Psychology vs Religion

[pacer]

Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds.

Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways.

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

 

[pacer]

P.S. If Jesus lived today, he would be declared mentally ill.

 

[Flopper]

Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds.

Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways.

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill conscious.

A fair judgement be it by man or God must take into account the person being judged. We all come into this world with varying degrees of capability and are born into vastly different environments. Where little has been given, little can be expected.

 

[pacer]

A fair judgement be it by man or God must take into account the person being judged. We all come into this world with varying degrees of capability and are born into vastly different environments. Where little has been given, little can be expected.

But if man is incapable of discerning appropriate or inappropriate behavior due to some mental dysfunction, he cannot be held responsible for his actions.

 

[Flopper]

A fair judgement be it by man or God must take into account the person being judged. We all come into this world with varying degrees of capability and are born into vastly different environments. Where little has been given, little can be expected.

But if man is incapable of discerning appropriate or inappropriate behavior due to some mental dysfunction, he cannot be held responsible for his actions.

True. God can make those judgement because God is all knowing. However, God's criteria in making judgement can not be man's criteria. Judgement by man can not take into account all types of mental and cultural dysfunction.

 

[pacer]

However, God's criteria in making judgement can not be man's criteria. Judgement by man can not take into account all types of mental and cultural dysfunction.

Precisely why psychology advocates everyone is mentally ill to varying degrees and it is a growing trend to have criminal behavior evaluated for psychiatric disorder. It is necessary!

 

[Michelle420]

Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds.

Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways.

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

" work out your own salvation with fear and trembling"

Self help or psychology may be a tool to help on that journey.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds.

Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways.

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

Christianity does NOT teach that Christ will return to judge all mankind according to his deeds. Which makes the rest of your "cruel God" post suspect as well.

When Christ returns to end the battle raging at Har Megido, He will judge the nations according to the way they treated Israel.
Let's see how harshly He deals with Israel's enemies, given that He is the gentlest of men:

Isaiah 19:23-25
In that day there will be a highway from Egypt to Assyria. The Assyrians will go to Egypt and the Egyptians to Assyria. The Egyptians and Assyrians will worship together. In that day Israel will be the third, along with Egypt and Assyria, a blessing on the earth. The Lord Almighty will bless them, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance.”

So much for the "cruel" condemnation part of your post. It appears that God's judgement is a lot more compassionate toward His children, than yours is towards Christ.

Christ has good reason to be harsh, but isn't. You have no reason to be harsh, yet never miss a chance to covertly condemn Him.

So let me ask the next question:
Why do you persecute Christ so consistently?

 

[pacer]

To my recollection, Christianity teaches God will judge mankind according to his deeds, in the end times. I stand corrected(?)

 

[pacer]

1. Jesus is the Judge of All.


"And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead." Acts 10:42

"The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." Acts 17:30-31

"in that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus." Romans 2:16

"I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:" 2 Timothy 4:1

 

[pacer]

3. Jesus is omniscient and omnipotent and can therefore render perfect judgment and repay a person according to everything s/he has exactly done.

"For the Son of Man is going to come with his angels in the glory of his Father, and then he will repay each person according to what he has done." Matthew 16:27

"Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then each one will receive his commendation from God." 1 Corinthians 4:5

Jesus as the Judge of All the Earth

 

[The Irish Ram]

To my recollection, Christianity teaches God will judge mankind according to his deeds, in the end times. I stand corrected(?)

lol. Not corrected, just supplemental information to be regarded.

The Lord is merciful < full of mercy, concerning our iniquities and our sin He remembers no more< no longer in existence.
So what is He going to judge me on Pace? When and where?

Man is singular, mankind plural. < as in groups, peoples, or nations. Mankind will be judged according to their deeds. > Israel is the starting reference point and ending reference point of this judgement. (Remember that the next time you go to the polls.)
When and where?

At some point, Christ will also judge Lucifer, demons, and any man whose allegiance was pledged to Satan while the man was alive and had a choice.
When and where?
^
Keep in mind what Christ said concerning the latter:

He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.

^ shepherd terminology.

Shepherds gather their sheep together for safety. Wolves scatter sheep herds to cull sheep out and destroy them. You are one or the other. There is no middle road, no opting out of "religion". You are responsible for gathering or scattering based on your words and deeds, whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not. The rules don't change based on how we feel about them.


Neutrality is not an option:

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.&#8230; Rev.3: 15-16

Spit in this reference means spew, or puke. Considering that He is the one that was beaten all night and then nailed to a cross because of His passionate love for us, straddling the fence, just not giving a damn one way or the other, makes Him sick to His stomach.

 

[Chuckt]

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot. So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.… Rev.3: 15-16

Spit in this reference means spew, or puke. Considering that He is the one that was beaten all night and then nailed to a cross because of His passionate love for us, straddling the fence, just not giving a damn one way or the other, makes Him sick to His stomach.

I've been fighting the literal interpretation of this verse.

What I think and it has been confirmed by others: Why would God spew someone out of His mouth? We think the answer is because they're not part of the body. I know that others have the other common interpretation but this is how I am leaning.

 

[The Irish Ram]

Context is the key Chuck.

Start with whom He is addressing:

Rev 3:14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God........

Then the issue at hand and the consequence of the issue:

Rev 3:15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.

Rev 3:16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

Then the cause of the ailment:

Rev 3:17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

They don't need Him. They have plenty of stuff. Apathy toward Christ. Idolizing earthy goods in Christ's place. They have taken the attitude, "not that we don't appreciate what you did there for us and all Jesus, but we're good".

Notice then, that He offers a cure:

Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.

He hasn't puked them out yet. And they are one of His churches and a part of the "body". But their attitude just makes Him sick.
Regurgitation is an involuntary action. But instead of Him sticking His fingers down His throat and just getting rid of what is causing His distress, He suggests a different remedy because He doesn't want to lose them. He doesn't want to toss those cookies.

And lastly, here's why:

Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.

I can't think of any other time in history that we have been more Laodicean and materialistic then now.

I hope that helps.

 

[The Irish Ram]

This thread speaks more about religion than philosophy. It's disappointing that it was moved.

 

[Flopper]

However, God's criteria in making judgement can not be man's criteria. Judgement by man can not take into account all types of mental and cultural dysfunction.

Precisely why psychology advocates everyone is mentally ill to varying degrees and it is a growing trend to have criminal behavior evaluated for psychiatric disorder. It is necessary!

For society to function, criminal behavior must be judged by man using rather ridge criteria. Trying to take into consideration cultural and personal dysfunction is just not practical. Thus judgments by man will always be flawed.

 

[loa]

Pacer said:
Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds....Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways....Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

Pacer,
I think your premise is flawed. Here is why:

While you speak of religion, I'm going to insert Christianity - it's the only one I know enough about to speak of in this context.

Christianity is continually putting forth the idea of setting yourself aside and seeking God.

The part of psychology dealing with behaviors says that much of what is dysfunctional has roots in narcissistic behaviors.

Those two ideas correlate more than oppose.

K.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Christianity teaches Christ will return to judge all mankind, according to his deeds.

Psychology advocates that every one of us is touched by mental dysfunction/illness to some degree, whether stress, anger, severe depression, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc. which causes us to impulsively behave in certain ways.

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

I've got a lot of issues with the Christian concept of God's wrath and the reasons behind it, mind you, but I disagree with this argument.

Where I think your logic is flawed is that, based on the premise that all people have some degree of "mental illness or dysfunction" (though if stress and anger made that list, perhaps the criteria for the sort of mental dysfunction that causes irrepressible changes in behavior is too broad), you seem to have made the assumption that mankind in general can't be held responsible for their actions.

Religion aside, I disagree strongly. I, personally, am able to decide right from wrong based on my moral code, and generally stick to those morals. I'm imperfect, of course, and there's been moments where opportunism and expediency, or even raw emotion, have caused me to compromise my own beliefs. These compromises, however, were never made in ignorance.

Now, I'm a pretty smart guy by most accounts. I like to think that I'm far from the average in terms of my ability to honestly self-assess. Come on, though, I can't be the only guy out there that, when he does something fucked up, realizes he's doing something fucked up. If you're aware of the wrongness of your actions, regardless of which emotion or dysfunctional culture led you to them, you are 100% responsible for them.

Making the blanket statement that God holding people responsible for their actions is somehow unjust is pretty silly on this basis. Assuming this is all true, for all you know he might have planned for those people too stricken by mental illness or not bright enough to account for their own actions and will hold them to much less stringent standards, if any at all.

 

[lizzie]

Given that our psychological, neurological wiring governs our actions/behavior, it would be a cruel god who would hold mankind responsible for deeds rooted in a culturally dysfunctional or ill collective conscious.

That is one of the reasons that I don't practice a formal or dogmatic religion. I personally think the two are connected, and both have some good concepts to contribute, but either one alone can result in an unbalanced approach.

 

[oldfart]

Where I think your logic is flawed is that, based on the premise that all people have some degree of "mental illness or dysfunction" (though if stress and anger made that list, perhaps the criteria for the sort of mental dysfunction that causes irrepressible changes in behavior is too broad), you seem to have made the assumption that mankind in general can't be held responsible for their actions.

I belong to a faith tradition (philosophical Taoism) that holds that personified deities such as the Christian God are human constructs created for social control. Thus discussions like this may be theological to some, but are sociological to me.

It seems to me that evolutionary biology teaches that traits passed down through generations have survival value and that cognitive and emotional processes are no exception. Thus it is reasonable to believe that regret, pain, anger, and so forth have had and continue to have survival value. They are manifested in continuums, and like any such continuum, extremes are likely to be dysfunctional. "One smart-ass can ruin your chi for a whole day!"

I agree that in an ethical sense, we all are imperfect as an essential part of human nature, but diminished capacity or function sufficient to absolve anyone of responsibility for their own actions must be an extreme on that continuum.

Religion aside, I disagree strongly. I, personally, am able to decide right from wrong based on my moral code, and generally stick to those morals. I'm imperfect, of course, and there's been moments where opportunism and expediency, or even raw emotion, have caused me to compromise my own beliefs. These compromises, however, were never made in ignorance.

I'm not sure about the "ignorance" part, we make decisions under conditions of uncertainty, and thus the results expected and the results attained can be different. Do we judge actions by their intentions or by their results? It's a long running argument. But I understand and generally agree with your position. In ethics, the number of perfect teachers is identical to the number of perfect students.

Now, I'm a pretty smart guy by most accounts. I like to think that I'm far from the average in terms of my ability to honestly self-assess. Come on, though, I can't be the only guy out there that, when he does something fucked up, realizes he's doing something fucked up. If you're aware of the wrongness of your actions, regardless of which emotion or dysfunctional culture led you to them, you are 100% responsible for them.

I have no doubt that in Jellystone Park we are all "smarter than the average bear". As I have aged and observed more people, my estimate of the portion of the population that is self-aware of their own cognitive processes keeps diminishing. This is not a put down of people. More it is a realization of how much our lives are governed by rules of thumb, social conventions, habits, and so forth. It's a symptom of a deeper problem, how we experience reality. Our senses from before we are born strain to make sense of the world that is bombarding us with input. Our brains develop frameworks to organize this input and structure it. When we begin to communicate we exchange these frameworks with others, and discover ultimately that each person experiences their reality in a unique way. When almost everyone agrees on a part of a shared framework, that becomes the common reality which defines sanity. People who do not share that framework are considered mentally ill. But not everything is black or white. Americans are about equally divided on the existence of UFO's, alien encounters, and the existence of angels and devils. Which group defines sanity?

Making the blanket statement that God holding people responsible for their actions is somehow unjust is pretty silly on this basis. Assuming this is all true, for all you know he might have planned for those people too stricken by mental illness or not bright enough to account for their own actions and will hold them to much less stringent standards, if any at all.

Note that because I don't believe in a personified deity, I never encounter this problem. To me there is no Cosmic Hitman in the Sky dispensing a peculiar type of judgment that shockingly is based on my person sense of injustice. I don't even need an afterlife to allow such a God to balance out the divine scales in the next life if such God fails to do so in this life. The classical theological conundrums of the existence of evil, of suffering, and of death in a cosmos created by an all-powerful, all-knowing personified sentient God disappear. Without God-talk to distract me, I have more time to observe, contemplate, and meditate on how a wise person ought to live their life and treat other people.