Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

A Troubled Man
Guru
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 10:24 am

Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #1

Post by A Troubled Man »

We are constantly bombarded with believers telling us their versions of reality in which gods, demons, angels, etc. are constantly swirling around our heads in endless battles of good vs. evil, of invisible gods who intervene in our affairs and all other types of supernatural events taking place right under our noses.

Since there is only one reality and no one has ever shown it to be anything other than what we all experience it to be every day, which never shows those gods, angels or other supernatural events existing and occurring, are believers perceiving that as reality, are they just misunderstanding the terms reality and perception or are they merely wishing reality was the way they want it to be?


Reality - That which exists objectively and in fact.

Perception - to become aware of (something) through the senses, to recognize or observe.

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #31

Post by JP Cusick »

Zzyzx wrote: Overconfidence in one's 'truth detection ability' is unwise.

When that 'ability' is actually put to test by psychologists the track record is NOT good.
Three decades of scientific studies support the conclusion that people have a difficult time telling whether or not someone is lying. It has been found that people can tell the difference between truths and lies only 55 percent of the time—just a little better than making random guesses.
http://sciencenetlinks.com/student-teac ... ng-honest/
Highly trained and experienced police officers and Secret Service officers who deal with the subject daily or regularly can detect lies 70% of the time.

I knew personally a Canadian Mounty who taught new agents to detect deception. He said that very few people can actually become highly proficient.
Hopefully I am just confident without being overly confident.

Seeing the lack of confidence in so many other people drives me onward as I find that to be so irritating and frustrating.

And in my way - truth detection is not the same as detecting honesty or dishonesty because that is usually a waste of time - IMO.

Honesty or dishonesty is NOT what I mean by seeking the truth.

I do not care very much if a person is honest or not as that is their own problem.

My primary concern is just for myself to be honest and true and as accurate as possible.

My perception of reality is only based on myself so by being true to myself then that gives me the best perception of reality.

I really do not like judging any person for truth, as I look for truth in books and in concepts and principles and in doctrines.

This is why I liked this thread topic because the "perception of reality" and the "reality of perception" is a really big and interesting concept for me.

I would even suggest that the biggest reason for people denying God and ghosts is simply because they do not trust their own perception of reality, and that is because they are not honest to their self.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #32

Post by Zzyzx »

.
JP Cusick wrote: I would even suggest that the biggest reason for people denying God and ghosts is simply because they do not trust their own perception of reality, and that is because they are not honest to their self.
One who is not a worshiper of gods can say exactly the same about worshipers -- do not trust their own perception of reality, and that is because they are not honest to their self.

Whose 'reality' actually involves experience with gods and ghosts?

No gods or ghosts are required to function in the real world. 'Perceiving' such things has not been demonstrated to be anything more than imagination and/or psychological episode.

Do worshipers trust their own perception of reality or do they trust what they have been told (or read) about gods influencing human lives and supposed 'afterlives'?
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #33

Post by JP Cusick »

Rufus21 wrote: Okay, so you use your brain and do vague research. That still doesn't answer my question. Perhaps the fact that you still can't describe your judgement process is evidence that it isn't as real as you think. Maybe you believe that your opinions are verified when they really aren't.
I am open to being wrong, or that I make mistakes, and I do not claim any infallibility.

I really do see my own judgement to be far superior than any one else, but I still respect other people, and other people have some aspects superior to my own.

If you know some better process then do tell???
Rufus21 wrote: Like when my uncle invented a "verified" system for blackjack. After he won several times we asked him how it worked (the method). He mumbled some business about cards being clumped and how certain tables had a "bad flow". It didn't make any sense so we asked him how to tell if the cards were clumped and how he decided when to raise his bets (the criteria). He mumbled some nonsense about trends and averages. It still didn't make any sense, but he was absolutely convinced that it worked. In his mind his system had been proven. Three years later he has never dug his way out of the hole.
I can not be certain but from this info I do see an ulterior perspective of that reality:

What may have happened is that your uncle was jinxed when they started asking him to explain his system (his method) for winning the card game, and that jinx destroyed his system. They violated his system and thereby screwed the system and your poor uncle lost track of his perspective.

It matters what people do to each other.
Rufus21 wrote: Since you can't describe how you make these judgements, maybe you can give us an example. Can you share a time when you were able to verify a spirit or a time when you were able to disprove someone's claim of seeing one?
First is that I would NEVER (never) try to disprove some one's claim of seeing God or spirits or a vision. The very idea of doing that is outrageous to me.

Second - to verify a ghost to any other person is problematic because the spirit world is scary to people and it freaks them out, and it can really hurt a person who is not up for it.

Third - a person who already knows about God and ghost then there is nothing to show or to prove or to verify.

It is different with God and ghosts, because lots of people claim to talk to God, while very few will acknowledge the ghosts or spirits.

Since you do not accept my explanation of my judgement - then you are free to offer some suggestion based on your own method of judging.

I do not have an example of my own that I am willing to share.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

Rufus21
Scholar
Posts: 314
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:30 pm

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #34

Post by Rufus21 »

[Replying to post 33 by JP Cusick]

Okay, I'm officially calling this trolling. There's absolutely no way that a real person could possibly believe these things. This has got to be a joke. I'm not feeding this one anymore.

Zzyzx
Site Supporter
Posts: 25089
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Bible Belt USA
Has thanked: 40 times
Been thanked: 72 times

Post #35

Post by Zzyzx »

.
Rufus21 wrote: Okay, I'm officially calling this trolling. There's absolutely no way that a real person could possibly believe these things. This has got to be a joke. I'm not feeding this one anymore.
Moderator Comment

Kindly do NOT make personal remarks toward other members. If anyone violates Forum Rules and Guidelines (including 'trolling') the ONLY appropriate action is to report the infraction.


Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
.
Non-Theist

ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #36

Post by JP Cusick »

Rufus21 wrote: Okay, I'm officially calling this trolling. There's absolutely no way that a real person could possibly believe these things. This has got to be a joke. I'm not feeding this one anymore.
I realize that this is a tough topic for people and it can be overwhelming.

The quote above is an example of how belief is a powerful virtue and the failure to believe (disbelief) is a defect and a weakness.

I really am not trying to disrespect or insult the poster or any one else, and I only mean to explain the principle and give some advice if any one might take it.

There is a reason why this poster can not believe in ghosts because he can not believe in me who is right in front of him on the computer screen, and of course the claim is that I do not believe what I say (as a troll) as if that is some logical diversion of reality and it is not.

It is a matter of perspective - if one can not believe what is directly in front of them then they can not believe the reality in front of them either.

The topic title is this = "Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception" = yes to both.

A person needs to first believe in God before they can see the reality of God.

Disbelief or failure to believe is like a prison wall which shuts the belief out and locks the person inside.

It just feels brave and strong by refusing to talk about it or refusing to talk the the person, because you can not believe what is being told, and it feels like you are shutting them out - but it is the exact opposite.

It is self protection and being defensive and it builds a wall around your self which is why it feels strong when it is just trying to be safe and locking your self away.

See how I am not locked in any self made prison, because I can believe any one and any thing and so that gives me a great advantage.

Perception is not just reality, perception is personal power.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

User avatar
Tired of the Nonsense
Site Supporter
Posts: 5680
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
Location: USA

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #37

Post by Tired of the Nonsense »

[Replying to post 36 by JP Cusick]
JP Cusick wrote: A person needs to first believe in God before they can see the reality of God.

Disbelief or failure to believe is like a prison wall which shuts the belief out and locks the person inside.
The very same thing can be said about believing in Santa Claus. A person needs to first believe in Santa before they can see the reality of Santa. But what you are failing to understand is that you are dealing with many people who once believed in Santa, but then moved on. Because we have considered the the unrealistic elements of the story, the team of flying reindeer, the impossible task of visiting the home of every child in the world on a single night, and all the rest of it. And we have concluded that the story is far too silly to be true. So many of the elements of the story contained in the Bible are unrealistic, The Day The Earth Stood Still (Joshua 10:12-13), the Pinocchio-esque story of Jonah, The Night of the Living Dead (Matthew 27:52-53). And of course the claim that a corpse came back to life and flew away which is the foundation for the entire religion of Christianity. Claims which are simply far to silly to realistically be true.

According to you, one must first believe these things are plausible before they become believable. But you see, not everyone is capable of maintaining that level of gullibility and naivete into adulthood. Many of us here believed in things as children which we have simply left behind as adults. Because as we grew to adulthood were could see that make believe is an illusion, and the illusion faded away. The story of Santa for example is a perfectly sweet story. But few of us would care to retain the childish sort of mind as adults that it took to believe in Santa as children. Once one understands how silly continuing to believe in make believe as adults is, there is no going back. No one really wants to go back.
JP Cusick wrote: It just feels brave and strong by refusing to talk about it or refusing to talk the the person, because you can not believe what is being told, and it feels like you are shutting them out - but it is the exact opposite.
Does it really seem to you that the people who do not believe as you do are afraid to talk about it?
JP Cusick wrote: It is self protection and being defensive and it builds a wall around your self which is why it feels strong when it is just trying to be safe and locking your self away.
From our point of view it is the believers who have cocooned themselves in unrealistic ancient myths and make believe. Believers dwell in a world which is divorced from the reality of the actual physical world. The world of the believer is dominated by invisible beings, invisible realms, and maintaining claims which have an ongoing record of futility that is thousands of years old.
JP Cusick wrote: See how I am not locked in any self made prison, because I can believe any one and any thing and so that gives me a great advantage.
Your level of gullibility based on blind faith is simply not appealing to many of us, I am afraid.
JP Cusick wrote: Perception is not just reality, perception is personal power.
Wikipedia
Psychosis
Psychosis is an abnormal condition of the mind that involves a "loss of contact with reality". People experiencing psychosis may exhibit personality changes and thought disorder. Depending on its severity, this may be accompanied by unusual or bizarre behavior, as well as difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out daily life activities.

Delusions
Psychosis may involve delusional beliefs, some of which are paranoid in nature. Put simply, delusions are false beliefs that a person holds on to, without adequate evidence. It can be difficult to change the belief, even with evidence to the contrary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosis


Do you have conversations with invisible beings? Do you believe that you hear voices in your head?


Raw Story
A new study published in the journal Neuropsychologia has shown that religious fundamentalism is, in part, the result of a functional impairment in a brain region known as the prefrontal cortex. The findings suggest that damage to particular areas of the prefrontal cortex indirectly promotes religious fundamentalism by diminishing cognitive flexibility and openness—a psychology term that describes a personality trait which involves dimensions like curiosity, creativity, and open-mindedness.

Religious beliefs can be thought of as socially transmitted mental representations that consist of supernatural events and entities assumed to be real. Religious beliefs differ from empirical beliefs, which are based on how the world appears to be and are updated as new evidence accumulates or when new theories with better predictive power emerge. On the other hand, religious beliefs are not usually updated in response to new evidence or scientific explanations, and are therefore strongly associated with conservatism. They are fixed and rigid, which helps promote predictability and coherence to the rules of society among individuals within the group.
http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/study-f ... mentalism/
Image "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #38

Post by JP Cusick »

Tired of the Nonsense wrote: The very same thing can be said about believing in Santa Claus. A person needs to first believe in Santa before they can see the reality of Santa. ... And of course the claim that a corpse came back to life and flew away which is the foundation for the entire religion of Christianity. Claims which are simply far to silly to realistically be true.

Many of us here believed in things as children which we have simply left behind as adults. Because as we grew to adulthood were could see that make believe is an illusion, and the illusion faded away.
I agree with rejecting the childish stories.

And so does the Apostle Paul = 1 Corinthians 13:11

We can not see "black holes" but we still believe in them, and we can not see the edge of the universe and yet we still believe in it, and Columbus could not see the earth as round but he still believed it first, and yes of course we have to separate the childish nonsense from the real beliefs.

You seem to be stuck on Christianity - in that seeing Christianity as wrong (and it is wrong) then you see all religion as wrong - and that is your own mistake.

Christianity is wrong - yes - but the reality of God is a far bigger truth than the human beliefs.
Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Does it really seem to you that the people who do not believe as you do are afraid to talk about it?
Some people are afraid to talk about such things, but that does not apply to every person, and I see it as more complex for you than it is for some others.

Reality is a matter of perspective.

I see Atheism and science as our State sponsored religion, as the US government and other Western gov's are teaching and endorsing science and Atheism as the new State religion, and so the people are just believing as they are brainwashed to believe.

So when we ask people about God then they have almost never read (past tense) the Bible or any scriptures, and they did no kind of legitimate research, and the people just believe (believe) what they are taught in school and on TV which mostly teaches secular science and Atheism.

As such you and so many other people are just believing as you all were told.

So yes many people are afraid to talk about God or the Bible, but I find it far more prevalent is that most people are unwilling (for whatever reason) to do their own research and then come to their own decisions - in my view that is the bigger sickness no matter what the reason.
Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Your level of gullibility based on blind faith is simply not appealing to many of us, I am afraid.
Some people do accept blind faith - but I do not.

You keep mixing me up with conservative Christianity when I am not.

You and I can not have a discussion here because you can not disconnect your self from the mainstream Christianity which I am not attached to.
It is an ugly truth that the mental illness industry is a big part of the State sponsored religion of the USA, in that any person who does not adhere to the science and the Atheism are then mistreated and even punished as mental deviant.

That is another reason why people fear the truth because the government religion uses physical force against its opposition.
Tired of the Nonsense wrote: Do you have conversations with invisible beings? Do you believe that you hear voices in your head?
If one does a little study of psychology then the human brain constantly has silent conversations in our head and the voices we hear is just our own brain functioning.

If any person says that they do not hear any voices or do not have any conversations in their own brain then they are not being true.

It is another old sickness to make people deny and to feel ashamed of their own human body function of self talk.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

User avatar
Tired of the Nonsense
Site Supporter
Posts: 5680
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
Location: USA

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #39

Post by Tired of the Nonsense »

[Replying to JP Cusick]
JP Cusick wrote: I agree with rejecting the childish stories.

And so does the Apostle Paul = 1 Corinthians 13:11
The nature of what is considered childish can change as knowledge changes. The story of Santa and the flying reindeer purposely were created for childish minds. To switch away from criticism of Christianity just for a moment, the story of Muhammad's night journey, whereby Muhammad rode a flying steed up to heaven to visit God, might seem a very childish story to anyone who is not a committed Muslim. And yet Christians accept the story of the corpse of Jesus returning to life and then flying away without a second thought. The story of Muhammad tearing the moon into two halves and the putting it back together again compares somewhat directly to the story in Joshua of stopping and restarting the rotation of the Earth for 24 hours to allow his men to continue to slaughter the entire nation of the Amorites, right down to the smallest child, in terms of the childish and unsophisticated nature of the claims. Many Hindu tales seem preposterously childish and unsophisticated in their nature by modern standards. The obvious conclusion is that ancient people who did not possess the knowledge that we, today, have laboriously worked to establish, were childish and unsophisticated. These were the people who wrote the Bible, and the Qur'an, and the Vedas of Hinduism. Which is not to say there is not wisdom in these books. These people were very bit as intelligent as we are. Just woefully lacking in knowledge as compared to us in modern times. As woefully lacking in knowledge as we will seem to people a few thousands years from now.

The bottom line is that Paul maintained beliefs that were childish when compared with what we know to be true today. If Paul were alive today he would be considered mentally unstable. Because you see, the deeper one subscribes to irrational superstition, the more mentally imbalanced, the more separated from reality, they become.
JP Cusick wrote: We can not see "black holes" but we still believe in them, and we can not see the edge of the universe and yet we still believe in it, and Columbus could not see the earth as round but he still believed it first, and yes of course we have to separate the childish nonsense from the real beliefs.
Actually black holes can be "seen," indirectly. When a black hole accretes material from from neighboring stars, the material heats up as it falls into the black hole and glows in x-rays. Most galaxies glow brightly in x-rays at their center, an indication of the presence of a supermassive black hole. And the mass of the black hole can be calculated by the speed at which each galaxy is rotating. Black holes are not simply a mind game that physicists play.
JP Cusick wrote: You seem to be stuck on Christianity - in that seeing Christianity as wrong (and it is wrong) then you see all religion as wrong - and that is your own mistake.
All ancient religions are based on ignorance and unsophisticated ancient superstitious assumptions. Not just Christianity. But this forum is dedicated to debating Christianity.
JP Cusick wrote: Christianity is wrong - yes - but the reality of God is a far bigger truth than the human beliefs.
The "reality" of God is based on the human assumptions of the condition and existence of the universe that modern observation indicates simply are not valid. Believers declare that the universe could not possible simply "just exist," and have declared that the universe must therefore have been created by a creator Being who simply "just exists." This self contradictory bit of convolution has no connection to logic at all. And it is certainly not observably true. Religious beliefs are all about the sort of childlike faith that modern empirical science has largely simply rendered obsolete.

The recognition that Christianity is wrong, at least to some degree, is a good first step in the process of trying to determine just what the truth actually may be. If Christianity is wrong, then the Bible is in error. If the Bible is in error, then it is necessary to reconsider the things that the Bible declares to be true. Did God really create heaven and earth as indicated in Genesis? This is the explanation that our ancient, ignorant not stupid, ancestors developed because they had no other explanation for existence. If the Bible is not accurate, then why believe it simply on faith? What does actual scientific observation indicate is true concerning the nature of the existence of the universe? I can give you a general nutshell explanation of the scientific view of how the universe came to be. But obviously such an explanation cannot be accomplished in a few sentences. Just ask, and I will provide it for you if you are interested.
JP Cusick wrote: Some people are afraid to talk about such things, but that does not apply to every person, and I see it as more complex for you than it is for some others.
The universe is incredibly complex. I am actually anxious to talk about it. But I do prefer to learn about the universe by studying the best current observations. As opposed to making stuff up. My view of the universe is full of mysteries. But your view of the universe is full of devils and demons and the sort of focused evils that do not exist in my view of the universe.
JP Cusick wrote: Reality is a matter of perspective.
Reality is whatever it is. It is up to each individual to attempt to discern the true nature of reality. The view of reality as established by modern empirical science has all of modern working technology to present as evidence for the accuracy of its position concerning the true nature of reality. Religion has the ancient superstitious beliefs of our ancient superstitious ancestors. Christianity specifically is predicated on the claim that a man who lived and died 2,000 years ago is about to return at any moment to bring on the end of the world. This ancient death wish represents a claim which has an ongoing record of accuracy that currently stands at zero for two thousand years. Actually it's zero for thirty five hundred years, when you consider that the Zoroastrians were predicting the end of the world as far back as the second millennium BC. So which point of view seems the more well founded? It's your choice to cling to your ancient superstitious view of reality if it pleases you to do so. But every time you fire up your computer, or use your smartphone, you verify the reality established by modern empirical science. And of course it also verifies the fact that the world is still quite resolutely here.
JP Cusick wrote: I see Atheism and science as our State sponsored religion, as the US government and other Western gov's are teaching and endorsing science and Atheism as the new State religion, and so the people are just believing as they are brainwashed to believe.
This is a common misconception of the religious, who suppose that anything which does not serve to sustain their beliefs is de facto antagonistic to their beliefs.

But first of all... atheism is NOT a religion. A-theos means to be without theos; literally it means to be without religion. All true religions contain some element of an appeal to the existence of the supernatural. As an atheist I have NO supernatural beliefs. I did not join the religion of atheism. When I stopped believing in religion I became an atheist by default.

The state is prohibited from taking a position on religion one way or the other. Some atheists have simply taken on the responsibility of reminding the state that it must not make laws which sustain any particular religion or religious point of view. The US is a country of majority rule however, and the majority in this country are Christians. Keeping religious beliefs out of secular life is an ongoing process.

Science and atheism are not the same thing. Science is neither religious or atheistic by its very nature. Science is simply the tool being used to figure out how things work. It is true however that many and probably most working scientists are atheists, or at least agnostic in nature. This is not the the design or intent of science. This has proven to be the result of scientific investigation, however. The more deeply one understands the true workings of the universe, the more obviously silly the ancient superstitious explanations become.

And all religions brainwash their young. The very bottom most line for why people believe as they do, is because their mommies and daddies told them what to believe when they were very young. It is the reason certain areas of the world are predominantly Christian, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Buddhist. The mommies and daddies underwent the same brainwashing process when they were young, of course. Every group believes that it is their duty as conscientious parents to cause their children to grow up to be "good" people by indoctrinating their own offspring with exactly the same nonsense they were indoctrinated with.
JP Cusick wrote: So when we ask people about God then they have almost never read (past tense) the Bible or any scriptures, and they did no kind of legitimate research, and the people just believe (believe) what they are taught in school and on TV which mostly teaches secular science and Atheism.
Most people simply believe what their mommies and daddies, or their preachers and pastors, have brainwashed them to believe. Science was not created to be "secular." Science is simply what the observable facts indicate is true. That the observable facts do not line up with what religion indicates is true is actually the best indication that religions have largely gotten things wrong. Because religion is a process of make it up and declare it to be true, while science is a process of observing what is true. Science is about ongoing observation and exploration. Religion is about the dogmatic acceptance of things which have been declared to be true. Largely by our ancient ancestors who had no real clue about what was actually occurring or why.

I am 68. I was raised to be a Christian, but stopped believing when I was 13 because it became apparent to me that Christian claims are far too silly to have any actual relationship to anything valid or true. The same is true for all the other religions as well. They are far too silly to have any possible relationship to anything valid and true. I was a little ahead of the curve on that in 1961, but the rest of society is rapidly catching up to now, with what I concluded back then. In 1961 I had never even met another atheist, and would not meet another openly avowed atheist for several years yet. Now, 55 years later, most of the people I know are not religious. Most are not as willing or as capable as I am in spelling out exactly why religion is nonsense. But I reached my conclusions earlier than most, and as a result I have been forced over the course of the last 55 years to defend my conclusions to others. So I have become pretty good at it.
JP Cusick wrote: As such you and so many other people are just believing as you all were told.
Nope! Reached these conclusions all on my own. You and other believers are just believing what YOU were told! By your mommies and daddies and priests and pastors.
JP Cusick wrote: Some people do accept blind faith - but I do not.

So yes many people are afraid to talk about God or the Bible, but I find it far more prevalent is that most people are unwilling (for whatever reason) to do their own research and then come to their own decisions - in my view that is the bigger sickness no matter what the reason.
If you really believe that people are afraid to talk about God or the Bible, then you have definitely come to the right place.
JP Cusick wrote: Some people do accept blind faith - but I do not.
Any blanket belief based on unsupportable claims, especially when those claims contradict all common experience, is simple abject gullibility. Gullibility is NOT a virtue. At some point your beliefs are based on assumptions of truths which cannot be reconciled with that which can be physically affirmed to be true. The only way you can believe any of it is to have faith that the basic assumptions are true.
JP Cusick wrote: You keep mixing me up with conservative Christianity when I am not.
Conservative Christians swallow all of it entirely on faith. You may have questioned and reached the conclusion that some of the claims are not reasonable. Which is a good start. But the only real way to get to the truth is to throw the entire claim out, and then objectively work to see which parts are sustainable by physical observable fact. And what you will discover, is pretty much NONE of it is sustainable by physical observable fact. Which is why believers are forced to promote faith as a virtue.
JP Cusick wrote: It is an ugly truth that the mental illness industry is a big part of the State sponsored religion of the USA, in that any person who does not adhere to the science and the Atheism are then mistreated and even punished as mental deviant.
Mental illness is being separated from actual physical reality. There are thousands of religious beliefs. Those who subscribe to false beliefs are separated from actual physical reality, and are mentally ill, to greater or lesser extent, by definition. The question becomes, in a world where the majority of individuals are separated from physical reality, who exactly is NOT mentally ill by definition? And this breaks down into two basic groups. Those who rely on direct observation and experimentation to discern how physical reality operates. and those who make it up and declare it to be true.
JP Cusick wrote: That is another reason why people fear the truth because the government religion uses physical force against its opposition.
There have been oppressive regimes in that past that have attempted to force people to believe a certain way. Certainly Christianity did this for many centuries. More recently communist regimes have attempted to impose non belief on its citizens. But belief cannot be imposed by force. Belief should be a product of the most convincing argument. But it is hard to overstress the importance of centuries of indoctrination. And naturally believers of every religion suppose that their beliefs are the obvious truth. But most believers have never really been exposed to contradictions to their beliefs. Most believers in fact adhere to whatever belief their mommies and daddies adhered to. And then when their beliefs are actually compared, in a head to head contest, with the conclusions of others, many believers often discover that their beliefs do not hold up well at all. Which leaves them confused and angry. It almost never causes them to reach the conclusion that perhaps the reason their beliefs did not hold up as hey always supposed they would, is because it is THEIR beliefs that are actually unfounded. Ultimately religious convictions are founded on indoctrination, personal emotional commitment, and faith. Actual facts and appeals to logic are very much secondary.
JP Cusick wrote: If one does a little study of psychology then the human brain constantly has silent conversations in our head and the voices we hear is just our own brain functioning.
Most people reason in their minds in the language of their upbringing. But many of the things we do from moment to moment are the result of external stimulus. We do this on a more or less constant basis and don't really put those reactions into words. We make instant decisions, usually based on past experience, and react. Which is why babies and young children have to be kept an eye on. They don't have the past experience necessary to make the best decision.
JP Cusick wrote: It is another old sickness to make people deny and to feel ashamed of their own human body function of self talk.
Body functions are natural processes. No one should be shamed because of things which are natural. When the subject comes up no one should feel ashamed to talk about them because such talk might be considered "indelicate." People need to be open with their questions, and more importantly, their problems. There are times when the whole subject of natural bodily functions may not be appropriate, however. Religion has proven itself to be destructively intolerant and repressive of things which are actually perfectly normal. Sexual practices, mainly. I for one have never been in favor of being saddled with the repressions and obsessive hang-ups of others. Many of these hang-ups relate back to the belief that there is a Being who is constantly watching and judging us. Not coincidentally, many extremely religious people are constipated, in a whole variety of different ways.
Image "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.

User avatar
JP Cusick
Guru
Posts: 1556
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:25 pm
Location: 20636 USA
Contact:

Re: Perception of Reality or Reality of Perception

Post #40

Post by JP Cusick »

Tired of the Nonsense wrote: The story of Santa and the flying reindeer purposely were created for childish minds.

I am 68. I was raised to be a Christian, but stopped believing when I was 13 because it became apparent to me that Christian claims are far too silly to have any actual relationship to anything valid or true.
I remember when I was very young (I am 61 now) and I remember well when I found out that Santa was a lie, and it hit me then that every person that I trusted had participated in the Santa lies, and then after they see that I knew of their lies then they changed the story over to some miracle baby born in a manger, and they expected me to accept this new set of lies as if the Santa lie did not matter, and I was not going to be fooled again a second time.

What happened is that I understood that Christmas was a fun time with pretty music and we get presents and loved the decorated tree and lights on the houses, so then I learned that I was to just play along with this new lie of Jesus and just keep the lies as our secret.

This was horrible brainwashing for a young child, and so we are taught and trained in the art of lies.

For myself I did not start to connect with God and the truth until I was 25 years old based on a horrific tragedy, and then the old brainwashing fell apart and I had a massive turnaround (repentance) which changed my life ever after.

So yes the Santa lies and the Christmas lies are extremely hurtful to the human mentality especially for the very young, and so that is real baggage that people need to over come.

People lie about God yes, but the truth about God goes onward.
SIGNATURE:

An unorthodox Theist & a heretic Christian:

Post Reply