Accountable for our beliefs

D McCloud · Apr 9, 2006

Casiopeia said:
Now see i don't quite agree. Any rational person who KNOWS something is true however much they wish it wasn't isn't forced into believing, they ACCEPT it. As I always tell my kids, there are NO victims here

Yes but what basis would anyone have to accept something on if they didn't believe it was true.

If you don't agree that we accept things based on what we know about them, why do you accept any of the things you believe?

icbeckyc · Apr 9, 2006

We all believe based on what we see, hear, taste, smell, and touch.

I have tasted an orange and it is sweet and I believe I like it.

I have not seen a unicorn, and I have heard they are mythical creatures so I believe they are not real.

I have seen God in his creation, I have felt his presence in my life, I have heard the stories past through the Bible, so I chose to believe that God exists.

In all these senrios someone can have an opposite or the same expericence therefore we will have the same or opposite belief, depending on what has happened.

But even if we have different experiences we are accountable for what we belief, because our beliefs will affect our actions.

"The simple fact is that your religion of choice condemns people for what they believe regardless of how their actions affect other people."

And some Christian become confused and mislead and make bad choices in their faith, and at some point they will be jugded too. It is wrong that Christian sometimes condemn people that have different views. For most we are not trying to actually condem we are actually trying to help and don't do it in the loving way we are called to. We try to help, because we want to make sure you are not missing something that is a life eterenal decision. My daughter heard me say something the other day and thought I was taking bad about athiest and that they were going to hell.(She has a friend that is athiest) I told her I was sorry, that the way it came out was wrong. I was trying to say that her friend may not think she is going anywhere after she dies. But our beliefs show otherwise and that is why we are to be loving and kind to her and if she ever wants to talk about it that is probably why God the two of them together. Her friend needs to see there is a God by seeing his love expressed through my duaghter and other Christians actions.

Eudaimonist · Apr 10, 2006

icbeckyc said:
But even if we have different experiences we are accountable for what we belief, because our beliefs will affect our actions.

Being accountable for one's actions doesn't mean that one is accountable for one's beliefs. That implies more choice in one's beliefs than might actually be present.

icbeckyc · Apr 10, 2006

Eudaimonist said:
Being accountable for one's actions doesn't mean that one is accountable for one's beliefs. That implies more choice in one's beliefs than might actually be present.

I keeping seeing people say this and maybe, because of my beliefs I am unable to get beyond my actions, but why do you say that there is no choice in ones beliefs.

levi501 · Apr 10, 2006

lol, 9 pages and some people still can't figure it out.
Can you make yourself believe in Zeus?
Then why do you think an atheist can make himself believe in the xian god?
Trying thinking about this before reacting emotionally to it.

elman · Apr 10, 2006

levi501 said:
lol, 9 pages and some people still can't figure it out.
Can you make yourself believe in Zeus?
Then why do you think an atheist can make himself believe in the xian god?
Trying thinking about this before reacting emotionally to it.

You don't get it. Being unable to commit to an unreasonable concept of the spiritual world does not mean you are unable to commit to a reasonable one. As I keep saying, belief in the Christian context is loving action, not just mental assent to something.

levi501 · Apr 10, 2006

elman said:
You don't get it. Being unable to commit to an unreasonable concept of the spiritual world does not mean you are unable to commit to a reasonable one. As I keep saying, belief in the Christian context is loving action, not just mental assent to something.

yet you offer no reason to believe in the xian god over the greek one.

elman · Apr 10, 2006

levi501 said:
yet you offer no reason to believe in the xian god over the greek one.

One says love your neighbor, and gives evidence to the seeker of why we exist. From Him and His teaching we can obtain a way to live that is good for us and the ones around us. The other was a made up story of a god who lived for his own selfish pursuits. Not even a close contest.

Eudaimonist · Apr 11, 2006

elman said:
One says love your neighbor, and gives evidence to the seeker of why we exist. From Him and His teaching we can obtain a way to live that is good for us and the ones around us. The other was a made up story of a god who lived for his own selfish pursuits. Not even a close contest.

That isn't a reason to believe in one over the other. That's only a reason to think that belief in one may provide a better moral example than the other. It speaks nothing about reasons to believe in the existence of one over the other, which is the issue at hand.

quatona · Apr 11, 2006

icbeckyc said:
I keeping seeing people say this and maybe, because of my beliefs I am unable to get beyond my actions, but why do you say that there is no choice in ones beliefs.

"Choice" can have different meanings.
Theists´ arguments concerning "choice of belief" and the accountability that they understand coming with it often make it sound like we can arbitrarily switch beliefs/disbeliefs.
This is clearly not so.E.g. I cannot, for the life of me, make myself believe there is a green elephant sitting on the desk in front of me.

elman · Apr 11, 2006

Quote
Originally Posted by: elman

One says love your neighbor, and gives evidence to the seeker of why we exist. From Him and His teaching we can obtain a way to live that is good for us and the ones around us. The other was a made up story of a god who lived for his own selfish pursuits. Not even a close contest.

That isn't a reason to believe in one over the other. That's only a reason to think that belief in one may provide a better moral example than the other. It speaks nothing about reasons to believe in the existence of one over the other, which is the issue at hand.

As I already said it does give a reasonable explanation of a spiritual world over an unreasonable one. If you want to look at the people who were willing to die because they believed in the risen Christ, many of them eyewitnesses to His life and death you have more reasons to believe one is true over the other. I never heard of people being willing to die rather than reject Zeus. Have you?

elman · Apr 11, 2006

quatona said:
"Choice" can have different meanings.
Theists´ arguments concerning "choice of belief" and the accountability that they understand coming with it often make it sound like we can arbitrarily switch beliefs/disbeliefs.
This is clearly not so.E.g. I cannot, for the life of me, make myself believe there is a green elephant sitting on the desk in front of me.

If your could you would be insane. Are you saying my choice to believe I was created for a reason and the Creator is interested in my loving others makes me as insane as you believing in the green elephant?

quatona · Apr 11, 2006

elman said:
If your could you would be insane.

How do you know? Can you see my desktop, and do you see what I see on it?

Are you saying my choice to believe I was created for a reason and the Creator is interested in my loving others makes me as insane as you believing in the green elephant?

No, I have not said nor implied anything to that effect. I have said what you can reread in my previous post. You yourself were the one who started judging things "insane".

I was merely talking about beliefs being the result of individual information, perception, experiences, disposition etc. - as opposed to arbitrarily chosen.
You are different than me in all those respects, and therefore I could and would never make any statement about you.

variant · Apr 11, 2006

elman said:
One says love your neighbor, and gives evidence to the seeker of why we exist. From Him and His teaching we can obtain a way to live that is good for us and the ones around us. The other was a made up story of a god who lived for his own selfish pursuits. Not even a close contest.

Loving ones neighbor being a good Idea and all, it is simply not the point.

Almost every religion ever in existence sought to impose both a cultural morality through a linked set of metaphysical beliefs (In this case one should love thy neighbor because of a Christian God). The moralities of any religion may have been either superior or inferior to one another but that never proves the God, it proves the morality was better suited to forming a particular societys

Personally I have few issues with Christian morality, and I will never speak much if any ill words of any Christian who actually practices it or those who sincerely attempt to practice it. There are objective reasons why the tenants of such a moral system are worthwhile that have nothing to do with a belief in God. It is a good example of how to live. My problem has never been practicing morality (I try to do my best), it is the faith, and I simply don't have it. I dont think I could choose to have it either, any more than any of you could choose to believe in any religion you dont already believe in.

If it were true that truth in a moral system lead directly to the truth of a metaphysical system that was attached to it, we could say, abstract back from say the inherent truths found in Buddhism (which reads a lot like Christianity to me) to say that Nirvana and reincarnation are realities..

Is this a reasonable conclusion?

Lilly of the Valley · Apr 11, 2006

JustJack! said:
So we get to burn because of no more than a simple mistake in theological belief.

Isn't your God a peach.

No...because of sin and choosing to reject God's forgiveness. If you do that, you are the only one in which to blame. Excuses are meaningless because you choose to sin everyday. You decide to fufil your will over God's on a daily basis.

Lilly of the Valley · Apr 11, 2006

D McCloud said:
Oh really. So you have never said or done something contrary to what you believe?

If you are willing to go against your beliefs then do you really believe them? What I'm saying is, if you believe something, your actions will go with it, if you truly believe it that is. If you keep going against that belief, and I'm not tallking occasionally or rarely, but regularly or in a pattern or easily, then your true beliefs are shown. If you believe that oranges are poisonous, you aren't going to puposely, unreluctanly, willfully eat them...if you do, then obviously you don't believe what you claimed.

Lilly of the Valley · Apr 11, 2006

JustJack! said:
Ok, but what if my actions are good? Similarly, the number of Christians who are just downright horrible people and their every act is a slap in the face to Christ is not few.

The simple fact is that your religion of choice condemns people for what they believe regardless of how their actions affect other people. That is injustice.

The fact is, there is no good to sin at all. Sins effects is already messing up society and having a harmful effect on folks now......claiming that sin, which is the choice of doing your will over God's, isn't harmful and has no affect on folks is inaccurate because sin is an action.

D McCloud · Apr 11, 2006

Lilly of the Valley said:
If you are willing to go against your beliefs then do you really believe them? What I'm saying is, if you believe something, your actions will go with it, if you truly believe it that is. If you keep going against that belief, and I'm not tallking occasionally or rarely, but regularly or in a pattern or easily, then your true beliefs are shown. If you believe that oranges are poisonous, you aren't going to puposely, unreluctanly, willfully eat them...if you do, then obviously you don't believe what you claimed.

Who's to say that when one goes against their believes it is intended actions? I think you have to take into account intent. How many times have you "sinned" in your life? Does that fact that when you sin you are going against god mean you don't believe in god.

Lilly of the Valley · Apr 11, 2006

D McCloud said:
Who's to say that when one goes against their believes it is intended actions? I think you have to take into account intent. How many times have you "sinned" in your life? Does that fact that when you sin you are going against god mean you don't believe in god.

I am looking at intent. In my example I even said the person wouldn't willfully, unreluctantly, purposefully.....etc...to illustrate that motives do have a part. W/ sin, there is even presumptious and non purposeful sin....now if you are presumptiously (purposely) sinning and such you are going against your claimed beliefs. And most people's actions aren't accidents that were unintended, the majority of their actions that is...

Telephone · Apr 11, 2006

wow!

What fresh madness is this !

Belief in something is not a choice, this is so wonderfully simple it surprises me people are even trying to defend this comic assertion that one 'chooses' to believe.

If belief was a choice, I would simply go 'shopping' around the numerous faiths (every one the 'true' and 'only' faith) to see which one offered the best 'deal', the one which appealed most to my sensibilities and desires.

Maybe this is what theists do, or would do outside of the influence of parental and cultural indoctrination.

Accountable for our beliefs

Veteran

Well-Known Member

I believe in life before death!

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

elman

Senior Veteran

elman

I believe in life before death!

"God"? What do you mean??

elman

elman

"God"? What do you mean??

Happy Cat

Legend

Legend

Legend

Veteran

Legend

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency