Does it even work and can they really be integrated?

Views: 499

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I first looked at this and was thinking it is a comedy sketch. These guys are serious apparently.





lol that was my first thought too actually... ever watched the Onion Network on YouTube? They make news into satire or fake reports and make it look real, almost looks like this stuff but yep they're serious.  I guess they're trying to shoot down psychology and say that it can't be used with religious teachings, psychologies and philosophies in my opinion are at the root of religion, they form basis of beliefs and schemas. Maybe it's just me, but I think the bible has reference to how the mind works and how moral and social beliefs should be appropriated among a myriad of other things, it would be well to work together.

for some reason they act like psychology is inherently anti-religious.  I don't get it. The fear is if a person's belief is not the same as the Psychologist's belief. There are a lot of different Christian beliefs. The UU church got a LOT of people who were recovering from Christianity in certain churches. They had been beaten-up pretty bad by the religion.  We had a lot of recovering Christians who worked together. (they were still Christians).

oh well.


sche·ma  (skm)

n. pl. sche·ma·ta (sk-mät, sk-mt) or sche·mas
1. A diagrammatic representation; an outline or model.
2. Psychology A pattern imposed on complex reality or experience to assist in explaining it, mediate perception, or guide response."
It is in the bible about psychology vs belief. There is psychological counselors and bible consolers.
Using two different words like psychological and bible, two different thoughts about two different beliefs/disciplines or apples and oranges. There are those who believe in the mind is within the brain and is biological plus material. Then there are those who feel the soul/spirit is spiritual and not material. Thoughts please. Paul

For the majority of people, if they have spiritual issues they are best to get spiritual help. If the issues are from the physical world, then the other techniques give better results.

If you are spiritual enough to not need the other side, then you probably are unlikely to even have any issues. Most people are not close to that level.

Sometimes - if you are only spiritual-oriented, both at once work best. It depends if you want to pray away your appendicitis, e.g., or just get it over with so you can again enjoy meditation/prayer sooner.

That may be a bit controversial, but life is short. Use the best tool at the time. Focus on the future. You get to choose the tool. It is a personal decision.

the major point is that a Christian Psychologist may do actual damage...  especially if you are convinced the other is against your religion, but you feel proud to tell others you only go to Christian Psychologists (a spiritual badge in public is a sign of weakness and detracts from spirituality).

well, just my 2 cents.



p.s. besides - if the bible has it all in it... you need the bible only. No Psychologist is needed. If you do not understand the Bible, are you going to go to a minister/preacher/priest or a psychologist?


I forgot to mention that one very key item is that the Psychologists and Psychiatrists do not think homosexuality is a disease. That is a major sticking point for many Christians. The friends I have who are fundamentalists are really scared of that idea. I noticed the clip you posted, or maybe in another clip they had,  had made a joke of Anderson Cooper. That dates the clip to after he stated he was gay. It also brought this issue back to mind.


It will work, as soon as the attempt is luanched from the right undersranding or perspective. Any failure provides specifuc information to adjust persective.

if you went into a Christian psychologist, what will they say about your core beliefs. If you practice magick, astrology, tarot etc. they will say your problems come from sin (?). Other religions coupled with psychology will have similar problems depending on your circumstance. How many psychologies will you have for the same cultural/social issue within the same culture. One per religious sect?

What if the problem is a disease that is a real physical issue and actually can be solved by using modern medical techniques. A schizophrenic is better off in the hands of a psychiatrist - unless the delusions are real. If real - send them to a spiritual healer. Other physical diseases have the same issues.

I agree with both of you in a way.

The thing with Psychology and Religion is that most "Christians" will say that we do not know much about the mind and that all answers are read in the scriptures.  Now the deeply rooted gnostic or esoterocist that reaches inward may be able to dive into the self and focus on certain issues that may lay on the surface of certain issues like depression or loss of hope, or even how to cope. Even with the Bible, there are great things in the book that can help you pull from the self or God or the Divine, to get you through those instances.  On the other hand, if that person is really religious and a devout Christian (going to the bible and reaching out to leaders of a church), some people may say that psychology is not the answer and to focus on the teachings from the scriptures to get the answer.  A good question is, can a person make a recovery from whatever mental ailing befalls them solely focusing on religion? Same goes for Psychology, can a person make a full recovery putting faith in man for the answer to their problems?

I guess from a religious perspective, putting faith in 'man' is the wrong way to go as we are all 'imperfect'.  In a sense something that is considered a reverential book that holds many answers to lifes problems seems like a good way to go, as many can be misled through even an educated mind. Then again, some people argue that the bible and/or religion is all man made anyway.  So what gives?

Of course, those with real mental illness, as John pointed out above, Schizophrenia and other disorders require real medical and psychological evaluations coupled with medication in order to live a somewhat "normal" existence.  Heading for books might not be the best way to go in that aspect, because it is a chemical imbalance and not a thing of thought/mind/self...

The ironic thing is, if a Christian, or better said, 'most' religions will most likely turn to Man if they have a physical illness or disease.  Just as so, they have no doubt that it is okay to put their faith in that person (medical professional) to get healing or betterment of their illness.  Yet when it comes to psychology (ie., consciousness, personality, frame of mind etc.), dealing with something that is not, in most cases, a physical thing it seems to be frowned upon that those medical professionals do not have the correct knowledge to heal the mind.... interesting how that works.

Now what is it, are we not a spiritual being? Are we completely physical? I'm sure many of you will agree that we are both.  But to find an answer as to where people can put their 'faith' or trust in either a spiritual healer or a physical healer is like a Catch 22.  We are in a sense governed by a "balance" of systems in both physical and spiritual realms.  Yet, no balance is agreed upon if they can be mixed even though we are the balance of both spiritual and physical.

If we recognize that "God" (whatever that is) exist within each of us, then psychology would have a future in religion. Then you can even recognize the "god" within your doctor and still be placing yourself in "God"'s hands when you seek a doctors counsel.

Of course this "spreads" "God"'s "power" equally among us, and the business of religion suffers.

So your not likely to hear a message like that.

Consider that within every formal religion is a fortune, each of them with massive bank accounts. They profess to help, but there's never enough money to help much. Yet the religions maintain these huge balances.

The psychology behind that alone is mind boggling.

If the religion itself followed the guidelines it professes, then they should all be broke.

If you continue this and add the understanding that money is created in debt. So every dollar in my pocket represents at least 9 (by my meager calculative ability) dollars worth of other peoples suffering. I personally don't want to be responsible for any more than I absolutely have to have. Even that assaults me every day. So the concept of sitting on all that money (allowing it to influence my perspective) is abhorrent, and certainly the work of the "devil" should such a thing exist.

We are both physical and spiritual beings. Each side of the coin has its own professional. Certainly they can learn from each other, but to combine all of the spiritual sides into one person is impossible as I see it (let alone with psychology). So I would see separate disciplines with a multitude of spiritual professionals, Mahayana Buddhist, fundamentalist Christian, fundamentalist Islam, ecclesiastical Christian etc., to fill those niches and then the existing subsets of Psychologists for the more scientific side.

It is interesting to note that many metaphysical concepts/techniques, such as meditation, are already currently in standard scientific psychology.

I think maybe the religious side is avoiding the Science side rather than the other way around.

I would have to disagree on who is avoiding who. I see the religious side moving to connect with the science. Didn't the Vatican announce recently a change in the church's view of the big bang theory?

Science however continues to set the bar of "proof" such that religion cannot even speak at an accepted level. So science isn't just avoiding religion, science ignores religion (things spiritual) almost entirely.

I will admit it is hard to blame them. The move that religion is making toward science may just be a business decision to protect those balances.

The examples you mentioned are not accepted as spiritual techniques, they are accepted as physical techniques. Science can see the benefit of controlled heart rate, breathing techniques, and the like. Don't be confused, science still outright ignores any spiritual references.

I also have to disagree with the idea of specialization as you applied it to psychology. My reason for this is relatively simple. We are any of these things at any given time, we are any combination of these things, we are all these things at any given time. So when we turn to "outside" console they would need to be able to untangle all these things, not specialized in a few.

The physical exist through determination, a sequence of events that had to happen to remain consistent with the "truth". Our universe did not appear from nothing as our science says (even though science itself is based on the concept "you can't get something from nothing"). Our universe (and everything in it) came from 1 thing (exploring what 1 thing means can be very interesting). True to what I keep saying (ad-nauseam), if 1 thing exist it is a singular perspective. In order for second thing to exist "space" has to be created for it. So as soon as the (non-physical) concept of a second thing appeared, our universe is the determined result.

That makes our universe the product of choice, and choice (apparently) is the "gift" "god" has given us above all other animals. We are the consciousness of what we call "god" (from whatever perspective) expressing itself in the language of the other choice, the physical.


Search Theosophy.Net!


What to do...

Join Theosophy.Net Blogs Forum Live Chat Invite Facebook Facebook Group

A New View of Theosophy


Theosophy References

Wiki Characteristics History Spirituality Esotericism Mysticism RotR ToS

Our Friends

© 2023   Created by Theosophy Network.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service