In your opinion what causes christians to believe in Jesus

[Fake Messiah]

Always with the armchair psychology lol. Go ahead, tell us what cognitive dissonance is and how it explains the behavior that Boru alleged?

Armchair psychology - hmmm...projecting much?

Breezy, you have become one of biggest trolls on this forum.  It's a shame because I think you may be smart enough, under your facade, to actually contribute positively to the members here.

Yeah, Breezy has become cocky because Belacqua is fellating him - as he does to all of the trolls on AF.

[Alan V]

Cognitive dissonance.

Always with the armchair psychology lol. Go ahead, tell us what cognitive dissonance is and how it explains the behavior that Boru alleged?

What good are psychological insights if they can't be applied by relatively well-read laypeople?

These days anyone can Google "cognitive dissonance":  "Cognitive dissonance is a state of psychological discomfort experienced when holding conflicting beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors simultaneously. This discomfort motivates individuals to reduce the inconsistency, often by changing their beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors, or by adding new cognitions to justify their actions."

In this case it applies to why religious people, who probably believe in both Christianity and science, seek scientific or at least pseudo-scientific support for their religious beliefs, instead of just dropping one for the other.

Cognitive dissonance in such cases is almost an admission that "something isn't quite right here." Consistency is an accomplishment which too few people are clever enough to pull off.
I certainly did not in my own lifetime, so I understand the problem personally.

[Thumpalumpacus]

In all fairness, I don't know why religionists insist on dragging science - and more often pseudo science - into their beliefs. They could simply say, 'It's all magic' and go off and have a nice brunch.

It's a lack of faith.

[John 6IX Breezy]

What good are psychological insights if they can't be applied by relatively well-read laypeople?
These days anyone can Google....

Yeah, that's the problem. You think that a superficial access to information imbues you with expertise. It is also highly irresponsible for you to pickpocket psychological theories as tools to self-diagnose and diagnose others. 

Consistency is an accomplishment which too few people are clever enough to pull off. I certainly did not in my own lifetime, so I understand the problem personally.

This is so backwards. The theory predicts that we are motivated to maintain consistency between our beliefs and behaviors: when there is dissonance we quickly seek to resolve it. So why are you saying consistency is an accomplishment few pull off, when the theory views consistency as the baseline we are always at and always strive to return to?

[Nay_Sayer]

You don't know what a theory is.

[Angrboda]

Always with the armchair psychology lol. Go ahead, tell us what cognitive dissonance is and how it explains the behavior that Boru alleged?

What good are psychological insights if they can't be applied by relatively well-read laypeople?

These days anyone can Google "cognitive dissonance":  "Cognitive dissonance is a state of psychological discomfort experienced when holding conflicting beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors simultaneously. This discomfort motivates individuals to reduce the inconsistency, often by changing their beliefs, attitudes, or behaviors, or by adding new cognitions to justify their actions."

In this case it applies to why religious people, who probably believe in both Christianity and science, seek scientific or at least pseudo-scientific support for their religious beliefs, instead of just dropping one for the other.

Cognitive dissonance in such cases is almost an admission that "something isn't quite right here."  Consistency is an accomplishment which too few people are clever enough to pull off.  
I certainly did not in my own lifetime, so I understand the problem personally.

Given that John's answer as to why people believe was essentially that it was consistent with what they already accepted, I'm not sure how this fits in here.

[Alan V]

What good are psychological insights if they can't be applied by relatively well-read laypeople?
These days anyone can Google....

Yeah, that's the problem. You think that a superficial access to information imbues you with expertise. It is also highly irresponsible for you to pickpocket psychological theories as tools to self-diagnose and diagnose others. 

Well, I can certainly understand why you object, since I so obviously include you in the same category.

Consistency is an accomplishment which too few people are clever enough to pull off. I certainly did not in my own lifetime, so I understand the problem personally.

This is so backwards. The theory predicts that we are motivated to maintain consistency between our beliefs and behaviors: when there is dissonance we quickly seek to resolve it. So why are you saying consistency is an accomplishment few pull off, when the theory views consistency as the baseline we are always at and always strive to return to?

I'm sure as a psychologist that you know all about compartmentalization. Google again: "When someone compartmentalizes, they mentally separate and isolate different aspects of their life or thoughts from each other. This can involve keeping work issues separate from personal life, separating positive and negative aspects of oneself, or putting difficult emotions into a separate mental 'box.' Compartmentalization can be a defense mechanism to cope with overwhelming emotions or avoid cognitive dissonance, but it can also have negative consequences if it prevents the individual from fully addressing difficult issues."

My problem, if you really want to call it that, is that I have to at least try to be honest. I aim for accuracy, and that requires a lot of reading.

No, I will not leave such issues to experts if I see they have some clear conflict of interest. And by the way, I assume you are a great help to people exactly because of your own combinations of incompatible ideas. I assume you function as a sort of half-way house for people with mental problems caused by their religious beliefs, many of which I thankfully no longer share.

IMO science generally works much better when it isn't combined with religious ideas. Obviously I am probably wrong concerning certain classes of people, but then I never claimed to be a therapist.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Compartmentalization can be a defense mechanism...

Now you're back to Freudian psychology?

I never claimed to be a therapist.

Then stop cosplaying as one.

[Nay_Sayer]

@Alan V He isn't a psychologist

[Alan V]

@Alan V He isn't a psychologist

He could be a bad psychologist.