Why is belief necessary?

(Probably belongs in Faith and Belief)As I stated a few months back in another thread, one of the main reasons I have a hard time believing in the God of the Bible is because of the emphasis on belief. See, the way I see it, I can't control my beliefs - if I see aspects of nature that seem to logically contradict what the Bible says (and for the sake of staying on topic, let's not go into what aspects), I cannot force myself to believe in its words. Even if I went to church every week for the rest of my life, and deeply wanted to believe that such a God existed (because, as an example, I wanted to believe that there is an afterlife of some form), I'm simply too skeptical/questioning/suspicious/[insert appropriate word here, I just can't think of one that fits perfectly] - it's just how my mind works.I could just as easily have used the example of someone trying to convince me that there is no such thing as gravity and that they can fly - there is simply no way I would be able to believe that without proof, even if I wanted to do so.However, I'm presented with the idea of a loving, benevolent God... who condemns souls to damnation for simply not believing in the right idea. So my question is, why would God not accept into Heaven those who simply could not reconcile aspects of faith with the evidence that they see? Why is it that one must be Christian for Christ's sacrifice to "apply" to them?In a similar manner, I cannot comprehend the portrayal of mere thoughts and feelings as sins that separate us from God. I cannot control my thoughts; why should I be condemned for them? If you ask me, it seems that having such thoughts and still resisting temptation to act upon them is a sign of strength of morality, rather than evil nature. Again, why this seeming contradiction with reason? I simply cannot comprehend a loving God who would forbid us from doing something we cannot help but do.I'd be quite interested in any answers anyone can provide - it's this sort of idea, that makes it impossible for me to believe in such a God, more than the evidence in "aspects of nature" I mentioned in my first paragraph (which I imagine is what leads most to cease belief in the Bible - not being able to reconcile their faith with evidence).

quote:

---

First, you need belief for any religion. GOD is not something that can be studied or evaluated by science, it's not an area where you'll find much objective evidence.

---

Well, obviously. What I meant was to question why belief is necessary for salvation, not for the religion itself.I've read that thread before, (actually, it's part of what got me thinking about this again most recently), and from what I know of your views, I remember thinking several times that *this* was the only type of Christian I could ever really envision myself as... The only viewpoint I could really comprehend. When I asked I was directing the question towards the more "Billy Graham" types - those who think that you must first ask for forgiveness before it will be granted. It's a semantics thing, I guess, since that thread kind of followed the lines I was thinking of for a few pages, but what I mean is less of a "Who can be saved?" and more of a "How can you explain to me a God that requires a certain thought/belief out of people who cannot control their thoughts/beliefs?" The stress being on not being able to control one's beliefs, or, in the latter case, one's "sinful" thoughts, rather than whether or not God actually *does* condemn them. I'm trying to understand the viewpoint, not debate God's actual reactions to how one believes.(I seem to have a serious tip-of-the-tongue syndrome tonight - if anyone can explain that better, please do. Otherwise, will try to elaborate when I come back and my head is less in a less political mode.)

quote:

---

One example might be planning and fantacising about doing major harm to another.

---

I was thinking of more basic, common lines of thought. But, point taken, I hadn't even thought of that; my thoughts are generally more of a random flow of consciousness that I rarely "direct", as the utter clunkiness of this post might imply. Again, I was thinking of a more fundamentalist viewpoint - our sinful thoughts separate us from God and make even the most righteous of men difficult for Him to look upon. ...I've been reading that column too much lately, they put it right next to the crossword and comics.

quote:

---

Is belief that your wife loves you necessary for your relationship to work?

---

Obviously, not always these days. And I'd be leaning towards yes, but I can see loving someone without having that love returned. In most circumstances, yes, anyway.But - and here's the thing - that analogy isn't really analogous, they're not comparable. If you believe that Jesus took all of the sins of humanity upon Himself on the cross, why should His sacrifice then only take care of those who believe that He was divine? In your example, my belief directly affects the outcome; but here the outcome has already occurred, I just don't believe it until I die and find out the truth. Unless I'm missing something...If you're trying to say, on the other hand, that it's necessary for me to believe in what Jesus did to be able to have a relationship with God (and to have my sins forgiven), what I'm asking is why a loving God would do this when all signs, to a mind like my own, seem to point to his nonexistence. Am I to be doomed from the start simply because of the way my thoughts process?

quote:

---

If salvation is by faith/belief alone, the only way to the Christian concept of heaven is through naivety, gullibility and ignorance. I can't imagine a deity would have any particular reason for rewarding possession of those qualities alone.

---

You know, at times I would agree (I admit that my beliefs, while generally stable, do vary in their respective strengths based on my mood - so that I might be very sure of them one day and more questioning the next). But right now I'm in a more pond'rous mood; I simply am trying to understand - from this viewpoint are some people, by basis of beliefs, condemned simply because they think in such a way? To me this is a grave injustice if it were to be true.Many tell me I'm resisting faith because I want to believe what I currently believe, but that simply isn't true (as a matter of fact I've been trying to learn more about various religions, at least in part because I might find something that makes sense to me; it's part of the reason I studied philosophy) - it's just that I know I cannot alter my own beliefs or way of thinking, so, short of a clearly supernatural miracle or an argument that somehow makes perfect sense to me, I simply can't see myself believing in the words of the Bible anytime soon. However (and here's the part that most people find doesn't make sense to them), I believe that there is an afterlife of some form (whether it be another world/reincarnation, I don't know), perhaps simply because I cannot imagine ceasing to exist. I suppose I'd simply like to know, if I'm to be damned by all the various deities that "exist", what I'm to be damned for. In all, that longwindedly says I agree with what you say, but I'm curious anyway - and I might just learn something new in the exchange.

quote:

---

I believe a person CAN believe anything he chooses to (as the above demonstrates)

---

Not really - I simply cannot comprehend the idea of nonexistence. My brain comes up with an error message and I have to CTRL+ALT+DELETE or just let it crash when that happens. Try explaining that to your boss when he asks you why you're asleep during a meeting...Seriously, it's not that I want to - it would make much more sense with the rest of my views if I didn't believe in an afterlife, certainly. But I couldn't believe otherwise unless I had a sudden epiphany or someone else explained nonexistence to me in a way that made sense to me; in other words, I cannot force myself to believe it.As for your other post, well, I pretty much agree with what crashfrog said. Having once believed in God (again, I didn't make myself stop believing - the circumstances just happened to be such that I could no longer honestly say I did), I have to say that it was easier for me then, but it just wasn't true when I thought of things such as this.Trust me, when I say I can't make myself believe something, I mean it. 2 plus 2 does not equal 3 no matter how many times I repeat that thought in my mind. But feel free to try it yourself - tell me when you get there, and when you do, please tell me what 4 times 7 equals. While you're at it, try to convince yourself that God doesn't exist and you'll see how impossible it is for me to persuade myself He does.

quote:

---

If you try to lead a good life as defined by yourself and the people that matter most to you, I can't see how you can go much wrong in this or the next life.

---

I was speaking cynically/satirically - I really meant it when I said just see the last paragraph, I simply find the study of beliefs (philosophy and religion) quite interesting and have a tendency to overtalk. I prefer the word "loquaciousness", myself.{Added in edit: Also, I think I've been reading too much Shakespeare, because I just reread that post and I certainly don't recall typing the word "pond'rous".}

quote:

---

Don't eat too many chips, yummy as they may be.

---

Don't worry, I've got a high, uh, chip tolerance. This message has been edited by Morte, 11-04-2004 02:01 AM

quote:

---

I don't believe this. There was a point in time, prior to a few years ago, that you DIDN'T exist.........so you know that it's possible for you to not exist. You can also get an idea of what non-existance is like every time you fall into dreamless sleep

---

But I don't really, because when I wake up I don't remember anything about the sensation - there is no sensation. I can't just imagine that. Like I said, it doesn't make sense to most, but there you go, it's as simple as that. I can't "picture" nonexistence. Every time I've ever gone to sleep, I've always woken up...Furthermore, I'm not so sure - if reincarnation turned out to be true, perhaps I wasn't nonexistent before this stage was born. ~Shrugs~Oh, and continuing on our earlier theme, try to believe it and see if you can make yourself. I certainly wouldn't be able to.

quote:

---

I'm pretty sure you directly stated the contrary in your first post.

---

Let me clarify - I'd like to think that there is an afterlife, but that is not what makes me believe in it. I'd like to believe in a God because that would mean there is an afterlife to look forward to, but I have yet to find one that makes sense to me and doesn't clash with evidence, other beliefs, or the morality I believe in, so I don't. Therefore, since I don't believe in a God, the most logical succession would be not to believe in an afterlife - so that would make things simpler, but I do not do so either. Sometimes things are complex. The two desires conflict each other (which, since I have a feeling you'll try to argue it, can happen; for example, a student might have a desire to be a good person but also to fit in with a less-than-good crowd by committing acts of vandalism or hazing).

quote:

---

So, you don't believe in any god, because no god conforms to your idealized concept of God........but you like the afterlife part, so you keep that.

---

Reread the first sentence you quoted - I don't believe in any God because no God I have heard of has not contradicted His own words with His own actions and/or within His religion, contradicted evidence that can be clearly seen to be true. Don't put words into my mouth.The afterlife I believe in is dissonant to the rest of my beliefs - it is illogical and irrational. But I believe in it because I cannot imagine not existing now that I have a consciousness (if you think of solipsism - though I don't believe in that myself, either - you might understand the trouble I'm having imagining nonexistence). Cognitive dissonance, if that's what it is that makes me feel as such (I never did quite understand what it is perfectly in my psychology classes), is not something I control consciously.It is quite possible that you are right, and I am believing simply what I want to - but the point is, that's not a conscious choice I'm making.Did you convince yourself yet that 2 plus 2 equals 3?

quote:

---

I guess as Morte said it's possible that reincarnation is true, but I have absolutely no recollection or knowledge of any previous life. If something has had absolutely no influence on me in any way at all I don't see how it could have been me in the past life, since what I class as "me" is defined by my experiences since I was born.

---

I was using the reincarnation more as an example. Honestly, I understand that the belief is not logical, but I cannot help but believe it. Most of the other atheists I know think I'm just eccentric ("crazy"). There's no simple way to explain it... When I think back to the time before I was born, I cannot think of such a time. My memories blur the further back I go. When I think of my conscious thoughts now, I can't imagine a time in which no such thoughts existed, even though I'm sure that even as a baby such a time occurred. So how is it possible that now that conscious thought could cease? I'm dangerously close to solipsist, but I do believe that the world can exist without me in it, just not that I can cease to exist altogether.While the evidence against a particular God is important, more important to me is the issues of contradictions within the faith - in other words, I'm not the stereotypical "science-based" atheist, and illogical thoughts, while they can bother me, do not destroy me, because I do not define myself based solely on logic. I mention this mostly because, from the other thread I have seen him in, Atheists have less reason to continue living?, Rusty seems to think that logic is the only absolute for all atheists. Abstract thoughts are not my enemy. The fact that I have opinions, thoughts, feelings, a personality... is enough to convince me that there is something more to humans (and perhaps other animals) than just chemicals - I'm just not so convinced it's a "soul".I will try to clarify later, as I have to leave at the moment.{Edited to remove the extra "Thread" in front of the link, I always forget to add the "-" in the UBB.}This message has been edited by Morte, 11-04-2004 05:57 PM

(Just in for a moment, but wanted to respond real quickly to this... oh and BTW, very much enjoyed reading your take on it, Hankdawg, will try to respond later.)

quote:

---

I'm not sure what you mean... I can control my thoughts - everyone can.

---

I was thinking of those who say that we are tainted with sin in the eyes of God no matter what actions we take in life because of the existence of such sinful feelings as greed, envy, and pride - we can suppress and minimize such thoughts, but I doubt most could live without ever even experiencing them. And... according to some, this makes us unworthy before we ever even had a chance.{Edit to close parantheses... ack!}This message has been edited by Morte, 11-04-2004 09:33 PM

quote:

---

Oh no... I've just never known exactly what to think of the ego. I always picture it as sort of a sort of metaphysical waffle inside our heads that gets chewed up a bit when somebody hurts our feelings (seriously!). But as far as what it actually is I'm uncertain.

---

As I understand it, in psychological terms the ego is part of Freud's psychoanalytic theory - it's one of the three components of the subconscious and unconscious personality, the other two being id and superego.The id is the instinctive, animalistic part of the human brain that controls the most basic (mostly biological, such as eating or drinking) urges and demands immediate satisfaction of wants and needs. The ego is the decision-making, rational part of the brain that considers both the id's wants and societal standards in deciding how to behave (it's basically there to keep the id from doing what it wants until such behavior is appropriate or acceptable). The superego is the moral part of personality.If you're asking about more common usage, I usually hear it used as a reference to arrogance or vanity, although I've heard it used in the place of "mind" once or twice before. I also think it's "I" in Latin, for what that's worth.

Yeah, I forgot to mention that. Most of it is not taken seriously due to poor testability and a lack of evidence - as a matter of fact, many will tell you that, though in a historical perspective his views were very influential for quite a while, today Freud has a greater effect on literature and the arts than psychology.

Just to get this thread back on track (the Belief...a choice? thread spurred my memory), I would like to restate my original inquiry in a less confused form.If we assume that belief is something that cannot be controlled,* why would a loving God require it for salvation, as many evangelicals preach?*If you wish to argue that it can be, the above thread would seem to be a more appropriate place - I'll be watching both and you could simply reference it if need be.