Does Christianity enhance your mental health?

[Jagella]

In an older thread, The Mental-Illness Theory of Religion, I received the following response:

Second, in response to historia you wrote:

Some claim religious belief can be beneficial mentally, and others have come to the opposite conclusion

The first part of that statement is clearly true. In Psychology Today psychologist Rob Whitley wrote:
“The amassed research indicates that higher levels of religious belief and practice (known in social science as “religiosity�) is associated with better mental health.�

Question for Debate:In what ways has your Christian faith and practice improved your mental health?

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 8:

Ya, so as i noted, without God we live for our flesh, and the world, and your making the case for that

All you do is spout assertions with not one piece of confirmatory data in support.

But yeah, considering your inability to show there's even a god, or to even show that god has assigned purpose to anything it does increase the probability we live without a god.


I notice you couldn't be bothered to address the rest of my Post 7.

Ya know, where I laid out three facts...


The fact of the matter is, that the theist is incapable of showing a god they can't show exists has assigned 'purpose' to anything, least of all human existence. 

The fact of the matter is, that some folks like to declare as 'fact' that which they can't show it is. 

The fact of the matter is, that the liar lies, and the preacher preaches!

[Jagella]

The argument is, if atheist is true, that there is no God, no purpose is objective, or real... Its illusory.. That is what Craig is saying...

Well, by "God" Craig means the Christian god or his version of that god. So he's arguing that without that particular god there is no "objective or real" purpose. So many theists including Jews, Muslims, and Hindus have no more objective or real purpose than atheists do. Everybody, except for those who believe in Craig's god, have on "illusory" purpose at best.

I'm still wondering what the difference is between real and illusory purposes. As far as I can tell, the purposes of Christians seem the same as that of non-Christians.

However, if Christianity is true, ALL people are made in the image of God, and there is purpose for all of us, even if you dont believe in it... And this helps explain why purposes exists at all. Like fighting cancer, on Christianity, this would be a valid and meaningful purpose...

How do you know what your purpose is? Did the Father of the sky tell you what your purpose is?

So the central point of what I'm saying in this post is that merely asserting that your purpose is more real than the purpose of some unbeliever doesn't amount to much. Can you demonstrate that your purpose is real while any purposes of my own are merely illusory?

[Tart]

The argument is, if atheist is true, that there is no God, no purpose is objective, or real... Its illusory.. That is what Craig is saying...

Well, by "God" Craig means the Christian god or his version of that god. So he's arguing that without that particular god there is no "objective or real" purpose. So many theists including Jews, Muslims, and Hindus have no more objective or real purpose than atheists do. Everybody, except for those who believe in Craig's god, have on "illusory" purpose at best.

I'm still wondering what the difference is between real and illusory purposes. As far as I can tell, the purposes of Christians seem the same as that of non-Christians.

However, if Christianity is true, ALL people are made in the image of God, and there is purpose for all of us, even if you dont believe in it... And this helps explain why purposes exists at all. Like fighting cancer, on Christianity, this would be a valid and meaningful purpose...

How do you know what your purpose is? Did the Father of the sky tell you what your purpose is?

So the central point of what I'm saying in this post is that merely asserting that your purpose is more real than the purpose of some unbeliever doesn't amount to much. Can you demonstrate that your purpose is real while any purposes of my own are merely illusory?

No I don’t think your purpose is any less real then mine. I certainly think we all have a need for real purpose, and that we all live as life is meaningful, both of us, all of us. Purpose exists everywhere.... however if atheism is true, purpose doesn’t even make sense. We can just pretend it’s real.

[Tart]

From Post 8:

Ya, so as i noted, without God we live for our flesh, and the world, and your making the case for that

All you do is spout assertions with not one piece of confirmatory data in support.

But yeah, considering your inability to show there's even a god, or to even show that god has assigned purpose to anything it does increase the probability we live without a god.


I notice you couldn't be bothered to address the rest of my Post 7.

Ya know, where I laid out three facts...


The fact of the matter is, that the theist is incapable of showing a god they can't show exists has assigned 'purpose' to anything, least of all human existence. 

The fact of the matter is, that some folks like to declare as 'fact' that which they can't show it is. 

The fact of the matter is, that the liar lies, and the preacher preaches!

If a theist couldn’t show you God exists, could God still exist?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 3 by Tart]

Ya know, your arguments would work a lot better, if you didn't quote Craig, he of the "The murder of children is an infinite good" (paraphrasing from memory) line.

Just to let you know...

[Tcg]

No I don’t think your purpose is any less real then mine.

We can just pretend it’s real.

You seem to be arguing with yourself. Of course given that you don't explain your terms nor support your assertions, it's almost impossible to determine if you are winning this argument with yourself or losing it.

From where I sit, you are losing it.

[Jagella]

No I don’t think your purpose is any less real then mine. I certainly think we all have a need for real purpose, and that we all live as life is meaningful, both of us, all of us. Purpose exists everywhere.... however if atheism is true, purpose doesn’t even make sense. We can just pretend it’s real.

I'm not sure why you can't make sense of purpose assuming that no gods exist. I have no trouble making sense of purpose without recourse to belief in any gods. In fact, theism would tend to obscure any sense of purpose for me. The gods tend to be inscrutable in that what they seem to want makes little sense. The Bible god, for example, demands that I love him. If I do not love him, then I am threatened with eternal punishment. What's illogical about this belief is that this presumably perfect and all-powerful god cannot take rejection. He doesn't act like he is invulnerable but is petty and insecure lashing out at those who hurt him. I see no sensible purpose in loving such a god.

So we can see how illogical and vacuous it is to maintain that Craig's god grants us any real purpose. Although Craig is a philosopher, his real job is Christian apologetics. He wants to defend belief in his version of a god. As a result, he will be quick to sacrifice good philosophical thinking in exchange for evangelizing his religion.

[Bust Nak]

The argument is, if atheist is true, that there is no God, no purpose is objective, or real... Its illusory.. That is what Craig is saying...

Well Craig isn't here to defend himself, care to address the counter-argument in his place?

however if atheism is true, purpose doesn’t even make sense.

Objective purpose doesn’t even make sense with or without God, that doesn't imply purpose doesn't make sense if atheism is true. The conclusion that purpose is not real or an illusion does not follow from the premise that no purpose is objective.

We can just pretend it’s real.

Why pretend when self created subjective purpose is real?

[Tart]

[Replying to post 3 by Tart]

Ya know, your arguments would work a lot better, if you didn't quote Craig, he of the "The murder of children is an infinite good" (paraphrasing from memory) line.

Just to let you know...

Poor logical reasoning, to dismiss a topic of debate..

"The guy who said that is immoral"~Not a good argument to make, via "Ad Hominem"...


What you just said is completely irrelevant in this discussion, yet you say it to discredit the topic at hand.. That is like the very definition of logical fallacies...

Just saying... I mean, i could just ignore answers like these, but it's for your benefit...

[Jagella]

Poor logical reasoning, to dismiss a topic of debate..

"The guy who said that is immoral"~Not a good argument to make, via "Ad Hominem"...


What you just said is completely irrelevant in this discussion, yet you say it to discredit the topic at hand.. That is like the very definition of logical fallacies...

But if we base our reasoning on the moral philosophy of Craig, then it's a good idea to understand what he means by "moral." So to point out that Craig believes that killing children to send them to heaven is the greatest good, then it is relevant to any argument that accepts that kind of morality.

So yes, let us not argue that Craig is wrong because we see him as immoral, but let us see him as wrong based on his morals and how he arrives at them.