Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
I get that, but I take issue with the equation of all "gnostic theists" with "zealots". This is really where this part of the discussion began, and my contributions have been meant to illustrate how people quite naturally develop a certainty in the existence of God that absolutely does not require some form of "mental deficiency" (to use your words). There are many gnostic theists, and most of them are not psychologically unbalanced; most of them are not zealots.
Is "nutty" the same as being "mentally deficient"? I also think my mother-in-law is nutty, but its more in line with being eccentric.
Agreed. But most people whom I would classify as gnostic theists do not fit this description. Most people who interpret Lev 19:28 literally do not take it upon themselves to punish anyone for violating God's law. Gnostic theists are not all zealots, according to your definition.
|
There is obviously a lack of communication on my part with how I think I am housing my comments.
The most religiously 'convinced' (convicted?) people I have know in my life have generally all intimated to me a deep personal and ongoing questioning of their faith. Most fascinatingly, this impression is populated mostly by faith or religious leaders. Like I said previously, this is not an area that I don't have a deep understanding of, going by familial history of the religious and ordained.
This, to me, is a stark contrast to those who I have met without a deep personal conflict of their faith. The 'righteousness' of religion, I have little doubt to be that of zealotry and mental deficiency.