Is religion a choice?

[lizzie]

I would argue that relgion is a choice, but with a small caveat. While, yes, we all ultimately decide what religion we wish to follow (if any), a large portion of that choice is influenced by our cultural upbringing. If one is raised in a predominantely Christian culture, choosing Islam or Hinduism is far less likely. Likewise, if one is raised on New Delhi, choosing Judaism or Wicca is far less likely.

We get to choose, but what choices are presented to us and at what levels of cultural acceptance vary from place to place.

More than cultural upbringing, I think it depends largely on the individual in question. I was raised in a heavily Christian environment. My parents went to church every time the door was open- literally. You'd think that would have made me much more inclined toward staying in church, and with the religion I was brought up in. In spite of being raised that way, by seriously wonderful parents who weren't pushy with religion, but lived it in their own lives, I was rebellious, had great difficulty accepting what I was taught, and went in search of another way for myself. Fortunately, I didn't lose my civility and my acceptance of that which I could not believe, and I didn't become a nasty anti-religious zealot, as I see so many anti-religious people do.

 

[Koros]

More than cultural upbringing, I think it depends largely on the individual in question. I was raised in a heavily Christian environment. My parents went to church every time the door was open- literally. You'd think that would have made me much more inclined toward staying in church, and with the religion I was brought up in. In spite of being raised that way, by seriously wonderful parents who weren't pushy with religion, but lived it in their own lives, I was rebellious, had great difficulty accepting what I was taught, and went in search of another way for myself. Fortunately, I didn't lose my civility and my acceptance of that which I could not believe, and I didn't become a nasty anti-religious zealot, as I see so many anti-religious people do.

There is certainly a level of individuality in the decision, without a doubt. My point was that, when adults are choosing which (if any) religion to follow, they will be heavily influenced by their cultural upbringing. You may not have chosen the religion of your parents, and neither did I. However, if you look at how many people worldwide follow the religion of their families, and how few break away to join religions which are minorities for their area, I think you'll see that culture plays a dramatic role in religious choices.

 

[Paxaeon]

You are saying that no faith is required when believing non-empirical things exists?

`
I am saying people use their own definitions of the word "faith" to suit their own agenda's.

 

[Black Dog]

I'm just applying the definition of the word "belief". You can't simple decide that you're going to believe something different in any context - it wouldn't be a belief if you did.

Yes you can. As a human you can decide what you want to believe or not. Now it does very from person to person, but you are assuming everyone thinks the same.

1. an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists.

2. trust, faith, or confidence in someone or something.

Going by the definition, it would seem it is a choice. It is not something we are born with or any kind of genetics. It is a choice. People can be taught things but ultimately it's still a choice.

You can be uncertain about something (I suspect we're all uncertain about pretty much everything) and seek out further information to clarify but you can't create a belief that doesn't align with that information in your mind.

And that makes no difference. It is still a choice. You can just say no, and dump it from your mind. Forgiveness vs revenge is a perfect example.

The simple test is for you to choose to believe something right now. Choose to honestly and unquestionable believe that there is an all-powerful God in heaven. Can you do that?

Well considering I am a Christian, I think that is pretty easy. It would be just as easy to dismiss any god as no proof exists. I made a choice to follow Jesus. I could however have said no and did for a long time.

Please don't see this as belittling religious belief or your transition. To my mind the concept of belief as uncontrollable makes your story all the more poignant.

No insult to me or my faith at all. We just disagree on whether it's a choice. Truth is because we are all different and see things just as differently I don't think there is a wrong or right answer here.

I am beginning to think this is more subjective than I at first believed.

The problem I have for your argument is you are generalizing something that is #1 very complicated (as in how the human brain works emotionally) #2 Is completely different for each person.

 

[Nilly]

Is religion a choice?

The question is not as simplistic as it seems on the surface. The question is also aimed at people who are, have been, or claim to be, religious.

Aspects to consider...

• People are "born into" specific religions/faiths in the sense that their family is of a particular faith
• This aspect usually means more for some religions/faiths (i.e.: Judiasm, etc.) than others
• Yes, people do often 'drop out of' their faith and either change faiths or drop religious faith completely, so in that sense it is a choice
• Yet, some people who do change or drop their faith often still identify in some manner with their previous faith
• The modern era is lessening this aspect somewhat, especially in western societies, but it still applies definitively in some regions and cultures of the world

So, what say you?

It certainly isn't a choice for millions of children around the world. When something is driven into you during your formal years it certainly makes it difficult to make a rational choice about it later in life.

 

[DDD]

Ah, got'cha.

To me, that is faith... belief in something but unable to prove it or demonstrate it, i.e.: technically unknown.

Just to make sure.

I am standing on a cliff, where all scientific theories end. Beyond that is darkness and the unknown. I know it is unknown for we do not have the ability to understand what lays beyond yet.

But all life originates from somewhere out there within that darkness. So I have a hunch it is there but I can neither prove it nor would I impose this hunch on someone else (how could I on these fragile grounds?). So you call all this faith then?

 

[DDD]

Behold....a deist with faith. (see below) :mrgreen:

"I believe in the existence of some kind of supreme divinity" <---- that's faith my friend....plain and simple

More like a source where all life comes from. I do not know whether it is "supreme" or whether it is a "divinity." It is just a hunch, I do not believe in anything without seeing it or understanding it objectively first.

 

[HonestJoe]

Yes you can. As a human you can decide what you want to believe or not. Now it does very from person to person, but you are assuming everyone thinks the same.

It's not about how people think, it's about the fundamental workings of the human mind and the basic definition of the words in question. That is (generally) consistent across all people.

Well considering I am a Christian, I think that is pretty easy. It would be just as easy to dismiss any god as no proof exists. I made a choice to follow Jesus. I could however have said no and did for a long time.

OK, I missed the bit where you'd gone back to Christianity. In that case, choose to stop believing in God. Not just saying "It would be easy", actually do it. Come back and tell me with all honestly that you completely and unconditionally don't believe in the existence of God.

Or how about believing, against, honestly and unconditionally, that there is a pink elephant sitting on your keyboard. It doesn't really matter how ridiculous the proposal is, your position is that it is easy to simply choose to believe it to be unerringly true.

 

[radcen]

Just to make sure.

I am standing on a cliff, where all scientific theories end. Beyond that is darkness and the unknown. I know it is unknown for we do not have the ability to understand what lays beyond yet.

But all life originates from somewhere out there within that darkness. So I have a hunch it is there but I can neither prove it nor would I impose this hunch on someone else (how could I on these fragile grounds?). So you call all this faith then?

You're making it more complicated than it needs to be. Maybe instead of saying "unknown", we say "unproven".

 

[Dragonfly]

But all life originates from somewhere out there within that darkness. So I have a hunch it is there but I can neither prove it nor would I impose this hunch on someone else (how could I on these fragile grounds?). So you call all this faith then?

It's faith if you believe "something" created/designed and/or started the whole thing with some kind of purpose.

Wouldn't you say?

 

[DDD]

It's faith if you believe "something" created/designed and/or started the whole thing with some kind of purpose.

Wouldn't you say?

It is a mater of origin. All this is coming from somewhere.

Whether the origin created/designed and/or started it all with a purpose or not is unknown. Thus I do not believe in it.

 

[Hamster Buddha]

Is religion a choice?

The question is not as simplistic as it seems on the surface. The question is also aimed at people who are, have been, or claim to be, religious.

Aspects to consider...

• People are "born into" specific religions/faiths in the sense that their family is of a particular faith
• This aspect usually means more for some religions/faiths (i.e.: Judiasm, etc.) than others
• Yes, people do often 'drop out of' their faith and either change faiths or drop religious faith completely, so in that sense it is a choice
• Yet, some people who do change or drop their faith often still identify in some manner with their previous faith
• The modern era is lessening this aspect somewhat, especially in western societies, but it still applies definitively in some regions and cultures of the world

So, what say you?

Faith is a choice, regardless of your born into a religious household or not.

 

[DDD]

You're making it more complicated than it needs to be. Maybe instead of saying "unknown", we say "unproven".

No one said that objective reality is not complicated. But it is unknown at this moment.

 

[AGENT J]

It can become a choice once you get past the hesitation to buck authority at all costs. Many of us are thoroughly indoctrinated in it to the point that we can't give it up, because we are afraid to, deep down inside. Some of us rebel, just because we resent our parents for "not giving us a choice", and we become bitter and hateful about religion. Others of us realize that we were indoctrinated, but we examine religion, and come to our own conclusions without the emotional outrage, and we may decide that we don't buy it at all, we buy it lock, stock, and barrel, or we find ourselves somewhere along the continuum, depending on our level of interest and need.

So yeah, I can see that you might think it isn't a choice, and it's true that being raised in a specific religion may be out of your control, but once you reach the ability to make your own choices, you are free to learn all you want, and make your own decisions about what role (if any) religion will have in your life.

In my life, I have gone through several religious phases, even being near-atheistic at one point, but I have settled into a comfortable place with religion, and it has no dogma, nor required hoops to jump through. It is a way of being, mentally and emotionally.

this is a close to a perfect answer as one can get and I agree :thumbs::clap:

Religion will always be a choice, theres nothing that will make it otherwise.
unlike above this is a very simplistic answer and of course there are many factors for many people, upbringing, culture, region, family, etc etc but the reality is those are all choices.Even if i hold a gun to your head and tell you to love apples its a choice. Not a lot of choice or choices with great outcomes but still a choice.

 

[CrabCake]

To what extent is anything a free choice? Do we have free will, or are our actions the only actions possible given our genetic makeup and the conditions in question? Determinists would say that free will is an illusion. They make some very good arguments that appear to be backed by modern science. As we learn more about psychology, personality, and the make-up of the human brain, it becomes increasingly easier to predict the actions of an individual subjected to a certain stimulus. The more we know, the smaller the window for what might be termed "free will" gets.

From a Christian theology perspective, the question becomes: how can God's providence and sovereignty be supreme if humans are able to act against God's will? Put in another way, if human beings can do as they like, how can we simultaneously say that God is in control? Another more common question that arises from this is the question of whether your actions can be free if God can already see what they will be.

John Calvin resolved these problems by crushing the concept of free-will. Under the Calvinist view (generally referred to as the Reformed tradition), we do not choose to follow God, God chooses us. Those who believe are those whom God pre-ordained would believe. Therefore, the choice to follow God is not a free choice, but was pre-ordained for us by God. This extends not just to salvation, but to every human action. The events that unfold in the world are the events that God pre-ordained would take place. We are, in essence, merely characters in the story God is telling. This is the dominant view in modern Christianity. Although not well-known among the body of believers, it is what is taught at most seminaries and accepted throughout the Baptist, Presbyterian, and Anglican world as well as being the dominant view among non-denominational evangelicals. "Follow Me: A call to Die. a Call to Live" by David Platt does a wonderful job of presenting the Reformed position to a modern lay audience. The advantage of this position is that it puts God at the center, making him the supreme force in the universe, against whose will nothing happens and without whose command nothing transpires. It is a very humble position that teaches us that there is nothing we did to deserve what he has given us and that the call to serve is not a call to save the world but rather a call to join God in the things he's doing anyway with or without us.

The other position, often referred to as the Arminian position, but most fully elaborated by John Wesley, takes the opposite approach. Under this view, God delegated authority over the world to human beings. It is up to us to lead the world because God has delegated that authority to us. God respects our decision and calls everyone to be saved, but allows us to decide for ourselves whether to accept salvation. Under some Arminian views, God's delegation of authority to human beings is so absolute that it renders him unable to see the future choices of independent moral actors (human beings). The primary proponents of the Wesleyan position are the Methodist churches and much of the pentecostal and charismatic movements. The strength of this view is that it puts greater responsibility on our shoulders and encourages us to go out and change the world, for without us, it won't get done. The disadvantage is that, in many ways, it puts human beings above God.

The post is starting to get longer than I intended so I'll end it here and edit some things out before it reaches "tldr" level.

Circling back to the question of whether we choose our religion, I think the answer, at least according to modern Christian theology, is either "no" or "sometimes". Under the Reformed view, the answer is always no. You were pre-ordained to be Christian or you were not and that's that. Under the Wesleyan view it depends on whether you were told of the gospel, where you were born, etc. as well as your free moral choice. There doesn't seem to be a solid theological basis for answering this question "yes".

 

[RAMOSS]

Please explain what you mean by this. Who is denied what and how?

In many Islamic cultures, it is your neighbors denying your ability to quit a religion. The penalty of leaving Islam is death.
r

 

[Paschendale]

I definitely think that we have a misconception of religion as an innate demographic. Religious affiliation is certainly something that a person can change, unlike race, gender, or sexuality. But at the same time, a person is often born into a religion and it becomes a significant portion of their identity, and it is sometimes treated as a demographic.

I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I certainly chose to give up on Judaism, though its cultural effects on me remain. I wouldn't say that I chose the values and rational thinking that lead me to give up on it, though. I certainly didn't decide one day to no longer think that there was a god. I learned more and reached that conclusion. I think that ultimately, we have a distorted view on what a choice is. No choice is ever made in a vacuum.

I think it's interesting how the more religious consider it a choice with few or no caveats. This plays into the internal narratives of the religions quite well, reinforcing that belief despite pressure to the contrary is noble, and discounting pressure to believe. I think that's where you get into indoctrination, where a person's ability to choose is compromised. Believing that they're making the choice freely is an important part of that. Obviously, this doesn't apply to all religious people, and maybe not even to most of them. But it is definitely a part of it.

When I was religious in my youth, I never thought of it as a choice. I thought of god and religion as simply the way things were. Then, when I knew more, I learned the way things actually are. I don't know if I ever made a conscious choice. I was fortunate never to be subjected to intense pressure to compromise my intellect for the sake of religious belief. If I had, then I might have had to make a choice, whether it was worth sacrificing the family or social connections that I would lose from leaving the religion in order to live without having to lie constantly, but I didn't have to do that. I know that many who were born into intensely religious households have had to make that choice. But that was certainly never a choice about what to believe. It was a choice about whether to defy the people who demanded belief.

Ultimately, I don't think that belief is a choice. You either think a religious belief is reasonable and credible or you don't. That conclusion can change over time. It can be modified by conscious choices and values. But I don't think that people choose to think something is true or not in a conscious manner. How to act on one's beliefs is certainly a choice. Whether or not to embrace over trappings of one's beliefs is certainly a choice. Whether or not to listen to contradicting views is certainly a choice. But I can't really see how credulity is a choice.

That said, I don't really like the deterministic implications of this. I didn't choose not to like it, though, I just don't. Damn...

 

[CrabCake]

I think it's interesting how the more religious consider it a choice with few or no caveats.

I think you may be mistaken about that. The fact is that Reformed theology currently dominates the Christian religious landscape. The Methodist church is the only major denomination that fully embraces Arminianism (the model that would allow for free will). The vast majority of churches do not believe your religion is a choice.

Having said that, I'm aware that the vast majority of believers are oblivious to their own church's theology. But it doesn't change the fact that it is the dominant theology controlling our churches. You'll find Reformed views in Liberty University, Bob Jones, and just about every other seminary that doesn't contain the word "Wesleyan".

I posted more about this three or four posts ago.

 

[Black Dog]

It's not about how people think, it's about the fundamental workings of the human mind and the basic definition of the words in question. That is (generally) consistent across all people.

The definition has nothing at all to do with it being or not being a choice.

OK, I missed the bit where you'd gone back to Christianity. In that case, choose to stop believing in God. Not just saying "It would be easy", actually do it. Come back and tell me with all honestly that you completely and unconditionally don't believe in the existence of God.

Ummmm... no. I have already made a choice. I have no need or desire to change it again.

Or how about believing, against, honestly and unconditionally, that there is a pink elephant sitting on your keyboard. It doesn't really matter how ridiculous the proposal is, your position is that it is easy to simply choose to believe it to be unerringly true.

Who said anything about believing nonsense as true? Your examples are a poor representation of anything.

Asking people to believe silly things is not proof of anything. It is a choice.

 

[JP Cusick]

It certainly isn't a choice for millions of children around the world. When something is driven into you during your formal years it certainly makes it difficult to make a rational choice about it later in life.

The very idea of parents not teaching their own children by their own faith and religion and standards is utterly outrageous, and it would be very close to child abuse if any parent does not teach their own children as they the parents see fitting and right.

Pretending that children are to grow up and completely make their own choices is inhuman and seriously it would be very near to child abuse or child neglect.

Children do not have a choice because they are not mature enough to make their own choices - after the child matures then we all grow into an ability to make different choices, but any child who intends to make some drastic changes that contradict their own family and society has got to understand that mature choices carry mature consequences too.

It is utterly reprehensible to claim that there is anything wrong with any religious family (Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or any religion) raising their own children in their own religion.

To do otherwise would be insane.

 

[Nilly]

The very idea of parents not teaching their own children by their own faith and religion and standards is utterly outrageous, and it would be very close to child abuse if any parent does not teach their own children as they the parents see fitting and right.

Pretending that children are to grow up and completely make their own choices is inhuman and seriously it would be very near to child abuse or child neglect.

Children do not have a choice because they are not mature enough to make their own choices - after the child matures then we all grow into an ability to make different choices, but any child who intends to make some drastic changes that contradict their own family and society has got to understand that mature choices carry mature consequences too.

It is utterly reprehensible to claim that there is anything wrong with any religious family (Christian, Islamic, Jewish, or any religion) raising their own children in their own religion.

To do otherwise would be insane.

Absolute BS.

I attended a CofE (church of england) school as a child, despite my parents not being christian. Through that I gained a better education and an appreciation for other religions besides my families. I was educated on my own families religion and came to my own conclusions in my early teenage years.

If religion is a personal decision and is dependent on ones own beliefs/thoughts, then parents should not be involved in that. Furthermore, a child should not be ostracised for making his/her own choices and coming to their own conclusions. Educate your child about religion, take them to church, fine. If you are a good parent and honestly believe in your religion then trust in god or whatever that your child will make the right choice, as plenty of people here have said is their own experience. However, coercing a young child to your own views through threats of hell or ostracism is absolutely repugnant. What's worse, is drilling into them ideas of inferior religions or cultures, as in the video, where the girl exclaims the Jews are to be struck down by Allah's wrath. That is absolutely abuse, no questions asked. People have been saying in this thread that religion is a choice. You think it's a choice for that two year old girl??

 

[obvious Child]

So, what say you?

All beliefs are a choice.

I can believe the sun is actually a ball of Jello. I can believe the world disappears when I stop looking at it.

Religion is no different.

 

[lizzie]

All beliefs are a choice.

I can believe the sun is actually a ball of Jello. I can believe the world disappears when I stop looking at it.

Religion is no different.

I don't think that's generally the case. To believe something, it has to make sense to you at least at some level. I can't believe the sun is a ball of Jello, because that makes no sense to me, based on my knowledge base. I don't think that belief is something which you just decide to do, without having a reason for it, even if that reason is flawed.

 

[obvious Child]

I don't think that's generally the case. To believe something, it has to make sense to you at least at some level.

I disagree. This place is enough proof to show that's simply not true.

I can't believe the sun is a ball of Jello, because that makes no sense to me, based on my knowledge base. I don't think that belief is something which you just decide to do, without having a reason for it, even if that reason is flawed.

Why does it have to make sense to you? There is a creationist who flat out admitted that his belief is completely wrong based on his education and his own experience, but he CHOOSES to believe anyways. How many times here have we explained why someone is wrong on to see them say the same belief again? They've been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they are wrong, they just choose to believe in what they want rather than what they know is right.

 

[lizzie]

I disagree. This place is enough proof to show that's simply not true.



Why does it have to make sense to you? There is a creationist who flat out admitted that his belief is completely wrong based on his education and his own experience, but he CHOOSES to believe anyways. How many times here have we explained why someone is wrong on to see them say the same belief again? They've been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt they are wrong, they just choose to believe in what they want rather than what they know is right.

To the bolded: give me examples, and the reasoning why you don't believe people have a reason for believing the things that they do. Everyone has a reason for believing what they do, even if it makes no sense to you or me.