Why do theists still insist belief is a conscientious choice?

Question

*Note: Some theists.

Dawkins: "Believing is not something you can decide to do as a matter of policy. [...] I can decide to go to church and I can decide to recite the Nicene Creed, and I can decide to swear on a stack of bibles that I believe every word inside them. But none of that can make me actually believe it if I don't. Pascal's wager could only ever be an argument for feigning belief in God."

Answer 1

I used to believed in fairies and it still didn't make fairies real...hmm, I wonder why?

Answer 2

I'm with Richard Dawkins. But to some Christians 'believe' means something different from what it means to you and me and Dawkins.

I always thought 'believe' meant something sounded reasonable to you and you thought about it and decided you thought it must be true.

But to some Christians it's more about believing what they are told they are -supposed- to believe. Too many times I have asked a Christian a question about one of these beliefs and got the answer 'Well I don't understand it, I can't explain it, but I BELIEVE it!'

When I point this out, they say 'Well, you believe in the theory of relativity, don't you? Can you EXPLAIN it?'

But I really think 'belief' means that you go along with the doctrines you are taught. It means you acknowledge them. You repeat them in answer to a question. If you just -say- you believe them, you get a lot of positive reinforcement, and you're well on your way. 8^)

As for the comment about Pascal's Wager, I think lots of Christians would say 'feigning' belief is a good start!

(Seriously, though, I know a lot of Christians who I think really -get- it. They really live their faith and set an example. And they are the first to warn you: Don't judge Christianity by Christians.)

Answer 3

It baffles me sometimes. I to my self can not see it. I have no belief. But Christians seems so feverishly full of belief I find it a little unnerving. They feel this belief so strongly. But if I believed in unicorns and fairy's this strongly I would been looked on as crazy! And don't forget devils, and angels and ghosts and talking donkeys and burning bushes that talk and...... I can not suspend my disbelief.

Answer 4

There isn’t much more that we can add to Dawkins incisive attack on Pascal’s little “wager.” Profession of belief, and true belief are completely different things. You can assert that you believe something, but to truly believe it with your heart and your mind is something entirely different, and it is beyond ones volition. You have to be convinced of its truth or be emotional disposed to believing it in order to really believe it. If you were to hold a gun to my head and command me to say that I love Paris Hilton, I can express love for her verbally, but no one in their right mind would assume that I REALLY LOVE PARIS HILTON just because I said it?

This leads, of course to certain unavoidable problems for Christians. If belief is dependent on being swayed by argument or having a visceral predilection to believe, then our eternal souls, assuming belief in Jesus’ resurrection and saving sacrifice are truly necessary for our salvation, have nothing to do with us, but have everything to do with how convincing the Christian world is in its promotion of its worldview, or on environmental factors that shape our emotional disposition. Hence, God, if he does exist in accordance with the Christian definition of him, is condemning unbelievers for something they have no true choice in. Such a God is villainous to say the least, and not the least bit worthy of our praise and adoration. Furthermore, a God of such brazen unfairness and capriciousness cannot be trusted by Christians to deliver on his promises.

Answer 5

Most humans have a lot less integrity and a more selective memory than Dawkins.

Answer 6

Gee, I guess if Dawkins said it then it's true.