It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Could the belief in god considered a mental illness ?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 10:06 AM

originally posted by: shawmanfromny
a reply to: gosseyn

You can't describe "faith" to people like you, so I don't even bother. You have just as much right not believing in a God, as I do believing in one.

Faith in a God has nothing to do with a malignancy or mental illness and I'm offended by your assertion that it is.

Personally, the belief in God and prayer has helped me cope with my depression and the guilt I feel for wronging many people in my life. If that makes me "mentally ill" in your book, then so be it.

That is all true and good, but the fact remains that faith is the antithesis of reason.

I tend to align with the Ancient Aliens idea that biblical references to gods actually refer to encounters with benign visitors from other planets.

It eventually morphed into priests and dogma, screwing things up royally.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 10:08 AM

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: gosseyn

Hi Gos. Thanks for posting this thread.

What if 2 psychiatrists, and 2 dictionaries, disagree with the definition of "mental illness" ?

Is not almost every post in this thread espousing various beliefs ?

Who gets to decide which beliefs and opinions are 'true' ?

Most of the people on this thread did not take into account my definition of mental illness before posting, no one clicked on that other thread.

In my definition, we are all more or less mentally ill, because mental illness is a question of being more or less adapted to reality, to what-is-really-going-on. If your thought processes don't have the same structure as the processes of reality, then you're unadapted to reality. Which means all of us suffer from mental illness, because none of us has a mental map that perfectly represents the territory of reality. One could say that the very fact of having thought processes makes you automatically unadapted to reality, because the map will never become the territory, but will always stay a map.

We all draw stuff on our map, stuff we assume exists in the territory, or has existed, or will exist. For example the sense of self : you have ideas about who you think you are, what you think you represent. You have a map of yourself that doesn't represent what you really are. People who believe in a god don't need to feel offended by what I say, but to the contrary, they should see how this definition makes them "normal".

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:16 AM

originally posted by: whereislogic
a reply to: gosseyn

I think you're confused with the belief in evolutionary ideas/philosophies, myths and storylines, including the one referred to as "the chemical evolution theory of life" (which speaks about the origin of life by means of chance and chemical evolution, i.e. 'Nature did it', arguing that it is a result of coincidence and a mindless process rather than purposeful design; quoting from the Wikipedia page for "abiogenesis", which was quoting Haldane and Oparin).

Fraud is defined as “an act of deceiving or misrepresenting.” It is the “intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value.”​—Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary.

“Evolution is a fact.” This is the standard confession of faith that assures the scientific community of your orthodoxy. And for public consumption, the claim is often added: ‘It has been proved so often that there is no longer a need to repeat the proof.’ Very convenient, especially since the evolutionist has no proof to repeat. Yet, for years the statement has been made again and again, like some mystical chant: “Evolution is a fact.”

In April 1989, in a book review in The New York Times Book Review magazine, biologist Richard Dawkins wrote: “We are here talking about the fact of evolution itself, a fact that is proved utterly beyond reasonable doubt.” He then said that to consider creation “in biology classes is about as sensible as to claim equal time for the flat-​earth theory in astronomy classes. Or, as someone has pointed out, you might as well claim equal time in sex education classes for the stork theory. It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I’d rather not consider that).”

Stephen Jay Gould wrote an essay on evolution in the January 1987 issue of the science magazine Discover (the same magazine which you linked an article from). Intent on overkill, in this five-​page article he proclaimed evolution to be a fact 12 times!

At one point in the article, Gould said: “I don’t want to sound like a shrill dogmatist shouting ‘rally round the flag boys,’ but biologists have reached a consensus . . . about the fact of evolution.” But really, does that not sound like “a shrill dogmatist shouting ‘rally round the flag boys’”?

Molecular biologist Michael Denton referred to this glib talk about evolution’s being a fact and dismissed it with these words: “Now of course such claims are simply nonsense.” It’s much more than nonsense. It’s fraud. It deceives and misrepresents. It perverts the truth to induce another to part with something of value. Newspapers, radio, TV, nature series, science programs, schoolbooks from second grade on​—all drum this evolution-​is-a-fact litany into the public mind. In 1989, however, The New York Times reported that California’s school board has issued guidelines for science textbooks that apparently de-​emphasize teaching evolution as a fact.​—November 10, 1989.

It copies the tactics of the chief priests and the Pharisees of Jesus’ day. When officers sent out to arrest Jesus came back without him, the Pharisees demanded: “‘Why is it you did not bring him in?’ The officers replied: ‘Never has another man spoken like this.’ In turn the Pharisees answered: ‘You have not been misled also, have you? Not one of the rulers or of the Pharisees has put faith in him, has he? But this crowd that does not know the Law are accursed people.’” (John 7:45-49) The tyranny of authority: ‘None of the important people, none of the educated people, accept Jesus as Messiah. Only the stupid accursed ones do.’

Evolutionists today use the same Pharisaic approach: ‘Believe as we do,’ they say. ‘All competent scientists believe evolution. All intelligent people believe it. Only the uneducated and the ignorant* don’t believe it.’ (*: quoting Dawkins: “ignorant, stupid or insane”; the same paintjob is often done on those who believe in God's existence) By such intimidation and mental bullying, masses of people are herded into the evolutionists’ camp. They know nothing of the weaknesses and inadequacies of evolutionary theory or its unsound speculations and hypothesized impossibilities​—such as the origin of life from inanimate chemicals.

So they are swept along by the repetitious mantras recited by evolution’s propagandizers. The theory becomes dogma, its preachers become arrogant, and dissenters reap disdainful abuse. The tactics work. They did in Jesus’ day; they do today.

This four-​word propaganda line, ‘Evolution is a fact,’ is little (little in content), is a simple sentence (easily said), and is repeated persistently (even 12 times in one short essay). It qualifies as effective brainwashing propaganda, and with repetition it reaches the status of a slogan​—and slogans everywhere repeated are soon programmed into brains and tripped off tongues with little critical examination or skeptical dissection.* Once a theory has been sloganized into community thinking, it no longer requires proof, and any who dissent are scorned. If such dissenters present rational refutation of the slogan’s validity, they are especially irritating and subjected to the only available response, namely, ridicule.

Evolutionists that specialize in the Big Lie that ‘Evolution is a fact’ also take another leaf out of Hitler’s book, for in it he said of the masses he controlled: “With the primitive simplicity of their minds they will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one, since they themselves perhaps also lie sometimes in little things, but would certainly still be too much ashamed of too great lies.” A book of popular quotations lists this one among them: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough, many will believe it.” The one evolutionists tell is apparently big enough, and it’s certainly told often enough, for millions believe it.

It is a lie that is also a fraud because it is “an act of deceiving or misrepresenting,” an “intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value.” Teaching that man’s ancestors are animals, starting with some microbe and ending with some ape, evolutionists have “exchanged the truth of God for the lie.” By this lie, they induce many to part with something of great value​—their faith in God as their Creator.​—Romans 1:25.

This fraud does terrible damage. Its victims feel freed from the Creator’s laws, and they become a law to themselves: ‘No right or wrong. Fulfill all fleshly desires. Do your own thing. No need for any guilt trips.’ Enter the moral breakdown, unrestrained and full-​blown. Parted from their Creator and the true values of the Bible, they become spiritually impoverished and end up “like unreasoning animals born naturally to be caught and destroyed.”​—2 Peter 2:12.

*: As astonomer George Greenstein expresses such a creedal dogma and slogan:

“As we survey all the evidence, the thought insistently arises that some supernatural agency​—or, rather, Agency—​must be involved. Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being? Was it God who stepped in and so providentially drafted the cosmos for our benefit?” But Greenstein recovers from such heretical thinking and reasserts his orthodoxy to the evolutionary religion, reciting one of their creedal dogmas: “God is not an explanation.”

Source: Fraud in Science—The Greatest Fraud of All (Awake!—1990)

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:19 AM

originally posted by: Lysergic
How do I know which of these voices belongs to God?

Ummm...they all do...

Father...Son...Holy Spirit...



posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:35 AM
I doubt these scientists are all suffering from a mental illness merely for believing in God's existence:

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:44 AM
I believe people who follow an organized religion just aren't that bright or lack basic logic skills.

I'm agnostic.

I don't believe in man made religions. Religion is what man creates to explain something he cannot understand. Christianity, Islam, etc are all nothing but BS fairy tales.

With that said, I can't discount the fact there could be something larger than ourselves. The universe is too vast to comprehend and so much we don't understand that we can't possibly be alone or all of this come out of nowhere. HOwever, none of that makes me believe in a pasty white guy wearing Birkenstocks in the middle east as my savior. Nor do I think praying to a blood lusting pedo five times a day is going to save my soul.

I most certainly will not be spending time, nor my money at mega churches so some huckster pimp, I mean preacher can sleep with all that women(and men) in the congregation.

Ya'll can go on believing these hucksters...

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:50 AM
Let's say that in utter secrecy and without any preparation, you are invited to a private worship session in a secluded location where a rapist/murderer/terrorist whose crimes you have seen firsthand is being held captive and your pastor hands you a gun. He says that God has chosen this little club, including your neighbors and friends, to deliver justice to filthy animals like this guy around the country, and now you're being recruited. No one will ever know anything except that you did what any patriotic servant of the lord would do. Send him to Jesus, he says. What do you do?
edit on 11-1-2020 by TzarChasm because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 11:51 AM
a reply to: Edumakated

That's just it - if you're putting your faith in the huckster, you're doing it wrong.

But the same could be said of secular topics. How many put so-called experts on the same type of pedestal a religious person would put a preacher on and with similar disastrous results?

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 12:01 PM

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

That's just it - if you're putting your faith in the huckster, you're doing it wrong.

But the same could be said of secular topics. How many put so-called experts on the same type of pedestal a religious person would put a preacher on and with similar disastrous results?

I agree. I don't put 100% faith in any man. We are all fallible and have flaws.

I just don't believe in organized religion. Yes, I pray. I may even think there is a higher power. However, I don't need to go to church or thump a bible. Most modern churches these days are nothing more than reality TV shows.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 12:11 PM
a reply to: Edumakated

The head of a church is supposed to be a teacher, nothing more or less. The people in a church are there to gather to draw strength from each other and learn from each other. Like anything, it's easy to twist that. It's hard to have faith in something intangible when the preacher is here.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 12:22 PM

originally posted by: gosseyn
a reply to: Nothin

Most of the people on this thread did not take into account my definition of mental illness before posting, no one clicked on that other thread.

Maybe some people feel like you don't get to re-define the meaning/definition for mental illness to make it fit your arguments and philosophies better, or at least make it appear that way?

So according to you, "we are all more or less mentally ill". Then why did you only focus on associating the belief in God with mental illness in this thread title and the OP? Why didn't you make any attempt at associating the belief in the evolutionary philosophies and myths you expressed in the OP with mental illness? Or the attempts at re-defining terminologies that need no re-definition?

originally posted by: gosseyn
So, do you think I would be the right choice to meet the aliens ?

Or the belief in the possibility, and maybe even plausibility or likeliness of aliens living on other planets? (see link to the Drake equation thread I linked earlier for details)

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 12:25 PM
Could the belief in god considered a mental illness ?

Usually no.

Until it cross's a very fine line in to paranoid delusions that become harmful to others.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 12:51 PM
scientists can not be atheist.
If you are closed off to something like "God" you are refusing to look at a lot of information.

That being said i think the scientific method is flawed. There are too many "anecdotal" accounts of reincarnation, OBE's, near death experiences, etc., to be ignored in my opinion.

One example is about a guy who went into psychedelic state using '___' i believe. He contacted a child who had supposedly passed away and wanted to let his parents know he was ok. The child gave the guy in the psychedelic state his parents phone number and when he woke up he called it. The people who picked up had recently lost a child and they said that he would have wanted them to know he was ok. Dr. Chris Bache talks about this briefly in this video.

he talks about it at . 1.22.30

I wanted to prove it myself so I learned how to astral project. And yes it has been proven to be real now.
Discovery Update: EEG-monitored Psi Study at Monroe, Part I—Participant Brain-Wave Analyses

Consciousness has been proven to not be confined to the physical body. Mainstream science does not accept this evidence because they can't measure it yet. I think the tide is turning though and they will be forced to pay attention soon.

That being said Earth is a mental asylum where everyone has guns. this is because people are brainwashed by their rulers though.

edit on 11-1-2020 by booyakasha because: video imbed

edit on 11-1-2020 by booyakasha because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-1-2020 by booyakasha because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 01:02 PM
a reply to: booyakasha

That doesn't really make sense. You might as well say a scientist cant follow a particular religion because if they believe in Jesus being the son of god, and all other faith's are wrong, then they're closed minded about the truth of other religions.

Science and religion dont mix well because science is about quantifiable data, and religion is about a personal faith. They can both exist, but they're still separate.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 01:03 PM
Belief in God makes humans human and if you want to take that away or suggest it is a mental disorder I'm not sure you really understand what is going on here. Humans spend much of their time thinking in the abstract world, as in we do not look out and only just see the physical nature of what is around us. If you look around the room you are in right now EVERYTHING was first created with an abstract thought. Math was an abstract thought to understand it, everything we can not touch or see is abstractly created. You can't even make you breakfast in the morning with out abstractly creating it first.....

Welcome to the human race of abstract...

Religion is a by product of all this, as we can create at will whatever we want by taking that abstract and making it a reality. Humans have made religion a reality and so there is no mental illness and even suggesting it then you would be suggesting the fundamental core ability of humans is a mental illness....

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 01:40 PM

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
The belief in you as a separate thing, is a mental illness.

The mind is full of you and time.

Mind is simply storytelling.

When there is no mind.... life is so simple.... it is just what actually is.

The mind does not see or hear.

Do you believe in a personal god that watches and listens ?

From what you say, you agree with me that everything that takes places in the brain is always far from the truth of reality, that our mental map is always imprecise, incomplete, or just simply always totally wrong. The universe may be one big process, there might be no separateness, etc.. So how would you describe this tendency of humans to make false assumptions ? Is "mental illness" the right expression to describe the human condition in your opinion ?

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 01:43 PM
a reply to: gosseyn

I have often considered the idea that the religiously inclined are suffering from some sort of mental illness. Of course when we look at and listen to individuals I can see that this is not the case.

It is when I see the likes of the mindless masses circling the Kaaba, the strange fellows who nod at the wailing wall, the snake handling tongue speaking Christians, the endless line of TV evangelists spouting drivel, the children being burned as witches in Africa that makes me wonder.

Throw in exorcism, angels, demons, saints, miracles, prophecy and I really do wonder at the state of humanity en masse. It sometimes feels as if this is nothing more than an open air asylum.

edit on 11-1-2020 by midicon because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 02:03 PM
a reply to: Nothin

Some beliefs have a lot of evidence supporting them.

Some don't.

Then there's the whole issue of willfully blind, proud, ignorant bull-headedness preventing genuine debate or dialogue.

When I say 'the basic issues are not that debatable,' I mean that the evidence supporting one side are so plentiful, high quality, emphatic that anyone with a fair-minded assessment of the evidence would end up on one side.

Then there's the issue of what constitutes solid evidence.

Some people accept only laboratory micrometer etc. sorts of "hard" evidence.

Some wisely accept statistical evidence of various sorts if collected in objective, balanced ways.

I think human nature is prone to arguing about virtually anything out of ego, turf, pride, psycho-dynamic issues. Those issues tend to pollute almost any dialogue or debate.

The discerning do their best to filter out such contaminants. The simple minded blather & stumble along seemingly clueless about such trash clogging up the dialogue or debate.

My 2 cents.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 02:31 PM
a reply to: gosseyn

Could the belief in god considered a mental illness ?

Just the title in and of itself is offensive, destructive and sneaky, because it'd open the way and normalize negative dangerous stereotypes/preconceptions against people that believe in God and have a genuine connection with Him. If we go down this hideous path, expect to eventually see institutional measures being introduced against these good-willed godly people. And where do we go from there??!! ... Over the cliff!

I will give my definition of "mental illness". I think that anything that makes you become unadapted to reality, to "what is really going on", can be considered a mental illness, and thus it ranges from benign to malignant.

What does "unadapted to reality" mean, what is *this* reality?! Who decides for its validity?! Maybe my reality is different and more legit than that of the others, who knows?! The people have lost their moral compass .

I've no doubt that it's been a long time that humanity is a runaway train headed for the abyss ... but better days will come.

posted on Jan, 11 2020 @ 02:41 PM
a reply to: gosseyn

No. People being gullible or naive is not a mental illness.

Someone that kills in the name of god is mentally ill but their belief in a god is not the illness.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in