Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply puritysourcelabs US-PHARMACIES
UGL OZ Raptor Labs UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAKUS-PHARMACIESRaptor Labs

Religious Fundamentalism as Mental Illness

She's not classifying Religious Fundamentalism as a mental illness, is saying that it could be treated as a mental illness. It's not the same.

Anyway I think she's not right -she's a Neuroscientist and I'm not, though, so just my opinion- a mental illness is usually not consciousness controlled meaning the subject acts without consciouness control -which is NOT the same that not knowing what she/ he is doing, they know what they're doing but they CAN'T rationalize it nad/or control it-. A different think is if you are conscientiously convinced about what you're doing -even if the rest think that's wrong-.

If we followed the idea Taylor says a soldier who gives his/her life for the country or kill for the country could be considered as a Patriot Fundamentalist for those who think that a country doesn't deserve the life of a citizen. And you may think in much more examples.

There's such a big list of nazis and comunist who were BRILLIANT and killed milions of people. Did they have a mental disorder? No, in fact some of them had a super-high IQ, they were convinced that what they were doing was the right thing to do.

The good and bad is only a culture view of the moral, called moral relativism. Is one of the big fields in philosophy. The discussion started in Greece 2,400 years ago and we continue discussing it.

Definition of Mental Disorder,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.
 
ismaele00 said:
She's not classifying Religious Fundamentalism as a mental illness, is saying that it could be treated as a mental illness. It's not the same.

Anyway I think she's not right -she's a Neuroscientist and I'm not, though, so just my opinion- a mental illness is usually not consciousness controlled meaning the subject acts without consciouness control -which is NOT the same that not knowing what she/ he is doing, they know what they're doing but they CAN'T rationalize it nad/or control it-. A different think is if you are conscientiously convinced about what you're doing -even if the rest think that's wrong-.

If we followed the idea Taylor says a soldier who gives his/her life for the country or kill for the country could be considered as a Patriot Fundamentalist for those who think that a country doesn't deserve the life of a citizen. And you may think in much more examples.

There's such a big list of nazis and comunist who were BRILLIANT and killed milions of people. Did they have a mental disorder? No, in fact some of them had a super-high IQ, they were convinced that what they were doing was the right thing to do.

The good and bad is only a culture view of the moral, called moral relativism. Is one of the big fields in philosophy. The discussion started in Greece 2,400 years ago and we continue discussing it.

Definition of Mental Disorder,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.
Click to expand...

So being convinced that you are right in your mind means you don't have a mental illness? I don't think that's how it works but even if you're right, she is suggesting that certain beliefs/actions should stop being seen as a choice of their own free will, and instead seen as out of their control and treating it as a mental disturbance, which would make it a mental disturbance but she is choosing her words carefully, that's all.

In response to a question about the future of neuroscience, Taylor said that "One of the surprises may be to see people with certain beliefs as people who can be treated," The Times of London notes.

“Someone who has for example become radicalized to a cult ideology -- we might stop seeing that as a personal choice that they have chosen as a result of pure free will and may start treating it as some kind of mental disturbance," Taylor said. “In many ways it could be a very positive thing because there are no doubt beliefs in our society that do a heck of a lot of damage."

The author went on to say she wasn't just referring to the "obvious candidates like radical Islam," but also meant such beliefs as the idea that beating children is acceptable.
 
my unintelligent answer is ...its already called being delusional with a touch of ocd....it needs a new classification?
 
ismaele00 said:
Definition of Mental Disorder,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.
Click to expand...

I agree that this woman seems to be saying religious fundamentalism can be treated like a mental disorder as opposed to saying it always is one, but I fail to see which part of that definition discounts certain religious extremists or fundamentalists as having mental disorders.

The religion is the cultural norm, the fundamentalism, often extremism, is not - so it's still outside the typical cultural context even if its rooted in normalcy.
 
AFeedz said:
I agree that this woman seems to be saying religious extremism can be treated like a mental disorder as oppose to saying it always is one, but I fail to see which part of that definition discounts certain religious extremists as having mental disorders.

Key word extreme. Meaning the religion is the cultural norm, the extremism is not - or it wouldn't be extremism, so it's still outside the typical cultural context even if its rooted in normalcy.
Click to expand...

One countrys normal is another countrys extremism

Radical Islam is normal throughout the middle east but obviously its extreme in Western nations.
 
-SD- said:
One countrys normal is another countrys extremism

Radical Islam is normal throughout the middle east but obviously its extreme in Western nations.
Click to expand...

Radical Islam isn't the norm in Middle Eastern countries. Islam definitely is.

Of course the extreme Muslim groups are from the Middle East because they're Muslim countries. Obviously you wouldn't find a Muslim groups who's roots are here just like you won't find the Westboro Baptists over there.

It's the difference between most (all) radical Muslims being Middle Eastern and most (all) Middle Eastern Muslims being radicals. Those are two different things and the latter is false.
 
AFeedz said:
Radical Islam isn't the norm in Middle Eastern countries. Islam definitely is.

Of course the extreme Muslim groups are from the Middle East because they're Muslim countries. Obviously you wouldn't find a Muslim groups who's roots are here just like you won't find the Westboro Baptists over there.

It's the difference between most (all) radical Muslims being Middle Eastern and most (all) Middle Eastern Muslims being radicals. Those are two different things and the latter is false.
Click to expand...

nailed it
 
AFeedz said:
Radical Islam isn't the norm in Middle Eastern countries. Islam definitely is.

Of course the extreme Muslim groups are from the Middle East because they're Muslim countries. Obviously you wouldn't find a Muslim groups who's roots are here just like you won't find the Westboro Baptists over there.

It's the difference between most (all) radical Muslims being Middle Eastern and most (all) Middle Eastern Muslims being radicals. Those are two different things and the latter is false.
Click to expand...

I would agree..and as a matter of fact pretty much everyone I've known that was middle eastern actually defined themselves as christian not muslim
 
"The author went on to say she wasn't just referring to the "obvious candidates like radical Islam," but also meant such beliefs as the idea that beating children is acceptable."
 
pdaddyII said:
"The author went on to say she wasn't just referring to the "obvious candidates like radical Islam," but also meant such beliefs as the idea that beating children is acceptable."
Click to expand...

Because radical Islam being the norm is a common American misconception.

The fact that you even need to qualify Islam with the word radical would suggest its not the norm, no?
 
Nice fucking thread
 
If you're a mooslim, you're a tear-rist.

It's mooslim law to wear an explosive vest under your robes at all times.
 
The whole thing is off, starting by the use of the term religious fundamentalism, had she at least worded it as Fundamentalist faith or Fundamentalist beliefs maybe I can see it better, but religious is such a broad subjective term that it's almost impossible to associate to a pattern let alone a pathology. Even two people going to the same faith based community at the same time with the same frequency can have different opinions and views about their faith, fellow humans, morals, laws and the world in general.

Personally when it comes to psycopathologies (wether identified in DSM-IV or not) they have to meet this simple criteria: it should be causing negative impact in an important/significant aspect of the persons life (social, work, partner, economic, family, self esteem, etc).

Neuroscientists should stick to empirical things and stay out of social and subjective matters, as much as you try to reconcile you will can't get verifiable, tangible, conclusive results from subjective cultural data.
That's my two cents...
 
ismaele00 said:
She's not classifying Religious Fundamentalism as a mental illness, is saying that it could be treated as a mental illness. It's not the same.

Anyway I think she's not right -she's a Neuroscientist and I'm not, though, so just my opinion- a mental illness is usually not consciousness controlled meaning the subject acts without consciouness control -which is NOT the same that not knowing what she/ he is doing, they know what they're doing but they CAN'T rationalize it nad/or control it-. A different think is if you are conscientiously convinced about what you're doing -even if the rest think that's wrong-.

If we followed the idea Taylor says a soldier who gives his/her life for the country or kill for the country could be considered as a Patriot Fundamentalist for those who think that a country doesn't deserve the life of a citizen. And you may think in much more examples.

There's such a big list of nazis and comunist who were BRILLIANT and killed milions of people. Did they have a mental disorder? No, in fact some of them had a super-high IQ, they were convinced that what they were doing was the right thing to do.

The good and bad is only a culture view of the moral, called moral relativism. Is one of the big fields in philosophy. The discussion started in Greece 2,400 years ago and we continue discussing it.

Definition of Mental Disorder,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.
Click to expand...

I think extreme religious beliefs are a result of conditioning. Many mental conditions are a result of negative stimulus and conditioning of the same kind, just in a different direction. I would agree with her. Just my opinion. For example growing up believing women are not equal (religious belief) -on the other hand growing up beig conditioned to belief you're worthless and dot deserve love, or something else horrible. Same thing different direction.
 
nangiggles said:
The whole thing is off, starting by the use of the term religious fundamentalism, had she at least worded it as Fundamentalist faith or Fundamentalist beliefs maybe I can see it better, but religious is such a broad subjective term that it's almost impossible to associate to a pattern let alone a pathology. Even two people going to the same faith based community at the same time with the same frequency can have different opinions and views about their faith, fellow humans, morals, laws and the world in general.

Personally when it comes to psycopathologies (wether identified in DSM-IV or not) they have to meet this simple criteria: it should be causing negative impact in an important/significant aspect of the persons life (social, work, partner, economic, family, self esteem, etc).

Neuroscientists should stick to empirical things and stay out of social and subjective matters, as much as you try to reconcile you will can't get verifiable, tangible, conclusive results from subjective cultural data.
That's my two cents...
Click to expand...

Wouldn't fundamentalists like those at Westboro Baptist church fit those criteria?
 
cindylou said:
Wouldn't fundamentalists like those at Westboro Baptist church fit those criteria?
Click to expand...

Technically no, I say that because their Church community consists of themselves as does their family, personal, work group, social work, relationships, etc and they all pat themselves on the motherfucking backs for their work, they probably fucking thrive in their circles with their heinous acts, it probably uplifts them instead of cause them issues, the rest of the world fucking hates them but they think we're all gross sinners and they dont care so technically it wouldnt affect them I'd think.
 
nangiggles said:
Technically no, I say that because their Church community consists of themselves as does their family, personal, work group, social work, relationships, etc and they all pat themselves on the motherfucking backs for their work, they probably fucking thrive in their circles with their heinous acts, it probably uplifts them instead of cause them issues, the rest of the world fucking hates them but they think we're all gross sinners and they dont care so technically it wouldnt affect them I'd think.
Click to expand...

That's not true.

The church only has like 50 members, and many of its adult members have jobs outside the church, so I'm sure they have work relationships with people unaffiliated.

And several stories have come from family members of people in the church or people
Who used to belong and who's family is still in about how brainwashed and nuts they are.

People in the congregation's practicing of those beliefs most certainly has a negative effect on many people in their lives.
 
AFeedz said:
That's not true.

The church only has like 50 members, and many of its adult members have jobs outside the church, so I'm sure they have work relationships with people unaffiliated.

And several stories have come from family members of people in the church or people
Who used to belong and who's family is still in about how brainwashed and nuts they are.

People in the congregation's practicing of those beliefs most certainly has a negative effect on many people in their lives.
Click to expand...
The church actually has 40 members most of which are "Phelpses" they are mostly family and distant relatives.

They have of course suffered adverse negative impacts to areas of their life, for example economic, they have been counter sued for picketing funerals and they actually lost one of those lawsuits and were ordered to pay millions of dollars, also in the family area since they banish any member that questions their faith or decides to leave (such as granddaughters like Megan Phelps who controlled most of their social media and former member Laura Drain) in fact Fred Phelps himself was technically disbarred as an attorney and lost his job for his extreme religious beliefs because he was accused of misconduct for treating a witness as hostile accusing her of being a whore, sexually depraved etc.

That being said, the reason why I said technically no is because again this being "faith" it's subjective, the people of WBC have a true belief that God hates pretty much the entire world but them, they believe they are superior that all of us and that regardless of what we say and do we are all filthy sinners and will always be beneath them since they are on God's side, which means that in a cognitive process regardless of how many negative consequences they may have around them, no matter what falls apart they will have their faith, their community and their righteous beliefs and this will always be greater and the most important thing, which means that us as outsides can see that yes they have adverse negative consequences but them as believers in their ideology will always be ok because they will have salvation.

So how can we apply diagnostic criteria to a subjective belief? based on what we see or based on what the client/patient sees? How can we state that their religion or beliefs have caused negative impact in their lifes when in their mind they have it all because they have God?
 
I understand what you're saying but insanity is subjective, right?

How can you base anything off of what a patient sees? What about someone that is delusional?
 
cindylou said:
I understand what you're saying but insanity is subjective, right?

How can you base anything off of what a patient sees? What about someone that is delusional?
Click to expand...
Insanity can even be subjective depending on your setting, I just personally dont think FAITH is the same as insanity, you're robbing people of something dear to them when you mess with their religion, hell faith is what actaully keeps some sane in times where others would have psychotic episodes and lose their shit.

If we're talking about science and tangible matters than of couse it doesnt always matter what the patient says, sees and believes of his potential pathology because as you said they may not be totally in touch with reality, however throwing religion and beliefs in the mix isnt the same to me because what is the norm in one place isnt in the other in terms of religion and culture, if you take a brasilian woman and drop her in Saudi Arabia they'd probably consider her mentally ill but if you took a saudi man and drop him off in NYC we'd think he's the ill one, yet they both function perfectly fine when they are in their country, community and setting, so technically they're both ok.
 
AFeedz said:
I agree that this woman seems to be saying religious fundamentalism can be treated like a mental disorder as opposed to saying it always is one, but I fail to see which part of that definition discounts certain religious extremists or fundamentalists as having mental disorders.

The religion is the cultural norm, the fundamentalism, often extremism, is not - so it's still outside the typical cultural context even if its rooted in normalcy.
Click to expand...

The point is that for a fundamentalist his beliefs are not the fundamentalits ones but the normal ones -that that you call "cultural norm"-.
For they the extremist are you -and me, of course-.

That's called ethnocentrism.
 
cindylou said:
So being convinced that you are right in your mind means you don't have a mental illness? I don't think that's how it works but even if you're right, she is suggesting that certain beliefs/actions should stop being seen as a choice of their own free will.
Click to expand...

If you're consciousness convinced about something -which is not the same that "being convinced that you are right"- you are not illness, that's right.
That's what the doctrine/teaching says.

I'll ask you this.
Were Romans -from the Roman Empire, or Greeks- suffering from some kind of mental illnes when they slept with teens -Plato and Aristotle e.g. (an widespread practise )-?
Absolutly not, there is such a big bibiography about that. They just had a different moral code, but today they'd be called pedophiles.

Exactly the same that Islamic fundamentalists. Do I like them? Of course not. But one thing is in what we believe and another is how our brain works and what Science says about that.

Read this, Historian's fallacy.

I'm assuming you're Christian, like me, were our ancestors crazy (had some kind of mental illness) when they went to the Crusades? Which were just a Holly War like the Islamic Fundamentalism today... No. Now read the links I posted.

And again, what a Mental Illness, according to Science, is,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.

EDIT: I think there's a better example about that.

Think in the abortion. And in two people. One's a Tea Party follower and the other one is a communist or a democrat -I'm not saying that democrats are communists-.

For the Tea Party folower the abortion is a crime, an assasination. The democrat will think is just an option. Now extrapolate it to the Religious Fundamentalist and our Occidental culture.
Same think with the Death Penalty. For us Europeans -for the most of us- it's a crime (and I don't want to criticize anyone). For some Americans is the most normal and fair thing.

Who's right and who's wrong? It depends on the point of view and the cultural environment. And in the three cases (fundamentalism, abortion and death penalty). There's a side thinking than the other one is killing a human being and the other one is thinking that is doing the right thing to do.
 
Last edited:
People who think God is talking to them are certainly classifiable. I have a 66 year old coworker who claims that God told her she'd always have her "beautiful blonde hair". I regularly hear people talking about how they "prayed and prayed" about every major life decision, and how they reacted depending on what God told them.
 
cindylou said:
I understand what you're saying but insanity is subjective, right?

How can you base anything off of what a patient sees? What about someone that is delusional?
Click to expand...
what standard is used to measure normal??

Pedo's will be normal behavior soon enough..

or do we use Sigmund Freud the father of mental health as the standard.?
 
ismaele00 said:
If you're consciousness convinced about something -which is not the same that "being convinced that you are right"- you are not illness, that's right.
That's what the doctrine/teaching says.

I'll ask you this.
Were Romans -from the Roman Empire, or Greeks- suffering from some kind of mental illnes when they slept with teens -Plato and Aristotle e.g. (an widespread practise )-?
Absolutly not, there is such a big bibiography about that. They just had a different moral code, but today they'd be called pedophiles.

Exactly the same that Islamic fundamentalists. Do I like them? Of course not. But one thing is in what we believe and another is how our brain works and what Science says about that.

Read this, Historian's fallacy.

I'm assuming you're Christian, like me, were our ancestors crazy (had some kind of mental illness) when they went to the Crusades? Which were just a Holly War like the Islamic Fundamentalism today... No. Now read the links I posted.

And again, what a Mental Illness, according to Science, is,

A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a psychological pattern or anomaly, potentially reflected in behavior, that is generally associated with distress or disability, and which is not considered part of normal development in a person's culture. Mental disorders are generally defined by a combination of how a person feels, acts, thinks or perceives. This may be associated with particular regions or functions of the brain or rest of the nervous system, often in a social context.

EDIT: I think there's a better example about that.

Think in the abortion. And in two people. One's a Tea Party follower and the other one is a communist or a democrat -I'm not saying that democrats are communists-.

For the Tea Party folower the abortion is a crime, an assasination. The democrat will think is just an option. Now extrapolate it to the Religious Fundamentalist and our Occidental culture.
Same think with the Death Penalty. For us Europeans -for the most of us- it's a crime (and I don't want to criticize anyone). For some Americans is the most normal and fair thing.

Who's right and who's wrong? It depends on the point of view and the cultural environment. And in the three cases (fundamentalism, abortion and death penalty). There's a side thinking than the other one is killing a human being and the other one is thinking that is doing the right thing to do.
Click to expand...

You're taking a really big picture approach in this thread with the moral relativism. Besides, the world is shrinking. ;-) I believe in moral absolutes and I don't really feel like arguing that anymore on here haha so lets shrink it down a notch to be on the same page with obvious examples of radical religion. I think I agree with you but how to determine those who truly believe they are doing the right thing and those parading under a self-righteous mask? How do you even get to be a radical extremist? How do you GET to the point of strapping a bomb to your chest and taking yourself out and as many people around you as you can in a ball of fire? How do you GET to the point where you are picketing funerals and saying God Hates Fags? How does someone get to that point? I don't think these people truly believe that they are doing the right thing but are sick people wearing the clothes of the self-righteous and doing terrible, destructive acts.

I'm not saying that certain beliefs/people/actions in themselves mean mental illness by default either. Yes, I am a Christian but my church history doesn't trace back as the terrorists but part of the terrorized men, women, and children that paid with their blood and their lives because they would not deny the old Syrian and Latin texts from Antioch. Even so, I understand what you are saying but there is something about being a radical that I believe an invisible line has been crossed and they become part of the treatable evil, or a spiritual illness that starts to physically warp their mind. Someone that is radical about anything becomes obsessive and it distorts their thinking, twists their perceptions, causes them to shut off empathy, and their hearts turn cold and they become depraved in some way. I'm not talking about invisible hypothetical people but real life sick people who cover their sickness with doctrine and religion and convince themselves they are superior to the entire world and only they have access to the Spirit or to Truth and lose their compassion for people in the process. They hide from their own conscience, different from the absence of conscience in sociopaths these people run from it and claim self-righteousness in the process but yet do the same destructive acts as sociopaths. I mean, sometimes I think those Westboro Baptist people are so full of hate they could kill someone at any time. How have they not, its pouring out of them.

There is a difference between normal people of faith and those on the fringe that through the disappointment of life have allowed themselves to be radicalized or sucked into some of this stuff. It has a look very much like OCD like Shirlene says. Even I am very careful with certain biblical topcs (numbers, prophecy) because they can rabbit hole into an obsession that could easily eat years of my life. I could see myself getting lost in the obsession while I calculate the date of the Great Tribulation and suspiciously scrutinize every new technology and call it The Mark while homeschooling my kids and stockpiling silver. :lmao: Just kidding that would never happen. Seriously though, I know people that study numbers in the bible that won't name their children with names that have a certain amount of numbers in them, or won't eat with family members because they don't interpret the bible the same. That is warped and twisted and it is outside of what defines faith and belief where peace SHOULD be a result like nan says. It's a perversion of faith. It's anti-faith. It's a sickness.
 
Last edited:
cindylou said:
You're taking a really big picture approach in this thread with the moral relativism. Besides, the world is shrinking. ;-) I believe in moral absolutes and I don't really feel like arguing that anymore on here haha so lets shrink it down a notch to be on the same page with obvious examples of radical religion. I think I agree with you but how to determine those who truly believe they are doing the right thing and those parading under a self-righteous mask? How do you even get to be a radical extremist? How do you GET to the point of strapping a bomb to your chest and taking yourself out and as many people around you as you can in a ball of fire? How do you GET to the point where you are picketing funerals and saying God Hates Fags? How does someone get to that point? I don't think these people truly believe that they are doing the right thing but are sick people wearing the clothes of the self-righteous and doing terrible, destructive acts.

I'm not saying that certain beliefs/people/actions in themselves mean mental illness by default either. Yes, I am a Christian but my church history doesn't trace back as the terrorists but part of the terrorized men, women, and children that paid with their blood and their lives because they would not deny the old Syrian and Latin texts from Antioch. Even so, I understand what you are saying but there is something about being a radical that I believe an invisible line has been crossed and they become part of the treatable evil, or a spiritual illness that starts to physically warp their mind. Someone that is radical about anything becomes obsessive and it distorts their thinking, twists their perceptions, causes them to shut off empathy, and their hearts turn cold and they become depraved in some way. I'm not talking about invisible hypothetical people but real life sick people who cover their sickness with doctrine and religion and convince themselves they are superior to the entire world and only they have access to the Spirit or to Truth and lose their compassion for people in the process. They hide from their own conscience, different from the absence of conscience in sociopaths these people run from it and claim self-righteousness in the process but yet do the same destructive acts as sociopaths. I mean, sometimes I think those Westboro Baptist people are so full of hate they could kill someone at any time. How have they not, its pouring out of them.

There is a difference between normal people of faith and those on the fringe that through the disappointment of life have allowed themselves to be radicalized or sucked into some of this stuff. It has a look very much like OCD like Shirlene says. Even I am very careful with certain biblical topcs (numbers, prophecy) because they can rabbit hole into an obsession that could easily eat years of my life. I could see myself getting lost in the obsession while I calculate the date of the Great Tribulation and suspiciously scrutinize every new technology and call it The Mark while homeschooling my kids and stockpiling silver. :lmao: Just kidding that would never happen. Seriously though, I know people that study numbers in the bible that won't name their children with names that have a certain amount of numbers in them, or won't eat with family members because they don't interpret the bible the same. That is warped and twisted and it is outside of what defines faith and belief where peace SHOULD be a result like nan says. It's a perversion of faith. It's anti-faith. It's a sickness.
Click to expand...



tl;dr
 
cindylou said:
You're taking a really big picture approach in this thread with the moral relativism. Besides, the world is shrinking. ;-) I believe in moral absolutes and I don't really feel like arguing that anymore on here haha so lets shrink it down a notch to be on the same page with obvious examples of radical religion. I think I agree with you but how to determine those who truly believe they are doing the right thing and those parading under a self-righteous mask? How do you even get to be a radical extremist? How do you GET to the point of strapping a bomb to your chest and taking yourself out and as many people around you as you can in a ball of fire? How do you GET to the point where you are picketing funerals and saying God Hates Fags? How does someone get to that point? I don't think these people truly believe that they are doing the right thing but are sick people wearing the clothes of the self-righteous and doing terrible, destructive acts.

I'm not saying that certain beliefs/people/actions in themselves mean mental illness by default either. Yes, I am a Christian but my church history doesn't trace back as the terrorists but part of the terrorized men, women, and children that paid with their blood and their lives because they would not deny the old Syrian and Latin texts from Antioch. Even so, I understand what you are saying but there is something about being a radical that I believe an invisible line has been crossed and they become part of the treatable evil, or a spiritual illness that starts to physically warp their mind. Someone that is radical about anything becomes obsessive and it distorts their thinking, twists their perceptions, causes them to shut off empathy, and their hearts turn cold and they become depraved in some way. I'm not talking about invisible hypothetical people but real life sick people who cover their sickness with doctrine and religion and convince themselves they are superior to the entire world and only they have access to the Spirit or to Truth and lose their compassion for people in the process. They hide from their own conscience, different from the absence of conscience in sociopaths these people run from it and claim self-righteousness in the process but yet do the same destructive acts as sociopaths. I mean, sometimes I think those Westboro Baptist people are so full of hate they could kill someone at any time. How have they not, its pouring out of them.

There is a difference between normal people of faith and those on the fringe that through the disappointment of life have allowed themselves to be radicalized or sucked into some of this stuff. It has a look very much like OCD like Shirlene says. Even I am very careful with certain biblical topcs (numbers, prophecy) because they can rabbit hole into an obsession that could easily eat years of my life. I could see myself getting lost in the obsession while I calculate the date of the Great Tribulation and suspiciously scrutinize every new technology and call it The Mark while homeschooling my kids and stockpiling silver. :lmao: Just kidding that would never happen. Seriously though, I know people that study numbers in the bible that won't name their children with names that have a certain amount of numbers in them, or won't eat with family members because they don't interpret the bible the same. That is warped and twisted and it is outside of what defines faith and belief where peace SHOULD be a result like nan says. It's a perversion of faith. It's anti-faith. It's a sickness.
Click to expand...

u sipping teh rum again, aren't ya?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

UnclePoon
Approved Log Retatrutide Fat loss cycle Log
Replies
35
Views
801
ZenithHealth
ZenithHealth
Trenhead3cc
Approved Log Cycle and Training Log Sponsored by Raptor Labs
2
Replies
133
Views
16K
stevesmi
stevesmi
eazy_
Epithalon: The Peptide That Targets Aging at the Cellular Level
Replies
0
Views
124
eazy_
eazy_
H
REBUILDING, LEAN MUSCLE GROWTH AND JOURNEY - Sponsored by Norvex Labs
Replies
5
Views
60
Demon_throne
Demon_throne
RawCutlery
Approved Log Road to Masters Olympia Training Nutrition Cycle Log - Team US-Pharmacies
2
Replies
145
Views
5K
the_alcatraz
the_alcatraz
Top Bottom