Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?

[Diogenes]

In clinical practice, no clear guidelines exist to distinguish between "normal" religious beliefs and "pathological" religious delusions. Historically, psychiatrists such as Freud have suggested that all religious beliefs are delusional, while the current DSM-IV definition of delusion exempts religious doctrine from pathology altogether. ....
Religious beliefs and delusions alike can arise from neurologic lesions and anomalous experiences, suggesting that at least some religious beliefs can be pathological. Religious beliefs exist outside of the scientific domain; therefore they can be easily labeled delusional from a rational perspective.....

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15990520/
The question for debate is stated in the title, Are Religious Beliefs Delusional?
A subordinate question: Should we distinguish between a learned belief in supernatural phenomena and those who believe and attribute their beliefs to personal experience... and how could we tell?

[Inquirer]

Jose: Show me evidence that something extraordinary happened in the past.

Me: Sure, look at this written record, its even corroborated by versions found by the Dead Sea.

Jose: But these claims are extraordinary, I can't believe that, show me evidence that something extraordinary happened in the past.

Me: Sure, look at this written record, its even corroborated by versions found by the Dead Sea.

Jose: But these claims are extraordinary, I can't believe that, show me evidence that something extraordinary happened in the past.

Me: Sure, look at this written record, its even corroborated by versions found by the Dead Sea.

...

[Jose Fly]

I guess we have to do this again (fourth time now)....

This is your original claim I replied to: Post #103

Clownboat: "It is delusional to believe that humans can live to the age of over 900. Surely you agree!"

Inquirer: "No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself."

So the topic of debate is whether humans living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry, thus my first response "Walk us through the evidence for humans living over 900 years."

You replied by citing "documentary evidence" (presumably the Bible), thus my next response "Are you saying that "it was written in a book" is evidence something occurred, on equal footing with the evidence for common ancestry?"

Now that you're up to speed, address the question or concede the point.

[Inquirer]

I guess we have to do this again (fourth time now)....

This is your original claim I replied to: Post #103

Clownboat: "It is delusional to believe that humans can live to the age of over 900. Surely you agree!"

Inquirer: "No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself."

So the topic of debate is whether humans living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry, thus my first response "Walk us through the evidence for humans living over 900 years."

You replied by citing "documentary evidence" (presumably the Bible), thus my next response "Are you saying that "it was written in a book" is evidence something occurred, on equal footing with the evidence for common ancestry?"

Now that you're up to speed, address the question or concede the point.

There are rational evidence based arguments for each claim Jose. Just because one seems extraordinary to Clownboat does not justify the conclusion that it is therefore delusional.

Please also kindly note that I've never once described belief in evolution as delusional, despite my reservations about some of the claims.

[Jose Fly]

There are rational evidence based arguments for each claim Jose.

Empty assertion.

Just because one seems extraordinary to Clownboat does not justify the conclusion that it is therefore delusional.

That's not what I'm debating.

Please also kindly note that I've never once described belief in evolution as delusional despite my reservations about some of the claims.

Again, the point of debate is your claim that people living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry. Do you have evidence for 900 year old people beyond what you've already posted?

[Inquirer]

There are rational evidence based arguments for each claim Jose.

Empty assertion.

Just because one seems extraordinary to Clownboat does not justify the conclusion that it is therefore delusional.

That's not what I'm debating.

Please also kindly note that I've never once described belief in evolution as delusional despite my reservations about some of the claims.

Again, the point of debate is your claim that people living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry. Do you have evidence for 900 year old people beyond what you've already posted?

Where did I claim "people living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry"? I did not say that, once again Jose your habit of paraphrasing lets you down.

I think you'd be better off asking Clownboat if he has any evidence that the claims for longevity found in the Bible are all untrue and the product of a deluded mind because if there is no such evidence then I am quite justified in saying what I said. In neither case can we evidentially attribute the claim to delusion.

[Jose Fly]

Where did I claim "people living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry"? I did not say that, once again Jose your habit of paraphrasing lets you down.

Fifth time now....

Your post #103 (regarding humans living 900 years): "No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself."

I think you'd be better of asking Clownboat if he has any evidence that the claims for longevity found in the Bible are all untrue and the product of a deluded mind because if there is no such evidence then I am quite justified in saying what I said.

Fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. You claimed that 900 year old people is on par with common ancestry, thus it falls on you to support that claim.

[Inquirer]

Where did I claim "people living 900 years is on equal footing with common ancestry"? I did not say that, once again Jose your habit of paraphrasing lets you down.

Fifth time now....

Your post #103 (regarding humans living 900 years): "No more delusional than believing mud can eventually give rise to flowers, birds and people all by itself."

I think you'd be better of asking Clownboat if he has any evidence that the claims for longevity found in the Bible are all untrue and the product of a deluded mind because if there is no such evidence then I am quite justified in saying what I said.

Fallacy of shifting the burden of proof. You claimed that 900 year old people is on par with common ancestry, thus it falls on you to support that claim.

You just can't stop it can you? Where did I write "900 year old people is on par with common ancestry"? I effectively said there is an equal degree of delusion in each belief.

Once again you are blatantly incorrect. In neither case can we evidentially attribute the claim to delusion be it about longevity or evolution.

let me simplify this for you: "Belief in X is no more delusional than belief in Y" - that is there is zero delusion in each belief if you believe evolution is not a delusion.

[Jose Fly]

You just can't stop it can you? Where did I write "900 year old people is on par with common ancestry"? I said there is an equal degree of delusion in each belief.

You said 900 year old people is "no more delusional than" common ancestry. Do you stand by that or not?

In neither case can we evidentially attribute the claim to delusion be it about longevity or evolution.

Empty assertion and thus my question....what is your evidence for 900 year old people?

[Inquirer]

You just can't stop it can you? Where did I write "900 year old people is on par with common ancestry"? I said there is an equal degree of delusion in each belief.

You said 900 year old people is "no more delusional than" common ancestry. Do you stand by that or not?

Yes, there is no evidence of delusion in each case, I stand by that.

In neither case can we evidentially attribute the claim to delusion be it about longevity or evolution.

Empty assertion and thus my question....what is your evidence for 900 year old people?

There is historic evidence, I already told you. Perhaps Clownboat can present evidence that the Biblical claims of longevity are the result of a delusion, he did - after all's said and done - make just that claim.

[Jose Fly]

there is no evidence of delusion in each case

What delusions are in 900 year old people? What delusions are in common ancestry?

There is historic evidence

Are all written stories automatically true?

I already told you. Perhaps Clownboat can present evidence that the Biblical claims of longevity are the result of a delusion, he did - after all's said and done - make just that claim.

Again, fallacy of shifting the burden of proof.