Jump to content

Are Christians Delusional?


R. S. Martin
 Share

Recommended Posts

Mongo, your definition of deluded sounds okay as far as it goes. I think you need to consider the psychiatrist definition of the word, too, to get the full spectrum of its meaning. I think it is Definition 3 in the Answers.com thing I posted earlier on this thread.

 

About "Dr." New10 Joseph. Do you think the guy's psychologist license is real? I don't. He does not write like an educated person. I am on a group where he posts. And just now I looked up one of his websites that you list. The stuff that he personally writes does not sound professional. An educated person would know when to use the plural form of a word when it cannot be singluar as in the following:

 

 

A QUESTION ONLY A CHRISTIAN WOULD ASK

 

 

X

Christians are forever asking atheist to prove God does not exist. They are asking us to prove that a man who was supposedly killed 2, 000 years ago came back to life and now remains invisible that Christians are able to have conversations with. What reasonable person would ask this stupid question?

 

Christians are forever asking atheist to prove God does not exist. They are asking us to prove that a man who was supposedly killed 2, 000 years ago came back to life and now remains invisible that Christians are able to have conversations with. What reasonable person would ask this stupid question?

 

This is taken from http://www.atheistfellowship.com/AQUESTION...ANWOULDASK.html

 

I copied everything on that page; the same thing is stated twice and the same mistakes are repeated. Very unprofessional.

 

 

If he does not mean for "atheist" to be plural, he needs to use an article. He uses neither an article nor the plural form. This is only one of the errors in this quote. His posts sound similar. I have seen unedited emails profs write in a hurry. These violate a whole slew of English language writing rules. None of them write like this guy. If the things he wrote were insightful I would give more credit but they're not. Just mundane stuff that anyone can say. Nor would I trust it if he said something unique. I think he's a high school kid twiddling away his time on his cell phone on the bus to and from school. I think he calls himself a pscyhologist to impress or for the sake of its impact value.

 

I could be wrong but I need to see some evidence to that effect if I am expected to believe his claims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Mongo, your definition of deluded sounds okay as far as it goes. I think you need to consider the psychiatrist definition of the word, too, to get the full spectrum of its meaning.

 

Fair enough. I have not delved into the DSM definition of delusion / delusional enough to offer an intellegent answer. Were I inclined to do that, I strongly doubt I would discover that the DSM authors would create a definition that could be interpreted to include any religious folks. It would be a hot potato.

 

About "Dr." New10 Joseph. Do you think the guy's psychologist license is real? I don't. He does not write like an educated person. I am on a group where he posts.

 

I was careful not to endorse him and I considered adding a caveat. I put in the link for the sake of discussion of various views.

 

I agree that the tone of his writing is less than professional.

 

Like you, he is on another forum where I post. I do believe that his is a legitemate individual and not a cyber-tot.

 

He definitely has a bias against xtianity and it seems to affect the accuracy of his writing but I don't find I can hold that against him. Perhaps he was hurt deeply like so many I have encountered on sites like these.

 

Mongo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mongo, your definition of deluded sounds okay as far as it goes. I think you need to consider the psychiatrist definition of the word, too, to get the full spectrum of its meaning.

 

Fair enough. I have not delved into the DSM definition of delusion / delusional enough to offer an intellegent answer. Were I inclined to do that, I strongly doubt I would discover that the DSM authors would create a definition that could be interpreted to include any religious folks. It would be a hot potato.

 

 

Thanks for your honesty. I have had a bit of exposure to DSM or whatever the organization is called that writes the official symptoms for the various mental illnesses. I've also lived with people who had mental illness, and had a few skirmishes with it myself, not to mention my grandmother. These kinds of things have made me aware of the difference between such things as willfull ignorance and voluntary delusion on one hand and genuine disconnect with concrete reality on the other. The line is thin but it exists.

 

I think we also need to be aware that religious people think we are the deluded ones. If we want to look at things objectively we need to look at all the factors. The fact is that throughout human history people have lived in close connection with the "inner" or "spiritual" world. They believed it was an objective world with non-physical beings. There is much reason for humans to be like this and I think we need to respect it as a natural/normal human phenomenon.

 

It is only in the past few centuries that humans on a large scale have come to differentiate between the material and spiritual world. Many religious people to this day do not. I am talking globally, which includes aboriginal peoples, and people of all religions world wide. Christians are not the exception to the rule but the norm. It so happens that Western society is somewhat split down the middle, so to speak, because of its extreme focus on and analysis of matter.

 

Inner life exists. Imagination. Fantasy. Emotions. These things are part and parcel of being human. Westerners do not all interpret these things the same way. Some people use religious language and symbolism to explain it and believe it is external to their psyche. Others, such as you and I, do not.

 

About "Dr." New10 Joseph. Do you think the guy's psychologist license is real? I don't. He does not write like an educated person. I am on a group where he posts.

 

I was careful not to endorse him and I considered adding a caveat. I put in the link for the sake of discussion of various views.

 

I agree that the tone of his writing is less than professional.

 

 

Okay, glad to see I'm not neurotic for thinking there's something not quite right.

 

Like you, he is on another forum where I post. I do believe that his is a legitemate individual and not a cyber-tot.

 

Yes, I think he's a real live human being. I don't think he has the capacity to pull off a fake personality. But maybe that statement takes things a bit far.

 

He definitely has a bias against xtianity and it seems to affect the accuracy of his writing but I don't find I can hold that against him. Perhaps he was hurt deeply like so many I have encountered on sites like these.

 

I don't hold anything against him. I just find impossible to believe that he has a PhD. Or perhaps he has one but something happened since then that he cracked. I've seen some of his posts that corresponded closely with professional writing, though I have too little training in the area to be sure. At that point, when he hands out "professional" information, I do worry a bit that the gullible will be drawn in and harmed. Then again, anyone with a genuine mental disorder will hopefully see a doctor in the flesh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he does not mean for "atheist" to be plural, he needs to use an article. He uses neither an article nor the plural form. This is only one of the errors in this quote. His posts sound similar. I have seen unedited emails profs write in a hurry. These violate a whole slew of English language writing rules. None of them write like this guy. If the things he wrote were insightful I would give more credit but they're not. Just mundane stuff that anyone can say. Nor would I trust it if he said something unique. I think he's a high school kid twiddling away his time on his cell phone on the bus to and from school. I think he calls himself a pscyhologist to impress or for the sake of its impact value.

 

I could be wrong but I need to see some evidence to that effect if I am expected to believe his claims.

 

Believe me, I'm a stickler for proper grammar myself and believe its lack only serves to lessen the impact of what is being read, but I'm learning that unfortunately in this day, age, and country, writing skills have gone in the toilet and it doesn't seem to make that much of a difference. Billionaires write worse than my 8 year old son and homeless men on the street could be Pulitzer Prize winning authors if their situations were different. You just can't judge someone by the style of their writing anymore.

 

I'm not saying to accept that Newton Joseph is who he says he is just because he says he is, but only that you can't write him off because he doesn't have perfect writing style. After all, those articles on his site aren't professional papers, but his own sort of "blog"...at least that's what I make of them.

My two cents. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob, as I indicate, I'm not going by one spelling error only. I am going by the pattern of his errors. And yes, one can glean major amounts of personal information about a person simply by their writing. Maybe you can't but I can. And my hypothesis is usually proven correct. Not by one post or article only, but by combining everything I have seen of a person, both what they consciously state and what comes out unconsciously in the tone and style of their writing, plus their mode of interacting with others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having serious second thoughts. I am sure my siblings are sane according to clinical standards but I'm being forced to say just like so many of the rest of you are that there is something seriously wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read all of this thread, but I have to add my two cents. First off, this thread consists mostly of one of my pet peeves which is arguing semantics. Language is an inaccurate art form most of the time, so we use words in different ways whether those ways be accurate or not. Now, there is definitely a difference between being clinically delusional and being the everyday/colloquial use of the word delusional. If you look in a medical dictionary, such as the DMV-IV, it'll probably describe it in an extreme way as in seriously impairing normal life. Here is also a medical definition as defined by a website(websites not always being the most accurate for info of course): http://www.answers.com/topic/delusion#Psychoanalysis I don't have a medical dictionary on hand unfortunately. However, as we have seen in a colloquial/everyday dictionary it describes 'delusional' as believing in something that is false. Therefore, if you consider Christianity to be wrong and you use the colloquial term (which has been cited several times in this thread), then Christians are delusional. In my opinion, there is no argument against this definition. Now, for the overly sensitive types( imho. I say ‘overly’ because I consider myself sensitive to some things), if you don't want to use the word 'delusional' then pick another word to accurately describe what is going on with Christians. But you CANNOT tell me that the definition of "believing something that is false" doesn't describe what Christians are doing.

 

I can understand how the overly sensitive people feel about the word 'delusional' being degrading. I know that they don't want to see their family members and loved ones as being delusional. It is hard to come to a conclusion that one’s loved ones are flawed in such a large and pervasive way, but objectively, using the colloquial definition, they are delusional. If it really bothers you, pick another word then.

 

Someone brought up the point that we all must be delusional at times because we believe things that aren't true because of ignorance. I agree. At these times, we are being delusional. However, this is a delusion based on ignorance. Christians are delusional based in a lack of evidence and evidence against their belief, thus making their delusion illogical.

 

 

In conclusion, Please Stop Arguing Semantics. Unless you are having a linguistic discussion on the reasons why people shouldn't use both colloquial and scientific definitions for things, it makes arguments and discussions essentially pointless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In conclusion, Please Stop Arguing Semantics.

 

Why do you pour oil on the fire if you want it to go out? It seems everyone else was going to let this one go to sleep then you come along restating much of what has already been said, and putting down everyone who disagrees with you, then telling us to shut up. Practice what you preach, smart-ass, and let sleeping dogs lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In conclusion, Please Stop Arguing Semantics.

 

Why do you pour oil on the fire if you want it to go out? It seems everyone else was going to let this one go to sleep then you come along restating much of what has already been said, and putting down everyone who disagrees with you, then telling us to shut up. Practice what you preach, smart-ass, and let sleeping dogs lie.

 

 

I couldn't help it. This thread just annoyed me so much I had to speak my mind. I've seen too many conversations go in circles over semantics with no fruit to show for it. I didn't mean to resurrect a dead thread just for the sake of causing controversy. It just made me feel better to get my frustration off my chest. I didn't mean to attack anyone or anything. This was all just my opinion. If you don't like it, that's too bad. Ignore it and move on.

 

Oh, and I told no one to "shut up." Don't put words in my mouth. It was an advisory of caution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you pour oil on the fire if you want it to go out? It seems everyone else was going to let this one go to sleep then you come along restating much of what has already been said, and putting down everyone who disagrees with you, then telling us to shut up. Practice what you preach, smart-ass, and let sleeping dogs lie.

 

What, are you the board police now Chip? Why do you feel the need to stiffle conversation? ASAC made some good points.

 

You are one antagonistic bitch if I ever saw one.

 

Oh, and I'm using the colloquial version of the word bitch, which has nothing to do with a female dog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People on streets living with delusions. We all walk by each other making judgements and assignments according to our scant knowledge and abilites.

 

Until that person(s) goes to do harm to me or mine, hurt, injure, or attempt to do so, their delusions and thoughts are protected by law in the uS.

 

Man or woman who might go about attempting to cause harm to you in some fashion, **fill in the blank for " " harm**, is then a clear danger which requires a response to minimize or negate that threat.

 

I don't give a flaming fuck through a rolling jelly filled donut what the gent in the nice 3-piece suit *thinks* or *believes*. When he reaches for the tool holstered in his belt trying to compel my actions or thoughts to his way, then I give him whatever response necessary to retain my safety and/or freedom.

 

Practical thing in this fucked_up_world is to simply remain on guard to the events happening around you.

 

For every pat Easy Answer Jar answer there are a millions more problems that will pop up and present themselves in your path.

 

Delusional? I think we all live with our thoughts and ideas that somewhere ans to someone are *wrong*. Sanity and clean mental health are oft judged by the way we treat our friends and neighbors. shitheads of any belief or non-belief structures are shitheads anyway..

Dunno quite often what slashing semantics and arguing like the little old jewish guys over tea manages to do..

 

kFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanity has always been a relative term, and tends to be dictated by the majority

 

oh, and you all smell of wee (i hate to be left out of a snitting match) ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanity has always been a relative term, and tends to be dictated by the majority

 

 

Agree, Grandpa,

 

My $0.02 for what it's worth...

 

I think anyone who lives their life thru magic invisible beings holds a belief that is a tad delusional. I also think that living as if imaginary places were real is also a form of delusion. Running one life as if these things are real even though evidence suggest otherwise is also delusional . I have both Friends and family who I love very much who buy into the illusion that hell and Christ are real. They aren't interested in looking for answers they take it upon faith and leave it at that. Faith is another word for Hoping against hope, or blind belief with out proof. They are either to lazy or to scared to look outside the cave of Christianity, which is fine with me. It's their personal choice. It's not to say I think they should be committed in a straight jacket, that's not the case. I'm avoided like the plague when it comes to topics of religion because I won't let it rest and will ask challenging questions, like any good pit-bull, I wont let go! LOL. People don't like their blind comfortable state of faith shaken so they put up defensives . My friends and family have life's outside of their cult, and apply reason and logic to every other aspect of their lives. They of course won't hesitate to call me delusional in rejecting their god, so it's all a matter of perspective I guess. I don't take it personally, I know they are wrong! :P

 

As far as this thread goes, I think looking at ourselves and our family with a little bit of humor and acceptance wouldn't hurt. I don't think anyones trying to be malicious and mean, I think that things are being taken on a personal level when no personal level is meant. Everyone is allowed to give their opinion without fear of being scolded, even if that opinion is upsetting. This thread will probably go on and on, which isn't a bad thing. All arguments should stand or fall on their merit, Personal feelings should take a back seat to some topics such as this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come now, someone's mother MUST do it with Neapolitan Sailors for drinks... ;)

 

On topic, too many here haven't had the courtesy of amusement or tolerance from their families to be overly tolerant back. Way of things. It's delusional when not only do they want to believe in their dying-resurrecting Man-God, and his insane despot of a 'Father' but they want everyone else to believe in him/them/it too. When one deals with that many people with issues in one place (that is, HERE), tempers are going to get a bit frayed, from time to time...

 

Unfortunately, only the insane have the strength to prosper. Only those who prosper say what is truly sane...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.