The blurry line between religious and crazy

What if he's fed up with his life? What if he follows his dreams? What if he rushes in where angels fear to tread?

And there, in a rather neat nutshell, is the psychology of religion.
When a "charismatic" cult leader convinces his followers to do good or do wrong, this is precisely the mindset he is preying on.

Well now that would be foolish.

He might discover something the angels were trying to keep for themselves. You get all my thoughts so far on this thread, ringo, because your post was the first to move me to reply. Only the fool rushing in part above is especially for you.If someone is taught to pray (meditate/reflect), and to interpret the reply (conclusion/result) as a communication from God...well, that's not crazy, that's just a common experience conditioned by religious instruction and practice.But if a woman on the way to work experiences a blast of trumpets, sees a fiery nimbus erupt from the mountains, and an earth-shattering roar demands an action she never considered and would have previously rejected...I'd probably be concerned about letting her babysit my granddaughter.Passionate religious expression, like sexual obsession, is often associated with madness because religious belief and sex are "high energy" states for most people; unsurprisingly, they are some of the most florid and thus most noticed foci of mental illness symptoms.It's tempting to ascribe many "crazy" offenses (terrorism, genocide, etc.) to religion, especially from the perspective of one culture looking at another. But usually, I think, the essential ingredient is otherness, and that can be racial, ethnic, political or national quite as readily as religious.Doesn't it seem like madness to wish or attempt the deaths of millions of people? You'd think so, but history suggests it may simply be a human behavior available to most of us, which is more frightening than the poor schizophrenic who panics and slashes someone with a kitchen knife.

Not just the psychology of religion, but the psychology of human beings. We want to build ourselves up and make ourselves seem more credible. I have the same problem when a speaker is introduced, even in non-religious settings, and their many credentials are announced as if that makes what they going to say above reproach. I don't begrudge giving people credit for their achievements, but what a person says or does should be judged on its own merits, not on their credentials. This is what "Let your 'yes' be 'yes' and your 'no' be 'no'." means - let the credibility of your words and actions speak for themselves. As do other scam artists. We want to trust other people; we expect that if someone has exceptional credentials that they are reliable; we want to believe that people are generally good and honest. And this part of human nature is easy to exploit.Question for you, do you think it is actually possible to "do Christianity" without using this type of manipulation? Or in other words, is manipulation inherent in religion or is it a distortion or corruption of religion?HBD

But when that person invokes God as their instructor/reference/inspiration that goes beyond the person or their credentials.
It is a rather effective way of disabusing themselfves of any responsibility for what follows.When the words "God told me.." are inserted before an instruction, desire, ideology or whatever, the devotee is far less likely to question it, as your original post suggested it makes you "want " to agree with it. Whether it be a song choice, a view on alterative lifestyles or incitement to war. Yes.
I mean, can anything that requires its followers to follow an archaic set of laws, (incorporating mysogyny, homophobia and sometimes genocide), many of which have little relevance to modern society, with the penalty for disobedience being some kind of unknowable eternal fiery torture at the hands of an unimaginably evil horned demon, be described as anything other than manipulation?Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.

To the extent that credentials reflect experience and knowledge, those things are worth considering. While those things are not guarantees that a speaker has merit, they are surely indicators, and can add weight to whatever intrinsic merit the person has. Bill Gates might be able to talk convincingly about making it without a college degree, but perhaps I could not.My favorite anecdote about experience regards something that happened during the birth of my first child. One of the nurses told my wife to expect some 'discomfort'. Since my wife 'believed' that she was already feeling actual pain and not mere discomfort, she asked the nurse whether she had given birth and of course the answer was no.My son is now an adult, but my wife and I still laugh about the unconvincing nurse whenever we talk about the births of our children. She threatens me with a smackdown whenever I speak about birthing discomfort. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Being human, we all have a tendency to manipulate, control, and push our own desires onto others. As Christians, we believe--by faith---that the Spirit(of Love and Truth) is greater than our animal instincts. It is therefore indeed possible to "do christianity" with noble motives....but it takes a disciplined lifestyle and a desire to help others before ourselves.

My personal favorite: "This is gonna sting a little."Second place, from a surgeon about to clean out an abscessed leg injury (using "GI anesthetic"--two orderlies holding my leg down):"Soldier, this will be extremely unpleasant for both of us."He was at least half right.

My favorite line from a doctor "Come in, what seems to be the trouble [looks up] OH MY GOD!"So I'm guessing that in med school he got poor marks for Bedside Manner 101.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

My wife learned very early in her medical training to never say "oops" when a patient is in the room.Seems to upset people a bit.

What's really frightening about the Holocaust, for example, is the cold, calculating efficiency with which it was done. Serial killers and child molesters also seem to lack an obvious appearance of madness.When we decide to mistreat somebody who is "other", we are pretty good at fooling the ones who are "us".

Well, was it efficient? We have these stereotypes of German efficiency, but in fact organizationally Nazism was a complete shambles. I think the real moral is that a bunch of crass bungling morons can do a lot of damage if they have enough idiots with enough guns.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Yes, it was efficient. Don't take Hogan's Heroes too literally. The sad part is that the transport of the Jews "to the East" was the crowning glory of Nazi organization.

And did they do that efficiently? They killed a lot of Jews, but we would judge their efficiency by how many got away, what it cost per Jew, and indeed whether that was a good use of their resources rather than fighting the Allies. They were ruthless in pursuit of their stupid half-baked half-assed objectives, but that doesn't mean that they were efficient.