How do you suddenly believe in something you didn't previously believe?

[AliceTheCamelHasGotTheHump]

I have recently though how nice it must be to have a faith and a religion. It must be nice to believe that there's a god or some sort of power in charge. I really like all the gubbins that goes along with religion too, the songs, the traditions, the pretty buildings. It must be nice to be in the gang.

However, I can never and will never be any religion because I don't believe in any god.

This got me thinking - how do people who have never previously believed in a particular religion's beliefs suddenly decide they do believe in it all? How does an adult decide that actually there probably is an omnipotent power in the sky and he's almost certainly called [insert deity of choice] and [Judaism / Islam / Christianity / Other Religion] is definitely the right way to go about worshipping him.

I'm genuinely interested. I realise my terminology may be a bit dodgy in places but I hope this doesn't become a discussion on semantics. I want to know how you go about believing in something you previously didn't believe to be true.

I have never believed that my fridge has a secret personality and likes to get dressed up and go out clubbing while we're all asleep in bed. I will never believe that. Likewise I will never believe in some Other Power or Force or something in the factual detail contained in most religions.

I feel a bit sad sometimes that religion of any sort will never be an option for me. I'm going to press post now and I really hope I've not been grossly offensive.

Interregnum - are you saying that you think there are people who want to believe but just can't make that leap of faith? If so then my response would be that they either don't want it hard enough or they haven't worked hard enough at trying!
I don't think faith or belief is something that just comes to most people. I think you have to decide on the stance that you want to take, and if that stance is to believe in God you need to then work on it through study and prayer.

I just want to add this into the thread because it works in many fields, not just this one.

A hypothesis can not really be proven - it is potentially valid until it is disproven.
We do not have the facility or understanding to either prove or disprove the existence of God, so He remains a working hypothesis.

It's the same with many things in science, we do not have the facility or understanding yet - if we had all the facilities and understanding, there would be no more research because we would already know all there is to know. While there is still ongoing research, it implies that there is stuff we still don't know - so anyone who thinks science has all the answers is wrong.

It is indeed impossible to prove a negative, therefore the onus is on the person making the affirmative claim ("there is an X") to provide evidence.

"Easter eggs come" is not evidence of the Easter Bunny. "I've felt them" is not evidence of ghosts. "The universe exists" is not evidence of gods. Anecdote is not data.

A god is a working hypothesis if you like, yes, but in that case so is the Invisible Pink Unicorn and so is the Great Green Arkleseizure, and so is Father Christmas.

It's all very well having an initial hypothesis and claiming it can't be disproved (it can't, because it's philosophically impossible to prove a negative). But you have to give at least a bit of evidence, and moreover display that the evidence is pertinent, germane and particular to the supernatural thing you are trying to demonstrate.

Otherwise it is like showing evidence that your car was scratched, and offering this as proof that Ryan Bloggs did it. It is not Ryan Bloggs's job to prove he was elsewhere at the time. It is the police's job to demonstrate that there is evidence to form a case, and until that time Ryan is presumed innocent.

Mersmam post 13.43:
Also I think it is good to be 'open-minded' to the existence of anything unless it has been proved not to be real

mersmam post 14:32
As I said above you cannot prove anything not to be real.

A Pauline conversion?

Unquietdad - but why do we need to provide evidence for our belief that God exists? You know that we believe it and our belief is backed by 'evidence' that we interpret as true evidence.
Whether you want to believe it or not is your choice - the evidence is available to you to interpret as you wish.
I believe that the most basic evidence for God is that life has no sense or purpose without him!
What kind of evidence is it that you want exactly anyway? Is there anything that would convince you totally that God does exist?!

No conversion I'm afraid interregnum - I was saying that I think it is good to be open minded to the existence of everything (as I said in a later post) I should have put a full stop after anything and ended there - but I have not contradicted myself one bit!

mersmam - well, you don't "need" to. I won't make you. But if you don't, it is just a belief with no more validity than a belief in fairies. There is nothing specific to that evidence which relates to "god" - it could relate to anything.

I think the best answer to the "what would make you believe?" question is always to ask the questioner what supernatural bodies and deities (if any) they don't believe in, and why not, and what would change their mind. This is then the answer to "why I don't believe in your god and what would make me."

Good post UQD. Why is it proof of God, rather than proof of aliens conducting a social experiment?

I believe in God rather than in other supernatural bodies because it makes the most sense to me.
God wants me to live my life in a certain way (obeying the Beatitudes)which will lead to true happiness here on earth.
Believing in aliens conducting a social experiment does not fill up the gap inside me, or make the world make sense in the way that believing in God does.
I have no problem in believing in aliens or fairies incidentally - I just don't think they're existence is important as that of God.
Something that puzzles me: why are non believers so keen to convince believers that they are right?
People who believe in God might want to convince others to believe to make their life happier, give them hope etc...
But what do non believers hope to achieve by questionning faith when they are closed minded to God's existence?
My belief is that there is something inside them crying out for God.

also, unquietdad, I think a choice needs to be made whether or not you believe in God because it has a definite impact on the way you live your life. If you believe in God then God is everything. Whether I decide to believe in fairies or not would not change how I live my life that much... apart from I'd maybe spend more time out looking for them

Non-believers, or atheists, often get questioned as to why they are so keen to "convince" people, but more often than not we are simply trying to justify a perfectly rational position in the face of what can become increasingly hostile questioning of it.

It's a little patronising to suggest that we are "crying out for god" (I can't be crying out for something that doesn't exist - you may as well say I am desperate for the Easter Bunny to fill a gap in my life), or that we are "closed-minded" to god's existence, when I could claim that believers are closed-minded to the existence of every other made-up deity.

The "gap" theory does make sense to me, in that you perceive a need or a gap in your own life and want it filled by god. I have no such need or gap. The universe functions perfectly well without my needing to explain it in supernatural terms.

fuck

This still going then?

I think I would rather go through life believing in God and be disappointed, than not believe in Him and get a shock.

I think - and I am sure someone will correct me if wrong - that people who believe in God (ie a deity of some kind) are in the majority globally. Therefore it always confuses me why the minority are so vocal about trying to prove that there isn't a God. Are they trying to 'unconvert' believers? If so, I am unsure what merit there is in this.

It is good to have a debate but I would never foist my beliefs on an unbeliever in the same militant way that unbelievers (not necessarily posters here BTW) sometimes try to foist their views on me. I would mention the benefits I have found, in much the same way that I would recommend a good product on a Style and Beauty thread (bad example, but the first one that sprung to mind [shallow beauty junkie emoticon], because I have found the 'product' helpful, or it generally made life easier.

I am probably rambling, and to all of you who think things through far more carefully, I am sure, I apologise.

Sorry, partial x post with unquietdad, slow typing!

unquietdad - I'm sorry I did not mean to be patronising. I hope my questioning is not too hostile either! I just obviously want to defend my own position and am doing it in the best way I can.
You are very fortunate to be completely at peace and satisfied with your life the way it is - and if that is the case than you obviously have no need for God or anything else. But I would say for most people, if there is an absence of God there is something missing.
It just seems to me that you want some evidence that God exists - but you cannot say what that evidence is.
I am not closed minded to the existence of anything by the way, it's just that God makes the most sense to me.

Also Unquietdad, if I'm honest I do find some of your dismissals of people's entire belief systems as 'fiction' quite patronising!
you seem to have the attitude that religion is just a stage in development that you have passed through...
Is it not fair to say that you have just gone in a different direction to some other people? To me your posts seems to imply that you are somehow better and more intelligent because you have 'gone past' the believing in God stage.
If you are not meaning to imply this then fair enough - it is just how your posts come across to me and that may be why I am coming across to you as defensive.

Gosh UQD, yet again you appear on a religious thread with exactly the same line of argument. I wonder why you want to address this issue so tirelessly and repeatedly when you seem so unwilling to explore the views of believers, agnostics, and even other versions of atheism.

there are a lot of atheist "evangelists" who are determined to show the "believers" the error of their ways, although to what end I don't know, maybe demonstrating "superior" intellect?

At least the Christian evangelists have a techincally valid reason for showing the non-believers the error of their ways - they believe that you won't go to Heaven if you don't believe in God and Jesus, so they are trying to save you.

What are you trying to do, UQD and others?

Oh, but I am sure UQD and others do have a far superior intellect to me; the Bible even confirms this. (Apologies UQD to quote 'fiction' at you, but here goes...)

Jesus said:
My Father, Lord of heaven and earth, I am grateful that you hid all this from wise and educated people and showed it to ordinary people. (Matthew ch 11 v 25)

PS God, please forgive me for calling your word fiction. I am only trying to help UnquietDad etc...

Disclaimer:

I did not post that last message. DD has had a friend round and her dad and brother came to pick her up - I suspect it was the brother.

I apologise unreservedly.

Jux

I have to admit, Jux, I did think that was a bit random - glad you explained!

Is there any point quoting the Bible at me? I mean, seriously? You people can do better...