Are People who Don't Believe in God psychopaths?

[rikuoamero]

Very recently, a Christian theist opined

I would. Honestly...if God didn't exist, I would become what you would call a psychopath. Why? Well, why not?

To that theist (and others of a like mind) I ask - Is that what you think of the non-God believers on this forum? In real life? Is this honestly, truly, what you think happens to people, and what will happen to you, once they (and you) don't believe a God exists?

[bluethread]

The person you are quoting no doubt knows his mental state better than I do. However, for me, it would be disconcerting, but even if Adonai did not exist it would not change how I live much, since believe the philosophy associated with Adonai is the best fit for my life. I would just be a mystic atheist.

[Divine Insight]

Very recently, a Christian theist opined

I would. Honestly...if God didn't exist, I would become what you would call a psychopath. Why? Well, why not?

To that theist (and others of a like mind) I ask - Is that what you think of the non-God believers on this forum? In real life? Is this honestly, truly, what you think happens to people, and what will happen to you, once they (and you) don't believe a God exists?

I wouldn't even remotely care what the person you quoted might think of me.

All that this person has done is openly confess that they have no sense of decency of their own. If there is no God they would be a psychopath?

I would hate to be the one to break the news to them but if that's their mentality then all they could possibly be is a psychopath who believes in God and chooses not to behave according to who they REALLY are.

Truly. What else could it mean?

[ttruscott]

The doctrine of sinful psychopathy stems from the commandment of the Exodus 12: For seven days no yeast is to be found in your houses. And anyone, whether foreigner or native-born, who eats anything with yeast in it must be cut off from the community of Israel. 20 Eat nothing made with yeast. Wherever you live, you must eat unleavened bread.�

This is because leave is a symbol for sinful evil which culminates in the verse: Galatians 5:9 A little leaven leavens the whole lump. Which means that a little sin will corrupts the whole person, community and finally, all of reality if not ended.

In human society this works out as a slow but steady and insidiously unstoppable growth of a person's addiction to the enslaving power of evil to become stronger and stronger.

Any sinful elect, before redemption, is just as legally evil as any demon, a person who has committed to rejecting YHWH as their GOD. But not everyone is matured in evil, totally engrossed in their own selfish personal perversions no matter where they are or who they are with. Most people are sometimes selfish and criminal and sometimes loving and gentle but the person mature in evil who is well leavened we call a psychopath because they are now so totally addicted to their selfish sin they cannot relate to the emotional needs of others anymore. That some people are reportedly born at this state of evil is proof to me that they chose sin long before their conception and are well given over to their addiction.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 4 by ttruscott]

What you say cannot be true. The reason this is so is because your dogma comes from Christianity, yet cultures that are not Christian cultures do not exhibit any higher level of evil behavior than Christian cultures.

Therefore there cannot be a shred of truth in the dogma in which you have embraced.

It's a dogma that proves itself to be false. Unless you also hold that religious beliefs are totally irrelevant, including the belief that Jesus is somehow special or that it's important that anyone believe in Jesus or Yahweh or the book you just quoted from.

[bjs]

I don’t know the larger context of this quote. However, the poster appears to be saying that he personally would be a psychopath, not that he believes all atheists are psychopaths.

I will also note that “psychopath� is a mostly meaningless term. It is not a medical diagnosis. It is a pop culture term to describe “people whose brains don’t work right.� It does not have a specific application or set of symptoms.

[rikuoamero]

I don’t know the larger context of this quote. However, the poster appears to be saying that he personally would be a psychopath, not that he believes all atheists are psychopaths.

I will also note that “psychopath� is a mostly meaningless term. It is not a medical diagnosis. It is a pop culture term to describe “people whose brains don’t work right.� It does not have a specific application or set of symptoms.

The context is obvious. It was a discussion of morals, among which, the same theist I quoted gave as an example that of raping children, asking whether that would be moral or immoral in a world without a god.
So take that as you will. I for one take it as not a good sign someone saying that in a world without a god raping children would not be immoral, and then saying that in a world without a god he would be a psychopath.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 1 by rikuoamero]

The mystery theist is obviously held in check from doing serious harm to others by the fear of the god he believes in.

His faith is based on fear, not love.

He has no sense of right and wrong apart from what the sky god tells him.

This has to be a miserable existence and one that is precariously close to plunging into the abyss of madness.

[KingandPriest]

Very recently, a Christian theist opined

I would. Honestly...if God didn't exist, I would become what you would call a psychopath. Why? Well, why not?

To that theist (and others of a like mind) I ask - Is that what you think of the non-God believers on this forum? In real life? Is this honestly, truly, what you think happens to people, and what will happen to you, once they (and you) don't believe a God exists?

Since you ask a question about what I and other think about non-God believers, I will say that I believe that non-theists are either deceiving themselves into a "lack of belief" for personal preference. It is this self-deceit I think that poster was referring to with the psychopath comment.

If one is able to convince themselves that they don't have to believe in God, then they are free to do what ever they think is best. It sounds good and may even feel good, but every time this train of thought is carried to its conclusion, the end is always destruction. Most non-theist try to avoid this eventually and ignore it as only a "possibility". This intentional illusion is what some would call a lack of sanity.

In another thread, we were discussing whether a person is born with a sense of an existence of a higher power (God) due to evolution/natural selection. We began to discuss whether it was smart or not to reject this innate or designed inclination towards belief in God. Most non-theist will affirm that their lack of belief came as a conclusion, meaning they did not start off this way. This conclusion is typically based on inconsistencies in rational or a jump to conclusion based on a negative personal experience. Either way, there is often a claim to only look at what is real, or reality, but this reality is highly selective.

If one claims to live in the real world, but that real world is one of their own making, then they have deceived themselves.

[amortalman]

Very recently, a Christian theist opined

I would. Honestly...if God didn't exist, I would become what you would call a psychopath. Why? Well, why not?

To that theist (and others of a like mind) I ask - Is that what you think of the non-God believers on this forum? In real life? Is this honestly, truly, what you think happens to people, and what will happen to you, once they (and you) don't believe a God exists?

Since you ask a question about what I and other think about non-God believers, I will say that I believe that non-theists are either deceiving themselves into a "lack of belief" for personal preference.

It is this self-deceit I think that poster was referring to with the psychopath comment.

Since you believe that deceit is a real human condition, then don't you think it's entirely possible that God-believers are the ones being deceived, and yes, it could very well be for their own personal preference.

If one is able to convince themselves that they don't have to believe in God, then they are free to do what ever they think is best.

Yes, and most non-theists think that what is best is to respect our fellow human beings and all life, for that matter, and to live peacefully, be generous and kind, do not steal or lie...basically all the virtues that Christians say are taught by their God.

It sounds good and may even feel good, but every time this train of thought is carried to its conclusion, the end is always destruction.

When terms like "every time" and "always" are used in a debate forum documentations are in order. Can you provide that, please?

Most non-theist try to avoid this eventually and ignore it as only a "possibility". This intentional illusion is what some would call a lack of sanity.

The real illusion exists in the god-believers who think all non-god-believers' lives will end in destruction from doing "whatever they think is best."

In another thread, we were discussing whether a person is born with a sense of an existence of a higher power (God) due to evolution/natural selection. We began to discuss whether it was smart or not to reject this innate or designed inclination towards belief in God.

You can't make conclusions from discussions unless there is also sufficient evidence to support it.

Most non-theist will affirm that their lack of belief came as a conclusion, meaning they did not start off this way.

Start off from where? Birth? I was a believer for fifteen years and from all the testimonies I heard not a single one claimed to have believed in God before someone told him or her about God. From there they made a choice to believe.

My conclusion to longer believe came when I stopped listening to the preacher long enough to read what the Bible actually says instead of what someone says it says.

This conclusion is typically based on inconsistencies in rational or a jump to conclusion based on a negative personal experience. Either way, there is often a claim to only look at what is real, or reality, but this reality is highly selective.

The selective reality you speak of is one that we perceive with our five senses. If there is another, please produce the evidence.

If one claims to live in the real world, but that real world is one of their own making, then they have deceived themselves.

Deception is not a respecter of persons. Again, who is being deceived?