A psychological approch to how religion works

[Gregoriouse]

Repentance is basically the way of securing the delusion. Oddly enough it’s about the same in parallel, to the final initiations used in cults. The really terrible thing about original sin is how it effects the real self and the ideal self. It’s a belief system that says this:

My ideal self is to be as good in god’s eyes as possible: perfection
My real self is a terrible incurable sinner. Like the amazing graze goes: a wretch.
I also believe that I can never in my life time achieve my ideal self: frustration

If I can make you think with your emotions, and not your mind, I can control you. What a better way to make a person think with their emotions than to convince them that about this idea of original sin; to make the real self and ideal self as far apart as possible, to the point that they opposite each other. The real and ideal self being far apart is a psychological explanation for what causes frustration, hence depression and anger. To get people to think with their emotions, you fuel the emotions. Friedrich Nietzsche first proposed that religion exploits human emotions. I’m explaining how it does it. Although this of course differs depending on if an individual believe it, and how deeply they believe it. In this sense Religion functions like a sociopathic-ideology.

[tackattack]

guilt, conviction and repentance have little to nothing to do with delusion. They are basic human responces to experiential stimuli. What causes the guilt/conviction or the reasons behind the repentance can be based in delusional concepts or real concepts. That's dependant on what you term "real". For instance : Would you feel guilty killing a kid? Of course, would you ask for fogiveness from the parents and seek restitution and attempt to justify your actions? That has nothing to do with any kind of delusion. Emotions and intellect are not mutually exclusive, but one can overide the other when it's overemphasized.

As far as a Chrisitan perspective on pitting an ideal self versus a real self, it's not exclusive to religion, nor is it always detrimental. Don't olympians have an ideal performance they're aspiring to? The fact that most religions hold that ideal self as an absolute value just means you don't have to continuously move the bar. Failure to attain an ideal doesn't depress the average individual, nor does it in most Christians I know. It lends no power to becoming overly emotional about failure to attain then the contrast between ideal/real self being opposites you're describing. In fact seeing that the bar is at a constant level (absolute value) it's easier , IMO, to keep it in focus for betterment of one's self. It's dogmatic in Christianity that you can't attain the goal, but it's never been about attaing it. It's about the struggle of betterment and an ideal. That ideal is absolute and a far better test than a finite bar set by human intellect. The struggle can get cumbersome at times, as can any self-imposed goal, but most religions have that built in hope thing called salvation for encouragement.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

[Zen Badger]

---

guilt, conviction and repentance have little to nothing to do with delusion. They are basic human responces to experiential stimuli. What causes the guilt/conviction or the reasons behind the repentance can be based in delusional concepts or real concepts. That's dependant on what you term "real". For instance : Would you feel guilty killing a kid? Of course, would you ask for fogiveness from the parents and seek restitution and attempt to justify your actions? That has nothing to do with any kind of delusion. Emotions and intellect are not mutually exclusive, but one can overide the other when it's overemphasized.

As far as a Chrisitan perspective on pitting an ideal self versus a real self, it's not exclusive to religion, nor is it always detrimental. Don't olympians have an ideal performance they're aspiring to? The fact that most religions hold that ideal self as an absolute value just means you don't have to continuously move the bar. Failure to attain an ideal doesn't depress the average individual, nor does it in most Christians I know. It lends no power to becoming overly emotional about failure to attain then the contrast between ideal/real self being opposites you're describing. In fact seeing that the bar is at a constant level (absolute value) it's easier , IMO, to keep it in focus for betterment of one's self. It's dogmatic in Christianity that you can't attain the goal, but it's never been about attaing it. It's about the struggle of betterment and an ideal. That ideal is absolute and a far better test than a finite bar set by human intellect. The struggle can get cumbersome at times, as can any self-imposed goal, but most religions have that built in hope thing called salvation for encouragement.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

---

But religion convinces you that you are a sinner from birth.

That you should feel guilty just for being alive.

Which is strange when when you think about it, god created you as a sinner. So he's set you up to fail before you're even born. Unless you beg for forgiveness from him because he made you that way in the first place.

[tackattack]

---

[quote='tackattack' pid='117789' dateline='1297763649']
guilt, conviction and repentance have little to nothing to do with delusion. They are basic human responces to experiential stimuli. What causes the guilt/conviction or the reasons behind the repentance can be based in delusional concepts or real concepts. That's dependant on what you term "real". For instance : Would you feel guilty killing a kid? Of course, would you ask for fogiveness from the parents and seek restitution and attempt to justify your actions? That has nothing to do with any kind of delusion. Emotions and intellect are not mutually exclusive, but one can overide the other when it's overemphasized.

As far as a Chrisitan perspective on pitting an ideal self versus a real self, it's not exclusive to religion, nor is it always detrimental. Don't olympians have an ideal performance they're aspiring to? The fact that most religions hold that ideal self as an absolute value just means you don't have to continuously move the bar. Failure to attain an ideal doesn't depress the average individual, nor does it in most Christians I know. It lends no power to becoming overly emotional about failure to attain then the contrast between ideal/real self being opposites you're describing. In fact seeing that the bar is at a constant level (absolute value) it's easier , IMO, to keep it in focus for betterment of one's self. It's dogmatic in Christianity that you can't attain the goal, but it's never been about attaing it. It's about the struggle of betterment and an ideal. That ideal is absolute and a far better test than a finite bar set by human intellect. The struggle can get cumbersome at times, as can any self-imposed goal, but most religions have that built in hope thing called salvation for encouragement.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

---

[KichigaiNeko]

---

[quote='tackattack' pid='117789' dateline='1297763649']
guilt, conviction and repentance have little to nothing to do with delusion. They are basic human responces to experiential stimuli. What causes the guilt/conviction or the reasons behind the repentance can be based in delusional concepts or real concepts. That's dependant on what you term "real". For instance : Would you feel guilty killing a kid? Of course, would you ask for fogiveness from the parents and seek restitution and attempt to justify your actions? That has nothing to do with any kind of delusion. Emotions and intellect are not mutually exclusive, but one can overide the other when it's overemphasized.

As far as a Chrisitan perspective on pitting an ideal self versus a real self, it's not exclusive to religion, nor is it always detrimental. Don't olympians have an ideal performance they're aspiring to? The fact that most religions hold that ideal self as an absolute value just means you don't have to continuously move the bar. Failure to attain an ideal doesn't depress the average individual, nor does it in most Christians I know. It lends no power to becoming overly emotional about failure to attain then the contrast between ideal/real self being opposites you're describing. In fact seeing that the bar is at a constant level (absolute value) it's easier , IMO, to keep it in focus for betterment of one's self. It's dogmatic in Christianity that you can't attain the goal, but it's never been about attaing it. It's about the struggle of betterment and an ideal. That ideal is absolute and a far better test than a finite bar set by human intellect. The struggle can get cumbersome at times, as can any self-imposed goal, but most religions have that built in hope thing called salvation for encouragement.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

But religion convinces you that you are a sinner from birth.

Not mine. We have the cumpulsion to sin, but sinning is an act that requires understanding and the mental fascilities to rationalize and decide, which aren't inherit to newborns, but learned.

That you should feel guilty just for being alive.

Not mine.
"I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly”
1 John 10:10
My biblical understanding of it is that Jesus wants us to live a full and prosperous life free from guilt, sin and shame.

Which is strange when when you think about it, god created you as a sinner. So he's set you up to fail before you're even born. Unless you beg for forgiveness from him because he made you that way in the first place.

He's created opportunities for you to choose to sin. There's not a lot of calvanistic predistined teaching of "no free will" left around that I can find in Christianity. Repentance is a great way to actually promote personally accountability in an individual which , IMO, is severly lacking in both society and your idea of Christianity.

---

[tackattack]

With such an exhaustive and thorough argument KN I'm not sure where to begin.. I conceed to the greater intellect.

[Edwardo Piet]

Religions still seem immature to me.

[OnlyNatural]

Repentance is a great way to actually promote personally accountability in an individual

I've heard other Christians say something similar to this. But I still don't understand how repentance promotes personal responsibility... If you 'sin,' no matter how bad the sin, you can always repent to a higher power and He'll forgive you, a universal get-out-of-jail-free card. You don't really have to be accountable, because you get to turn over your responsibility to God.

I suppose there are people who also do the right thing, and try to rectify their wrongs. But that doesn't require confessing them to any deity. It is other people you have wronged, and it is these other people who will decide whether or not to forgive you.

[Edwardo Piet]

It's halfway to full responsibility. You admit you've done wrong, but you nevertheless can just be forgiven again and again if you do the same in future. It has present moment responsibility but it lacks future responsibility.

[HeyItsZeus]

Brainwashing from an early age.