"if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia"

[Heyo]

28% of the population claims that God talks to them. It's not a figure of speech. They believe it. And its not mental illness unless it makes them dysfunctional.

Someone who acts upon what her unconsciousness boils up without questioning it may not be technically ill but in my view someone who is entirely instinct driven isn't functional as a human being.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I think that having "conversations" with "god" is magical thinking. When you believe that an entity (that is not a manifestation of your unconscious) is communicating with you without knowing the method of communication or how that entity even exists, the only explanation you have for that entity or that path of communication is "magic".

Magical thinking is the idea that your thoughts, ritual behavior, words, or use of symbols can effect the material world. Notice how hearing God's voice doesn't fit into that definition.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Someone who acts upon what her unconsciousness boils up without questioning it may not be technically ill but in my view someone who is entirely instinct driven isn't functional as a human being.

I find it very strange that you refer to this behavior as "ENTIRELY instinct driven."

 

[Heyo]

Magical thinking is the idea that your thoughts, ritual behavior, words, or use of symbols can effect the material world. Notice how hearing God's voice doesn't fit into that definition.

"Magical thinking, or superstitious thinking,[1] is the belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them, particularly as a result of supernatural effects." - Magical thinking - Wikipedia

There are other definitions so I'm not saying yours is wrong. The same goes for superstition which was the original word in question.
But any way you turn it there has to be a belief in the supernatural and in magical transportation of information. Do we agree?

 

[Heyo]

I find it very strange that you refer to this behavior as "ENTIRELY instinct driven."

You are right, that was hyperbole. But since you don't seem to disagree with the main message I gather that we agree that unreflected instinctive behaviour is unworthy of someone calling himself homo sapiens?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why should we. Even if someone truly hears a divine voice, how do we know they are repeating correctly what they heard and that the voice is really divine?

Is there any corroborating evidence? If none, then it will be hard to believe for some.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It is not a mental disorder unless the vision causes dysfuntion in their lives. For example, lets say the Virgin Mary appears to sthem and say to be a good catholic, and as a result they become better people. That is not a mental illness. Now if the virgin mary appears to them and tells them that all their food is poisoned and so they stop eating, THAT is mental illness.

I do not. See those as different in kind.
Any such appearance is in the mind.
However it could be possible to see someone and believe that they were the Virgin Mary, when in fact they were not. That would be mistaken identity.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Some cases may be "pareidolia".

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You are technically right, I can't diagnose someone just on that one symptom.

But aren't you also alarmed when someone is hearing voices?
You call an ambulance if someone feels pain in their left arm and has difficulty breathing even though you can't diagnose that as a heart attack.

I'd urge someone to visit a psychiatrist if they hear voices.

Short story. Years ago when being treated for clinical depression my former therapist said one of his clients heard voices. He said that the voices made him do X number of things to where he needed treatment.

His patient no longer sees a therapist cause he's on medication and can function.

Yet he still hears voices.

My therapist said

1. If he doesn't harm others
2. He doesn't harm himself
3. He can take care of himself

The government (and authorities) don't care.

No matter how unique ones experiences in life, that doesn't mean we all need to be seen.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

"Magical thinking, or superstitious thinking,[1] is the belief that unrelated events are causally connected despite the absence of any plausible causal link between them, particularly as a result of supernatural effects." - Magical thinking - Wikipedia

There are other definitions so I'm not saying yours is wrong. The same goes for superstition which was the original word in question.
But any way you turn it there has to be a belief in the supernatural and in magical transportation of information. Do we agree?

Let's say someone has a moral dilemma, and is unsure which route to take, since both choices are iffy. So they pray to God for guidance, and as a result, they believe God is gently pushing them to do the first possibility rather than the second possibility. So in their eyes, God has spoken to them, and they now have moral clarity on the best option. How does this instance meet your own definition of Magical thinking? It is not a case of this prayer changing their circumstance (or them believing it to) -- the dilemma continues to exist until they actually act on the "guidance" they received.

I thought for a while about your next question and how I should answer it. I am not sure that I would agree. You can have someone who believes in no god or gods or angels or unicorns, and they may still believe something magical can happen if they do a particular thing.

The point I'm making in all of this is that in magical thinking, you have a link where none exists. Thoughts and words and ritual behaviors and using symbols simply don't change the concrete reality that can be sensed and measured.

Prayer, however, does not fall into that understanding of magic. A prayer is a request. God may or may not answer to the affirmative. There is therefore no manipulation of things going on.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You are right, that was hyperbole. But since you don't seem to disagree with the main message I gather that we agree that unreflected instinctive behaviour is unworthy of someone calling himself homo sapiens?

Oh I completely disagree! Our instincts do us well -- they have evolved because they keep us alive and enable us to procreate. For example, it is our instinct to fight or fly in the face of danger. If we didn't do that, then in most situations we would be harmed or perhaps killed. There is no time usually to stop and reflect on the situation -- to pause to reflect may mean that the danger gets you.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I do not. See those as different in kind.
Any such appearance is in the mind.
However it could be possible to see someone and believe that they were the Virgin Mary, when in fact they were not. That would be mistaken identity.

Then I'd say going into psychiatry or psychology is not a good career plan for you, since the mental health field does make such a distinction.

And you notice that you changed the example from seeing a vision of the virgin Mary to believing you are the virgin Mary. In YOUR example, there is no way that you can believe you are the Virgin Mary without it adversely effecting your life (or at least I cannot imagine it so -- perhaps in the future I'll meet such a person, lol). Your ability to interact with others and make sound decisions would be considerably impaired by such a grandiose delusion. Thus, yes, that would be mental illness.

 

[Heyo]

Prayer, however, does not fall into that understanding of magic. A prayer is a request. God may or may not answer to the affirmative. There is therefore no manipulation of things going on.

First, you are focusing on manipulation but magic isn't only manipulation. There is also magical information retrieval. Things like scrying, true dreams, clairvoyance, dowsing, you name it.
Praying for an information and "listening to the voice of god" is exactly that - unless you can name the mechanism how the information got to that voice in your head.

 

[Heyo]

Oh I completely disagree! Our instincts do us well -- they have evolved because they keep us alive and enable us to procreate. For example, it is our instinct to fight or fly in the face of danger. If we didn't do that, then in most situations we would be harmed or perhaps killed. There is no time usually to stop and reflect on the situation -- to pause to reflect may mean that the danger gets you.

This is completely irrelevant to the point of debate. We are not talking about making fast decisions in the presence of danger, we are talking about things you could think through but chose to instead listen to the "voice of god".

 

[paarsurrey]

"if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia"

Is it a fact of science or religion, please?
My understanding is that it is neither from science nor religion, please.
Right?

Regards

 

[Kenny]

Consider this quote:

View attachment 54241

To what extent is this statement true???

I say to a very great extent

If I were to come onto RF and tell everyone that God talks to me I would be considered schizophrenic, and my role on RF would be that of a person who is schizophrenic - I would become Schizophrenic as that is how this community would understand me, including those who routinely talk to God...

I like this quote, there is a lot going on with it

This is what this quote has made me think:

There are socially acceptable ways of experiencing God and that there are other ways, which result in you being considered mentally unwell

It's a matter of normality

And normality is a matter of safety in numbers!

Billions talk to God

Yet only a relatively tiny number of people experience God talking to them

By "talk" I mean "directly communicate" - not literally speaking words at someone

Those who get to decide what is healthy or unhealthy - what is spiritual experience or a psychotic episode - always try to make their way of experiencing reality the only healthy one, and medicalise other ways of experiencing the same reality

The religious establishment and the medical establishment stand united in this, in a bizarre alliance of science and faith that is very telling of the true social function of both these institutions!

Of course, the experience of God communicating with you can be a symptom of a severe mental illness

However, if you believe that God exists and listens to you then I don't think you should write off all such reported experiences so very quickly. I don't think that is a huge leap to make!

I think there is a wealth of anecdotal evidence that God communicates directly with some people in such a way that others would consider them unwell, although I concede that the majority of such cases are likely to be some kind of mental illness

And I mean direct experience - not an awesome sense of seeing God at work in the natural world or having an amazing euphoric spiritual experience whilst attending church, and so on

By "direct experience" I mean "communication"!

And by "talks to you" I mean "communicates with you" in a more general sense

Just because some such experiences can be put down to mental ill health doesn't mean all of them can!

I'll say this to any person who routinely talks to God: Just because he doesn't directly communicate back to you in particular doesn't mean he doesn't communicate with anyone!

I don't think you should be so quick to dismiss

Or should at least keep an open mind...

And for the record, I no longer believe that God personally communicates with me, as I once did. But that's another story...

According to Society:​

1. A one-way direct line to God = prayer = normal and healthy​
2. A two-way direct line to God = schizophrenia = abnormal and bad​

That is what I think this quote can be boiled down to!

I think that psychiatry and the religious establishment want humankind to dismiss those to whom God speaks

I think they want to silence God, as they cannot control what God has to say in the same way that they can control what people believe and what God may or may not have said in the past - they don't want their monopoly challenging!

They wish to preserve the Status Quo and keep God's new word from human ears:

They are basically putting fingers into the ears of humankind so it cannot hear, and are drowning out the voice of God with hymns and mindless popular music so that any new revelation is rejected, or dismissed, or ignored, or ridiculed...

That's my take on this quote, anyway

Edit: and no, I do not claim to have any new revelation for humankind

I would have to agree with you.

Have had two way conversations with my Lord and God, I would say there isn't anyone we know that would call us schizophrenic.

I would also say that it isn't to say that there those who also say the have a two way conversation and I would question whether it was God... or a lying spirit

 

[rational experiences]

The eternal the never changed spirit.

Owns a space womb with newly changed eternal burnt inside it's own body.

The unconditional loving spirit owning no condition to explain why change occurred

Communicated spirit forms the same substance out of its body.

We came out only when earths gas atmosphere formed a zero spatial plane refilled space. As it re contacted the eternal. What had physically been separated.

Creation owns recording proven first as a State in creation. The earth and it's heavens recorded itself is proven transmitted back to earths mass machines to be seen. Images. Sounds.

Recording and transmitting back is real.

We have to be human first to own self image. Voice sounds image recorded we then die. Life ended.

The eternal however was always communicating out from its owned body. Why we ask how unconditional love would support life harm.

Reason it owned no control to stop change.

Humans chemical irradiated changes mind body status. Hearing by brain conditions change you hear human voices not your own speaking back.

Some humans are kind some humans nasty. You take the advice human from human memories. Some advice loving some extremely cruel.

Human says I get told what to do or get own owning no self control. Drugs try to block chemical imbalance but cannot alter brain hearing change physical.

We have lived enough examples that prove it real. Multi human experiences forms large voiced feedback also. Always heard.

Human in experiences changes the heard spoken advice.

As we are all human to pretend it is medical only is ludicrous. If you hear voices then you are hearing voices. If a human is changed then the environment in which we survive proves it changes and then changes our physical living status.

Is claimed human advice and human warnings.

 

[sun rise]

Is there any corroborating evidence? If none, then it will be hard to believe for some.

It should be hard to believe. There is no reason for anyone to believe someone else's experience unless that person is so dear to you and whose words have been proven true in the past. But that's a special case.

 

[Heyo]

I would have to agree with you.

Have had two way conversations with my Lord and God, I would say there isn't anyone we know that would call us schizophrenic.

I probably would.
But I first like to know how such a conversation goes. Can you please describe it to us? What were the circumstances? (E.g. are you sure you didn't just nod off and dream it?) Who initiated the conversation? Did you really have the sensation of hearing (opposed to imagining a conversation)? What was the topic and how did the conversation go (short transcript)?

I would also say that it isn't to say that there those who also say the have a two way conversation and I would question whether it was God... or a lying spirit

And how do you know you weren't conversing with a "lying spirit"?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

First, you are focusing on manipulation but magic isn't only manipulation. There is also magical information retrieval. Things like scrying, true dreams, clairvoyance, dowsing, you name it.
Praying for an information and "listening to the voice of god" is exactly that - unless you can name the mechanism how the information got to that voice in your head.

I realize that these other things go along with a pagan religious orientation. However, I would not call clairvoyance or "scrying" magic--they fall more into the category of using one's intuition. I would also throw dowsing into a category like divination, not magic.

When I studied magic in the university, it was presented to me as trying to effect reality either by representational imagery (this doll looks like the woman, so whatever I do to the doll is done to the woman) or by contagion (I have hair and fingernails of the person -- if I destroy them, it will destroy the person).