When is a Religious Belief Delusional?

[Amarok]

"Goodness" must have another definition then.  His god seems like a cunt.

But min your using god to determine that he's a cunt .Because god is goodness because he is because he is because he is........................

[Neo-Scholastic]

---

nevertheless, there seems to be an overarching concept of human goodness that unites them all.

If by "unites them all" you mean only that the concept applies in all cases, perhaps there is.  That is a hypothesis that could be checked.

From there it is not too difficult to derive an overarching concept of goodness shared by both humans and non-human species. And from there it is not too difficult to conclude that there something like ‘The Good’ in which all good things participate and that this transcendent Good is real, in some ways perhaps more real than everyday reality.

No, the only claim to reality available to a concept is the accuracy with which it reflects the phenomenon to which it pertains.  A concept isn't so much real in its own right as it is true.  Perhaps you believe in a realm of Platonic archetypes whose ultimate reality exceeds the actual instances we find in the world.  If you do we aren't using the words in the same way.

This is by no means a clear-cut derivation but it was the conclusion made by Plato and adopted by many later pagan and Christian philosophers who call this God. They may indeed be mistaken. Most AF member seem to attribute the moral sense to some combination of animal instinct and social pragmatism. This is merely a difference of opinion between Plato. Plotinus, and Aquinas, among others and AF members. I see no justification for piling derision on people who hold opinions similar to some of the greatest thinkers of the past.

---

Some of the greatest, mistaken thinkers of the past perhaps.

That is my only point. Mistaken is not the same as delusional.

[Anomalocaris]

In Wooters worldview goodness exists in magic fairyland

Wooters believes he is entitled to make shit up to browbeat, conjure, deceive, threaten, tempt or otherwise cause other people to adapt a world view designed to be more pleasing to Wooters by virtual of placing wooter’s made up shit at a higher level than it deserves, and it also by happenstance seem to elevate Wooters in the eyes of his respective victims by making it seem conceivable that Wooters has more valuable access to wooter’s own bullshit than other people.

[Amarok]

In Wooters worldview goodness exists in magic fairyland

Wooters believes he is entitled to make shit up to browbeat, conjure, deceive, threaten, tempt or otherwise cause other people to adapt a world view designed to be more pleasing to Wooters by virtual of placing his made up shit at a higher level than it deserves, and also elevate Wooters in the eyes of his respective victims by making it seem conceivable that Wooters has more valuable access to his own bullshit than other people.

Truth

[Minimalist]

He used to be, when he wrote that book. He's reformed. His objective morality is much better now.

Wait.... these are the same asswipes who insist that their god is "unchanging."

“And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or change His mind; for He is not a man that He should change His mind” (1 Samuel 15:29).

Must be another of those annoying contradictions, huh?

[Neo-Scholastic]

I suppose at the end of the day we are all influenced by various experiences and sources.  If reading the bible or Aquinas or Confucius helps someone to focus their ideas regarding morality that doesn't do any harm.  But if they conceive themselves to be heeling to divine orders their humanity is diminished and they will become a tool for somebody.

I agree with all this. Whether something is harmful or not has no bearing on whether or not something is true or delusional. And I think you know that from your posts. Others seem to be avoiding the issue.

Just to push you a little further is it delusional to believe the Gospel accounts are historical documents in the same sense as Plutarch's Lives?

[Minimalist]

Yes, because some of the people Plutarch speaks of are real.  And a few are mythic heroes.

[Whateverist]

Note the bold. Please provide a list of the "indisputable evidence" that there is no God. Absence such a list, such a belief by definition is not a delusion. Note that this is not merely "in spite of no evidence". It is in the face of indisputable evidence to the contrary. 

Even worse for your position is that you cannot even adequately undercut the evidence that people rely on for the religious beliefs. Who's delusional again?

Here's the proof.  If there's a god he will surely strick me down with great fury and righteous anger 60 seconds after I call him a fucktard.

God's a fucktard.

Anyone heard from Wololo lately?

[LastPoet]

This is the stupidest thing I've  read in a long time. Nothing happens if you murder? Nothing happens if you molest children? Nothing happens if you rob a bank. Pleas, rob, do everyone a favor and go back to making innane videos.

Some escape justice. Its work in progress. It may shatter your mind but I believe a few dozens died without regret for raping murder and child abuse. Many of them also claimed more sanctimonious than you. And as to molest children, glass roof and all that.

Get it into your head, bad people do bad things and eventually die unpunished, regrettably, but we as society are doing our best to find those doing that. Your god is as usefull as a bag of rocks, that the whole humanity is carrying.

[Whateverist]

I suppose at the end of the day we are all influenced by various experiences and sources.  If reading the bible or Aquinas or Confucius helps someone to focus their ideas regarding morality that doesn't do any harm.  But if they conceive themselves to be heeling to divine orders their humanity is diminished and they will become a tool for somebody.

I agree with all this. Whether something is harmful or not has no bearing on whether or not something is true or delusional. And I think you know that from your posts. Others seem to be avoiding the issue.

Just to push you a little further is it delusional to believe the Gospel accounts are historical documents in the same sense as Plutarch's Lives?

I don't know.  History is a hard area for me to think about in these terms.  Confirmation bias is always in play.