And, MorningCalm... You didn't respond to the second part of my question, which importantly, was the only part analogous to your stated belief about Chansen.  So I'll try again...

If you did become an atheist, do you then think then you could start believing only in Odin?  Or Ra?  Or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?

BTW, the full context of MC's answer was (underlined part in the OP):  "Hi Brett, and thank you for the question. Yes, I believe that I can stop myself from being a theist anytime I want to. However, I also believe that the Spirit of God has transformed my heart in such a way that I will never truly want to stop. He has taken away my stone-heart and given me a flesh-heart. I believe that Jesus preserves Christians in such a way that having been saved they will never fall away."
 

 Why would people want to?  What would be the motivation?  What is there to be gained?  

And more importantly, can you answer any of these questions without the status quo answers of an atheist?

 Ps.  Yes, the slime ball is following your every move.

That's right, evade, avoid and ignore the parameters...

"The question has nothing to do with what you might want to do... just whether it would be possible to decide to change from belief in a God to non-belief and/or to belief in other Gods."

Can I take it that you'd find it impossible as well?

Elaborate please...  I think I did...  It would be as unthinkably impossible for me to will myself to believe in any 'God'... just as unthinkably impossible for me to will myself to believe in anything that I know as non-existent except in the mind of (some) people... like those mentioned.

I couldn't give a rat's hinterteil about that - I asked, after all.  What I care about is when you are grossloy hypocritical about it - whining and complaining about others doing this when NOT asked, when you've just done the same thing... mutiple times!  As in HYPOCRITE.

I've answered a similar question recently.  I would say that forcing myself to believe in a god or gods (based on the information currently available) would be like me trying to hide something in my house where I could never find it.

I just don't think I trick myself to such an extent.

 It's totally possible to stop believing in a supernatural deity.  I did.  The God I was taught to believe in as a child  (akin to a kind of meaner version of Santa Claus up in the sky) stopped working for me as a young adult.   But I'm one of those mega right-brained intuitive types that inteprets the cosmos as existing in the presence of something More, so rather than deny any and all forms of God and spirituality,  I turned to the writings of people MUCH wiser than myself, and learned to redefine God as the presence of a 'force' or 'energy'  (kind of closer to the force in Star Wars than much in the Bible!!) that encompasses all and yet transcends all.  Not supernatural, but the ground of being itself. 

Our choices don't have to be only between supernatural being or nothing at all.  But when you see things that way, I think you are doomed to endless, pointless arguments.

I see the friendly neighbourhood atheist is back, as venomous as ever.

A simple explanation of what I missed in your message would have been more than enough.

As an agnostic, I can't make myself go one way or the other (atheist or theist). My belief or lack thereof evolves with time as I read, think, and study. There have been times when I've said to myself "Why don't I just start believing in God?" or "Why don't I just not believe" and found that it just doesn't work that way. So, for me at least, the answer would be that it is not possible to just change my beliefs at will. It's something that changes and evolves with me, not necessarily something I cause to happen.

Mendalla

I flagged your loving welcome back message, BrettA.  Apparently you are unable to control the venom. 

No venom at all... just TRUTH.  So, what do you classify as "venom", please?

In my case, it is not possible for me to "switch."   (Read my profile for a brief description of my conversion experience).

I freely admit many people may find my experience an example of being irrational.   However, my best efforts at trying to be rational failed.    

This in no way constitutes proof of the existence of God, only that for me, I cannot switch.   I am simply answering your question as you asked it, "can you stop?"

 Like I said, if I missed the point of your thread, a simple explanation of what you meant would have been perfect.  No accusations of evading, no name calling.  Just an explanation of what you are looking for.  

But, it appears you have your mind made up about me, and what I might say.

Ahh, but Diana, was that a deliberate choice on your part - or was it something that happened to you?  I doubt anyone here would suggest that a change of position on (a)theism is impossible.  Obviously it happens.  Many of us have experienced it personally, one way or the other.  The question is whether it can happen as a direct result of a personal decision.

To Brett:  I think it would be helpful to distinguish between deciding (not) to believe and knowingly deciding to take steps that will lead to (dis)belief.

I don't think I could do the former - chansen's analogy of hiding an object where he can't find it is appropriate here.  If I'm not already convinced that X is true, then I won't be able to make myself believe it because I'll be constantly aware of my efforts to that effect, and what those efforts mean (ie., I'll know the 'new' belief is a self-deception).

That said, I might be able to do the latter.  For example, I could probably decide to become a believer in a cult by voluntarily subjecting myself to their follower-conditioning process (assuming their process is a half-decent one).  Everyone's mind has its breaking point, and the decision to enter into a situation where that breaking point is reached doesn't take the same sort of active self-deception that a direct, wilful change of beliefs requires.

Once again, I love it when people flag a post as "offensive", then quote it to make sure everyone reads it.

 Your idea of TRUTH is slightly skewed in favour of your idea of me before I even said a word in response.  That's not TRUTH.  That's BIAS.

What was the intended purpose of this post?

And the problem with that is ....??

BrettA feels strongly that I am a slimeball that follows him around.

Yeah, I got that.  I read some of the thread in which he said so.

But was it your intention to draw that grudge-match into this thread?  Because that's been the result.

 Okay.  My bad.  I should have known to stay away from this thread.  I asked those questions genuinely, and the slimeball reference was a joke.  Clearly, BrettA is pretty attached to his BIAS.  I regret having set a virtual foot in this particular trap.

Hi Brett:

I have changed my belief in God as well as my definition of God.

I was raised as a traditional believer in the supernatural God, became an atheist at age 24, and changed back to being a theist at age 44, but with a different definition of God.

God, to me, is no longer the supernatural deity of my childhood and youth but the totality of being. My religion now is progressive Christianity, meaning that my belief is a constant progression: a constant progressive process rather that something fixed, and includes scientific insights. Similarly, my theology is process theology, in which the definition of God is not fixed but a continuous creative process.

Many anti-theists seem to think that traditonal theism, i.e. the belief in a supernatural deity or deities, is the only possible form of theism, and this theism is what they are against. But progressive theists have moved beyond this defintion of God into pantheism, panentheism or unitheism.

"If everything is God, why bother calling it 'God?'," you may ask. Well, I experience ordinary reality as divine, and that's why I call IT "God."

You see, some of us are very hung up on God. So, if we can't find the evidence to match the hypothesis, we taylor the hypothesis to match the evidence. It is a desperate attempt to prove the existence of God.

My abject apologies, Aggie - I usually don't make this mistake.  I meant to say:   That's right, evade, avoid or ignore the parameters...

"The question has nothing to do with what you might want to do... just whether it would be possible to decide to change from belief in a God to non-belief and/or to belief in other Gods."

Can I take it that you'd find it impossible as well?

It was a joke.  The slime ball line was a joke. 

Edit: just to explain what I'm referring to

 BrettA, I really am not Aggie.  Really.  Never have been.

I'm out.

It's like being so offended by an off-colour joke, you have to tell it to everyone to show them how offensive it is.

You're not offended - you're mad, you're playing on at least the same level as Brett is, and you want a WC admin to swoop in and take him out.  I don't hold the competence of the admins on this site in high regard, but even I don't think they'll automatically side with you here.

Here is a classic illustration of what is called category mistakes in thinking.  Of course one could cease to believe in a particular understanding of God - I rejected a supernatualist view as a teenager- yet I had a sense of a more or awe and when I found a satisfying metaphysics ( Whitehead) I reconstructed my model ( theory) of God.  It makes sense empirically, rationally,and emotionally.  Interesting I found many scientists who are friends found the same possibitlity of a God through Whitehead and they gave up atheism.

Then again a classic mistake in thinking is the equation oof baal and other views that we evolved beyond as the same as more nuanced theories about the nature of God.

Empirically humans have accepted and rejected many theologies about God - and many in rejecting what is called the classical supernaturalist view or moved to anti theism, actually when they followed the logic found in whitehead, a scientist, reaffirmed a new understanding of God, that is different from those usually offered and found wanting.  ( or non thinking accepted).

Azdgari - hmmmmmm....could I make an intellectual choice to believe in a supernatural deity?  No, because I just don't.  It doesn't make sense to me. Could I make an intellectual choice to believe that nothing exists beyond the material?  Yes, I guess, but it would leave a hole in my soul that would, for me, rob life of much of its meaning.  So I can't imagine making that choice.  You're right - the way I interpret the world seems to be built into me.  I guess maybe that's why I feel so strongly about living my own subjective truth without imposing it on others, and wishing for others to do the same, and respecting differences while finding common ground.  

Wait a minute here.  A perhaps pedantic difference is that I said "like an unwanted slime ball" which hardly indicates strength of feeling, but more to the point was that she was following me ONLY TO ATTACK.  She went to the trouble of making whole posts where she had no involvement - just to attack me (no relevant content to the thread at all)... and then complained when HG (I think) later made a post where he had no involvement.  Context, please!  Examples of this include:

BrettA, please stop.

I have no idea what you're on about here, but whatever...

Hi BrettA

With respect to your original question, I am 100% in agreement with Mendalla's answer.  I tend to define myself as a Christian Agnostic.  By that I mean I have deep Christian roots, have close ties with the progressive Christian community, and am compelled toward an agnostic position based on an intense life-long involvement with science (astronomy, relativistic and quantum physics, and genetics).

I could not change my philosophical or theological stance by an act of will.  Whatever spirituality I may feel is driven by my sense of awe and wonder, and by my intense personal engagement with the universe that I am privileged to be a part of.
 

You actually sound a lot like me, iwonder, except that I ended up dropping the Christian label while still acknowledging that faith as the starting point of my journey and an important influence on both my journey and my values. Your last sentence in particular is me to a tee.

Mendalla

My name is Agnieszka.  I don't know where I provoked you in this thread.

You win.  Please stop.

Brett,  you pose a well-articulated, excellent question!  Clearly, if I strapped you to a polygraph machine, pointed, a gun to your head, and asked, "Do you Now believe in the Christian God?  You life depends on your answer,"  you would flunk the test.  So would I, if my life depended on renouncing my Christian faith and claiming I am now an atheist.  Yet, both atheism and Christian commitment are a choice.   How you could actually choose to believe in Jesus and the God He serves will be the subject of a future post to you.  Right now, I'm swamped with ministry tasks and I need to think about the case I need to make.  So stay tuned.

And I think you have proven that to be TRUTH right here on this thread.

Out.

Hold on...  Do I understand this correctly?  I'm sure that I've seen others call you Aggie with no associated complaint from you (I'd have to search to find one), and YOU arbitrarily shortform MY name (I can't recall to what - maybe 'B' or 'A')... but for some reason you can abbreviate my name but I cannot abbreviate yours??? 

I'm not trying to win... but I think it's fair to expect you to let me play by the same rules you use, especially when I have no way of knowing what rules you'll pull out next.  This seems like a very ugly case of "Do as I say, not do as I do".  And sorry, I'm not a sadist, just someone who think equality matters.

BrettA,

fascinating question.

It makes me think of people like George Plimpton (if you've seen the movie -- Paper Lion -- you will get an idea of what I'm writing aboot here), who would do things like compete in professional sporting events (like being in 2 All-Star games and being the backup quaterback for the Detroit Lions).  I think, ok, when he was doing those, did he believe he was that way?  What did he have to do?  How long did the process take?

It makes me think of Andy Kaufmann.  When he was wrestling those women, did he believe he was a wrestler?  If so, for how long?

It makes me think of blisters forming under hypnosis.  If hypnosis works, not by creating some state that doesn't exist previously, but, rather, relies on the subject giving up their will to the hypnotist, so to speak...can it be said that they believe that their hands are being burned by imaginary cigarettes?

I have trained myself (or ended up this way) to be able to try on other points of view.  To see what becomes 'true' when I believe a certain worldview and what doesn't become true.  I think that, however, there are a spectrum of beliefs that I have, axioms, and some are easier to change than others.

Declining to participate on this thread.  BrettA has raised an excellent question (i.e. could I, as a believer, change my faith stance if I chose to?)  However, he seems to have made his opening post in the spirit of seeking an argument rather than a discussion.  Perhaps I am mistaken here.

Oh, absolutely you are, but perhaps you could say what you mean by "opening post in the spirit of seeking an argument".  I took it directly from MorningCalm's statement about atheists (Chansen, in this case), and simply tried to reverse it. 

So, do you think MC's point was in the spirit of argument?  I don't see it for either.

Edit:  And to try to ensure that I was doing it fairly, I included:  "Thanks in advance (and I hope I've represented you fairly here, Jae)."

I think as we grow in wisdom and study, this is what happens - our understanding of God.

We will never understand all of God.

Aside = BrettA ,Nishie is what we call her. This is what Agnieszka asked a long time ago. 

Thanks, CH!  I certainly was never privileged with that knowledge and wouldn't have come up with that in hundreds - or likely many thousands - of tries (yet I get nailed before I can possibly know)...  It's what I'll use from now on.  Again, Gracias!

Berserk

Your quote to BrettA:

"How you could actually choose to believe in Jesus and the God He serves will be the subject of a future post to you."

I want to let you know that BrettA is familiar with what you propose to teach him. I came across this quote of BrettA's on an old thread when I was reading in the archives.

BrettA quote:

I went to 'Bible studies' at a close friend's house at maybe age 10, and to Knox Presbyterian Church for a couple of years with the family, recited the Lord's Prayer daily in school, attended Wolf Cubs and more.  My parents also discussed science, including evolution (they were missing some critical concepts, but tried). 

When asked directly about the existence of 'God' however, they of course voiced their view that they believed that "God is a creation of man and that man is not a creation of God".  However, they balanced that by explaining that most people we knew thought the reverse - hence the gist of talks in church and at friend Bryan's house, etc.  So, I think I got a much more rounded view than most Christian kids - hearing 'both sides', plus Judaism, as several classmates were Jewish (I recall the subject of Jewish holidays, for instance).

If people here feel that that was 'indoctrination', so be it, but it's nothing like many Christian homes I knew.  For what it's worth, my eldest brother is strongly Christian and his family was raised that way (Grandkids look like they will be, too), while the middle 'bro and I are atheist.  My wife's Catholic, though not strongly so. end of quote

NO , Not possible, I can not stop believing in God, I can stop following him, I can change my views about him as I grow and learn and correct, but it is in possible to stop believing, because I know with out a douth that God IS, and it is witnessed in the deepest part of my being, that which we call the spirit of man.  

It seems that many people would not agree with Jae's approach that he could stop believing at will* (and I'm interpreting some responses), but so far, most people have avoided the answer to my second question, which I noted was not answered by MC either, when it came up earlier. 

"And if so, could you start believing in say, Thor, Baal, Amotken or The Invisible Pink Unicorn?"

* Diana excepted initially, but as Azdgari noted, it was a deliberate choice, and Arminius excepted, and I'mn trying to figure how that fits in, and Berserk but that's undefined)

Sorry, StarDust...  What am I "familiar with"?  Or do I need to wait for said "future post"?

That's an odd lesson to take from our exchange, IMO.  Consider:  you could have participated in this thread without deliberately referencing your conflict in another thread, and thus dragging it into this one.  If you had posted normally and Brett had dragged the conflict here of his own account, then he would have been clearly in the wrong.  It's impossible to know if he would have done so, now, because you did it for him.

In my case, probably not.   My instinctive reaction to a strong belief in some kind of supernatural power led me to the most common variant in my culture, Christianity.   If I had been been born into an Islamic community, no doubt I would have been led to Islam, and so on.   

I'd like to point out two things here.  Re your:  "It's impossible to know if he would have...", I don't think I would and indeed said:  "I couldn't give a rat's hinterteil about that - I asked, after all."  But I was not prepared to give people the impression that we were talking apples to apples... when her earlier posts were not asked for and were clearly attacks...  thus "following like an unwanted slime ball" ain't that inappropriate, IMO.

Also, re Nishie's "I asked those questions genuinely", I'd say if there's any truth there, then it was not so genuine that she cared to read even the minimum 16 lines I wrote, since I didn't need to explain anything further - I just reiterated a paragarph.  Also re "any truth there", there was not the slightest attempt to respond to my question - ever!  She's put 14 posts here, and not once has tried to reply to the question - how "genuine" is that?  Even her last post was nothing more than a dig. 

Brett, one's own testimony to what one's actions "would have been" does not allow others to know that those are what his or her actions "would have been".

Well, of course it doesn't... but one is surely allowed to comment when being talked about speculatively by others, no?  I mean, even I only said "I don't think I would...".

Fair enough.  I'm just trying to show Agnieszka that bringing his problems from the other thread into this one were a mistake, and that any lack of civility on your part might have been avoided had he refrained from doing so.  In other words, "he started it".