Psycho-Babble Faith Thread 926490

Shown: posts 27 to 51 of 83. Go back in thread:

 

Re: Lou's request-pskpsie Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:36:07

In reply to Lou's request-pskpsie SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 8:06:02

> D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?

It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.


- Scott

 

Re: Lou's request-pskpsie Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:48:53

In reply to Lou's request-pskpsie SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 8:06:02

Lou, I really do think that you should begin a new thread to ask your questions. Although they are not totally irrelevant to the theme of the thread started by meAgain, they are very general and, in my opinion, not directed to address the original question.

> B. Do you know which God the man was saying would save him?

> C. Could that God be the God that the Jews give service and worship to?

I will not attend to your requests of me to answer these questions along this thread at this time.


- Scott

 

Re: Is taking medication being unfaithful to God? meAgain

Posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 10:03:51

In reply to Is taking medication being unfaithful to God?, posted by meAgain on November 21, 2009, at 22:22:09

> I have take meds for mental issues and have been feeling ashamed because I feel like I should not rely on anything but God. Am I being unfaithful by taking medication?

I hope the replies to your post have been helpful.

Please don't think that you have incited an altercation of some sort. You haven't.

My sentiment is that this is not an appropriate thread to pursue a debate regarding the validity and ownership of God. I won't participate in one here.


- Scott

 

Lou's request to members-uthelmiegh

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 15:48:53

In reply to Re: Lou's request-pskpsie Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 26, 2009, at 9:36:07

> > D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
>
> It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.
>
>
> - Scott

Friends,
It is written here,[...a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool..open to interpretation...relevant to the important question...provkes the type of thought that can produce insight...used..in religious contexts...as it is suggeative...].
I am unsure as to what those statements are wanting to mean. If interested members could email me answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
A. In [...a humoroust parable...],what does it mean in the story about the man drowning that it teaches as being humorous to you, if at all?
B. In,[...produce insight....] what is the insight that it produces, as you see it?
C. In [...it is suggestive...] suggestive of what, as you see it?
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
there is an underscore between the name and the 1188

 

Lou withdraws request to members

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 16:00:13

In reply to Lou's request to members-uthelmiegh, posted by Lou Pilder on December 26, 2009, at 15:48:53

> > > D. What is your overiding intent here to posting what you say is a joke?
> >
> > It is actually more of a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool, the lesson of which is open to interpretation. I find it to be very relevant to the important question that was asked by meAgain. My intent was to present an allegory that provokes the type of thought that can produce insight. This particular parable is used quite often in religious contexts. One can accept or reject the portrayal. I don't think it is meant to be so much dogmatic as it is suggestive.
> >
> >
> > - Scott
>
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...a humorous parable meant to be a teaching tool..open to interpretation...relevant to the important question...provkes the type of thought that can produce insight...used..in religious contexts...as it is suggeative...].
> I am unsure as to what those statements are wanting to mean. If interested members could email me answers to the following, then I could respond accordingly.
> A. In [...a humoroust parable...],what does it mean in the story about the man drowning that it teaches as being humorous to you, if at all?
> B. In,[...produce insight....] what is the insight that it produces, as you see it?
> C. In [...it is suggestive...] suggestive of what, as you see it?
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
> there is an underscore between the name and the 1188

> Friends,
I am withdrawing my request for you to point out to me what you could see in the statements in question. Another has pointed out what I needed to know.
Thanks anyway if you were going to send me what you see,
Lou
>

 

Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2?

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23

In reply to Lou's reply-whichgd2? SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 22, 2009, at 7:31:30

>I will await a reply to me here from a member that will identify the God that they give service and worship to if they would want to have discussion.


I'm fond of this from Steve Earle......

>Then the sea gave birth and it crawled up on the dirt
And stood up and took a look around
Said "I'm the next big thing and the gift that I bring
Comes directly from God, so there ain't no holdin' me down"
So he crowned himself king
Now no one remembers his name
But the seed that he sowed took the show on the road
There was blood on their hands and a plague on the land
They drew a line in the sand and made their last stand
They said "God made us in his image
And it's in God that we trust"
When asked about the men that had died by their hands
They said "ashes to ashes and dust to dust"

 

Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2? Sigismund

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:30:48

In reply to Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2?, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23

Which seems a little like what Natalie Merchant was talking about in 'Thick as Thieves'......

>The worst of it is come & gone in the chaos of millennium
in the falling out of the doomsday crowd
their last retreat is moving slow
they burn their bridges as they go
the heretic is beatified
teach the harlot's child to smile

>Wracked again by indecision
should we make that small incision
testify to the bleeding heart inside
we cut, we scratched, we ran, we slashed
and when we opened up at last
found a cul-de-sac deep and black
smoke and ash
deep and black
smoke and ash

 

Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle? Sigismund

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 7:26:38

In reply to Re: Lou's reply-whichgd2?, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 0:26:23

> >I will await a reply to me here from a member that will identify the God that they give service and worship to if they would want to have discussion.
>
>
> I'm fond of this from Steve Earle......
>
> >Then the sea gave birth and it crawled up on the dirt
> And stood up and took a look around
> Said "I'm the next big thing and the gift that I bring
> Comes directly from God, so there ain't no holdin' me down"
> So he crowned himself king
> Now no one remembers his name
> But the seed that he sowed took the show on the road
> There was blood on their hands and a plague on the land
> They drew a line in the sand and made their last stand
> They said "God made us in his image
> And it's in God that we trust"
> When asked about the men that had died by their hands
> They said "ashes to ashes and dust to dust"

Sigismund,
In what you wrote above, as to if it is a reply to my invitation to identify which God, is there a particular God that you could identify from what you posted there? If so, then the aspect as to if one that gives service and worship to that god could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs and to define what a medicine is or is not according to that God could give rise to a discussion from my view.
Lou

 

Drink the water. Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 8:12:40

In reply to Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle? Sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 7:26:38

> could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs

...or are they brain-correcting and mind-correcting drugs?

That is the goal, I believe. To the extent to which there has been some success in the use of psychotropic drugs to treat mental illness and improve quality of life, I believe the goal is justified.

Would one be unfaithful to God to drink the water that the works of man has been brought to our spigots?


- Scott

 

Lou's reply-aichtuoh SLS

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 8:36:20

In reply to Drink the water. Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 8:12:40

> > could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs
>
> ...or are they brain-correcting and mind-correcting drugs?
>
> That is the goal, I believe. To the extent to which there has been some success in the use of psychotropic drugs to treat mental illness and improve quality of life, I believe the goal is justified.
>
> Would one be unfaithful to God to drink the water that the works of man has been brought to our spigots?
>
Scott,
You wrote,[...would it be unfaithful to God to drink the water (from a tap)...?]
Since the discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into one's system causes one to be unfaithful to God or not,I would need to know which God is in question as to being unfaithful or not, for drinking that water, and from which tap, as if you are or are not wanting to mean that that water has mind-altering chemicals in it, before I could answer your question. Granted, water from different taps could have chemicals in it, but are those chemicals mind-altering chemicals or not?
Lou
>
> - Scott

 

Yours. Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 12:29:04

In reply to Lou's reply-aichtuoh SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 8:36:20

> Since the discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into one's system causes one to be unfaithful to God or not,I would need to know which God is in question as to being unfaithful or not

I speak of your god.

Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?

Thanks.


- Scott

 

Re: Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle?

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 16:14:20

In reply to Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle? Sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 7:26:38

>In what you wrote above, as to if it is a reply to my invitation to identify which God, is there a particular God that you could identify from what you posted there?

That one in whose image we are made?


>If so, then the aspect as to if one that gives service and worship to that god could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs and to define what a medicine is or is not according to that God could give rise to a discussion from my view.

The spirit of the regulations seems to be that intoxicants are not OK but medicines are. This does not help us much, except to imply that if a medication is unpleasant enough or has enough side effects it might be OK.

What if my depression is controlled by opium (bad intoxicant) as against Parnate (good medicine)?
(How keen am I to worship a God who would make us in his image, and is this the same thing as 'we are the greatest'?) So, OK, you need a reason to take it. Thus, if you are in (physical) pain, opium is OK but not if you are in mental pain, though before the new rules (1968 here) it might have been more acceptable.

Can you make any better sense of it?

 

Lou's reply-eksnahilow SLS

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 16:56:39

In reply to Yours. Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 12:29:04

> > Since the discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into one's system causes one to be unfaithful to God or not,I would need to know which God is in question as to being unfaithful or not
>
> I speak of your god.
>
> Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> - Scott
>
Scott,
You wrote,[...your god (the god that you give service an worship to)...writings...].
This discussion is about as to if taking mind-altering chemicals into your system could cause one to be unfaithful to their god and as to what is or is not a medicine.
Now the God that I give service and worship to is the God that the Jews give service and worship to. That God has given to the books that they consider to be truth that give infomation about that God and commandments to follow.
The first statement in the book called Genesis reads;
[...In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth...]
Then the book continues;
[...And God said, Let us make man in our image...]
Now with those two statements in mind, there is a God that is a person that made the heaven and the earth. Then we go on...
Lou

 

Yours. Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 17:19:49

In reply to Lou's reply-eksnahilow SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 16:56:39

Now that you have identified your god, perhaps you can answer my questions. To refresh your memory:

Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?


- Scott

 

Lou's reply-mgndavd Sigismund

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 17:27:07

In reply to Re: Lou's reply-wychgdSteveEarle?, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 16:14:20

> >In what you wrote above, as to if it is a reply to my invitation to identify which God, is there a particular God that you could identify from what you posted there?
>
> That one in whose image we are made?
>
>
> >If so, then the aspect as to if one that gives service and worship to that god could or could not be deemed to be unfaithful to that God if they take mind-altering drugs and to define what a medicine is or is not according to that God could give rise to a discussion from my view.
>
> The spirit of the regulations seems to be that intoxicants are not OK but medicines are. This does not help us much, except to imply that if a medication is unpleasant enough or has enough side effects it might be OK.
>
> What if my depression is controlled by opium (bad intoxicant) as against Parnate (good medicine)?
> (How keen am I to worship a God who would make us in his image, and is this the same thing as 'we are the greatest'?) So, OK, you need a reason to take it. Thus, if you are in (physical) pain, opium is OK but not if you are in mental pain, though before the new rules (1968 here) it might have been more acceptable.
>
> Can you make any better sense of it?

Sigismund,
You wrote,[...the one whose image we are made...intoxicants are not OK but medicines are...opium...]
The question as to the innitiator here is would someone be unfaithful to God if they took medication. The question then is what is a medication and you are bringing that out.
The discussion is about mental health medications that are mind-altering.
Now there is an example in the scriptures concerning intoxicants that you have posted, for the scriptures that the Jews use condemn drunkeness. more...
Lou

 

Lou's reply-chlhvnho SLS

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 17:49:47

In reply to Yours. Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 17:19:49

> Now that you have identified your god, perhaps you can answer my questions. To refresh your memory:
>
> Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?
>
>
> - Scott

Scott,
You wrote,[...would employing Li..be an unfaithful act...why?...produce writings...]
We have not established yet here as to what a medicine is or is not according to the God that I give service and worship to as to then if takingLi is being unfaithful to that God.
First, before we go into this, there is a post by Mr. Hsiung threatening me with expulsion from this community if I was to post what has been revealed to me that is connected to this discussion. You see, a commandment to me that xxxx has a part in my answer to you. Interestingly, another poster brought this out about him/her using pills as to if their God thought that yyy. You may have some remeberance to that post that I did not comment on.
But I could go on with the other aspects that involve the taking of or not taking of mind-altering drugs.
Lou

 

Re: Lou's reply-mgndavd Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 17:52:10

In reply to Lou's reply-mgndavd Sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 17:27:07

> The discussion is about mental health medications that are mind-altering.

How do you define mind-altering? Can you describe the features of an altered state?

What are some examples of mental health medications that are mind-altering?


- Scott

 

Re: Lou's reply-chlhvnho Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 18:01:03

In reply to Lou's reply-chlhvnho SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 17:49:47

> > Now that you have identified your god, perhaps you can answer my questions. To refresh your memory:
> >
> > Would employing lithium to control one's bipolar illness be an unfaithful act toward your god? If so, would you explain why or produce writings that describe the proscriptions of this behavior?

> We have not established yet here as to what a medicine is or is not according to the God that I give service and worship to

I didn't qualify lithium as being anything but lithium. I feel that you can answer my question without further qualification. Of course, you don't have to answer any of the questions I ask. However, your failure to answer them only serves to reinforce my impression that, for me, continuing a discourse with you here is undesirable.


- Scott

 

Lou's reply-eighthrst SLS

Posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 18:08:09

In reply to Re: Lou's reply-mgndavd Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 17:52:10

> > The discussion is about mental health medications that are mind-altering.
>
> How do you define mind-altering? Can you describe the features of an altered state?
>
> What are some examples of mental health medications that are mind-altering?
>
>
> - Scott
Scott,
You wrote,[...what are ..examples of..medications that are mind-altering?...]
If you look at the PDR and see that the drug could cause;
A. hallucinations
B. Suicide thoughts
C. depression
D. mania
E. delusions
F. euphoria
G. other related mind-altering states
Lou

 

Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. Lou Pilder

Posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 19:03:46

In reply to Lou's reply-eighthrst SLS, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 18:08:09

> If you look at the PDR and see that the drug could cause;

Which drug?

> A. hallucinations
> B. Suicide thoughts
> C. depression
> D. mania
> E. delusions
> F. euphoria
> G. other related mind-altering states

These are some of the possible side effects that can occur with the use of many psychiatric and non-psychiatric drugs. They are undesirable, and often indicate that the offending drug be discontinued and replaced with another treatment. What you fail to mention is that these things usually occur in a minority of people. It happens more often that a psychiatric patient glean benefit from drug treatment without the occurrence of the side effects that you have listed here. With further refinement, medical science will produce treatments with greatly reduced liability of producing undesirable psychiatric side effects.

Unfaithful? How do you know?

Is it unfaithful to your god that one take lithium?

If you could produce evidence as to the proscription by your god the use of lithium, I could then respond accordingly.

Thanks.


- Scott

 

Re: Lou's reply-mgndavd

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:19:52

In reply to Lou's reply-mgndavd Sigismund, posted by Lou Pilder on December 28, 2009, at 17:27:07

>The question as to the innitiator here is would someone be unfaithful to God if they took medication.

Well, I would not see it like that, but what if the medication is an intoxicant (prohibited under the Eightfold Path in Buddhism)?

I can't for the life of me see why taking benzos for an anxiety condition is much different to taking opium for one, except from the crowd management angle.

 

Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. SLS

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:23:50

In reply to Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. Lou Pilder, posted by SLS on December 28, 2009, at 19:03:46

I can't imagine God prohibiting lithium.

Why not?

Lack of abuse potential?

So God doesn't mind us taking mind altering drugs as long as there is no abuse potential?
And if not that, what?

 

Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects.

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:28:32

In reply to Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. SLS, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:23:50

This reminds me of that wretched organic psychiatrist (whose name I forget) who said of Jesus that if modern psychiatry had got hold of him he would have gone back to carpentry.

 

Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects.

Posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:33:32

In reply to Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects., posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:28:32

"...Jesus Christ might simply have returned to his carpentry following the use of modern [psychiatric] treatments." - William Sargant

(but perhaps not Sargant's).

 

Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. Sigismund

Posted by SLS on December 29, 2009, at 7:01:11

In reply to Re: Unfaithfullness and Side Effects. SLS, posted by Sigismund on December 28, 2009, at 19:23:50

> I can't imagine God prohibiting lithium.
>
> Why not?
>
> Lack of abuse potential?

I don't know about God, but I think that because a drug has the potential of abuse is not sufficient reason to prohibit its use therapeutically. However, I think it is important to demonstrate that such a drug is efficacious in treating illness and to control its availability as is done with other prescription drugs. I guess it depends on how one uses an object that defines its appropriateness. Using a ram's horn to produce and effect is not in itself a sin. For example, one can blow through it and produce a noise that communicates meaning to others. However, one can also use it as a blunt instrument weapon to kill. I'm sure God knew this in advance of His allowing people to use it as a tool.


- Scott


Go forward in thread:


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.