Changing beliefs

Christians always say all you need is to accept Jesus as your god and savior, to believe and all is well for you. But this is not even possible. Oh sure, anyone can say they believe, but it is impossible to will yourself to believe something. No matter how hard I try, I simply cannot believe that there are leprechauns at the ends of rainbows, or that it is really little tiny people living in my TV making the shows I watch. I likewise cannot convince myself to believe something I do not find to be true or even rational. Some great invisible person in the sky, watching my every move, judging me and sending his son who mysticly removes all my sins? Huh? I can't make myself believe that.

It is not in our nature to be able to change our beliefs through force of will (at least not our world views/major beliefs); it is not possible. So it is God's fault himself that our beliefs aren't controlled by our will? Is it then his fault that we (the non-christians, of course) are doomed to hell?

I challenge the christians to answer this. Either force yourself to not believe in God and Jesus (if you're too scared to do that, pick something equally difficult, like believing in elves, unicorns, and leprechauns), or agree that I am right and it cannot even be my fault that I don't believe in Jesus, and that I cannot be held accountable for this "sin" and thus be doomed to hell.


-----------------------------
And guess what's left after belief... Leading a good life. That I can control, "right" belief or not.

 

I find it much easier to believe in elves and leprauchauns and unicorns than believing in some god

 

I am the same, elves, dragons, etc, way easier.




"I believe in everything until it's disproved. So I believe in fairies, the myths, dragons. It all exists, even if it's in your mind. Who's to say that dreams and nightmares aren't as real as the here and now? Reality leaves a lot to the imagination." -John Lennon



I believe in God, but not as one thing, not as an old man in the sky. I believe that what people call God is something in all of us. I believe that what Jesus and Mohammed and Buddha and all the rest said was right. It's just that the translations have gone wrong.
- John Lennon

 

you're looking at one interpretation of christianity and god - the atonement form of salvation, where you believe that jesus was the absolute son of god, went through a physical resurrection, and therefore by believing in his place in the trinity, you will be saved.

but there are definitely other ways of looking at god and still being a christian. of course there are people out there who will say you're a false christian, but does it really matter what they say? all that matters is what you feel is right.

if you don't feel jesus is the right way to spiritual fulfillment for you, then by all means don't try to make him be! finding the light through jesus just makes you a christian - but that doesn't mean he's the only way. and saying and believing that doesn't make you the anti-christ or anything there are christian scholars who have said the same thing. jesus is one way, but he's not necessarily the only way. if a different set of symbols fit you better, then they are the right ones for you.

if there's anything i think everyone can learn from the teachings of jesus as portrayed in the bible is that the most important part of life is being good to one another and loving one another, and finding your own spirituality by improving life on earth. the gnostic gospels particularly emphasize that it's not about the dogma, it's not about believing in virgin birth or resurrection or any of that, it's about making a real effort to know yourself and through that, find god.

that's my take on it anyway. i think i'm what is affectionately known as a "liberal" christian

don't feel forced to align yourself with chrisitianity if it doen't feel right to you. i don't believe that's what jesus or god intended. and of course there are biblical texts that would say i am tooootally wrong. but those were written by whom? paul? now just why exactly am i supposed to live my life according to paul? a lot of what he says is great and i agree with, but not all of it. and i think that's ok, because he was just another human being like myself, making his own interpretations of his experiences. i'll live my life according to my heartfelt sentiments toward god and jesus and spirituality, and i'll feel good about it because i'm being true to myself.

 

i try to be like him, and he inspires me with his message.

 

I don't feel forced to align myself with anything. I think you missed the point of what I was saying; i was making an argument against strict beliefs and the need to accept a single creed. Because it is impossible to force myself to believe things I don't find true or rational, so belief can't be important anyways, certainly not grounds for salvation or damnation.

 

haha my whole POST was about the exact same thing, not having to take the texts literally or believe in a strict interpretation. i'm pretty sure i got your point.

and you must at least feel forced to explain yourself for not believing things, or else you wouldn't have posted this thread. i don't go around asking people in other religions to explain to me how i could possibly believe in their god.

of course it is, and that's why i said you shouldn't believe in anything you feel you'd be forced to believe in, and why i said belief in jesus isn't the only way, and that the important thing is to live a good life - thereby making living the good life, NOT the belief in the dogma, to be the grounds for salvation/damnation.

did you even read what i said?

oh and also, i was wondering, why is this directed at christians particularly? there are maany theistic religions out there.

 

that is what i call ethical
honest, and princpled

 

I admire your view too. Very loving, and to me, ethical and rational.
God Bless

 

Orthodox religion is the old paradigm.

We are in the process of evolving past it.

As cultures and ideologies integrate further and further, the universal law of balance asserts itself in the form of open hearts and minds.

 

Hell is a place without God. If you don't want to be with God, why do you want to be in Heaven?

There are many different religions, yes, but the only way to be in Heaven with the Lord, is through the Lord. If Jesus teaches something one way, but one does not believe what he teaches, they aren't a Christian. "Christian", is a very loose term. However, to be a Christian, you have to believe in Christ, considering the fact that the term, "Christian", means, "follower of Christ". (The dictionary of all places even agrees so) Yet, many people do believe in Christ, and they are still not saved. For it is much more than just belief. The Gnostic gospels may not agree, but Christ himself said that whoever does not know him, will not be with him for eternity.

 

First, I did read your post, it seemed like you thought I was feeling bad about not believing certain things, and also that you misunderstood what I was saying. Of course I don't feel bad about not believing in Jesus, and I agree with your entire post, and it seems you only misunderstood my intent. I was just asserting that it is not possible, even if I wanted to, to make myself believe in Jesus. I can't will my beliefs to change. Maybe they will someday, that happens, but I can't sit down and say "I want to be saved, I want to believe jesus is my savoir" and have it happen. Thus, even if we did need to be saved, it couldn't depend on accepting one specific belief, because that is not under our control to will ourselves to believe it; it would be like a lottery.

I directed it at christians because I've been debating with Christians on this forum and it was on my mind. Yes it applies to other religions, no I don't feel forced to explain myself; like I said it was on my mind so I thought I'd post it, see what others thought.

And Epiphany: I KNOW about Jesus, but can't force myself to believe he is god incarnate come to wash my sin away. Why must I be damned to hell for not being capable (due to the nature of humans) of changing my belief structure?

 

This is an interesting point - and it could be another catch 22 type thing, because I think that some Christians might say that the reason one can't accept believing in Jesus etc. is that the human will is itself corrupt and 'sinful'.

NB - I don't beleive this, but just pointing out a Christian belief that seems to tie in with your point.

It also raises aquestion about the nature of faith - is faith simply assent to a given set of beliefs or dogmas or is it something much deeper? Myself I go for the second option.

It is clearly impossible to force onself to beleive some things. And I see no advantage in 'making oneself stupid' just to then be able to parrot 'I beleive!'

 

but even that definition of christianity, to "believe in christ" - what does that mean? it means many different things to many different christians. how much do you have to believe to be a christian? do you have to believe he was the real son of god, or just that he was sent by god to teach? do you have to believe he went through a bodily resurrection, or is the real christian path one that goes with the evidence that he was not bodily resurrected?

it's dogmatic questions like those that i find litte benefit from. and yes, of course christ himself says that. and that means something to a christian, but not to a non-christian - it's hardly relevant to buddhist or a hindu to say "but jesus said..." hehe not criticizing you, i'm just saying, i think most people know that's what the bible says, but i don't take the bible to be an inerrant document, and i guide my faith a lot more on the spiritual connection i have from reading those texts.

and trippin, i definitely understand what you're saying! and i definitely have felt the exact same way... and you know, part of the .. hmm i believe it's calvinistic? someone correct me if that's wrong, yes some calvinistic developments in christianity DO say it's kind of a lottery - that people are predestined for heaven and hell. not that i agree, but that sentiment is out there!

 

Granted, but only from one's currently held worldview. Show a TV show to someone who lived 1500 years ago, and he may actually be inclined to believe that little people were living inside the TV. Without knowledge of camaras and so forth, he would come to the best explaination that his worldview would allow, but this doesn't change the reality of the matter. Perhaps it is your current (mis-)understanding of Christianity that keeps you in your current state of unbelief.

As hinted above, it is your current understanding of, camaras, TVs, TV shows, etc., that cause the "tiny people living in my TV" explaination to be implausible. How good of an understanding of Christianity to you have?

Or perhaps it's our own faults for not seeking to understand that which we reject.

Here's the classic mistake, equating a belief in God to unicorns or leprechauns. You see, believing that God doesn't exist, or "lacking a belief in God" (whatever that means) entails much. If God is absent from one's worldview, than he's forced to explain reality in a different manner, one which entails many positive assertions about ethics, teleology, etc., etc. In this way, not believing that God exist is like not believing that a computer has a CPU, which would radically change your understanding of how a computer actually works. On the other hand, if today I suddenly decided to believe in unicorns or leprechauns, nothing significant in my worldview would change. It's like suddenly believing that I have 511MB RAM instead of 512. ...but anyway, I'm off on a tangent

As for your challenge, your correct, I can't just stop believing in God. And as for the unicorns and leprechauns, well as soon as they leave me evidence that points to their existence I'll start believing in them.

 

Hence the need to realize God does not exist, accept nihilism and overcome it by revaluating everything.

 

Why should I realize God does not exist, when I already realize that He does exist? And how is it possible for a nihilist to evaluate anything?

 

Your first question seeks no answer.

Why would you assume a nihilist necessarily cares about nothing?
There are different kinds of nihilists; I think you speak of the sort that cannot or choose not to overcome forlornness.

 

No, really. You've said that one needs to "realize God does not exist." When I attempt to apply this to myself I run into a problem: I already realized God exist, so why should I realize He doesn't exist? In fact you've even put a "hence" at the begining of that post implying that you inferred that from something I wrote! Well anyway, if you want me to realize that God doesn't exist, the least you can do is help me through the process.

I was using nihilist in it's philosophical sense:an extreme form skepticism.

 

If you say you already realize God exists, I do not interpret that as: tell me why God does not exist.

Well if you use nihilism in that way (never heard it quite like that, but) it could be meant to mean that one would be very skeptical of societies norms, realize they are ultimately rationally baseless, revaluate their values, and be a reformed nihilist.