Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
javaguru
Banned
lol Damn I thought that was an original thought in my head. That wasnt directed just at java so much but all the arrogant know nothing atheists btw...there are a cpl on here
Interesting....copied and saved for future reference.
Top Ten Creationist Arguments Part 1 and 2
- Thread starter javaguru
- Start date
Interesting....copied and saved for future reference.
don't take the bait!
javaguru
Banned
I think this is the most informative post in the thread.
javaguru
Banned
He's engaging in internet douchebaggery....loll. I must hate religion because I was raised in a fundamentalist household; Of course as a teenager I resisted being told what to do by my parents but I went to church because it was expected and I still go to church with my mother when I visit her over twenty years after I became an adult as my own choice; I schedule an Easter visit for her. I have also gone to church with every jesusy chick I've dated voluntarily because it was important to them and it sure beats going to the mall with them. So, the idea that non belief means you "hate" what you don't believe in is fundamentally ridiculous....religion is a social issue and nothing more.
bigpokey
Banned
quite the cocksucker of a thread we got here..... i dont mind jg's vids they're not all trash, if there was logical and rational youtube videos of the christian argument (unpossible) im sure there'd be someone to whore those vids here too.... cindy i dont really get your "new christianity"..... ur take on christianity is so different than any other christian ive come across, i like it in a lot of ways, think ur an intelligent and moral (sweet) person, and find ur arguments much less offensive than most jesus freaks... but like i dunno you're take on being christian is just weird, like more of a spiritualist or some shit.... could u break down ur christianity a lil further in the the absolutes u believe in...(e.g. askin jesus into your heart saves u no matter what?, did jesus walk on water?, jonah got swallowed by a whale? people go to hell no matter what if they dont ask jesus in their heart?)... what exactly makes u a christian? i know u don't believe in the strict literal interpretation of the bible so im guessin most christians would say you're not a true christian... im definitely not an atheist, but im def not a christian, i do believe in "god" or "energy" or "supreme power" or some kinda ultimate shit but i don't see how anyone could believe the key to everything ever of all time is in the bible, why would it be in one book? what about he people in the world that can't read and have never been in contact with a christian? they just automatically go to hell never havin a shot?
i dont agree with richard dawkins on everything but his main argument is we live in a logical world where we can explain almost everything with science and reasoning, why would god be so irrational and illogical?
im so fukn fogged wtf am i talkin bout... no foggin clue
i dont agree with richard dawkins on everything but his main argument is we live in a logical world where we can explain almost everything with science and reasoning, why would god be so irrational and illogical?
im so fukn fogged wtf am i talkin bout... no foggin clue
mrplunkey
New member
Well I'm shocked that you'd like your own post the best. As humble and down-to-Earth as you are, I'd think you would choose another merely to show your open mindedness.
Here's my favorite post:
You know that was *exactly* the message the creators of SP were sending when they made that scene, correct? The show is stupid and superficial in many ways, but they often embed a deeper message about society as well.
loll pokey all fogged up Of course not all of his videos are shit...I wouldn't say any of them have been shit beisdes the one that started this thread...lol silly.
I am a regular Christian. This idea that all Christians are young earth creationist bible literalists is just not true! We live in two realms the spirit and the natural...religion is pure flesh. Outside of that, if you wanted to label me, label me a Baptist. Jesus does not come into your heart...lol but the Holy Spirit does technically I guess...lol...I don't see how that is weird or different..idk if someone wants to say I'm not a true Christian I guess that's their problem, I agree with the important basics I guess...I go to a Baptist church right now.
I personally think Christianity to be probably true, and I can supplement my experiences with the Holy Spirit, and I can live assured with what I know to be true. Yes I believe Jesus walked on water and performed miracles. I trust the bible as far as its credibility about Jesus historically. I think that the bible can represent objective history. Anything outside of that is historical relativism which can be overcome if you think about it. Just because someone types something that sounds smart on a message board does not mean shit, really, or just because you think you learned something from someone smarter than you does not make it true either...where did they get their information, where are their biases and how was it taught to them and how have ideas about history changed over time? Have historians always always gone about their task the same way? The records on the life of Jesus were written in the first generation while the witnesses were still alive. I know human behavior and motivation. People don't lie when it does not benefit them and might kill them. About what the bible says…no, if people that can’t read and don’t know about Jesus, they don’t automatically die and go to hell…no. (Romans) No, I don’t believe in a 100% literal bible, it’s impossible to read that way for example there are not seven literal candlesticks in the book of Revelation…no one takes Daniel literally…etc but I still believe it to be 100% true. There is no reason to take the creation story literally (even if we did the bible never addresses the age of the earth or the universe)if we understand the context of who it was written to and when it was written. People miss points that are delivered through nuance and context they read things that are not there...like young earth creationism and dinosaurs living with humans. There is just nothing in there that says that. The bible also has paradoxes, which do not make sense to the common mind. Jesus said, "to save your life you must lose it," that doesn't make sense to the natural mind but in the spirit it makes all the sense in the world. Those are my personal beliefs. Holy fuggin long paragraph. Sorry if you made it this far. Good thing I can type quickly
Of course not all of his videos are shit...I wouldn't say any of them have been shit beisdes the one that started this thread...lol silly. I am a regular Christian. This idea that all Christians are young earth creationist bible literalists is just not true! We live in two realms the spirit and the natural...religion is pure flesh. Outside of that, if you wanted to label me, label me a Baptist. Jesus does not come into your heart...lol but the Holy Spirit does technically I guess...lol...I don't see how that is weird or different..idk if someone wants to say I'm not a true Christian I guess that's their problem, I agree with the important basics I guess...I go to a Baptist church right now.
I personally think Christianity to be probably true, and I can supplement my experiences with the Holy Spirit, and I can live assured with what I know to be true. Yes I believe Jesus walked on water and performed miracles. I trust the bible as far as its credibility about Jesus historically. I think that the bible can represent objective history. Anything outside of that is historical relativism which can be overcome if you think about it. Just because someone types something that sounds smart on a message board does not mean shit, really, or just because you think you learned something from someone smarter than you does not make it true either...where did they get their information, where are their biases and how was it taught to them and how have ideas about history changed over time? Have historians always always gone about their task the same way? The records on the life of Jesus were written in the first generation while the witnesses were still alive. I know human behavior and motivation. People don't lie when it does not benefit them and might kill them. About what the bible says…no, if people that can’t read and don’t know about Jesus, they don’t automatically die and go to hell…no. (Romans) No, I don’t believe in a 100% literal bible, it’s impossible to read that way for example there are not seven literal candlesticks in the book of Revelation…no one takes Daniel literally…etc but I still believe it to be 100% true. There is no reason to take the creation story literally (even if we did the bible never addresses the age of the earth or the universe)if we understand the context of who it was written to and when it was written. People miss points that are delivered through nuance and context they read things that are not there...like young earth creationism and dinosaurs living with humans. There is just nothing in there that says that. The bible also has paradoxes, which do not make sense to the common mind. Jesus said, "to save your life you must lose it," that doesn't make sense to the natural mind but in the spirit it makes all the sense in the world. Those are my personal beliefs. Holy fuggin long paragraph. Sorry if you made it this far. Good thing I can type quickly
Last edited:
L
lartinos
Guest
agreed
Capitalizt
New member
WLC = epic fail.
lol! What the hell? You are unbelievable. Everyone here knows you are full of shit most of the time.
lol
I think I finally get it...I was fellowshipping with like minded bretheren at Christwire...trying to understand why unequally yoked relationships don't work and the Lord showed me this... I prayed about it and the Lord put it upon my heart to share with others about the athiests' dark heart. It would greive the spirit if I didn't do this:
Are Atheists Capable of Love?: No. Happy Valentine?s Day! | ChristWire
Are Atheists Capable of Love?
The short answer to this question is no, Atheists are not capable of love because in fact and practice love requires thinking outside of their own interests and experience as well as expressing an emotional maturity beyond their ability. They just can’t help it.
Romans 1:21 – Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
The first step for Christians in understanding these attacks is to not take it personally. Enduring these slurs on Christian character means one must turn the meaning of the word slur from “insult” to “smooth musical lyric” or perhaps modify further to “melodramatic wailing for attention” before responding.
A good portion of Atheists’ hate comes from the fact many suffer from undiagnosed Narcissistic Personality Disorder. NPD is a deformed love of the reflection of self that is destructive and renders them incapable of loving relationships with others as well as the Atheist’s singular true self.
Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves.
While it is unclear which (NPD or Atheism) occur first, observation, experience as well as rational thinking indicates a corollary between the two. The Mayo Clinic online lists the following symptoms of NPD . Expression of five or more of these symptoms in an individual may indicate pathology indicative of NPD and Atheist disbelief.
■Believing that you’re better than others
â– Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
â– Exaggerating your achievements or talents
â– Expecting constant praise and admiration
■Believing that you’re special and acting accordingly
■Failing to recognize other people’s emotions and feelings
â– Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
â– Taking advantage of others
â– Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
â– Being jealous of others
â– Believing that others are jealous of you
â– Trouble keeping healthy relationships
â– Setting unrealistic goals
â– Being easily hurt and rejected
â– Having a fragile self-esteem
â– Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional
In summary it is a flea riddled bed the Atheist with NPD has made for herself or himself. Atheists with NPD live a life of loneliness and despair, incapable of loving or receiving love from others, and in a constant state of alert and worry to threats that manifests as offense to any Christian reference or reasoning. Oftentimes Christians will witness a tirade of rants, foul language and demands for “proof”. In the end, all hearts remain steadfast. The Atheists plod back to well-reasoned abodes and hours of internet study and debate. The Christians plan a soccer league and spaghetti supper
Praise God and have a blessed afternoon
Are Atheists Capable of Love?: No. Happy Valentine?s Day! | ChristWire
Are Atheists Capable of Love?
The short answer to this question is no, Atheists are not capable of love because in fact and practice love requires thinking outside of their own interests and experience as well as expressing an emotional maturity beyond their ability. They just can’t help it.
Romans 1:21 – Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
The first step for Christians in understanding these attacks is to not take it personally. Enduring these slurs on Christian character means one must turn the meaning of the word slur from “insult” to “smooth musical lyric” or perhaps modify further to “melodramatic wailing for attention” before responding.
A good portion of Atheists’ hate comes from the fact many suffer from undiagnosed Narcissistic Personality Disorder. NPD is a deformed love of the reflection of self that is destructive and renders them incapable of loving relationships with others as well as the Atheist’s singular true self.
Romans 1:24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves.
While it is unclear which (NPD or Atheism) occur first, observation, experience as well as rational thinking indicates a corollary between the two. The Mayo Clinic online lists the following symptoms of NPD . Expression of five or more of these symptoms in an individual may indicate pathology indicative of NPD and Atheist disbelief.
■Believing that you’re better than others
â– Fantasizing about power, success and attractiveness
â– Exaggerating your achievements or talents
â– Expecting constant praise and admiration
■Believing that you’re special and acting accordingly
■Failing to recognize other people’s emotions and feelings
â– Expecting others to go along with your ideas and plans
â– Taking advantage of others
â– Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior
â– Being jealous of others
â– Believing that others are jealous of you
â– Trouble keeping healthy relationships
â– Setting unrealistic goals
â– Being easily hurt and rejected
â– Having a fragile self-esteem
â– Appearing as tough-minded or unemotional
In summary it is a flea riddled bed the Atheist with NPD has made for herself or himself. Atheists with NPD live a life of loneliness and despair, incapable of loving or receiving love from others, and in a constant state of alert and worry to threats that manifests as offense to any Christian reference or reasoning. Oftentimes Christians will witness a tirade of rants, foul language and demands for “proof”. In the end, all hearts remain steadfast. The Atheists plod back to well-reasoned abodes and hours of internet study and debate. The Christians plan a soccer league and spaghetti supper
Praise God and have a blessed afternoon
You better home smurfy doesn't see that Chris...
hope
Lolololol.. This has to be a Freudian slip! You keep messing with the Fourth Reich you're gonna end up in Auschwitz.
For whanne thei hadden knowe God, thei glorifieden not as God, or diden thankyngis. but thei vanyscheden in her thouČťtis, and the vnwyse herte of hem is.
Seynt Poule wryteĂľ to Ăľe Romaynes. & seiĂľ, RyČťt as Ăľe vnboxumnesse of on man many men beĂľ y-maad synful men, so by Ăľe boxumnesse of on man many men beĂľ y-maad riČťtful men. & Ăľe lawe entred in, Ăľat sinne were in plente. but Ăľere as sunne was in plente, grace was in more plente: Ăľat, riČťt as sunne regned in-to deĂľ, so grace schulde regne ĂľorowČť riČťtfulnesse in-to an euerelastynge lyf, by Iesu Crist oure Lord.
Amazing how much this shit's changed in the english language alone. (I'm not looking up the fucking latin version.)
lol I'd love to talk translations and manuscripts and shiz but it seems pointless ITT (and in this medium)
I thought it was obvious I was kidding I don't speak Christianeese very often
UMich has a fantastic middle english website that contains the Wycliff translation of the bible.
javaguru
Banned
loll pokey all fogged up
I am a regular Christian. This idea that all Christians are young earth creationist bible literalists is just not true! We live in two realms the spirit and the natural...religion is pure flesh. Outside of that, if you wanted to label me, label me a Baptist. Jesus does not come into your heart...lol but the Holy Spirit does technically I guess...lol...I don't see how that is weird or different..idk if someone wants to say I'm not a true Christian I guess that's their problem, I agree with the important basics I guess...I go to a Baptist church right now.
I personally think Christianity to be probably true, and I can supplement my experiences with the Holy Spirit, and I can live assured with what I know to be true. Yes I believe Jesus walked on water and performed miracles. I trust the bible as far as its credibility about Jesus historically. I think that the bible can represent objective history. Anything outside of that is historical relativism which can be overcome if you think about it. Just because someone types something that sounds smart on a message board does not mean shit, really, or just because you think you learned something from someone smarter than you does not make it true either...where did they get their information, where are their biases and how was it taught to them and how have ideas about history changed over time? Have historians always always gone about their task the same way? The records on the life of Jesus were written in the first generation while the witnesses were still alive. I know human behavior and motivation. People don't lie when it does not benefit them and might kill them. About what the bible says…no, if people that can’t read and don’t know about Jesus, they don’t automatically die and go to hell…no. (Romans) No, I don’t believe in a 100% literal bible, it’s impossible to read that way for example there are not seven literal candlesticks in the book of Revelation…no one takes Daniel literally…etc but I still believe it to be 100% true. There is no reason to take the creation story literally (even if we did the bible never addresses the age of the earth or the universe)if we understand the context of who it was written to and when it was written. People miss points that are delivered through nuance and context they read things that are not there...like young earth creationism and dinosaurs living with humans. There is just nothing in there that says that. The bible also has paradoxes, which do not make sense to the common mind. Jesus said, "to save your life you must lose it," that doesn't make sense to the natural mind but in the spirit it makes all the sense in the world. Those are my personal beliefs. Holy fuggin long paragraph. Sorry if you made it this far. Good thing I can type quickly
Here is a poll from 2004....
Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution - CBS News
"Americans do not believe that humans evolved, and the vast majority says that even if they evolved, God guided the process. Just 13 percent say that God was not involved. But most would not substitute the teaching of creationism for the teaching of evolution in public schools.
Support for evolution is more heavily concentrated among those with more education and among those who attend religious services rarely or not at all. "
God created man in his present form:
All Americans: 55%
"60 percent of Americans who call themselves Evangelical Christians, however, favor replacing evolution with creationism in schools altogether, as do 50 percent of those who attend religious services every week."
Young Earth Creationism is the dominant belief among Americans. Therefore, if you self describe yourself as a "regular Christian" then you should be a young Earther, speaking statistically.
javaguru
Banned
Delusional Disorder
Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults
"Delusional disorder is characterized by the presence of recurrent, persistent non-bizarre delusions .
Delusions are irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, that are highly resistant to change even when the delusional person is exposed to forms of proof that contradict the belief. Non-bizarre delusions are considered to be plausible; that is, there is a possibility that what the person believes to be true could actually occur a small proportion of the time. Conversely, bizarre delusions focus on matters that would be impossible in reality. For example, a non-bizarre delusion might be the belief that one's activities are constantly under observation by federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies, which actually does occur for a small number of people. By contrast, a man who believes he is pregnant with German Shepherd puppies holds a belief that could never come to pass in reality. Also, for beliefs to be considered delusional, the content or themes of the beliefs must be uncommon in the person's culture or religion. Generally, in delusional disorder, these mistaken beliefs are organized into a consistent world-view that is logical other than being based on an improbable foundation.
In addition to giving evidence of a cluster of interrelated non-bizarre delusions, persons with delusional disorder experience hallucinations far less frequently than do individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder .
Description
Unlike most other psychotic disorders, the person with delusional disorder typically does not appear obviously odd, strange or peculiar during periods of active illness. Yet the person might make unusual choices in day-to-day life because of the delusional beliefs. Expanding on the previous example, people who believe they are under government observation might seem typical in most ways but could refuse to have a telephone or use credit cards in order to make it harder for "those Federal agents" to monitor purchases and conversations. Most mental health professionals would concur that until the person with delusional disorder discusses the areas of life affected by the delusions, it would be difficult to distinguish the sufferer from members of the general public who are not psychiatrically disturbed. Another distinction of delusional disorder compared with other psychotic disorders is that hallucinations are either absent or occur infrequently.
The person with delusional disorder may or may not come to the attention of mental health providers. Typically, while delusional disorder sufferers may be distressed about the delusional "reality," they may not have the insight to see that anything is wrong with the way they are thinking or functioning. Regarding the earlier example, those suffering delusion might state that the only thing wrong or upsetting in their lives is that the government is spying, and if the surveillance would cease, so would the problems. Similarly, the people suffering the disorder attribute any obstacles or problems in functioning to the delusional reality, separating it from their internal control. Furthermore, whether unable to get a good job or maintain a romantic relationship, the difficulties would be blamed on "government interference" rather than on their own failures or omissions. Unless the form of the delusions causes illegal behavior, somehow affects an ability to work, or otherwise deal with daily activities, the delusional disorder sufferer may adapt well enough to navigate life without coming to clinical attention. When people with delusional disorder decide to seek mental health care, the motivation for getting treatment is usually to decrease the negative emotions of depression, fearfulness, rage, or constant worry caused by living under the cloud of delusional beliefs, not to change the unusual thoughts themselves.
Forms of delusional disorder
An important aspect of delusional disorder is the identification of the form of delusion from which a person suffers. The most common form of delusional disorder is the persecutory or paranoid subtype, in which the patients are certain that others are striving to harm them.
In the erotomanic form of delusional disorder, the primary delusional belief is that some important person is secretly in love with the sufferer. The erotomanic type is more common in women than men. Erotomanic delusions may prompt stalking the love object and even violence against the beloved or those viewed as potential romantic rivals.
The grandiose subtype of delusional disorder involves the conviction of one's importance and uniqueness, and takes a variety of forms: believing that one has a distinguished role, has some remarkable connections with important persons, or enjoys some extraordinary powers or abilities.
In the somatic subtype, there is excessive concern and irrational ideas about bodily functioning, which may include worries regarding infestation with parasites or insects, imagined physical deformity, or a conviction that one is emitting a foul stench when there is no problematic odor.
The form of disorder most associated with violent behavior, usually between romantic partners, is the jealous subtype of delusional disorder. Patients are firmly convinced of the infidelity of a spouse or partner, despite contrary evidence and based on minimal data (like a messy bedspread or more cigarettes than usual in an ashtray, for instance). Delusional jealousy sufferers may gather scraps of conjectured "evidence," and may try to constrict their partners' activities or confine them to home. Delusional disorder cases involving aggression and injury toward others have been most associated with this subtype.
Delusion and other disorders
Even though the main characteristic of delusional disorder is a noticeable system of delusional beliefs, delusions may occur in the course of a large number of other psychiatric disorders. Delusions are often observed in persons with other psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. In addition to occurring in the psychotic disorders, delusions also may be evident as part of a response to physical, medical conditions (such as brain injury or brain tumors), or reactions to ingestion of a drug.
Delusions also occur in the dementias, which are syndromes wherein psychiatric symptoms and memory loss result from deterioration of brain tissue. Because delusions can be shown as part of many illnesses, the diagnosis of delusional disorder is partially conducted by process of elimination. If the delusions are not accompanied by persistent, recurring hallucinations, then schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder are not appropriate diagnoses. If the delusions are not accompanied by memory loss, then dementia is ruled out. If there is no physical illness or injury or other active biological cause (such as drug ingestion or drug withdrawal), then the delusions cannot be attributed to a general medical problem or drug-related causes. If delusions are the most obvious and pervasive symptom, without hallucinations, medical causation, drug influences or memory loss, then delusional disorder is the most appropriate categorization.
Because delusions occur in many different disorders, some clinician-researchers have argued that there is little usefulness in focusing on what diagnosis the person has been given. Those who ascribe to this view believe it is more important to focus on the symptom of delusional thinking, and find ways to have an effect on delusions, whether they occur in delusional disorder or schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The majority of psychotherapy techniques used in delusional disorder come from symptom-focused (as opposed to diagnosis-focused) researcher-practitioners.
Causes and symptoms
Causes
Because clear identification of delusional disorder has traditionally been challenging, scientists have conducted far less research relating to the disorder than studies for schizophrenia or mood disorders. Still, some theories of causation have developed, which fall into several categories.
GENETIC OR BIOLOGICAL. Close relatives of persons with delusional disorder have increased rates of delusional disorder and paranoid personality traits. They do not have higher rates of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or mood disorder compared to relatives of non-delusional persons. Increased incidence of these psychiatric disorders in individuals closely genetically related to persons with delusional disorder suggest that there is a genetic component to the disorder. Furthermore, a number of studies comparing activity of different regions of the brain in delusional and non-delusional research participants yielded data about differences in the functioning of the brains between members of the two groups. These differences in brain activity suggest that persons neurologically with delusions tend to react as if threatening conditions are consistently present. Non-delusional persons only show such patterns under certain kinds of conditions where the interpretation of being threatened is more accurate. With both brain activity evidence and family heritability evidence, a strong chance exists that there is a biological aspect to delusional disorder.
DYSFUNCTIONAL COGNITIVE PROCESSING. An elaborate term for thinking is "cognitive processing." Delusions may arise from distorted ways people have of explaining life to themselves. The most prominent cognitive problems involve the manner in which delusion sufferers develop conclusions both about other people, and about causation of unusual perceptions or negative events. Studies examining how people with delusions develop theories about reality show that the subjects have ideas which which they tend to reach an inference based on less information than most people use. This "jumping to conclusions" bias can lead to delusional interpretations of ordinary events. For example, developing flu-like symptoms coinciding with the week new neighbors move in might lead to the conclusion, "the new neighbors are poisoning me." The conclusion is drawn without considering alternative explanations—catching an illness from a relative with the flu, that a virus seems to be going around at work, or that the tuna salad from lunch at the deli may have been spoiled. Additional research shows that persons prone to delusions "read" people differently than non-delusional individuals do. Whether they do so more accurately or particularly poorly is a matter of controversy. Delusional persons develop interpretations about how others view them that are distorted. They tend to view life as a continuing series of threatening events. When these two aspects of thought co-occur, a tendency to develop delusions about others wishing to do them harm is likely.
MOTIVATED OR DEFENSIVE DELUSIONS. Some predisposed persons might suffer the onset of an ongoing delusional disorder when coping with life and maintaining high self-esteem becomes a significant challenge. In order to preserve a positive view of oneself, a person views others as the cause of personal difficulties that may occur. This can then become an ingrained pattern of thought.
Symptoms
The criteria that define delusional disorder are furnished in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition Text Revision, or DSM-IV-TR , published by the American Psychiatric Association. The criteria for delusional disorder are as follows:
•non-bizarre delusions which have been present for at least one month
•absence of obviously odd or bizarre behavior
•absence of hallucinations, or hallucinations that only occur infrequently in comparison to other psychotic disorders
•no memory loss, medical illness or drug or alcohol-related effects are associated with the development of delusions
Demographics
The base rate of delusional disorder in adults is unclear. The prevalence is estimated at 0.025-0.03%, lower than the rates for schizophrenia (1%). Delusional disorder may account for 1–2% of admissions to inpatient psychiatric hospitals. Age at onset ranges from 18–90 years, with a mean age of 40 years. More females than males (overall) suffer from delusional disorder, especially the late onset form that is observed in the elderly.
Diagnosis
Client interviews focused on obtaining information about the sufferer's life situation and past history aid in identification of delusional disorder. With the client's permission, the clinician obtains details from earlier medical records, and engages in thorough discussion with the client's immediate family—helpful measures in determining whether delusions are present. The clinician may use a semi-structured interview called a mental status examination to assess the patient's concentration, memory, understanding the individual's situation and logical thinking. The mental status examination is intended to reveal peculiar thought processes in the patient. The Peters Delusion Inventory (PDI) is a psychological test that focuses on identifying and understanding delusional thinking; but its use is more common in research than in clinical practice.
Even using the DSM-IV-TR criteria listed above, classification of delusional disorder is relatively subjective. The criteria "non-bizarre" and "resistant to change" and "not culturally accepted" are all subject to very individual interpretations. They create variability in how professionals diagnose the illness. The utility of diagnosing the syndrome rather than focusing on successful treatment of delusion in any form of illness is debated in the medical community. Some researchers further contend that delusional disorder, currently classified as a psychotic disorder, is actually a variation of depression and might respond better to antidepressants or therapy more similar to that utilized for depression. Also, the meaning and implications of "culturally accepted" can create problems. The cultural relativity of "delusions,"—most evident where the beliefs shown are typical of the person's subculture or religion yet would be viewed as strange or delusional by the dominant culture—can force complex choices to be made in diagnosis and treatment. An example could be that of a Haitian immigrant to the United States who believed in voodoo. If that person became aggressive toward neighbors issuing curses or hexes, believing that death is imminent at the hands of those neighbors, a question arises. The belief is typical of the individual's subculture, so the issue is whether it should be diagnosed or treated. If it were to be treated, whether the remedy should come through Western medicine, or be conducted through voodoo shamanistic treatment is the problem to be solved.
Treatments
Delusional disorder treatment often involves atypical (also called novel or newer-generation ) antipsychotic medications, which can be effective in some patients. Risperidone (Risperdal), quetiapine (Seroquel), and olanzapine (Zyprexa) are all examples of atypical or novel antipsychotic medications. If agitation occurs, a number of different antipsychotics can be used to conclude the outbreak of acute agitation. Agitation, a state of frantic activity experienced concurrently with anger or exaggerated fearfulness, increases the risk that the client will endanger self or others. To decrease anxiety and slow behavior in emergency situations where agitation is a factor, an injection of haloperidol (Haldol) is often given usually in combination with other medications (often lorazepam , also known as Ativan). Agitation in delusional disorder is a typical response to severe or harsh confrontation when dealing with the existence of the delusions. It can also be a result of blocking the individual from performing inappropriate actions the client views as urgent in light of the delusional reality. A novel antipsychotic is generally given orally on a daily basis for ongoing treatment meant for long-term effect on the symptoms. Response to antipsychotics in delusional disorder seems to follow the "rule of thirds," in which about one-third of patients respond somewhat positively, one-third show little change, and one-third worsen or are unable to comply.
Cognitive therapy has shown promise as an emerging treatment for delusions. The cognitive therapist tries to capitalize on any doubt the individual has about the delusions; then attempts to develop a joint effort with the sufferer to generate alternative explanations, assisting the client in checking the evidence. This examination proceeds in favor of the various explanations. Much of the work is done by use of empathy, asking hypothetical questions in a form of therapeutic Socratic dialogue—a process that follows a basic question and answer format, figuring out what is known and unknown before reaching a logical conclusion. Combining pharmacotherapy with cognitive therapy integrates both treating the possible underlying biological problems and decreasing the symptoms with psychotherapy.
Prognosis
Evidence collected to date indicates about 10% of cases will show some improvement of delusional symptoms though irrational beliefs may remain; 33–50% may show complete remission; and, in 30–40% of cases there will be persistent non-improving symptoms. The prognosis for clients with delusional disorder is largely related to the level of conviction regarding the delusions and the openness the person has for allowing information that contradicts the delusion.
Prevention
Little work has been done thus far regarding prevention of the disorder. Effective means of prevention have not been identified.
Read more: Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults
Notice that if enough people hold a delusion then it magically becomes non-delusional.
Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults
"Delusional disorder is characterized by the presence of recurrent, persistent non-bizarre delusions .
Delusions are irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, that are highly resistant to change even when the delusional person is exposed to forms of proof that contradict the belief. Non-bizarre delusions are considered to be plausible; that is, there is a possibility that what the person believes to be true could actually occur a small proportion of the time. Conversely, bizarre delusions focus on matters that would be impossible in reality. For example, a non-bizarre delusion might be the belief that one's activities are constantly under observation by federal law enforcement or intelligence agencies, which actually does occur for a small number of people. By contrast, a man who believes he is pregnant with German Shepherd puppies holds a belief that could never come to pass in reality. Also, for beliefs to be considered delusional, the content or themes of the beliefs must be uncommon in the person's culture or religion. Generally, in delusional disorder, these mistaken beliefs are organized into a consistent world-view that is logical other than being based on an improbable foundation.
In addition to giving evidence of a cluster of interrelated non-bizarre delusions, persons with delusional disorder experience hallucinations far less frequently than do individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder .
Description
Unlike most other psychotic disorders, the person with delusional disorder typically does not appear obviously odd, strange or peculiar during periods of active illness. Yet the person might make unusual choices in day-to-day life because of the delusional beliefs. Expanding on the previous example, people who believe they are under government observation might seem typical in most ways but could refuse to have a telephone or use credit cards in order to make it harder for "those Federal agents" to monitor purchases and conversations. Most mental health professionals would concur that until the person with delusional disorder discusses the areas of life affected by the delusions, it would be difficult to distinguish the sufferer from members of the general public who are not psychiatrically disturbed. Another distinction of delusional disorder compared with other psychotic disorders is that hallucinations are either absent or occur infrequently.
The person with delusional disorder may or may not come to the attention of mental health providers. Typically, while delusional disorder sufferers may be distressed about the delusional "reality," they may not have the insight to see that anything is wrong with the way they are thinking or functioning. Regarding the earlier example, those suffering delusion might state that the only thing wrong or upsetting in their lives is that the government is spying, and if the surveillance would cease, so would the problems. Similarly, the people suffering the disorder attribute any obstacles or problems in functioning to the delusional reality, separating it from their internal control. Furthermore, whether unable to get a good job or maintain a romantic relationship, the difficulties would be blamed on "government interference" rather than on their own failures or omissions. Unless the form of the delusions causes illegal behavior, somehow affects an ability to work, or otherwise deal with daily activities, the delusional disorder sufferer may adapt well enough to navigate life without coming to clinical attention. When people with delusional disorder decide to seek mental health care, the motivation for getting treatment is usually to decrease the negative emotions of depression, fearfulness, rage, or constant worry caused by living under the cloud of delusional beliefs, not to change the unusual thoughts themselves.
Forms of delusional disorder
An important aspect of delusional disorder is the identification of the form of delusion from which a person suffers. The most common form of delusional disorder is the persecutory or paranoid subtype, in which the patients are certain that others are striving to harm them.
In the erotomanic form of delusional disorder, the primary delusional belief is that some important person is secretly in love with the sufferer. The erotomanic type is more common in women than men. Erotomanic delusions may prompt stalking the love object and even violence against the beloved or those viewed as potential romantic rivals.
The grandiose subtype of delusional disorder involves the conviction of one's importance and uniqueness, and takes a variety of forms: believing that one has a distinguished role, has some remarkable connections with important persons, or enjoys some extraordinary powers or abilities.
In the somatic subtype, there is excessive concern and irrational ideas about bodily functioning, which may include worries regarding infestation with parasites or insects, imagined physical deformity, or a conviction that one is emitting a foul stench when there is no problematic odor.
The form of disorder most associated with violent behavior, usually between romantic partners, is the jealous subtype of delusional disorder. Patients are firmly convinced of the infidelity of a spouse or partner, despite contrary evidence and based on minimal data (like a messy bedspread or more cigarettes than usual in an ashtray, for instance). Delusional jealousy sufferers may gather scraps of conjectured "evidence," and may try to constrict their partners' activities or confine them to home. Delusional disorder cases involving aggression and injury toward others have been most associated with this subtype.
Delusion and other disorders
Even though the main characteristic of delusional disorder is a noticeable system of delusional beliefs, delusions may occur in the course of a large number of other psychiatric disorders. Delusions are often observed in persons with other psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. In addition to occurring in the psychotic disorders, delusions also may be evident as part of a response to physical, medical conditions (such as brain injury or brain tumors), or reactions to ingestion of a drug.
Delusions also occur in the dementias, which are syndromes wherein psychiatric symptoms and memory loss result from deterioration of brain tissue. Because delusions can be shown as part of many illnesses, the diagnosis of delusional disorder is partially conducted by process of elimination. If the delusions are not accompanied by persistent, recurring hallucinations, then schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder are not appropriate diagnoses. If the delusions are not accompanied by memory loss, then dementia is ruled out. If there is no physical illness or injury or other active biological cause (such as drug ingestion or drug withdrawal), then the delusions cannot be attributed to a general medical problem or drug-related causes. If delusions are the most obvious and pervasive symptom, without hallucinations, medical causation, drug influences or memory loss, then delusional disorder is the most appropriate categorization.
Because delusions occur in many different disorders, some clinician-researchers have argued that there is little usefulness in focusing on what diagnosis the person has been given. Those who ascribe to this view believe it is more important to focus on the symptom of delusional thinking, and find ways to have an effect on delusions, whether they occur in delusional disorder or schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The majority of psychotherapy techniques used in delusional disorder come from symptom-focused (as opposed to diagnosis-focused) researcher-practitioners.
Causes and symptoms
Causes
Because clear identification of delusional disorder has traditionally been challenging, scientists have conducted far less research relating to the disorder than studies for schizophrenia or mood disorders. Still, some theories of causation have developed, which fall into several categories.
GENETIC OR BIOLOGICAL. Close relatives of persons with delusional disorder have increased rates of delusional disorder and paranoid personality traits. They do not have higher rates of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder or mood disorder compared to relatives of non-delusional persons. Increased incidence of these psychiatric disorders in individuals closely genetically related to persons with delusional disorder suggest that there is a genetic component to the disorder. Furthermore, a number of studies comparing activity of different regions of the brain in delusional and non-delusional research participants yielded data about differences in the functioning of the brains between members of the two groups. These differences in brain activity suggest that persons neurologically with delusions tend to react as if threatening conditions are consistently present. Non-delusional persons only show such patterns under certain kinds of conditions where the interpretation of being threatened is more accurate. With both brain activity evidence and family heritability evidence, a strong chance exists that there is a biological aspect to delusional disorder.
DYSFUNCTIONAL COGNITIVE PROCESSING. An elaborate term for thinking is "cognitive processing." Delusions may arise from distorted ways people have of explaining life to themselves. The most prominent cognitive problems involve the manner in which delusion sufferers develop conclusions both about other people, and about causation of unusual perceptions or negative events. Studies examining how people with delusions develop theories about reality show that the subjects have ideas which which they tend to reach an inference based on less information than most people use. This "jumping to conclusions" bias can lead to delusional interpretations of ordinary events. For example, developing flu-like symptoms coinciding with the week new neighbors move in might lead to the conclusion, "the new neighbors are poisoning me." The conclusion is drawn without considering alternative explanations—catching an illness from a relative with the flu, that a virus seems to be going around at work, or that the tuna salad from lunch at the deli may have been spoiled. Additional research shows that persons prone to delusions "read" people differently than non-delusional individuals do. Whether they do so more accurately or particularly poorly is a matter of controversy. Delusional persons develop interpretations about how others view them that are distorted. They tend to view life as a continuing series of threatening events. When these two aspects of thought co-occur, a tendency to develop delusions about others wishing to do them harm is likely.
MOTIVATED OR DEFENSIVE DELUSIONS. Some predisposed persons might suffer the onset of an ongoing delusional disorder when coping with life and maintaining high self-esteem becomes a significant challenge. In order to preserve a positive view of oneself, a person views others as the cause of personal difficulties that may occur. This can then become an ingrained pattern of thought.
Symptoms
The criteria that define delusional disorder are furnished in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth Edition Text Revision, or DSM-IV-TR , published by the American Psychiatric Association. The criteria for delusional disorder are as follows:
•non-bizarre delusions which have been present for at least one month
•absence of obviously odd or bizarre behavior
•absence of hallucinations, or hallucinations that only occur infrequently in comparison to other psychotic disorders
•no memory loss, medical illness or drug or alcohol-related effects are associated with the development of delusions
Demographics
The base rate of delusional disorder in adults is unclear. The prevalence is estimated at 0.025-0.03%, lower than the rates for schizophrenia (1%). Delusional disorder may account for 1–2% of admissions to inpatient psychiatric hospitals. Age at onset ranges from 18–90 years, with a mean age of 40 years. More females than males (overall) suffer from delusional disorder, especially the late onset form that is observed in the elderly.
Diagnosis
Client interviews focused on obtaining information about the sufferer's life situation and past history aid in identification of delusional disorder. With the client's permission, the clinician obtains details from earlier medical records, and engages in thorough discussion with the client's immediate family—helpful measures in determining whether delusions are present. The clinician may use a semi-structured interview called a mental status examination to assess the patient's concentration, memory, understanding the individual's situation and logical thinking. The mental status examination is intended to reveal peculiar thought processes in the patient. The Peters Delusion Inventory (PDI) is a psychological test that focuses on identifying and understanding delusional thinking; but its use is more common in research than in clinical practice.
Even using the DSM-IV-TR criteria listed above, classification of delusional disorder is relatively subjective. The criteria "non-bizarre" and "resistant to change" and "not culturally accepted" are all subject to very individual interpretations. They create variability in how professionals diagnose the illness. The utility of diagnosing the syndrome rather than focusing on successful treatment of delusion in any form of illness is debated in the medical community. Some researchers further contend that delusional disorder, currently classified as a psychotic disorder, is actually a variation of depression and might respond better to antidepressants or therapy more similar to that utilized for depression. Also, the meaning and implications of "culturally accepted" can create problems. The cultural relativity of "delusions,"—most evident where the beliefs shown are typical of the person's subculture or religion yet would be viewed as strange or delusional by the dominant culture—can force complex choices to be made in diagnosis and treatment. An example could be that of a Haitian immigrant to the United States who believed in voodoo. If that person became aggressive toward neighbors issuing curses or hexes, believing that death is imminent at the hands of those neighbors, a question arises. The belief is typical of the individual's subculture, so the issue is whether it should be diagnosed or treated. If it were to be treated, whether the remedy should come through Western medicine, or be conducted through voodoo shamanistic treatment is the problem to be solved.
Treatments
Delusional disorder treatment often involves atypical (also called novel or newer-generation ) antipsychotic medications, which can be effective in some patients. Risperidone (Risperdal), quetiapine (Seroquel), and olanzapine (Zyprexa) are all examples of atypical or novel antipsychotic medications. If agitation occurs, a number of different antipsychotics can be used to conclude the outbreak of acute agitation. Agitation, a state of frantic activity experienced concurrently with anger or exaggerated fearfulness, increases the risk that the client will endanger self or others. To decrease anxiety and slow behavior in emergency situations where agitation is a factor, an injection of haloperidol (Haldol) is often given usually in combination with other medications (often lorazepam , also known as Ativan). Agitation in delusional disorder is a typical response to severe or harsh confrontation when dealing with the existence of the delusions. It can also be a result of blocking the individual from performing inappropriate actions the client views as urgent in light of the delusional reality. A novel antipsychotic is generally given orally on a daily basis for ongoing treatment meant for long-term effect on the symptoms. Response to antipsychotics in delusional disorder seems to follow the "rule of thirds," in which about one-third of patients respond somewhat positively, one-third show little change, and one-third worsen or are unable to comply.
Cognitive therapy has shown promise as an emerging treatment for delusions. The cognitive therapist tries to capitalize on any doubt the individual has about the delusions; then attempts to develop a joint effort with the sufferer to generate alternative explanations, assisting the client in checking the evidence. This examination proceeds in favor of the various explanations. Much of the work is done by use of empathy, asking hypothetical questions in a form of therapeutic Socratic dialogue—a process that follows a basic question and answer format, figuring out what is known and unknown before reaching a logical conclusion. Combining pharmacotherapy with cognitive therapy integrates both treating the possible underlying biological problems and decreasing the symptoms with psychotherapy.
Prognosis
Evidence collected to date indicates about 10% of cases will show some improvement of delusional symptoms though irrational beliefs may remain; 33–50% may show complete remission; and, in 30–40% of cases there will be persistent non-improving symptoms. The prognosis for clients with delusional disorder is largely related to the level of conviction regarding the delusions and the openness the person has for allowing information that contradicts the delusion.
Prevention
Little work has been done thus far regarding prevention of the disorder. Effective means of prevention have not been identified.
Read more: Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults Delusional disorder - define, causes, DSM, functioning, effects, therapy, paranoia, adults
Notice that if enough people hold a delusion then it magically becomes non-delusional.
javaguru
Banned
lol! What the hell? You are unbelievable. Everyone here knows you are full of shit most of the time.
For the record, both, but I deserved it....dad was only involved when I really fucked up.
People are entitled to hold their opinions and beliefs but they aren't entitled to it being recognized as factual.
Just sayin'....If the majority of people in the United States want man being created in our current form taught in biology class then they need to provide more evidence than I was taught this by my parents/church and the Bible tells me so.
I know that today's skeptics are trendy, mindless, zombie followers that let others tell them what to think in exchange for a label and the delusion of not being a dumb.
Nothing in your link said anything about young earth creationism...you are so good at reading between the lines and reading things that are not there that if you were a Christian you'd probably be a young earther too.
If that is true then it is a little disturbing but it still means nothing. It would just mean that most Christians don't read Genesis because it says nothing about the age of the earth even if you took it literally. It does not matter, the majority of Christians are not my authority. Maybe I can't call myself a regular Christian then...but I can say from my experience that I've never met someone that believed in YEC under the age of 75. Twenty years from now those ideas will be dead along with the olds that believe it.
Last edited:
lol... that had me giggling becuase of what you consider "fact"
I think you're a regular christian. I go to a church of 6000 that basically teaches the exact same sort of things you've spoken of in this thread. I think they get it right in ways so many get it wrong. Pokey, her ideas aren't weird, they are just not controversial enough to have reached your ears before. There's plenty of us out there who feel the same way.
Things that can be observed and proven?
that was kinda a joke only java would get I think...
(and it has nothing to do with religion/creation/evolution btw lol)
*can't observe or prove graviton*
*concludes that gravity does not exist*
lol
*can't observe or prove graviton*
*concludes that gravity does not exist*
Are you saying that it can't be observed or proven? Or just that it hasn't yet?
Predicted by the standard model. But since it's a propagator of the weakest of the fundamental forces (along with the photon, W and Z bosons, and gluons), experimental observation is way out of our league. Like, this shit makes the Higgs look like a fucking standing wave.
Theoretically, it's quite interesting. Moarso then even the gluon and other cool virtual particles. (Yes, we can prove virtual particles are real. We can "borrow" energy from the universe to create a particle detectable in our spacetime as long as it's really tiny and only exists for a short period of time. This is how we can "visually" (via non-vis EM radiation) detect black holes, viz. Hawking radiation)
Graviton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scoff-scoff-scoff-scoff..
The dominant belief in Christianity today is God wants to make your life perfect too. Hence, horrible source and horrible stats. In other words, people believe what they want to hear. I can prove about a time gap, but you don't have ears to hear. Anyway, keep doing what you do, trying to destroy God's credibilty. You have atheists starting to question their beliefs. God uses you more than anyone to spread the gospel. God reversed the whole game on you. Good job...
Last edited:
mrplunkey
New member
Predicted by the standard model. But since it's a propagator of the weakest of the fundamental forces (along with the photon, W and Z bosons, and gluons), experimental observation is way out of our league. Like, this shit makes the Higgs look like a fucking standing wave.
Theoretically, it's quite interesting. Moarso then even the gluon and other cool virtual particles. (Yes, we can prove virtual particles are real. We can "borrow" energy from the universe to create a particle detectable in our spacetime as long as it's really tiny and only exists for a short period of time. This is how we can "visually" (via non-vis EM radiation) detect black holes, viz. Hawking radiation)
Graviton - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is interesting, but what does pick3 have to say on the subject???
Are you talking about the gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2?
Indeed, you brilliant Harry Truman lover.
Are there any real Atheists who actually don't believe in God? No. There are no Honest Atheists.
He seems to have a strange fascination with the interaction between top quarks and bottom quarks.
javaguru
Banned
*can't observe or prove graviton*
*concludes that gravity does not exist*
Which is why I'm promoting the theory of intelligent falling be taught in all physics classes from high school through college as an alternative.
Lol
Java can stop trolling Cindy for attention now, she's moved on to Arabian.
she totally cheated on me
after 4 years of me being totally faithful
I'm kidding Cindy lol
javaguru
Banned
Not really, supernatural belief doesn't even arise to a hypothesis let alone being worth testing; It would like be trying to disprove Santa Clause, Unicorns or Leprechauns....not worth the effort.
I thought this was something you had given some thought but I realize now you have not thought about it at all. Just like the authors of books you have not read but still quote on this forum, you are full of sensationalism and lack substance.
No one cares that you're an atheist. You don't like Christians because they are judgmental and think they are better than everyone...and you don't see the irony in that.
I deleted my post while editing..lol i tried to retype it
Yes it is. I never mind challenging my faith, people that don't challenge their faith don't manage to hold on to it for very long and I'm not afraid to grapple with doubt. Doubt is just doubt and no reason for me to run in the opposite direction while I temporarily struggle with it. The new atheist literature, although packaged and put together for mass consumption sometimes raise some good points but none of them are convincing. It is obvious they don't know anything about religion and have no understanding of things that religious scholars have spent decades honing and they don't even bother responding to it. Hitchens has a hard time with the most basic parable of the good samaritian. What they have to say just has no effect one me. IDK what else to say. It would take a lot to convince me of naturalism if Christianity was shown false, I wouldn't run into the arms of naturalism. There are strong arguments against God/Christianity (for example what samoth posted) and usually involve evil/suffering and have not convinced me. The weakest ones are the science ones, the idea that evolution disproves God etc...just does not do it for me.
ha okay sure that did cheer me up a bit.
That and skipping church, making pancakes, and laying around on Sunday morning with my daughter...I'm in a pretty good mood now
Last edited:
ha that did cheer me up a bit.
Did you drink any ORANGE JUICE?!
oh Cindy, that's just gonna fuel the java fire.
lol I know I'm barely a xtian now
I had a very very good reason to skip this morning
I had a very very good reason to skip this morning
mitch banting?
don't worry Cindy, Mitch may be gone, but jacked jesus is forever!
javaguru
Banned
Her Jesus street cred is on thin ice....
true
bigpokey
Banned
loll pokey all fogged up
I am a regular drunkard. This idea that all Christians are young earth creationist bible literalists is just not true! We live in two realms the spirit and the natural...religion is pure flesh. Outside of that, if you wanted to label me, label me a Baptist. Jesus does not come into your heart...lol but the Holy Spirit does technically I guess...lol...I don't see how that is weird or different..idk if someone wants to say I'm not a true Christian I guess that's their problem, I agree with the important basics I guess...I go to a Baptist church right now.
I personally think Christianity to be probably true, and I can supplement my experiences with the Holy Spirit, and I can live assured with what I know to be true. Yes I believe Jesus walked on water and performed miracles. I trust the bible as far as its credibility about Jesus historically. I think that the bible can represent objective history. Anything outside of that is historical relativism which can be overcome if you think about it. Just because someone types something that sounds smart on a message board does not mean shit, really, or just because you think you learned something from someone smarter than you does not make it true either...where did they get their information, where are their biases and how was it taught to them and how have ideas about history changed over time? Have historians always always gone about their task the same way? The records on the life of Jesus were written in the first generation while the witnesses were still alive. I know human behavior and motivation. People don't lie when it does not benefit them and might kill them. About what the bible says…no, if people that can’t read and don’t know about Jesus, they don’t automatically die and go to hell…no. (Romans) No, I don’t believe in a 100% literal bible, it’s impossible to read that way for example there are not seven literal candlesticks in the book of Revelation…no one takes Daniel literally…etc but I still believe it to be 100% true. There is no reason to take the creation story literally (even if we did the bible never addresses the age of the earth or the universe)if we understand the context of who it was written to and when it was written. People miss points that are delivered through nuance and context they read things that are not there...like young earth creationism and dinosaurs living with humans. There is just nothing in there that says that. The bible also has paradoxes, which do not make sense to the common mind. Jesus said, "to save your life you must lose it," that doesn't make sense to the natural mind but in the spirit it makes all the sense in the world. Those are my personal beliefs. Holy fuggin long paragraph. Sorry if you made it this far. Good thing I can type quickly
fyp
what do u think seems more likely that jesus walked on water or people made up that jesus walked on water to give him gold street cred?
streets of gold? huh? why even have streets? spirits gotta walk on streets? wings for angels? winged people? really?
more likely that god told people the streets were gold in heaven or people tried to convince people bout heaven and how awesome it was there with shiny gold streets?
whats the point of walkin on water? if jeezy walked on water couldn't he just fly around like superman? coulda did way more miracles flyin around prolly, i bet he was fast
if god made us in his image and all that wouldn't he have made something inherent in us that allowed us to find god without having to read a bible or learn anything from anyone else?? like a piece of the brain, they had those experiments that showed which part of the brain activated during spiritual experiences, kinda makes sense i dunno im pretty fogly
maybe im sweatin the details too much, but i think if xtians were less forceful about trivial details more people would be inclined to accept the religion as a whole... if ppl didn't have to agree with shit like jonah got swallowed by a whale and lived in its stomach for like a fukn week (gtfo) then maybe more people would be open to christianity?
btw u think jonah live in a whale? really? jus chillin like building a fire in his stomach to grill some fish and have some light? jus chillin in the whale belly?
this could be true, actually my location prolly has a lot to do with what i would assume xtians to believe... i could be completely ignorant to the majority opinions in christendom... "plenty of us out there feel the same way" makes sense i guess since it's not like there's a lot of denominations or anything
Oh whatever. 
ANYWAY I know you're joking pokey...and I know you're fogged and I promise I'm not trying to get you to convert or anything just trying to help you understand Christians a little better. Sometimes I think false ideas are the biggest obstacles to people understanding Christianity, thinking it a delusion or that we are crazy rednecks. It is okay to sweat the details, especially when you're fogged.
I completely understand where you are coming from because often what people talk about Christianity isn't what is in the bible or what people practice or think. The evidence of God is in everything around us. Angels don't have wings and you don't have to accept anything to be a Christian except that Christ is God in the flesh. Spirits walking on streets? We won't be spirits we will have bodies...Christians don't believe half of the stuff you're saying unless they are a social Christian which is kinda like that Norway bomber guy. It has nothing to do with the actual religion or what it teaches; it's a misconception. We can't keep pretending that any of that stuff makes Christianity false.
It is written that Jesus performed miracles. Just looking back on history and how it is gathered you can make a decision on if the bible is credible. Jesus was an actual person who lived in Judea and it is acknowleged in historical writings from Christian, jews and pagans. He was put to death and after his death we was worshiped by men because he had performed miracles throughout his life. They have been written down in the first generation of people who saw them. Again, understanding human behavior and motivation we know that the people who wrote this and people that switched religions to worship Christ, their OWN religion before would forbid lying and to make a false witness. They wouldn't get any money or honor; why would they do it? People died for it. Do people die for a lie they knew was made up or a lie they had made up themselves? Plus I understand the importance with historical proofs you have to rely on the testimony otherwise all of history collapes, really. Other types of historical proofs are accepted on no other ground but themselves.
"If men know anything with assurance, it is the facts; and of everything that falls within their knowledge, there is nothing in which it would be more difficult to deceive them and over which there would be less occasion for dispute. And thus, when one will have made them see that the Christian religion is inseparably attached to facts whose truth cannot be sincerely contested, they must submit to all that it teaches or else renounce sincerity and reason"
So...after thinking about it you should be able to determine that neither lack of direct access to the past or really neutrality can stop us from learning something about Christianity if it does not stop us from learning about other history. But really, those were not my initial assumptions either so I'm not sure that is the right road to go down in attempting to explain. You do not have to accept it as infallible or anything just keep an open mind; change perspective. Christianity isn't about the inches that fell in the flood or how long a man spent in a fish stomach. The bible describes a very real God because of the way it's revealed. All of those authors over all of those years come together and make sense when looking at the big picture of man's struggle with our nature, God's nature, and the final solution to our selfishness.
The miracles...I understand that it would be difficult for many people to accept Christianity because of the problem with the miracles. It's hard to go into this because to even start here I (personally) presuppose the existence of God. If God exists miracles are not really that incredible. However, all of this has been argued and written over the centuries. You are not the first person to think this, this was argued back in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. If you're interested you should look into theologian Jean Le Clerc, philosopher-theologian Samuel Clarke..there's more..it would take me hours to type it all up...and I don't have that kind of time this evening. The only reason that someone would dismiss the bible only because of the miracles contained in them has to assume that miracles defy natural law. If you just do some digging the world might be a much more fun place than you imagine
So, I guess what I'm trying to say that I understand finding it hard to believe the miracles but once you starting thinking more about God and trying to understand him (I guess) they stop being a problem(at least they have for me) because for me all of that stuff came later. As far as God building us to know him, we are supposed to seek. Somewhere along the line humanity "fell" and lost touch with God. It helps by thinking God as the ultimate libertarian (because that is what he is!) He puts a "tree" there with no fence, no police, nothing to stop us and says "dont eat it". He gives us free will. He risks the destruction of everything, why? Because He values freedom.
ANYWAY I know you're joking pokey...and I know you're fogged and I promise I'm not trying to get you to convert or anything just trying to help you understand Christians a little better. Sometimes I think false ideas are the biggest obstacles to people understanding Christianity, thinking it a delusion or that we are crazy rednecks. It is okay to sweat the details, especially when you're fogged.
I completely understand where you are coming from because often what people talk about Christianity isn't what is in the bible or what people practice or think. The evidence of God is in everything around us. Angels don't have wings and you don't have to accept anything to be a Christian except that Christ is God in the flesh. Spirits walking on streets? We won't be spirits we will have bodies...Christians don't believe half of the stuff you're saying unless they are a social Christian which is kinda like that Norway bomber guy. It has nothing to do with the actual religion or what it teaches; it's a misconception. We can't keep pretending that any of that stuff makes Christianity false.
It is written that Jesus performed miracles. Just looking back on history and how it is gathered you can make a decision on if the bible is credible. Jesus was an actual person who lived in Judea and it is acknowleged in historical writings from Christian, jews and pagans. He was put to death and after his death we was worshiped by men because he had performed miracles throughout his life. They have been written down in the first generation of people who saw them. Again, understanding human behavior and motivation we know that the people who wrote this and people that switched religions to worship Christ, their OWN religion before would forbid lying and to make a false witness. They wouldn't get any money or honor; why would they do it? People died for it. Do people die for a lie they knew was made up or a lie they had made up themselves? Plus I understand the importance with historical proofs you have to rely on the testimony otherwise all of history collapes, really. Other types of historical proofs are accepted on no other ground but themselves.
"If men know anything with assurance, it is the facts; and of everything that falls within their knowledge, there is nothing in which it would be more difficult to deceive them and over which there would be less occasion for dispute. And thus, when one will have made them see that the Christian religion is inseparably attached to facts whose truth cannot be sincerely contested, they must submit to all that it teaches or else renounce sincerity and reason"
So...after thinking about it you should be able to determine that neither lack of direct access to the past or really neutrality can stop us from learning something about Christianity if it does not stop us from learning about other history. But really, those were not my initial assumptions either so I'm not sure that is the right road to go down in attempting to explain. You do not have to accept it as infallible or anything just keep an open mind; change perspective. Christianity isn't about the inches that fell in the flood or how long a man spent in a fish stomach. The bible describes a very real God because of the way it's revealed. All of those authors over all of those years come together and make sense when looking at the big picture of man's struggle with our nature, God's nature, and the final solution to our selfishness.
The miracles...I understand that it would be difficult for many people to accept Christianity because of the problem with the miracles. It's hard to go into this because to even start here I (personally) presuppose the existence of God. If God exists miracles are not really that incredible. However, all of this has been argued and written over the centuries. You are not the first person to think this, this was argued back in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. If you're interested you should look into theologian Jean Le Clerc, philosopher-theologian Samuel Clarke..there's more..it would take me hours to type it all up...and I don't have that kind of time this evening. The only reason that someone would dismiss the bible only because of the miracles contained in them has to assume that miracles defy natural law. If you just do some digging the world might be a much more fun place than you imagine
So, I guess what I'm trying to say that I understand finding it hard to believe the miracles but once you starting thinking more about God and trying to understand him (I guess) they stop being a problem(at least they have for me) because for me all of that stuff came later. As far as God building us to know him, we are supposed to seek. Somewhere along the line humanity "fell" and lost touch with God. It helps by thinking God as the ultimate libertarian (because that is what he is!) He puts a "tree" there with no fence, no police, nothing to stop us and says "dont eat it". He gives us free will. He risks the destruction of everything, why? Because He values freedom.
stfu!
lol I wish. If I couldn't type so fast I'm sure I could find a way to make my posts about this stuff shorter. I annoy myself. I know it's annoying yet I can't stop myself.
well, sorry but I cannot get my ADHD to calm down long enough to make it through even the first paragraph. lol
"If men know anything with assurance, it is the facts; and of everything that falls within their knowledge, there is nothing in which it would be more difficult to deceive them and over which there would be less occasion for dispute. And thus, when one will have made them see that the Christian religion is inseparably attached to facts whose truth cannot be sincerely contested, they must submit to all that it teaches or else renounce sincerity and reason"
So...after thinking about it you should be able to determine that neither lack of direct access to the past or really neutrality can stop us from learning something about Christianity if it does not stop us from learning about other history. But really, those were not my initial assumptions either so I'm not sure that is the right road to go down in attempting to explain. You do not have to accept it as infallible or anything just keep an open mind; change perspective. Christianity isn't about the inches that fell in the flood or how long a man spent in a fish stomach. The bible describes a very real God because of the way it's revealed. All of those authors over all of those years come together and make sense when looking at the big picture of man's struggle with our nature, God's nature, and the final solution to our selfishness.
The miracles...I understand that it would be difficult for many people to accept Christianity because of the problem with the miracles. It's hard to go into this because to even start here I (personally) presuppose the existence of God. If God exists miracles are not really that incredible. However, all of this has been argued and written over the centuries. You are not the first person to think this, this was argued back in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. If you're interested you should look into theologian Jean Le Clerc, philosopher-theologian Samuel Clarke..there's more..it would take me hours to type it all up...and I don't have that kind of time this evening. The only reason that someone would dismiss the bible only because of the miracles contained in them has to assume that miracles defy natural law. If you just do some digging the world might be a much more fun place than you imagine
So, I guess what I'm trying to say that I understand finding it hard to believe the miracles but once you starting thinking more about God and trying to understand him (I guess) they stop being a problem(at least they have for me) because for me all of that stuff came later. As far as God building us to know him, we are supposed to seek. Somewhere along the line humanity "fell" and lost touch with God. It helps by thinking God as the ultimate libertarian (because that is what he is!) He puts a "tree" there with no fence, no police, nothing to stop us and says "dont eat it". He gives us free will. He risks the destruction of everything, why? Because He values freedom.
Okay, but do you think these words can apply to dozens of other religions across the globe? Christianity doesn't have the only holy book, the only omnipotent/omniscient/all-good being, the only incarnate flesh-form child. One thing I don't understand is why all religions and gods are necessarily mutually exclusive.
If you maintain there exists a god, and you're wrong about your particular god, you will suffer extensively in the correct religion's hell should your choice happen to be incorrect. Does that disturb you, or is that a risk you are willing to take because you have free will and choices and there exists evil and similarsuch?
Okay, but do you think these words can apply to dozens of other religions across the globe? Christianity doesn't have the only holy book, the only omnipotent/omniscient/all-good being, the only incarnate flesh-form child. One thing I don't understand is why all religions and gods are necessarily mutually exclusive.
If you maintain there exists a god, and you're wrong about your particular god, you will suffer extensively in the correct religion's hell should your choice happen to be incorrect. Does that disturb you, or is that a risk you are willing to take because you have free will and choices and there exists evil and similarsuch?
They could apply. I don't want to disrespect anyone's religion or spirituality. I'm not sure I can answer that without doing just that. I've read their holy books and found them either incomplete, kinda redundant statements about morality or their prophet/s were deceptive (to me). I at some point in the future could reject Christiany but would probably (I say this now) embrace some general god outlook. I would have to have an epiphany, some core theme of Christianity would have to be proven false, or it could become unlivable/ conflict with reality. So no, I don't worry too much. If I'm wrong I'll figure it out eventually...
Crap. That's not a usual retort against such arguments, so I need to think of something else, lol.
Another thing I have against many religions is that their books have been translated through half a dozen major languages over dozens of centuries, yet most cannot read anything but the current Wal-Mart version of their book. Wouldn't a truly religious person devote the necessary time and resources (since we're talking about their eternal soul and stuff) to learn at least the latin translation and interpretations?
Crap. That's not a usual retort against such arguments, so I need to think of something else, lol.
Another thing I have against many religions is that their books have been translated through half a dozen major languages over dozens of centuries, yet most cannot read anything but the current Wal-Mart version of their book. Wouldn't a truly religious person devote the necessary time and resources (since we're talking about their eternal soul and stuff) to learn at least the latin translation and interpretations?
If you did you would be living under the assumption that those texts were the infallible inspired word of God. So no one can know the word of God except by piecing together 5,000 or so different pieces of manuscript? Inspiration is only in the originals?
PICK3
New member
I certainly don't know much about different religions (or the differences between christian religions), but I've always been under the impression that religions treat their respective holy books as the words of their respective gods (whether directly or by proxy), and although interpretations may vary by political opinions (roman catholic church, etc.), they are indeed infallible.
Can you tell me that you trust the catholic monks that King James hired in the late 1500s to dictate to you their personal and political interpretations of the words of god as originally written? Do you not wonder how the original (or older) texts read or how interpretations may have changed over the millenia? I mean, I'm not religious and even I wonder this.
I certainly don't know much about different religions (or the differences between christian religions), but I've always been under the impression that religions treat their respective holy books as the words of their respective gods (whether directly or by proxy), and although interpretations may vary by political opinions (roman catholic church, etc.), they are indeed infallible.
Can you tell me that you trust the catholic monks that King James hired in the late 1500s to dictate to you their personal and political interpretations of the words of god as originally written? Do you not wonder how the original (or older) texts read or how interpretations may have changed over the millenia? I mean, I'm not religious and even I wonder this.
I have thought about that. I don't think that a translation can't be inspired. The book of Rev ends in 90 AD yet the books of Acts lays out the manuscripts in advance and one is pure. There may be over 5,000 different texts but they all fall into three categories they come through Rome, Alexandria or Antioch. In the Byzantine texts have Paul's preserved writings in the Greek and are part of the Antioch family of manuscripts. The Egyptian manuscript is corrupted in over 6,000 places and no one should trust anything that comes out of Rome.
lol The KJV1611 came from Erasmus... texts that people paid for with their lives against the Roman Catholic Church/Inquisition for not denying the Syrian text from Antioch.
I think it's far more likely that they were all written by men, with an agenda.
Crap. That's not a usual retort against such arguments, so I need to think of something else, lol.
Another thing I have against many religions is that their books have been translated through half a dozen major languages over dozens of centuries, yet most cannot read anything but the current Wal-Mart version of their book. Wouldn't a truly religious person devote the necessary time and resources (since we're talking about their eternal soul and stuff) to learn at least the latin translation and interpretations?
Why would people waste their time reading the bible in latin. The old testament was originally written in Hebrew and the New Testament was originally written in Greek, so yes! we do devote time to study the bible in its original language. No, a truly religious person would not devote time, but a truly spiritual person does spend time to learn.
Christians make up 33% of the worlds population, Muslims make up 20%, Hindus about 13%, 14% non religion, 2% atheists, and different religions make up the rest of the percentages. Hindus worship cows, atheists don't believe in anything, the rest of the religions are by-products of Christianity and Islam or from the Satanic church, Satan is classified as a bible character, so you can actually limit the arguement to Christianity vs Islam.
Why in hell can't the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can't they be like Marines.
Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918
I was going easy on people by saing latin, but if you want to learn hebrew, I'm all for that.
Link? I thought it was the wycliff version that got him/others killed.
BRB, there's a treefrog on my computer cord.
