes, am I right in remebering that fr0d0's position is that there can be no empirical evidence for God and therefore logic is the only way to imply God's existence? Am I right fr0d0, or have I completely misrepresented everything you stand for in life?

No goddammit you got it exactly right! Kill me now.

Cool. Do you think your logic is strong enough to be convincing? And what are the premises based on? I'd quite like to get to the bottom of your disconnect with Evie. I really struggle to understand what goes on between you two...

[Edwardo Piet]

His premises can't be rationally based on anything by definition because he says his belief has no evidence. This is the problem. And he won't accept that, so he switches back and forth between 'no evidence' and 'no empirical evidence'.

And what's even funnier is that at times he's even said there can be logical proof for God, he's said this on a few occasions in respect to Jon Paul's and Arcanus' arguments, etc. And proof is as strong evidence as you can get! So there's a massive contradiction there. Kind of problematic.

But this is not the issue here Luke, not per se anyway...the issue is his belief that belief in God is a choice, not his belief in God itself. However the above logic still applies in respect to this topic too, if he once again expects no evidence!

I ask you fr0d0, once again: if you're unwilling to backup your position on this topic, nevermind your belief in God itself, I'm talking this matter of your belief that belief in God is a choice here - then how do you suggest we discuss this matter?!

EvF

[fr0d0]

you're happy to discuss it if I provide what I have stated very many times is not possible. You want me to discuss choice but not as part of my belief!? To me this directly equates to a refusal to discuss the subject. I'd love to hear how you possibly think it couldn't.

No - I'm happy to discuss it in any way at all, but we've gotta be actually discussing. And what I'm asking you, non rhetorically as I've stated on a few occasions is: if then you are unwilling to evidence your position, and you're just going to keep saying that only yourself and other Christians can understand that belief in God=a 'choice' somehow. Then how are we going to discuss it? I genuinely want to know, how we are supposed to discuss this, if I can't question you for evidence....how else are we supposed to discuss this matter.?? I want to know!! And ideas?!

What are you - a parrot!?

So you're saying you won't discuss it until you have 'evidence' to believe it yeah? I came to this thread because I thought you wanted to discuss how choice was a factor of belief in God, and not that you had to accept what you obviously do not. I require you to 'watch from a distance' how the reasoning works. Of course I don't expect you to understand belief in God or Faith or Choice in this context. I expect you to question, given the framework you disagree with, how other people that hold beliefs, reason the 'choice'.

If you want me to convert you to Christianity first, then I think that's a bit of a tall order. Not primarily because I have no fucking interest in doing so.

I don't need to 'support' my position. I have already done that countless times in other posts on other threads. You have perfect reasoning presented in JP's thread and you haven't refuted it. But this is besides the point. In this thread we aren't discussing why the existence of God is immaterial, or whether belief in God is rational. We're supposed to be discussing if belief in God can be a choice or not, from a Christian perspective (as you asked the question of me).


Please say you understand this now. I don't know how much more of this I can take.

[Darwinian]

I think it could be a choice, if you have enough evidence to back up what your saying, you might be able to prove god doesn't exist, and change peoples minds.
Like if a Christian really looked into it, they might be able to see how much of a fairy story it is, if they wanted to. Most would just blank it out though, wouldn't want to believe that there isn't a god, and wouldn't be able to accept it.
so in that sense, it is like a choice.
But if you don't believe in god, i don't think you could just choose to believe, because It doesn't make sense, I wouldn't in a million years be able to believe it, because it sounds like the ramblings of someone on LSD

What evidence - type of evidence would that be then MV? God cannot be proven to exist, that's how God is defined. You may call that bullshit, or claim what is the best argument of non believers: that some fairytale of science will come along with it's magic wand and prove it some day. The intelligent people understand the concept of a non existent God. Stupid people believe in magic like the science theory.

So I agree with you 100%. Belief with evidence makes no sense whatsoever. Belief without evidence is sorta the point.

Careful with my baby girl fr0d0!!

[fr0d0]

Careful with my baby girl fr0d0!!

Haha!

I was tryin to be nice!

But then maybe I should admit that I love the idea of mind control. And that Hannibal Lecter is my hero.

[Darwinian]

Careful with my baby girl fr0d0!!

Haha!

I was tryin to be nice!

[Edwardo Piet]

Please say you understand this now. I don't know how much more of this I can take.

Understand this: All through my last post I repeatedly asked a question, that I'd already asked more than once in posts before...but I went overboard with it in my last post...and you still haven't answered it.

I am not saying that we can't discuss it without you giving evidence, and I'm not saying that I expect you to therefore bow down to my way of doing things before we can discuss. I am genuinely asking you, non-rhetorically, as I have stated several times: how do you suggest we discuss this matter if you won't evidence your position?.

And how have you supported it without evidence? That's a contradiction because that's what evidence is, that what supports a belief. And yes, the matter of JP and Arcanus' arguments for God is not the issue here, but it does seem your view is analogous on this matter too, and I wonder how you can support your position without evidence without that being a question, and I wonder how you can say there can be no evidence and then say JP and Arcanus' arguments are logical proof. As I have said, proof is as strong evidence as you can get, so that's a massive contradiciton there.

So it's just that your position on this matter seems to be analogous to the position on the God matter, yes you expect no evidence once again, but then you also say it has support, which I wonder how is possible since that's what evidence is...support?

Once more - Understand this: All through my last post I repeatedly asked a question, that I'd already asked more than once in posts before...but I went overboard with it in my last post...and you still haven't answered it.

Once again:

I am not saying that we can't discuss it without you giving evidence, and I'm not saying that I expect you to therefore bow down to my way of doing things before we can discuss. I am genuinely asking you, non-rhetorically, as I have stated several times: how do you suggest we discuss this matter if you won't evidence your position?.

Please pick that up this time!!

Just in case you missed it above! Because it seems that you've ignored it so many times that I think since this time it's got two exact copies in this same post, at the beginning and end...maybe you'll actually answer it this time!! Or will you miss it again? I've said it a lot now!!

EvF

[fr0d0]

how do you suggest we discuss this matter if you won't evidence your position?.

To quote myself:

"I require you to 'watch from a distance' how the reasoning works. Of course I don't expect you to understand belief in God or Faith or Choice in this context. I expect you to question, given the framework you disagree with, how other people that hold beliefs, reason the 'choice'."