A psychological approch to how religion works

[Gregoriouse]

“immature in what way? Related to the spanse of what?
It is full responsibility. You admit to doing wrong, ackowledge it was your shoice to do that wrong, seek to compense the situation with equanimity, then you repent (turn away from) to hopefully not do those actions any more and it's all done on a community level which supports group accountability as well. It also encourages us to introspect and question others on their actions; two more parts in the equation of social and individual responsibility”

I know I’m responding to another persons comment but I just wanted to give my input. The thing is you admit and repent but that doesn’t say anything about doing anything about it. if you can convince yourself that you are forgiven for what you do then what would you have to change? For that matter if you can do the whole presses to yourself (which in religion you can) then there isn’t any action being taken at all. Worse if you assume the god will take care of things then you can end up neglecting to take action.
As far as immature frankly it’s a lot like the idea of santa clause only for adults. A few parallels:

God -Santa

Jesus – Rudolf (both persecuted)

Angles – elves

Twelve disciples – twelve reign dear

Heaven - Presents

Hell – no presents

Both Always watching you to see if you’re doing good or bad

It’s odd how we assume “well kids will grow out of it when they mature” and yet Christian believes in a lot of ways is a lot like that.

Numbered for easier reference

“1-What you seem to really be arguing against is the rationality of the underlying ideology here. Are you saying Christianity is false, fanciful or based on deception? While it may be irrational I don’t feel that it falls into any of the delusional categories I listed. Perhaps illusory, but I digress. It’s no more of a motivation, IMO, than someone with an irrational ideology of … arachnophobia.”

Teaching and or believing a false belief is a delusion. Delusion is defined as false belief. As far as a phobia what’s were the belief of eternal damnation comes it (arachnophobia as irrational at least has more credibility given that we know spiders exist.).

In fact I find it far less emotionally motivating than a phobia based in materialism. I agree that it’s a psychological mechanism, but I think you’re overemphasizing the damage due to personal ideology. I’ll use your example.. Both of us kill a child. Both of us feel guilty and know it’s wrong by whatever standards. The emotional arousal, and subsequent, damage from constantly processing guilt during the cognitive appraisal process is far more damaging, IMO, than actually dealing and confronting the issue. The fact that the standard Christianity also applies to the thoughts behind actions just means it more of an encompassing standard to live by, and shouldn’t be offhandedly rejected due to it’s complexity.”

Actually your using of my example is actually you using your example because in the last post I used the example that you initially used. The issue of having to kill a child isn’t so much as relevant (something I was pointing out before although this time more bluntly) because with original sin you don’t have to commit the act to have the guilt. Original sin is the belief that you are a sinner by nature. Flat out. It doesn’t matter what you did or didn’t do at the end of the day you are still a sinner by this belief. (Should it be possible possible) say you live a sinless day and you have this belief. You still believe you’re a sinner that day and still have the guilt.

2-OK depression exists. OK depression is destructive. The point I was making was you still haven’t convinced me that Christianity encourages depression.

I never said Christianity particularly does. My point is that a strong and deep belief in original sin can potentially be very dangerous. It’s a belief the is found in Christianity. Some Christians don’t believe in it as strongly as others. To say that I am saying this about Christianity and not particularly original sin is to put my statement in a different context. Nor did I say anything about encouraging. My point is that this idea can cause it, should a person believe in it deeply enough.

3,4,5- My intent was not to obfuscate the point. Within the realm of soteriology There is a common Christian (but specific to Christianity) belief that one is saved by Grace, meaning that the work of getting saved is out of the hands of the individual. There is also another doctrine (not universal but common) called sanctification. It’s the continuous process of refining the human character to a superior standard. These are inextricably tied together. It’s a process and a struggle against our sinful nature and its end is glorification. Therefore perfection is attainable and sinfulness is not wanted, but it’s a continual process for purification and refinement. If you’re interested in reading more here is a good article [link]http://bible.org/seriespage/soteriology-salvation[/link]. People struggle for unattainable things all the time. Does that mean it’s fruitless to hope and dream? Does that mean our lives are constantly filled with frustration because of it? If we were all perfect and didn’t hope for better, why would we even want evolution? Struggle and perseverance is what makes life living rather than existing, IMO. I’m not saying you can’t be content with who you are and feel whole, that’s a good and healthy thing; but to think you have nowhere to go but down, to me , is the really depressing thought. I think you’re just making into a much bigger deal then it is and exaggerating the damage done, due to your disagreement with the rationality of Christianity.

Hoping and dreaming is ok if you can be realist about it and have a dream that is reasonably achievable. That’s why you want to set your ideal self at a reasonable level. By doing this you can minimize the frustration. If you’re ideal self is set too high then dreaming and hoping can have an extremely negative effect on you. Striving for things is a big part of what keeps people going. If they strive without having any results of any kind it’s going to build more frustration. Because I’m saying that this is how original sin effects self theory doesn’t mean that every person’s real self and ideal are set inadequately. Original sin is a belief that that makes the real and ideal self, unrealistic and by a wide margin. If you don’t believe in original sin your real and ideal self doesn’t have original sin making them unrealistic. To be frank I don’t think you understand what self theory is very well.

Logically an ideology based on extraneous standards is far more preferable to an ideology based on internal subconscious mechanisms.

Because you prefer something doesn’t mean it’s good for you. As well because you prefer it doesn’t mean it is preferred my others. I think you logic is rather arguable. Should people to do something because they prefer it, even though it’s not good for them? If that was logical a person’s choice to kill themselves would be acceptable. That’s why I don’t think original sin is acceptable.