Posts from Are Psychology and Religion compatible concepts?

Where did you get this from? There’s no need to invent things that don’t exist. This is something for psychologists to analyze – a person has a persistent idea to portray themselves as an expert.
People, if you consider yourselves believers, at least make an effort to read the sacred texts of your religions.
Psychologists should analyze this phenomenon – the feeling of being all-knowing. This definitely has nothing to do with religion.

It feels like we’re speaking different languages... I have read these texts and interpret them in my own way, but without changing the meaning. You are accusing me completely without reason. Okay. I don’t want to argue with anyone. Let’s discuss the specific topic instead.

HERE! You don't believe in God. I'll quote from Genesis now:
"...In the 3rd chapter of Genesis, Adam, having listened to the voice of Satan, ate the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, and began to live with this knowledge of good and evil, trusting not God, but himself. Today, many people live not according to the word of God, but according to human standards of good and evil, formed by Satan, and they judge themselves and others by these standards. The result of trusting oneself and turning away from God was unhappy and disastrous. This is similar to the life of Memphiosphere, who was afraid of David, listening to his nanny..."
This once again shows that psychologists rely on human standards of good and evil and judge by these same standards.
P.S.: I didn't mean to offend anyone.

Let me agree with Alexei, you, OptiMAL, are quoting, so quote it accurately. And not your own interpretation, which, by the way, may not coincide with other people's opinions about these lines. And the fact that psychology relies on human standards is correct, because it was created for living people in this world.

Religion is essentially psychology. Religious dogmas are based on human weaknesses. True preachers are skilled psychologists who, depending on the person they are talking to, may say one thing and remain silent about another.

I agree with Alexey, you, OptiMAL, are quoting the TEXT exactly as it is.

Then, please forgive me, I made a mistake. But you have to agree that the meaning remains the same.

Because psychologists call belief in God a delusion created by mentally disturbed people who need to find solace from above.

- You, Optimal, are reasoning like a Marxist from the 1920s, sorry. Psychology, as Adelaide rightly pointed out, is the science of the soul; it does not deny religion, and where did you get such data? There are mentally disturbed people on religious grounds, but there are far fewer of them than those who are mentally disturbed for, for example, social reasons... By the way, most people in the modern world have one or another psychological problem... And, as Ada rightly pointed out, one should not confuse psychology and psychiatry.

And in general, psychologists have their own gods - Freud, Jung, and others.

- well, that's a stretch. Chemists don't consider Mendeleev a god.

- and where did you get this information?

I talked to a psychologist (not a psychiatrist!), and we touched on the topic of religion. He told me that people mostly invent gods for comfort.

I spoke with a psychologist (not a psychiatrist!), and we touched upon the topic of religion. He told me that people mostly invent gods for comfort.

I don't know, OptiMAL, what made you decide to start comparing psychology and religion; I would rather advise you to study mathematical logic, so you wouldn't create such strange cause-and-effect relationships. If you meet an atheist geographer, will a topic appear on the forum about geography and religion being incompatible?
Just study logic, as well as psychology, using scientific sources, and not based on the words of a single individual who may have their own point of view on anything, including their profession.
Yes, and the Bible too... at least read the works of theologians before claiming that the biblical serpent and Satan are the same thing.
By the way, if your psychologist said that "people invent gods for comfort," this does not yet define religiosity as a mental disorder. The instinct of self-preservation is inherent in a mentally healthy person, and the desire to convince oneself that one can protect oneself from any evil, any misfortune, naturally follows from this instinct.
You know, few people can calmly accept that "...man is mortal, but that would be half the trouble. The problem is that he is sometimes suddenly mortal, and that's the catch! And he can't even say what he will be doing this evening." (c)

Added 14 minutes later

People who are possessed are considered insane and locked up in psychiatric hospitals. But when they bring some madman to a church and begin the exorcism rite, terrible things happen: for this person, holy water is like knives. Soon after this rite, when the demon leaves the body, the person becomes normal. This fact cannot be explained by psychology.

Have you personally ever seen an example of a successful exorcism attempt? Because physicists, for example, also cannot explain walking on water and turning water into wine... however, no one has personally seen these processes. And if you have to choose between religion and physics, the latter seems much more convincing to me.
By the way, what do you treat yourself with, if you don't mind me asking: medicine or religion? That is, pills or holy water?

This fact cannot be explained by psychology.

In fact, any doctor can explain this fact - the placebo effect, most likely.

People who are possessed are considered insane and locked up in psychiatric hospitals.

This is a very inaccurate statement. "People who are possessed" - are you sure they have a demon? It should be noted that "possession," as it is described, is usually epilepsy in its most typical clinical manifestations. The fact of epileptic brain damage is easily recorded on an electroencephalogram. But where is the evidence of the presence of a "demon" in a person? "They are locked up in psychiatric hospitals"? Epilepsy is more often treated on an outpatient basis, and it is definitely not a reason for placing a patient in a specialized closed institution.
And most importantly: epilepsy is not a mental, but a neurological disease. It is treated not by psychologists (who do not treat patients at all), not by psychiatrists, but by neurologists. So let's now expose neurology as an anti-religious science...

Slozh +1. Regarding the familiar psychologist – he made an excessive generalization, which is not always the case... And in general, he is simply incompetent (most likely). Recently, cases of professional incompetence have become more frequent, and the issue of conducting exams to "maintain standards" has even been raised...

Thank you for helping me figure it out. I would boost Slonysh's morale if I could :) Regarding illnesses, believe it or not, I mainly treat myself with traditional medicine, including holy water. Except for very serious cases, like pneumonia.
So, that person was speaking a little bit untruthfully:o. Okay, we can close the topic:cool:.

Okay, the topic can be closed.

As requested by the author.