Help me understand being religious

[breakingcontact]

Based on the many assumptions you state on here I can tell that you don't. As YG points out you know your journey. My guess is that you were always seeking something and ended up finding that in your religion.

My response to YG would be/is the same response to your comment. Of course I dont understand all non-believers but I do understand the common elements of non-belief.

 

[Younggun]

It's all good. Wasn't trying to discredit you in any way, not my MO here. Just something we all forget from time to time.

 

[breakingcontact]

Hmmmm this brings up an interesting concept. There is a distinction between non and dis belief isnt there.

 

[breakingcontact]

It's all good. Wasn't trying to discredit you in any way, not my MO here. Just something we all forget from time to time.

Of course no problem. Im glad people want to have this conversation and dont mind being challenged or even called out on things.

 

[Younggun]

Hmmmm this brings up an interesting concept. There is a distinction between non and dis belief isnt there.

Hmmm, typically they are used in different context. Meaning would be fuzzy as they are slightly interchangeable however it is the idea the speaker is trying to share that ultimately defines meaning.

That doesn't mean that the meaning will be properly translated by the recipient.


Communication=What you want to say+what you really say+what they hear+what they think they hear

 

[TheDan]

Hmmmm this brings up an interesting concept. There is a distinction between non and dis belief isnt there.

Well, I think those are synonyms but you're on the right track. I've found that the difference between an opposing belief and a lack of belief is hard for believers of all kinds to reconcile.

If it weren't for TGT I don't think I'd ever ponder this stuff

 

[Vaquero]

I believe.

 

[TheDan]

I believe.

...but are you a belieber?

 

[Vaquero]

...but are you a belieber?

I don't have the answer to that.

 

[JohnnyLoco]

You understood your particular journey and feelings, that doesn't qualify you as understanding all who are non religious.

That would e similar to one person who is religious claiming everyone found religion for the same reason and through the same journey.

I disagree. That's like saying because you are not a sociopath or narcissist, you cannot understand or explain someone who is a sociopath or narcissist. This is on the face false, as sociopaths and narcissists are heavily studied in the fields of psychology, behavioral science, and criminology. A non-sociopath actually understands sociopaths more than a sociopath ever could. They are highly predictable and manipulatable.


Being a Christian does not mean you have forgotten all your thoughts and feelings before becoming a Christian. You are literally a non-believer in every typical sense until that moment things change, usually when you hear some passages of scripture, hear a testimony, or something else and the proverbial light flicks on, you just believe. The experience really is hard to describe, but it is not purely an emotional one, or intellectual, it almost feels like a bus of clarity and truth hitting you.

 

[Younggun]

You are talking about a psychological disorder vs religious/non religious belief. Two completely different levels of complexity.

I would also not compare a believers or nonbelievers to sociopaths and narcissists.

You are agains stating a process from YOUR journey. Not everyone will feel the same. Your presumptions are on the face, false.

Yes, you can easily say a non believer is someone who doesn't believe, but that gives no insight in to the persons motivations or moral standards, unlike a narcissist or sociopath.

 

[JohnnyLoco]

I've found that the difference between an opposing belief and a lack of belief is hard for believers of all kinds to reconcile.

Well, an opposing belief would be a contradictory belief, right? Therefore, you would not be believing in the belief you are opposing.

and how would a person choose what path to follow? There are more versions of eternal life out there than can possibly be studied in depth. Why would Nirvana be preferable to Valhalla, or any other flavor?

If you look at it intellectually, you can weed out many of them based on logical contradictions, grave inconsistencies in doctrine and narrative, dubious historical evidence, irrational metaphysics, highly immoral or inconsistent ethics, or seem to be fantasies of lone madmen (cults).

Based on the many assumptions you state on here I can tell that you don't. As YG points out you know your journey. My guess is that you were always seeking something and ended up finding that in your religion.

I think you would be trying to psychoanalyze him and explain his experience. Many Christians were not looking for anything and were totally content when they came to the Cross.

 

[JohnnyLoco]

You are talking about a psychological disorder vs religious/non religious belief. Two completely different levels of complexity.

I would also not compare a believers or nonbelievers to sociopaths and narcissists.

You are agains stating a process from YOUR journey. Not everyone will feel the same. Your presumptions are on the face, false.

Yes, you can easily say a non believer is someone who doesn't believe, but that gives no insight in to the persons motivations or moral standards, unlike a narcissist or sociopath.

I definitely agree.

I would only disagree that you cannot take a psychoanalytical perspective to the discussion of understanding a "believer" and "non-believer/non-Christian," both categories that encompass many general traits.

I mean, who determines a "psychological disorder"? It's all based on theories of normalcy and deviance. There is not a lot of genetic or biological evidence suggesting causes to many of these "disorders."

Remember, we could easily be living in a world in the future that categorizes Christians or gun owners as people with "psychological disorders."

 

[Younggun]

I never claimed religion to be any form of psychological disorder, not did I attempt take a psychoanalytical perspective.

It was you who brought up psychological disorders, trying to play the card against me won't work. Check my posts.

I hope you stick to your agreement of not comparing the two and we look at the comparison in post 150 as being unrelated in any way to how we look at Religious vs non religious.

 

[TheDan]

Well, an opposing belief would be a contradictory belief, right? Therefore, you would not be believing in the belief you are opposing.

Possibly, but that is still different from a lack of belief.

If you look at it intellectually, you can weed out many of them based on logical contradictions, grave inconsistencies in doctrine and narrative, dubious historical evidence, irrational metaphysics, highly immoral or inconsistent ethics, or seem to be fantasies of lone madmen (cults).

You can find some of those in every religion as well.

I think you would be trying to psychoanalyze him and explain his experience.

Taste of his own medicine I guess

 

[breakingcontact]

Thanks to whoever has been praying for rain. It worked. Prove it didnt!

 

[Younggun]

Lol.

No need to. Just go with what you feel is right

 

[breakingcontact]

Lol.

No need to. Just go with what you feel is right

Right as rain.

 

[JohnnyLoco]

I never claimed religion to be any form of psychological disorder, not did I attempt take a psychoanalytical perspective.

It was you who brought up psychological disorders, trying to play the card against me won't work. Check my posts.

I hope you stick to your agreement of not comparing the two and we look at the comparison in post 150 as being unrelated in any way to how we look at Religious vs non religious.

I never said you did.

I mentioned psych. disorders to illustrate how you can indeed understand the way someone thinks without actually being that person or having the same experiences.

 

[Younggun]

I never said you did.

I mentioned psych. disorders to illustrate how you can indeed understand the way someone thinks without actually being that person or having the same experiences.

The reason the disorders you mentioned have been named is because they entail a very specific way of thinking. Being "religious" or "non religious" are both pretty vague when it comes to the way someone actually thinks.

Just because I own a truck does not mean I know why another person owns a truck, nor could I say with much validity why someone else owns a large SUV or compact car. It would be nothing more than a guess.