Wow! You’re asking me about something I posted many moons ago. OK.
I posted this by Dr. Robert W. Godwin, Ph.D, a clinical psychologist who blogs as “Gagdad Bob”:
“For an atheist to reject religion means only that he has failed to understand it, precisely.” ~ Gagdad Bob
Hank Kerchief: “Perhaps you can explain it then. There are theists who believe everyone is born in sin, already condemned unless they are converted and God has to do the converting. There are other theists who believe sin is chosen and that salvation is chosen. Do both these kinds of theist “understand” their religion? And which kind of theist are you, if you don’t mind my asking?”
I’m a Christian theist. Of course you know that there are various levels of spiritual maturity among professing Christian theists, therefore - if truly called - their ongoing sanctification -(after their initial positional sanctification)- is God’s business.
As far as what the clinical psychologist meant by what he said about atheists, you would have to ask him. I think we can get a pretty good idea, however, by reading some more of what he writes on that subject.
For instance, in context, he appears to be referring to Christianity when he used the word “religion” at the link in post #20.
Here is a different link where he talks about the logic/difference between Christian concepts / precepts, and the logic engaged in by pagans, radicals, leftists, et.al.:
“...As I have written before, this is a religious passion in the absence of religion, so it has no traditional means to structure and channel it. Just as religion partakes of symmetrical logic in an adaptive way (i.e., the meek shall inherit the earth, the Golden Rule, humans are made in the image of the Creator, etc.), leftists do so in a terribly unhealthy way. ...”
Excerpted from:
The Patterned Irrationality of the Left
http://onecosmos.blogspot.com/2007/09/patterned-irrationality-of-left.html
In the unconscious mind, where symmetrical logic rules the night, the stronger the emotion one is feeling, the more “symmetrical deductions” are likely to occur.
For example, as Bomford writes, on a deep unconscious level, “one who hates has to believe that his or her hatred is returned.” Note that this is a logical operation, only based upon a different sort of logic.
This logic is no doubt the source of the psychotic fear of Israel in the Islamic world. Their unconscious hatred is so profound that it simultaneously reverses the relation, so that they can’t help perceiving that Israel hates them. But Israelis just want to shop, raise their families, or read the Torah. They couldn’t care less about Muslims, except to the extent that bloodthirsty Muslim barbarians harbor murderous rage toward them.
It’s fine to hate evil, but in the Islamic world, what is hated is transformed into evil. Something is not hated because it is evil, but evil because it is hated.
One could say the same of the left, which habitually fears what it eternally hates. The left cannot be comprehended unless one appreciates the extent of their unbound hatred. Once this is grasped, what seems illogical is suddenly seen to obey the dictates of symmetrical logic.
For example, the unconscious feeling that I hate America and want us to lose in Iraq is transformed to General Petraeus is a traitor, or I am a racist becomes America is racist, or I am unbearably envious becomes the wealthy are engaged in class warfare against me!
[snip] Continue at above link.
First let me apologize for dredging up this old post. Just bumped into this thread, and was not aware of it’s age until after I had posted, and FR does not allow one to correct such mistakes.
Thank you, however, for your very long answer. My question was intended to discover the context for another question. If you are interested, that question is, what do you think sin is?
The Bible says “ ... sin is the transgression of the law,” (1Jn. 3:4) and “where no law is, there is no transgression.” (Rom. 4:15). Christians tell me they believe right and wrong are absolute (which is what I believe) but if what is sin, or not sin, can be changed simply by changing the law (e.g. changing the Sabbath laws) doesn’t that make right and wrong contingent and arbitrary. [I know all about the ritual laws being fulfilled in Christ, and that is not the explanation.]
I won’t be disappointed if you don’t wish to answer.
Have a nice day. Thanks for your kind response.
Hank
bookmark