Is Faith a choice?

[_just me]

Variablist!

I love you, too, darlin!

[_Stormy Waters]

It would be nice if it was cut and dry, black and white!

Real life is messier than that. To some extent it is a choice and to some extent it is not a choice.

I mean, I can't have faith in something I believe so strongly to be false and wrong. However, if I were on the fence I might be able to choose faith a little easier.

One can choose to ignore all evidence that pokes holes in their beliefs and thus maintain their faith.

There are sooo many variables.

You're right. The question I asked is too simplistic. I should have least distinguished between faith in the absence of evidence and faith in spite of the evidence.

[_Drifting]

You are mistaking 'faith' with 'confidence' in my opinion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith

The Apostle Paul taught that “faith is the substance [assurance] of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). Alma made a similar statement: “If ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true” (Alma 32:21). Faith is a principle of action and power. Whenever we work toward a worthy goal, we exercise faith. We show our hope for something that we cannot yet see.

LDS.org

[_Themis]

The Apostle Paul taught that “faith is the substance [assurance] of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1). Alma made a similar statement: “If ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true” (Alma 32:21). Faith is a principle of action and power. Whenever we work toward a worthy goal, we exercise faith. We show our hope for something that we cannot yet see.

LDS.org

I am right though that confidence is used as part of the definition of faith.

[_Drifting]

I am right though that confidence is used as part of the definition of faith.

Not the Mormon version!

[_Themis]

I am right though that confidence is used as part of the definition of faith.

Not the Mormon version!

Opps, wrong again http://www.LDS.org/scriptures/gs/faith?lang=eng

They also did bring up evidence though.

[_Stormy Waters]

"Emphasize that faith is a conscious choice that each must make."

I think we should consider the audience this letter was written to. If Church leaders had been writing for a general audience, they may have needed to clarify--maybe saying;

'Emphasize that to exercise faith is a conscious choice that each must make',

However, this letter was not meant for a general audience; It was written specifically to LDS leaders who would understand completely the concept of faith. hence no clarifications were needed. They know that Faith is a gift of god and individuals have agency to seek for this gift and to exercise it in our lives. The letter is encouraging leaders to help members understand this important aspect of Faith.

I have an older LDS Bible which includes a section called 'ready references' between the Old and New Testaments and there is a note added to the section on Faith. I think it explains clearly how Faith is viewed among believers. It says;

"Though it be within the reach of all who diligently strive to acquire it, faith is nevertheless a gift from God. As is fitting for such a priceless possession it is given to those only who show by their sincerity of purpose that they are worthy of it, and who give promise of abiding by its dictates.

Although called the first principle of the Gospel, faith is preceded by sincerity of disposition and humility of soul, whereby the word of God may bring conviction to the soul.

No compulsion is used in bringing men to a knowledge of the Gospel; yet as men open their hearts to the influences of righteousness the faith that leads to eternal life is given them of God."



I bolded the last portion to point out the 'choice' aspect of Faith. While it is a gift, a gift can be neglected, discounted and even rejected and must be accepted and acted upon in order to grow and develop.

So if one comes across evidence that makes it more difficult to believe what is the answer? To choose to excercise more faith? Is there an amount of contrary evidence where it doesn't make sense to keep choosing to excercise faith?

If faith is something that we have to choose to excercise isn't this a circular dependency? For example why would a non believer choose to excercise faith and believe in Mormonism.

At least for me, I find it hard to understand how I could consciously decide to excercise faith in spite of things like polyandry or the Book of Abraham. Maybe others are different, but for me it isn't a conscious decision.

I'm not saying faith can't work, but I don't think faith as a conscious decision can. In my experience beliefs are usually decided as part of a larger process. I don't make conscious decisions about what I do and do not believe.

[_KevinSim]

When I lost my faith in the LDS church it happened because of another problematic item I had discovered. I tried to shelf the item, but like the proverbial straw that broke the camels back trying to shelf this item caused the entire shelf to collapse under the strain and I realized that I no longer believed in the church. I think of my loss of faith as an involuntary reaction to the evidence I had been exposed to. I didn't make a choice to stop believing.

So what say ye? Is faith a choice?

I think for many people faith is not a choice. For me it is.

There are a lot of people who see the evidence, and subconsciously they evaluate it, one way or the other, the way that seems most logical to them. I understand why they do that. When I hear the evidence against the existence of God, for example, sometimes I feel enormous pressure to abandon my faith in God. When I hear evidence against the truthfulness of the LDS Church, for another example, once again I feel enormous pressure, once again, to abandon my faith that God gave me His answer about the LDS Church back in 1976 when I asked God if the LDS Church is true. It would just be natural for me to toss my beliefs out, and at times it feels very unnatural to go on believing as I have.

But to all that evidence I say, I am more than an impartial analyzer of my observations. I can believe whatever I want to believe, regardless of what the evidence says. I understand my reasons for believing in God, and I will not veer away from my belief in God until those reasons go away.

[_Cicero]

So if one comes across evidence that makes it more difficult to believe what is the answer? To choose to excercise more faith? Is there an amount of contrary evidence where it doesn't make sense to keep choosing to excercise faith?.

As Just Me said above, everyone, whether they admit it or not, has faith in something (meaning a belief or hope in something that is unseen). The key difference to me, as you are noting here, is how one reacts to contrary evidence. Do you adjust your view and beliefs, painful as that may be, or seek to twist the contrary evidence to fit your pre-conceived, faith-based notion of the truth?

If faith is something that we have to choose to excercise isn't this a circular dependency?

If you are using faith to ignore or twist contrary evidence then yes.

I don't make conscious decisions about what I do and do not believe.

You lost me there. How are you not making a conscious decision about what you believe?

[Guest]

But to all that evidence I say, I am more than an impartial analyzer of my observations. I can believe whatever I want to believe, regardless of what the evidence says.

No, you can't. You cannot, for example, induce the placebo effect by merely choosing to believe that the sugar pill you just took is actually a powerful and effective drug.

If someone offered you five hundred million dollars to sincerely believe that the United States is still a British colony, could you do it?¹

If your friend inadvertently spoiled the surprise ending of a movie for you, could you choose to believe that the conversation had never taken place, and still be genuinely surprised by the ending?


1. http://www.ditext.com/alston/deontological.html