Are Christians Delusional? HELP

[PatThePoet]

youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ

Is this true? I may seem like a fool for believing all the YouTube videos I see, but I am weak in faith.

 

[MindOverMatter]

youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ

Is this true? I may seem like a fool for believing all the YouTube videos I see, but I am weak in faith.

The you-tube video is not responding properly; so can you please give me an idea of why they think Christians are delusional.

Its interesting that the first part of the video makes a petition to our “moral-conscience”, as if to say that our belief is “Wrong”, as such that we our trepassing against a “universal moral good”. They say that our belief is “hurting them”, as if we “ought to care” or feel “guilty”. I think thats quite delusional, if they think that God does not exist.

 

[MATT12321]

The religion of athesism is pretty delusional itself. I wouldn’t give much creedence to what you see on a ten minute youtube video.

It comes to a conclusion that a planet full of those “delusional religion is not healthy”

How about a planet full of people who believe that there is no concequinces to there actions beyond what happens on this earth. There are all kinds of things we can do to others that aren’t illegal but give great harm to the lives of others. If all those who live good lives lead those lives because they believe there is something beyond this, then how would this world be.

Problem 1: Christianity makes you delusional and inclined to pray. Looks look at this from two perspectives. Let us pretend there was no God out there and are prayers where to thin air. What harm would this do anyway. Why would this be a problem.

The truth is that prayer does seem to work, ask any nuymber of people who use it and you will see results. There have been a great deal of studies done on prayer and results are varied. Many if not most show prayer works but there are objectors that say that the results wher flawed for some reason or another, which is why I didn’t provide specifics. There are countless numbers of people who have been healed through prayer, either God answering it or there own bodies causing a miraculous healing that science can’t explain.

Problem 2: The belief in Christianity devalues life. Hmm interesting, this must be why we are so concerned about birth control and issues like abortions. Also other santity of life issues. Why is it that countless popes and other christians speak out against wars and violence. Yes there where “religious wars” in the past but when you really study those they where more about political power of certain leaders at the time than about religious domination. It was flawed human desire to dominate others not Christian beliefs and these would have lead to wars weather religion existed or not.

Problem 3: the delusion of Christianity replaces rational thought with dangerous mythology. Further stating that this leads to slower scientific progress. Although there are always exceptions, some of the only people delving into science through history where the christians and other religious. Without them we would not have progressed scientifically as fast as we have. Are you aware that the Vatican has one of the biggest lad based observatories in the US maybe the world. To me that doesn’t sound like an example of religion trying to impeed any kind of scientific progress. clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/History_p4.html

All of his premaces in the video are wrong and therefore his theory of atheism is faulty. It’s absolutely understandable that it might appear to have some creadnece if you have not looked deep into these things. The stories of the bibles are reapeated by numerous people. If you would like me to go into more detail about any of these I will. I just didn’t want to overwhelm anyone with a post that reads like a long boring book. Instead I wanted some quick bullet points.

Keep on studying your faith. The more you research it, especially if you look back to the early church fathers, the more you will see how we know that this is the truth. Remember religion takes faith and it is never easy to completely accept this truth. It’s good that you continue to seek the truth.

Remember this, what science calls delusion one day is tomorrows fact. If we stopped trying to explore the impossible nothing would get done. It wasn’t that many generations ago that flying across the world was a fantasty, talking on the phone was impossible or even watching people on a little box was a crazy idea. Now we have all of these things and the future will hold even crazier things. The point being if things man creates in his future can seem impossiblities how can we possibly fathom the things God has in store for us after our death or the ways in which he created what is here on this earth.

Matthew

 

[St_Aloysius]

The premise of atheism is faulty because it denies all that is outside of individual ego and empirical evidence–and humanity as a whole simply knows better.

An atheist is therefore enslaved to ego, not to his/her true Self. He/she is left fending against the cosmic odds in a vast universe devoid of purpose or meaning. Atheism is irrationality at its best, and a certain sign of weakness, I might add: To deny all that resides outside of ego shows just how tightly an atheist clings to such in the first place.

Try telling a man on his deathbed he’s not part of something much bigger than himself–regardless of whether or not he calls that something “God.”

 

[Texas_Roofer]

youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ

Is this true? I may seem like a fool for believing all the YouTube videos I see, but I am weak in faith.

Did you take time to review his evidence? Did you notice he says everybody knows it is delusion, and he says million believe it is not delusion, so my question to you is could both statements be true?

 

[MarcoPolo]

I didn’t see the video, but what is delusional about believing the witness of 500+ people who saw a man die and later saw Him alive? Who are consistent in their stories? Who recognize the life of that man matches prophecies written centuries before??

What’s delusional about believing the nature of miracles like Padre Pio’s stigmata, that science cannot explain?

 

[ehtheist]

I didn’t see the video, but what is delusional about believing the witness of 500+ people who saw a man die and later saw Him alive? Who are consistent in their stories? Who recognize the life of that man matches prophecies written centuries before??

What’s delusional about believing the nature of miracles like Padre Pio’s stigmata, that science cannot explain?

Did 500 people see it or did someone write that 500 people saw it? Believing in something despite the evidence would make it a delusion. I don’t, however, think that believers are dumb or stupid.

As for “matching”, unlike science, “believers” find “evidence” that MATCHES their theories/beliefs.

Padre Pio - I know many people who have seen the strangest things - but each of them are in state care (or used drugs for that purpose). Let’s get real here, some guy claiming that he saw Jesus deserves no more respect than a person who claims to have been abducted by aliens. Each is likely doing it for money.

As for earlier posts, atheism is not a religion.

 

[Starwynd]

No, but it is a *faith *because they believe in something that cannot be proven by empirical evidence.

That is, you cannot disprove the existence of God with empirical scientific evidence.

But neither can you prove the existence of God either.

You can only speculate about whether He exists or not.

Now Christians *know *He exists, Sure, there’s no scientific evidence to support it, but saying that something can exist only with the empirical scientific evidence is only setting science up as the one true authority to say what is real and what is not real, and comes dangerously close to being a religion in that particular sense.

A faith is a strong belief in anything without empirical scientific evidence to back it up. So that makes atheism a faith. It can also be treated in a dogmatic manner much like organized religion can as well. Such as if you start making demands that Christians and other religious people be sent to an asylum or a psychiatrist for their alleged delusions, and not allowing Christians to pray openly to their God.

But Christians know God is real. Unfortunately, it is something that is extremely difficult to explain to someone who cannot feel the presence of God. The only way for a person to know God is to accept them as their Lord and savior.

Yes, I know all the atheists objections. And there are some very difficult questions to consider. But that does not in any way shape or form renders what we feel moot. In short we feel God.

I’d suggest reading the book “The Case For Christ” that is about one man’s search for the answers to God and how he came to find his faith.

 

[joeybaggz]

The atheist is the ultimate victim of delusion.

Atheists, those who deny even the possibility of the existence of God, predicate their scientific belief on a theory that has not been proven and is full of holes, gaps, and inconsistencies. And an equation that states that nothing plus nothing equals something.

The clown narrating that piece of tripe is simply repeating the mantra that is at the heart of all atheistic “logic”. That I am right and your are wrong because I believe I am right. No proof, just a bunch of condescending drivel. He doesn’t refute anything with either facts or proof, but simply his assertion that theists are wrong because he wants it to be that way.

Sad.

 

[ehtheist]

No, but it is a *faith *because they believe in something that cannot be proven by empirical evidence.

Wow, I thought the “there are gaps that only god can fill” stuff disappeared years ago. Your god was obviously sloppy at putting things together - any good designer would have separated the breathing tubes from the eating/drinking ones. They wouldn’t leave in parts that weren’t necessary and, you’d think, it’d put the good parts in the ones it designed after itself (our eyesight is terrible compared to many other animals!). However, since we evolved it is quite easy to see how it is possible that we ended up the way we did.

That is, you cannot disprove the existence of God with empirical scientific evidence.

The burden is on YOU to prove that the teapot exists.

But neither can you prove the existence of God either.

That’s your responsibility.

You can only speculate about whether He exists or not.

I don’t speculate that he exists - I’m not going to say he doesn’t exist, it is your job to PROVE that it does. Even if a god could exist, odds are that you are worshipping the wrong one.

Now Christians *know *He exists, Sure, there’s no scientific evidence to support it, but saying that something can exist only with the empirical scientific evidence is only setting science up as the one true authority to say what is real and what is not real, and comes dangerously close to being a religion in that particular sense.

Science is the true authority. In time, science will have more and more answers and god will have fewer and fewer gaps. Please do explain how science becomes a religion… I’d love to see some valid points on that. Science is not “stuck” with outdated beliefs, our understanding grows each and every day. Religions… well… change interpretations every day.

A faith is a strong belief in anything without empirical scientific evidence to back it up. So that makes atheism a faith. It can also be treated in a dogmatic manner much like organized religion can as well. Such as if you start making demands that Christians and other religious people be sent to an asylum or a psychiatrist for their alleged delusions, and not allowing Christians to pray openly to their God.

A delusion is a belief in something despite the evidence. I have no problems with christians - people should be free to practice their own religions so long as they impose none of their beliefs on other people. All world religions attempt to do so and that is where the problem lies.

But Christians know God is real. Unfortunately, it is something that is extremely difficult to explain to someone who cannot feel the presence of God. The only way for a person to know God is to accept them as their Lord and savior.

The only way to know there is a teapot is to assume there is a teapot and, despite the evidence, believe the teapot exists.

Yes, I know all the atheists objections. And there are some very difficult questions to consider. But that does not in any way shape or form renders what we feel moot. In short we feel God.

The question was “Are Christians Delusional?” The answer is, if you believe in a personal god who created the earth and somehow is involved in the happenings on earth, yes, Christians are delusional. Do I think the Christianity is bad? Not necessarily.

I’d suggest reading the book “The Case For Christ” that is about one man’s search for the answers to God and how he came to find his faith.

I’ve read The Case For Christ, The Case for Creator, The Case for The Real Jesus, Searching Issues, Alpha Questions for Life, etc.

I WAS a practicing Catholic, I tried evangelical - I even was a host for the Alpha course on numerous occasions. I was, at one time, a serious apologetic, I argued from your side but the firmer I got in my beliefs, the more people questioned me, the more I learned that I knew very little.

I’m glad I’m past that delusion, as you can see from my comments.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

… Your god was obviously sloppy at putting things together - any good designer would have separated the breathing tubes from the eating/drinking ones. They wouldn’t leave in parts that weren’t necessary and, you’d think, it’d put the good parts in the ones it designed after itself (our eyesight is terrible compared to many other animals!)…

Help me out with something, how come men and women are so different? If for millions of years they have the same source why are they not identical by now?

 

[ehtheist]

Help me out with something, how come men and women are so different? If for millions of years they have the same source why are they not identical by now?

Do you mean “why do men have nipples”? (hint: evolution)

Or “why do women generally have long hair and men generally have short hair”? (hint: that’s how they choose to wear it)

Surely you understand the difference between the sexes and the need for both to reproduce. Or are you asking for someone to interpret evolution as you have others interpret your other books?

 

[Starwynd]

The burden is on YOU to prove that the teapot exists.

No. This is a board that is not for formal debate, it is a board for Catholic fellowship so Catholics can grow stronger in their faith and devotion to God, not to justify ourselves to an arrogant elitist snob who has merely substituted science for their religion, proving once again how important religion is for people. Catholics are believers and the only being we have to account for ourselves to is God, not to an arrogant person who thinks they know all the answers. You come into a person’s house, you do not force them to justify their choices to you. That is rude and condescending. You made the claim that God doesn’t exist, the responsibility is yours to prove.

Your debating style is like a hamburger. You take out only a sesame seed or two and ignore the bun, the meat, the lettuce, the ketchup, the pickles, and the mayo.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Originally Posted by Texas Roofer
Help me out with something, how come men and women are so different? If for millions of years they have the same source why are they not identical by now?

Do you mean “why do men have nipples”? (hint: evolution)

Or “why do women generally have long hair and men generally have short hair”? (hint: that’s how they choose to wear it)

Surely you understand the difference between the sexes and the need for both to reproduce. Or are you asking for someone to interpret evolution as you have others interpret your other books?

Actually I was asking why are they not similar in size, and hormone level? Why are so many woman 5’1” 100lbs while the men are 6’1” 250 you might say so males can fight but when did we really fight that way? We used are brain so why does are size and hormone levels not reflect that? Why are our offspring slow to mature 15 years why not faster? It would seem evolution really let us down.

 

[ehtheist]

No. This is a board that is not for formal debate, it is a board for Catholic fellowship so Catholics can grow stronger in their faith and devotion to God, not to justify ourselves to an arrogant elitist snob who has merely substituted science for their religion, proving once again how important religion is for people.

Starwynd, let me first apologize for coming to your board for answers. I was a practicing catholic that, because of attitudes as yours, now has serious doubts about the need for and benefit of religion.

The question was asked “Are Christians Delusional?”. If I wanted people to agree with me and to patronize me, I’d become a priest – err, I mean, I’d go to an atheist or humanist board. If your beliefs are so weak that some logic puts you into a serious defensive position, that is not my problem.

I don’t want a stronger non-belief - that’s why I’m not on those boards. However, I just can’t throw out all reason and I surely can’t bring myself to claiming that other humans are lesser people (gays, women, etc.).

Catholics are believers and the only being we have to account for ourselves to is God, not to an arrogant person who thinks they know all the answers.

I don’t know all the answers, that is why I am here. A discussion like this one should have valid points raised that disagree with the idea that Christians are delusional and I hope that it gets to that point (though if history is any indicator, I’m doubtful).

You come into a person’s house, you do not force them to justify their choices to you. That is rude and condescending. You made the claim that God doesn’t exist, the responsibility is yours to prove.

Two points:
I came here for proof of god. We can’t simply take the assumption that god exists or claim that because a book says it exists, we should believe it - especially a book that is claimed to be the word of god.

If someone is wrong for coming here and questioning, I have no regrets for having “lost god”. Religion has no problem coming to my house to tell me that what I believe is wrong. But, unlike religion, my current understanding is based on facts and reason not superstition.

Your debating style is like a hamburger. You take out only a sesame seed or two and ignore the bun, the meat, the lettuce, the ketchup, the pickles, and the mayo.

That’s an excellent point. The sesame seed possibly being the one not created by man (or having been created with the least amount of interference). Lettuce, pickles and cows are the result of artificial selection. Ketchup is, like god, man made.

 

[ehtheist]

Actually I was asking why are they not similar in size, and hormone level? Why are so many woman 5’1” 100lbs while the men are 6’1” 250 you might say so males can fight but when did we really fight that way? We used are brain so why does are size and hormone levels not reflect that? Why are our offspring slow to mature 15 years why not faster? It would seem evolution really let us down.

Awesome Texas - great points.

In a great number of ways, humans have stopped evolution by means of natural selection. People are getting taller, generally, and what the cause of that is could simply come down to preference. There may, very well, be natural reasons for the increase in height but for a great number of people, height is an indicator of success and/or a desirable trait. (Women who are attracted to taller men - which is more the rule than the exception - perpetuate the increase in height by enabling those genes to be successfully replicated.) Men, on the other hand, tend to prefer (these are generalizations but, again, more often the case than not) a mate that is shorter than them.

Contrary to what natural selection would see happen, and I think it is good for society, we are reducing the number of deaths of people who would otherwise die because of mutations that would, left to the natural world, not be rewarded with the ability to reproduce (or even survive). If the brain was the most necessary element for survival and natural selection were allowed to continue in its entirety, those with a more capable and functional brain would ultimately be the ones to reproduce and we would see that gene favoured for the continuation of the species.

Our offspring would mature at a quicker rate if it was necessary for its survival and it was able to mutate at a quick enough rate to get to the “younger” age of maturity before it became extinct. Fortunately for us, science and our ability to think and plan, we aren’t subject exclusively to the natural laws of evolution.

Evolution doesn’t plan - by the process of rewarding (in the sense of reproducing being a reward) “good” (necessary for survival to the stage of reproduction) genes, we have been able to get to the stage we are today. Un-touched by human intervention, evolution would be continuing (even more so than it is) in humans.

 

[Texas_Roofer]

…

Two points:
I came here for proof of god.

which can not exist

We can’t simply take the assumption that god exists or claim that because a book says it exists, we should believe it - especially a book that is claimed to be the word of god.

agreed

If someone is wrong for coming here and questioning, I have no regrets for having “lost god”. Religion has no problem coming to my house to tell me that what I believe is wrong. But, unlike religion, my current understanding is based on facts

actually it is not, I see that over and over atheists claiming the have proof when they have none. They say this because the fact is they have “faith” (maybe another type) which they deny. we have faith too but we do not deny it.

and reason not superstition.

…

 

[Texas_Roofer]

Awesome Texas - great points.

In a great number of ways, humans have stopped evolution by means of natural selection.

is that possible? or did you mean by physical size advantage

People are getting taller, generally, and what the cause of that is could simply come down to preference. There may, very well, be natural reasons for the increase in height but for a great number of people, height is an indicator of success and/or a desirable trait. (Women who are attracted to taller men - which is more the rule than the exception - perpetuate the increase in height by enabling those genes to be successfully replicated.) Men, on the other hand, tend to prefer (these are generalizations but, again, more often the case than not) a mate that is shorter than them.

but if the tall breed with the short they normally would produce via the dominate gene, yet we see more short and more tall?

Contrary to what natural selection would see happen, and I think it is good for society, we are reducing the number of deaths of people who would otherwise die because of mutations that would, left to the natural world, not be rewarded with the ability to reproduce (or even survive). If the brain was the most necessary element for survival and natural selection were allowed to continue in its entirety, those with a more capable and functional brain would ultimately be the ones to reproduce and we would see that gene favoured for the continuation of the species.

isn’t that where we are? How many fights does the average man have? who provides better Doctors or big fighters?

Our offspring would mature at a quicker rate if it was necessary for its survival and it was able to mutate at a quick enough rate to get to the “younger” age of maturity before it became extinct. Fortunately for us, science and our ability to think and plan, we aren’t subject exclusively to the natural laws of evolution.

can it be “fortunate”? It would seem fast reproduction is always favored. Again evolution is letting us down

Evolution doesn’t plan - by the process of rewarding (in the sense of reproducing being a reward) “good” (necessary for survival to the stage of reproduction) genes, we have been able to get to the stage we are today. Un-touched by human intervention, evolution would be continuing (even more so than it is) in humans.

Evolution stopping would not seem right. If we do not need the physical fighting for mates we do not need the size difference, yet we have the size difference. If the size is important why do we have the short? How does nature reproduce the large and small by sex type not by natural selection of a mate?

 

[ehtheist]

is that possible?

Not only possible but true.

or did you mean by physical size advantage but if the tall breed with the short they normally would produce via the dominate gene, yet we see more short and more tall?

Huh? Are you saying that “tall” is a “gene” and that it is “dominant”? I’d like to see some evidence or proof of that.

isn’t that where we are? How many fights does the average man have? who provides better Doctors or big fighters?

Who said anything about fights? We don’t live in a society of survival of the fittest - at least not in developed countries. And by “fitness”, nature’s definition would not necessarily suggest that size determines fitness. (Speed, ability to fly, ability to blend with the surroundings, defense mechanisms, etc., could be what makes an animal “fit”. Fitness could mean immunity to certain viruses or bacteria, it could mean the ability to digest certain matter and any combination of such.)

can it be "fortunate"? It would seem fast reproduction is always favored.  Again evolution is letting us down

Fast reproduction is associated with shorter life-spans and “smaller” beings (ie. mice reproduce quickly, age quickly and die sooner - elephants grow slower, reproduce slower and live longer). I’d prefer slower maturity, later reproduction and a longer lifespan - it almost certainly is necessary for us to have the ability for brains to develop to the stage where we can do what we are doing

Evolution stopping would not seem right. If we do not need the physical fighting for mates we do not need the size difference, yet we have the size difference.

One could deduct that we have evolved to be taller people (we aren’t forced to reproduce sooner) for this reason.

Nobody has claimed that evolution has stopped, we are stopping evolution in the sense that we are limiting the effects of natural selection. Evolution continues but we, as humans, are providing unnatural rewards (for society, I don’t see that as a bad thing).

If the size is important why do we have the short? How does nature reproduce the large and small by sex type not by natural selection of a mate?

Who says that size is important? As for sex being the determining factor - there isn’t a gene that is specifically for height and one that is specifically for gender and one for colour of hair and one for size of nose, etc.

Are you concerned more with why women are typically shorter than men (ie. in the same family, the girls, in your suggestion, are shorter than the boys) or are you wondering why it appears that way in the population as a whole?

I guess what most amazes me is that the Catholic church believes evolution occurs. How can you question it? (That is sarcasm - I applaud you for questioning the beliefs of your church - it will build strength in those beliefs or make you a disbeliever. Either of those is better than simply believing it because a priest told you to believe it.)

 

[Texas_Roofer]

evolution and natural selection can not turn on or off, they have to exist forever

Not only possible but true.

Huh? Are you saying that “tall” is a “gene” and that it is “dominant”? I’d like to see some evidence or proof of that.

Tall people come from tall families, if the gene is not dominate why are tall people here? If the gene is dominate why are short poeple here?

Who said anything about fights? We don’t live in a society of survival of the fittest - at least not in developed countries. And by “fitness”, nature’s definition would not necessarily suggest that size determines fitness. (Speed, ability to fly, ability to blend with the surroundings, defense mechanisms, etc., could be what makes an animal “fit”. Fitness could mean immunity to certain viruses or bacteria, it could mean the ability to digest certain matter and any combination of such.)

yes, so why are we different? People have always intermarried so why has evolution not eliminated the slow, poorly immunited?

Fast reproduction is associated with shorter life-spans and “smaller” beings (ie. mice reproduce quickly, age quickly and die sooner - elephants grow slower, reproduce slower and live longer). I’d prefer slower maturity, later reproduction and a longer lifespan - it almost certainly is necessary for us to have the ability for brains to develop to the stage where we can do what we are doing

but evolution should have developed a fast maturing long life animal where is it? why is it not us?

One could deduct that we have evolved to be taller people (we aren’t forced to reproduce sooner) for this reason.

Nobody has claimed that evolution has stopped, we are stopping evolution in the sense that we are limiting the effects of natural selection. Evolution continues but we, as humans, are providing unnatural rewards (for society, I don’t see that as a bad thing).

so we are outside of “natural” and we control “evolution”?

Who says that size is important? As for sex being the determining factor - there isn’t a gene that is specifically for height and one that is specifically for gender and one for colour of hair and one for size of nose, etc.

Are you concerned more with why women are typically shorter than men (ie. in the same family, the girls, in your suggestion, are shorter than the boys) or are you wondering why it appears that way in the population as a whole?

How can evolution say from the same egg make a man taller, and a woman shorter?

I guess what most amazes me is that the Catholic church believes evolution occurs. How can you question it? (That is sarcasm - I applaud you for questioning the beliefs of your church - it will build strength in those beliefs or make you a disbeliever. Either of those is better than simply believing it because a priest told you to believe it.)

I believe in evolution, just not everything came from evolution. There is too much diversity both with in and between species evolution should reduce diversity. Additionally evolution should have made other animals into engineers, builders, thinkers. Where are they?

btw my path was opposite in direction than yours science lead me to God!