|
|
|
|
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/17/2008 6:42:46 AM | RE msg 24 by racheljay:
I believe that I can understand your conflict a little better, from what you've written. I apologise if I came off very hard. I agree with your uncle.
I've always loved both my non Christian friends and Christian friends. Now, that's Christian to me.
I just FELT from others that I HAD to be done with them because they didn't belive which made no sense to me.
It's just that I have been brought up that you are to ONLY be friends with your Christian friends and if your Non Christian friends don't succumb to the Lord, you have to banish them. Makes no sense to me either, particularly as my best friend's late mother was Jewish, and a Catholic Monseignor was good friends with her. So if one of the clergy doesn't have a problem being friends with a Non-Christian, why should anyone else? Could it be that these others are just acting tribally, rejecting anyone who is not "one of us"? Could it be that these people are interpreting scripture without looking into it deeply enough?
I'll explain it by another of your statements:
I want to be friends with everyone! This again goes against what I was taught. To not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. The key word here is YOKED. To be "yoked" to someone is like when one animal is yoked to another animal. If 2 animals are yoked to each other, then they are both bound to a yoke, in the same way as 2 prisoners are bound by handcuffs that are connected by a single chain. They must both go in the same direction. If one wants to go to left, the other must follow suit, or must stop him. If one wants to go right, the other must follow suit, or must stop him.
This is what it means to be "yoked" to someone. It means that you are bound to that person, and to follow whatever direction they take. If one of you wants to go to a brothel, the other must go too, or must stop him/her. If one of you sees no point in life, and wants to jump off a cliff, the other must go too, or must stop him/her.
If you belong to a "gang", where everyone in the gang must do the same thing, then you are "yoked" to the other person. But friendship comes with choice. I don't have to do drugs just because a friend does. I don't have to drink 15 pints of alcohol just because a friend does. If my friends want to do either of those things, and I don't, then if they are my friends, they will respect my choices, and realise that I might make exactly the same choices whether I am following a religion or not.
As long as you are not going to blindly do everything that your friends do, just because they do it, then I believe you are not "yoked" to them, and so I see no disadvantage in being friends. Moreover, if you are friends with them, they might see how your religion makes your life happier, and so they might come to religion. But people learn mostly from example, not proselytisation. They are far more likely to want to be a Christian because they see how much happier you are than you were, and how much happier Christianity might make them, than by any amount of persuasion or quoting of Bible scriptures.
The only way I could see a disadvantage in being friends with non-Christians, is if you are easily led, and if you find that if your friends suggest doing Cocaine or Heroin, that you will do the same, just to fit in with your friends. If you are like that, then you need to be very careful about who you are friends with, because there are enough Christians who also do hard drugs, who are just looking for people who can be influenced, to put you in problems. But if you are your own woman, who is not easily led, but makes up her own mind about things, then I cannot see the harm. Maybe it's the people who are telling you to stay away from non-Christians who are easily led, and are really worried about you, because they would do what those other people do, just to fit it?
Be your own person. Listen to others. But make up your own mind. It's the only real freedom any of us ever have.
This goes back to what I said in my post. The reason I am not happy, is because I am not sure what I believe and what I should believe. I am unsure. I think this is your issue. There is nothing that you "should" believe. There are only facts. Facts of life. Facts about what Jesus believed. Facts about religion. You learn about Christianity and you make your own choices over what to believe, and what to do. What people often tell us that we "should" do, is whatever we feel an obligation to do, because others tell us to, without any good reason at all, and only to fit in with them.
What you "should" do, is to make up your own mind. After all, look at Jesus. He was a Jew who spoke out against injustice. Same with the saints. They didn't try to fit in. They did what they thought was right.
Follow the example of Jesus. Decide what is right, and do that.
If you are doing what is right, then you have G-d with you. G-d can do anything to make your life better. Anything. What better friend can you have than G-d?
If you are not doing what is right, then G-d is not with you. The entire universe is just a part of G-d. What difference does it make how many friends you have, if the entire universe turns away from you?
Follow the example of Jesus. Decide what is right, and do that.
RE msg 32 by socal731:
So, depression is caused by being self-absorbed and/or a lack of self worth? Silly doctors and scientists seem to think it has something to do with brain chemistry. Imagine! You guys need to call some of 'em up and educate 'em. I would. But a psychologist on TV just recently announced that psychologists classify anyone who presents a different view of life to them, like theism, as delusional. So merely suggesting the idea that depression works differently to how it is perceived by psychologists right now, might present a problem to them.
Now, I am certainly not advocating that mental illness is not affected by brain chemistry at all. I knew a man for many years, who was perfectly normal when on his meds, but was seriously mentally ill when not on his meds, and there was no trace of mental illness in him when he was taking his pills. But the brain is affected by lots of things, and we don't generally assume that incorrect thinking is mostly due to brain chemistry alone. If someone was not good at Mathematics, we would say that his brain doesn't work out Mathematics correctly. If we believed that all incorrect thinking was mostly down to brain chemistry, then everyone who ever failed an exam in Mathematics would be on Ritalin, or an SSRI, or some other drug.
It's generally true that when someone is suffering from a mentally deficient form of reasoning that doesn't seem to be eliminated by simply pointing out the facts, that therapy is seen as the best answer. Therapy is often not a special technique, but something simple, like listening, and just encouraging the other person to get all their thoughts out, so that you can see things in the correct light. The main reason why therapy is so much more popular today, is that in earlier times, a friend would listen to you, and now such behaviour is rarely found by many people.
Drugs are often seen as a short-stop. It would be nice to believe that just taking a drug for a year would get you out of a despression permanently. But it doesn't. It often takes therapy.
SSRIs are supposed to increase your Serotonin levels. It's based on the idea that non-depressed people produce the right amounts of Serotonin, and depressed people don't. But it's not that common for someone to have a genetic disorder that means they are permanently without enough Serotonin, because then depressed people would all have been depressed their whole lives, and people who weren't depressed in childhood would never become depressed later on. It seems to me that when non-depressed people encounter situations, they can become depressed. At that point, the depression seems to be accompanied by a lack of Serotonin. However, it's the Serotonin that makes you feel good about yourself. So now the depression comes with a lack of Serotonin, so you don't feel good about yourself, so you don't do anything, and so you never get anywhere in life, and you see your life as hopeless and depressing. So you become even more depressed. So the lack of Serotonin acts in a negative feedback loop with the depression, leading to a vicious cycle.
If you can artificially raise the levels of Serotonin, then the person would logically feel better, and that would raise someone's spirits. So you would start doing more with your life, and so you would see that you get more out of life. So you would see that your life is hopeful, not hopeless, and enjoyable, not depressing. So you would come out of your depression naturally.
Even if this positive feedback loop doesn't happen, your Serotonin will still be increased, so you'll feel better, and so your depression will be held back from a vicious cycle, keeping it where it is, making it manageable. Hopefully, in those cases, therapy will help, or that the depression will go by itself.
Vancer has it right, where he says:
I imagine brain chemistry is very complicated, and states caused by unbalanced brain chemistry are brought on by varieties of situations just as complicated.
Patterns in diet and stimulus are two things off the top of my head that I can think of that trigger adaptive neurochemistry. Our brain is just trying to establish an equilibrium with what's being provided to it. However, it appears that we tend to generally think about things that we were focussing on previously, and that even our dreams are often based on what we were thinking about the day before, which creates a feedback loop. Our thoughts are built from our previous thoughts, and feed our future thoughts. So if we can change what we are focussing on, for long enough, we can change our habits of thinking, and then we will establish a new feedback loop, which will keep our thoughts in the new line of thinking. It's one reason why we often focus on work, when things get problematic, because it keeps us so occupied with work, that we don't get a chance to fall into habits of thinking negative thoughts. However, if we are already thinking negatively, then work doesn't help, because the patterns need to be changed, and all we are is putting them on hold, so when we stop thinking about work, we return to our negative habits of thinking.
However, if we can pour ourselves into helping others, then our thoughts will become focussed on others, and not solely ourselves. So if we don't allow ourselves to focus on ourselves for even an instant, we stop thinking about how bad our problems are, and we change our methods of examination to be in terms of how others are handling the same problems. That has several advantages:
1) We notice that lots of people are in the same situation and handling things much worse than us. So we re-evaluate our skills to be much more realistic, that we are much more capable of solving our problems. So we see that we are already doing much better than we could be doing, and so we realise that we can do much better than we already are doing, and that gives us motivation to achieve that, and motivation is usually the biggest limitation in success, not limitations.
2) We notice that others have it much harder than us. So we become more thankful for what we have. So we see that we have a lot already, and with a lot, you can get more, so we become more hopeful that we can get what we want. If you don't get more, you still have a lot, so we are not as upset when things don't go to plan, so we are more willing to accept things in a happier frame of mind when things don't go our way.
3) Moreover, because we are more willing to accept things in a happier frame of mind when things don't go our way, we are not as fixated on the loss of our goal. So we are better able to consider alternatives, that will still achieve our objectives in a different way.
4) We see how others do things and learn from them. So we learn far more. We see what methods work in the majority of people, and what doesn't, and when those methods work, what attributes are consistent with those people for whom that method does work, and attributes are consistent with those people for whom that method doesn't work. So we are able to form a much more solid framework for working out how to achieve our aims. We have a much better idea of when to give up on something, and try something else, and when our actions just need more time, and we just need to persevere to achieve our aims. So we are far less likely to give up too early, or keep trying to achieve something that is never going to happen.
All of this can be achieved by observation and contemplation. But in general, we see things differently when we are in the situation than when we are observing it from the outside, and we tend to relate our observations of others in an abstract intellectual way, that doesn't transfer to a more personal and emotional way. Also, we tend to miss the subtleties of what is needed to make something work, unless we are doing it ourselves. So observation tends to be very good for academic theories, but very poor for motivation and practical experience. So we really need to see things as if we did things ourselves.
The question is what is the difference between an observer and a doer?
There are 2 differences:
1) The doer gets the benefit of the action. The observer does not.
2) The doer evaluates success and failure based on the result of the action. The observer does not.
We tend to evaluate our personal feelings of disappointment, based on whether or not we got the benefits of the action.
But we tend to evaluate our personal feelings of success, based on whether or not the action was successful, whether or not we are the beneficiary.
Consider baseball. If you are trying to get on a baseball team, then you will practice to get good enough to be accepted for the team. If you practice and you get on the team, you feel elated.
If you practice and you don't get on the team, then you feel disappointed. If you practice, and you don't get on the team, but then one of the team breaks his leg, and they are a man short, so they take you on anyway, you don't feel that elated to be part of the team, because you feel that you really don't deserve to be there. This is also why so many soldiers who survived a massacre of their platoon feel guilty. They feel that it is luck that they survived, so if things were really fair, they would be in the same situation as their comrades-in-arms. If their comrades survived, then so should they. But when their comrades die, they feel they should have died too, and are not entitled to life.
However, if you train someone else, and he gets on the team, then you don't feel elated. You feel much more confident in your abilities that what you know and do is the way to ensure success in baseball. If he doesn't get on the team, then you feel a bit disappointed in yourself that you didn't train him well enough to get on the team, but you don't feel the sense of dismay that your goals weren't achieved, because it was never your goal to get on the team. Your only goal was to help him, which you did t the best of your ability. You are realistic that he might be good enough for the team, but the team positions might already all be filled by good players, or by people with more raw natural talent. He might be good enough for the team, and if he tries out for other teams, he might get on them. He might not be quite good enough for the team, but you can see that he's definitely a lot better at baseball than he was.
Your emotions tend to cloud your thinking, but only those emotions related to the things you've invested in. However, your confidence and experience are purely based on whether the objective is achieved or not. So if you are helping others, with the aim of ensuring the person has the capability to achieve his objective reasonably, to the best of his ability, then you are not personally invested in seeing the objective achieved, but your confidence and experience are still increased according to how much that person is reasonably capable of achieving the objective. You won't get upset if he doesn't get what he wants. But you'll have a much more positive view of your skills if he does.
But that positive view of your skills will apply equally to you when you attempt to achieve your goals.
So if you focus on helping others, you will have the benefits that come from success, without the downfalls. That makes us confident and happy in all ways.
Conversely, if you are always only focussed on your own self, you'll never get a good perspective of how others are faring compared to you, so you can easily develop unrealistic expectations, you won't realise just how much you have, so you won't even realise how much you have, and only think about how much you don't, and and you won't have the benefits of learning from multiple situations, only your own, so you won't have a good breadth of experience, and your won successes are more likely to be down to luck, than skill, which means that there is a good chance you will fail often in the future.
So focussing on yourself is likely to bring more in the way of depression, and focussing on others will bring more happiness and success, and this is what others have found. To quote one famous teacher:
"I learned much from my teachers, but more from my colleagues, and the most from my pupils."
Even in terms of changing your habits, Henry James remarked that thoughts affect actions and actions affect thoughts, but you can control your actions far more than your thoughts. So by changing your actions, you can slowly change your thoughts. Something to consider. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/17/2008 6:41:52 PM | good podt scorpion mover, lots of good points to consider. One thing I always hate to do is develop a system or program that cements something like how the human psyche works and can be programmed. Just thinking of the situation with depression, and I am not speaking in regards to the OP and her situation but depression in the variety of ways it can effect a person.
When I look at Isaiah 53, I know you probably understand this scripture passage differently than I do, but nonetheless, whoever we percieve is being described in Isaiah 53, I would say we can both conclude that this is a description of a completely selfless person. Yet though completely selfless, this person was no stranger to sorrow and depression..in fact the passage boldly proclaims this person to be well aquainted with sorrow and depression.
Now of course for me this is a description and prophecy of Jesus Christ, as christians we don't think much about the depression and lonliness that Christ suffered, we think because He was also God that He was somehow above all these humanly experiences that all of us suffer from at some time or another. In any event I don't think any of us are spared periods of sorrow and depression, these all go hand in hand with a world that is under the reality of death imo.
Anyways I liked what you said and consider it to be good advice for the OP and all of us.
peace. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/17/2008 7:12:16 PM | Thanks, Scorpiomover, for a well thought out - and thought provoking post. You expalin things in a simple and clear fashion. I especially like the baseball analogy you use in your post.
Your explanation of the benefits of putting the needs of others before our own is excellent:
<div class="quote">if you focus on helping others, you will have the benefits that come from success, without the downfalls. That makes us confident and happy in all ways.
Conversely, if you are always only focussed on your own self, you'll never get a good perspective of how others are faring compared to you, so you can easily develop unrealistic expectations, you won't realise just how much you have, so you won't even realise how much you have, and only think about how much you don't, and and you won't have the benefits of learning from multiple situations, only your own, so you won't have a good breadth of experience, and your won successes are more likely to be down to luck, than skill, which means that there is a good chance you will fail often in the future.
So focussing on yourself is likely to bring more in the way of depression, and focussing on others will bring more happiness and success, and this is what others have found. To quote one famous teacher:
"I learned much from my teachers, but more from my colleagues, and the most from my pupils."
From my own experience, when I first became a Christian I was someone who struggled with issues of selfishness and isolation. Fact is, I was in the depths of a depression when I had my first encounter with God. Over a (not so very long) period of time the Lord started working on my heart, giving me the desire to help wherever I could, and sometimes in areas where he saw a use for me but in which I was originally uncomfortable. The most recent is in the area of outreach with those whom society considers unreachable and virtually unimportant. Now I find myself interacting with the homeless, sharing meals and Bible study time with them. No, I am not the one leading the study, but I am an equal participant.
What you say is true.... ( my words ) we learn from our interactions, just as much as we hope those we interact with are learning from us. My acts of service in the name of the Lord may bless others, but I am being blessed in the doing. I am also growing and changing the more I seek to do His will. And, the conversations - both private and group - shared with the other participants in these sessions have made it clear to me that I have a great deal to be thankful for. | |
|
Nergal
|
Joined: 5/14/2008
Msg: 54 | |
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/18/2008 4:40:36 AM | Interesting Topic. I think you have to look for root causes. People dont often realise, or see religion as a crutch, but it is. The deeply religious or spiritual people I've encountered in real life are there because they felt something lacking in their real lives. Talk to them and understand and there is a deep seated depression an inner unsatisfied need. I've just spent the past few months deprogramming cult victims so I know what I'm talking about. When the religion or spirituality fails that need thats when the depression kicks back in. In many ways any form of religion can be declared to be a psychological dysfunction. When it reaches the stage that a person cant survive without it, cant function in the real world without prayer or magic.
Christianity is depressing, its fatalistic and based on guilt. Its why the end of days them is so strong in some places. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/18/2008 6:05:30 AM | Back from your sabbatical, Nergal??
There'll be some cheering...and some wailing and gnashing of teeth I guess.
Are some people religious because they are depressed...or depressed because they are religious?? For some it possibly reaches clinical proportions....but for others...I guess it is more of a minor chronic ailment to be borne with fortitude...and prayer.  | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/18/2008 9:03:22 AM | Hi, Nergal. Good to see you back. Do you have any facts such as studies, reports, information (all with quoted sources and links if possible) to support your conclusion. Or is it just anecdotal and your own personal opinion. If you're making a sweeping generalisation that "Religion is a crutch" and "Religion = Depression", and , your authority claim that you've just spent X months deprogramming cult victims doesn't count for anything (1. It's unverifiable. 2. It's irrelevant.)
As for your conclusion, "Christianity is depressing, its fatalistic and based on guilt." that's just your opinion. Wrong in my opinion. But I'm eager to see the studies that support that conclusion. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/18/2008 12:10:20 PM | I agree that religiosity can lead to depression and cause more problems then it solves when it tips over into a religious addiction or hyper-religiosity. It can be prevelant in those who are switching addictions where they attempt to use their faith as a band-aid over a festering psychological wound instead of using spiritual healing to deal with past hurts and unloving behaviours. From a Christian perspective it is often as a result of relying on "by faith alone" rather than on "repent and be baptized".
"By faith alone" is used as a justification for continuing with negative behavior patterns and when life doesn't get any better, depression and other methods of acting out are the result since the believer starts to think they are not good enough to obtain God's blessings.
When one starts to see that it is the dysfunctional behaviors that are the source of the problems and becomes willing to repent from them and become more Christlike, the depression is overcome. | |
|
| |
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 3:45:38 AM |
"By faith alone" is used as a justification for continuing with negative behavior patterns
Quite right.
Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children would be an example of this well thought out statement. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 6:54:31 AM |
Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children would be an example of this well thought out statement.
Whining about how you want to control hat parents can teach their children under the guise of children's rights is a good example of dogmatism. What's your point? | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 7:42:55 AM | Mr Optimist
dogmatism
Main Entry: dog·ma·tism
Pronunciation: \ˈdȯg-mə-ˌti-zəm, ˈdäg-\
Function: noun
Date: 1603
1 : positiveness in assertion of opinion especially when unwarranted or arrogant
2 : a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises
Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade
The IDers do bleat an awful lot about various unsubstantiated claims so description 1 would tend to point away your assertion of dogmatism.
Description 2 is not apt either as there is indeed sufficiently examined evidence to make this assertion.
Ditto for this claim-
and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children
There is strong evidence to back this assertion. Kids are taught certain fanciful claims about the nature of the universe that have nothing to do with reality. Therefore, neither assertion suffers from dogmatism.
good example of dogmatism
Can you see now that it's not?
What's your point?
Well it was irony but it does get lost on some.
Whining about how you want to control hat parents
Hat parents? You mean it's possible these days to adopt a stetson??? | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 8:20:05 AM |
"By faith alone" is used as a justification for continuing with negative behavior patterns
Quite right.
Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children would be an example of this well thought out statement.
Obviously you and E Kyro are both unaware of what faith is and how faith works at justifying a believer.
Romans 3:28
For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.
Galatians 2:16
know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.
Galatians 3:11
Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, "The righteous will live by faith."
James 2:17
In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
Hebrews 11:1 Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
If a person reads hebrews 11 they will see that the works of faith have nothing to do with the deeds of any law...but have to do with men being obedient to what God as required of them...and in each individual listed of being a witness to the workings of faith, it is clear that one person's actions are only considered a work of faith in that person's life.....for instance, if God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and he went off and buiolt an ark as Noah did.....then Abraham would not have been considered as one who did the works of faith.
There are no two people who share the same works of faith in any of the heroes of faith listed in Hebrews 11.
My point being, what God may require of me, may not be the same as God requires of you...so works of faith vary with each individual. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 11:33:40 AM |
I said: Whining about how you want to control hat parents
ev62 riposted: Hat parents? You mean it's possible these days to adopt a stetson???
A typo flame? Too funny. If that's the best you can do, don't quit your day job. 
Seriously, why don't we agree that we'll always differ. I think that parents have the right - within the law - to bring up their children teaching them about their faith, and you think that State should punish them for doing so. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 12:31:21 PM | Christianity and depression... It depends on whos perspective you're looking from... There are many which seem depressing to me but there are many which seem joyful too.
I have chopped off and fwb relationships that I have had. Broken a heart or two as well. My friends totally think I'm lame now that I've found my "new found glory"
If left at that I would say it's their problem... Some people just refuse to be happy for their friends when they're embarking on change... But this
I've even bruised some friendships in the terms that "we shouldn't be unequally yoked with unbelievers" by telling them that I can't be friends or date someone who isn't a Christian.
says to me that you have elevated yourself above those who believe differently than you... I don't think Jesus would really dig that.
"Unequally yoked"... What is that exactly? If we are all children of God how could we be "unequally yoked" with anyone?
I can totally see a corelation with the illusion of separation and loneliness.
With all of this new found glory, I feel like crap, my friends think I think that I am better than them. I'm depressed to the point where I stay at home, work out mon- friday, eat, paint, and lay down for hours.
It sounds to me like you've been told you are better than them... What's worse is you sound like you're starting to believe it.
The thing is, I've know most of the people in my church for years and I don't find pleasure in fellowshipping with any of them! There is nothing really going on in my church and I don't have a drive to start something.
Are you pretending to be something you're not? Validation from your family or friends is one thing, but at the cost of your true self? It's ok to change... Just as long as you are true to you... If you end up believing differently than your family and friends so be it... The ones who truely care about you will look on your uniqueness as a good thing.
And everyone knows that as a Christian, you aren't supposed to crave those things, that you are to take off your daily selves and take on the cross.
I'm not even sure all Christians believe this... I think to live your life in self denial only adds to the misery in the world... If you let your spirit be what it wants to be, there would surely be more happiness around... Smiles set off chain reactions of smiles and misery loves company... Which would you choose to surround yourself with during your stay here on Earth?
Personally, I don't believe in not associating with my friends just because they don't believe what I do, that just seems selfish to me.
Good... Without other perspectives, you are only limiting what you can learn here... After all, when you look into the eyes of a newborn, do you see wonder and curiosity or do you see an evil which needs to be forgiven?
I can offer my opinions in hopes to save their souls but why should I have to worry about the after life?
I'm of the notion that if you live a life of compassion for all and are true to yourself that the afterlife will take care of itself.
Do you think my beliefs caused my depression?
No... I think trying to conform to the beliefs of others caused your depression. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 1:12:09 PM | I'm pleased that consigliere31 and cuddlybuddy can see what I'm on about. I'm not here to suggest that anyone turns to Christianity, just to avoid people. In my view, true religious people seek to help others, as much as possible, and to avoid criticising others as much as they possibly can.
RE msg 54 by Nergal:
Interesting Topic. I think you have to look for root causes. People dont often realise, or see religion as a crutch, but it is. The deeply religious or spiritual people I've encountered in real life are there because they felt something lacking in their real lives. Talk to them and understand and there is a deep seated depression an inner unsatisfied need. I've just spent the past few months deprogramming cult victims so I know what I'm talking about. When the religion or spirituality fails that need thats when the depression kicks back in. In many ways any form of religion can be declared to be a psychological dysfunction. When it reaches the stage that a person cant survive without it, cant function in the real world without prayer or magic. I agree that you have to look for root causes. I've often been told that religion is a crutch. But I've only heard this from one person, who claimed to want relationships. He dated lots of women, but never beyond sex. So I think that there are dysfunctions in both views. Some people seek religion so as to avoid dealing with their problems. Some people seek a lack of religion so as to avoid dealing with their problems. Both ways are extremely damaging to the individual and to society, because that individual often hurts many people before he starts to sort himself out.
We also have to look at what we consider dysfunction. If you can't run your life without a car, then it too becomes a dysfunction. Since most people who are used to owning a car would find their life impossible to run without it, then it is clear that all cars are even worse than religion, when it comes to dysfunction.
I believe that there is an assumption by many people that religion is automatically bad, and so they see dangers where there are none. The same people avoid seeing dangers where they are seriously causing harm to innocent people, because they see religion as dangerous, and those people aren't religious.
I suspect that in your case you've just spent a lot of time seeing the dangers of religion, and so you're not considering the wider view. I believe I would feel the same in your situation. But if anyone just spent the past few months dealing with the survivors of horrific car crashes, they would consider cars the most dangerous and vicious thing in existence. If anyone just spent the past few months dealing with the victims of Thalidomide, they would consider prescription drugs the most dangerous and vicious thing in existence. So I think that before we start casting throws at religion, we have to look at EVERYONE, not just the minority who speak out the loudest, but the many people who are genuinely nice and reasonable people who follow a religion.
Christianity is depressing, its fatalistic and based on guilt. Its why the end of days them is so strong in some places. I used to feel the same way about Judaism. It depressed me. I gave it up and I became far more depressed. I slowly realised that Judaism itself is not depressing but full of joy. However, the way SOME people teach Judaism was depressing. So I looked at how those people treated other subjects, expecting they would be happier. They were not. In my experience of people, some religious people and some non-religious people speak in a way that encourages guilt and depression, about everything in the entire world, and some religious people and some non-religious people speak in a way that encourages happiness and a sense of good self-esteem.
So these days, when I want to know about religion, or anything else, I listen to how they talk about trivial things. If it implies that people must conform to some mythical standards or be made to feel bad or guilty for not doing what these people want, I know they will talk about religion in the same way. If they want people to be religious, they will say that atheism will make us unhappy. If they want people to be non-religious, they will say that religion will make us unhappy. What I believe is important, is that these people are just using religion and atheism to get others to do what they want, to make slaves out of us, and use emotional persuasion about religion and atheism.
So I no longer make judgements about religion by looking at individuals, or even single groups. I look at what people do, both in and out of religion. If any religion has most of its adherents being polite, respectful, happy and full of self-esteem about things that cannot be affected by religion, and yet when it comes to religion, they are miserable, I can see how their beliefs about their religon are desructive, and if their beliefs are exactly what the books and sources of that religion preaches, then I could come to the conclusion that such a religion might be destructive. However, if I see that that most of the adherents in a region are miserable, both in and out of religion, and so are the people in that region who are not religious, then I have to conclude that the people of that region are miserable because of the way they live, and the religion has nothing to do with it.
So far, I have seen that everyone who is non-religious, from most countries, seem to be just as miserable, as the religious people from their country, and they often seem to have the same idiosyncrasies too, indicating that the way they thing is affected by the culture of their country, not by their religion. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 6:21:14 PM |
Seriously, why don't we agree that we'll always differ.
OK I'll start.
I agree that I differ with your description of what I think regarding the teaching of unsubstantiated claims to children within the law.Yes I believe the law needs to change in some instances regarding this, although I have never mentioned anything about punishment, once again there you go making false assertions.
I've explained this several times but for whatever reason it appears not to have sunk in.
Are you able to debate an issue in a grownup way or, as the evidence suggests, are you just full of ad hominem, over reactions and petty insults? | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 7:53:11 PM | Posted by evolving62
Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children would be an example of this well thought out statement.
You are confusing "belief" and "faith" it appears. An analogy to explain the difference:
I ask you to recommend a good mechanic in your area and you tell me Joe's Garage can fix anything. On your say-so I go to Joe's with a belief that he can fix my car. He does a great job and even fixes a couple other items that no one else has been able to.
The next time my car breaks down I take it to Joe's with the faith that he can repair it because in past he provided evidence that he is a top notch mechanic. Therefore faith by definition is supportable whereas if it is unsupportable it is only a belief.
Posted by consigliers31
Obviously you and E Kyro are both unaware of what faith is and how faith works at justifying a believer.
Alright, in your own words, enlighten me. I just invite Jesus in my heart, have faith He is there, then can carry on as before all justified?
If a person reads hebrews 11 they will see that the works of faith have nothing to do with the deeds of any law...but have to do with men being obedient to what God as required of them
So just wait until God gives me a clearcut sign of a project to do and for the rest live as I like? No 10 commandments, repentance, restitution, etc. required? Sounds like cheap grace to me but maybe I am misunderstanding what you're trying to communicate here. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 8:34:12 PM | rACHELj
hERE IS
Something I read from a handbook to the Bible
written in 1973
It reads "'The Offer of a New Life
Simple Illustrations of the Bibles Relevance to present day Society & to modern Man or Woman Based on Creation and a Law which is True to Man 'or
woman and Society as they really are .
The Bible does not limit itself to Gods law for Humanity
It recognizes that Man or woman is unable to keep these laws or to make reparations for his offenses against a Holy God
"So the law is intended not simply to regulate conduct in an imperfect world , But to show up our imperfections and so lead us to Christ
''What we Believe inevitably affects how we live .
Jesus view of the Bible
must become ours too^^^"'Doctrine is is vital ^^"as well as 'Keeping The Commandments
Do not let the World Squeeze you into its own mould ..........Phillips 12:2
Pray for the Woman and forgive her for her being ignorant to truth ''and possibly one would or could even consider a False prophet ...
We can do all things thru Christ "" God Loves You
you are the Apple of his Eye  Draw it or Dream A Blueprint for Your Life "" whole heartedly''' Believe it to Achieve it  | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 10:12:24 PM |
The next time my car breaks down I take it to Joe's with the faith that he can repair it because in past he provided evidence that he is a top notch mechanic.
From your previous dealings with Joe you now have knowledge based on evidence, and therefore have a supportable belief that Joe will do a good job.
Faith is belief without evidence, and in this scenario is unwarranted. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/19/2008 10:57:26 PM | Posted by consigliers31
Obviously you and E Kyro are both unaware of what faith is and how faith works at justifying a believer.
Alright, in your own words, enlighten me. I just invite Jesus in my heart, have faith He is there, then can carry on as before all justified?
If a person reads hebrews 11 they will see that the works of faith have nothing to do with the deeds of any law...but have to do with men being obedient to what God as required of them
So just wait until God gives me a clearcut sign of a project to do and for the rest live as I like? No 10 commandments, repentance, restitution, etc. required? Sounds like cheap grace to me but maybe I am misunderstanding what you're trying to communicate here.
If explaining justification by grace and faith was in my power, then everyone would be a christian. But it doesn't work like that. Grace is a revelation of faith and the Spirit is the One who bears witness to us. I can only hope that somehow we hear from the Spirit and the Word produces this faith within us.
If a person owes someone then they should pay thier debt, or make restitution, however this has nothing to do with christianity, this has to do with common decency as a human being. This has nothing to do with God, or our relationship with Him. We cannot earn salvation through making restitution.
As far as the 10 commandments, they are all part and parcel of the law and they were never meant for anyone but the children of Israel. No other nation was ever expected to obey the law except for Israel. They were the ones who reaped the blessings and cursings of the law, and as far as the rest of the populated world goes, they were never under any law or required to keep any of God's commandments. This is all elementary and I would suggest reading the book of Romans and Galations to get a better understanding. I recommend reading what Paul wrote as he revealed the full revelation of God. Jesus can be difficult to understand as He was only addressing the children of Israel in almost all of His teachings, so unless you are a 1'st century Jew, you probably won't understand what Christ was talking about in His parables.
Repentance is nothing more than a change of heart and mind, and this change of mind is concerning turning away from trusting in dead works of the law in order to make oneself justified before God. If you think that the law justifies you and not faith, then you haven't even repented in the first place. Inviting Jesus into your heart was merely lip service with no true understanding or belief that He is actually the Savior who justifies mankind before God. This repentance from dead works, is the elementary stage of christianity, and the principle on which christianity is founded, if a person doesn't have this, then what makes them a christian? The law of Moses....not in the least!
Hebrews 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
E Kyro this is a classic case of stumbling over the stumbling stone and not moving forward into faith and grace in Christ.
In regards to the 10 commandments...which one? Thou shalt not murder? Are you saying that only christians are required to keep these commandments and anyone who is not a christian is free to murder whoever they want. To me this sounds about the same as saying that christians are free to murder whoever they want because they are not under the law. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/20/2008 5:08:25 AM | [QUOTE "Repentance is nothing more than a change of heart and mind, and this change of mind is concerning turning away from trusting in dead works of the law in order to make oneself justified before God. If you think that the law justifies you and not faith, then you haven't even repented in the first place. Inviting Jesus into your heart was merely lip service with no true understanding or belief that He is actually the Savior who justifies mankind before God. This repentance from dead works, is the elementary stage of christianity, and the principle on which christianity is founded, if a person doesn't have this, then what makes them a christian? The law of Moses....not in the least!
Hebrews 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, " QUOTE ENDS}
Excellent point Consigiere , Hebrews was a great help to me to get rid of both depression and the " false doctrine " that was a cause of it. Who here has kept all the laws ? Who here has done such great works that they are not just " filthy rags "in the sight of the Lord? If you believe that your following the law is the important thing, then what laws are greater than other ones?
I work with a chap who is very legalistic, so much so that he has technacalities that he speaks of, to account for what he might be doing wrong. He refuses to belong to any group other than his church, as he follows the doctrine of being divorced of this world as his "Apostle ( his sect believes their preacher is an apostle ) He will not have any dealings with a fellow Muslim co worker as he follows the advice to avoid all evil, and he happens to believe that is evil , same with known Gays . This chap even believes that breaking health laws is a sin, smoking or drinking for example, and wont associate with any who do.
I use this gentleman as an example of those that live as though following the law is the most important thing. Now, what is wrong with what he does? All those beliefs he espouses it can be argued , can be supported in the Bible. The problem is this, when you look at how Christ lived while on this earth, he himself did not follow those laws !
He sat and dined with the Tax Collectors, he was pleasant and understanding with the woman at the well, he taught us to "render up to Ceasar what is Cesaers ". Andy Warhowl once said, "if Jesus was alive today, he wouldnt be in the Cathederals ( glass towers today), but rather with the Hookers down of 5th" , or something to that affect. That is very true I think, as when we look at his life, he spent time with those that were not considered " rightous" at the time.
Following the law is a funny thing, do you follow it simply because you have to or want to? For example, there is a well known speed trap near where I live. Ridiculous, it is a 4 lane highway, rural. but because it falls with in the City Of Brantford it has a 50 kph ( 30 mph) speed limit. It is one of the few places that I ever do the speed limit, not because I agree with doing it there but because I want to avoid paying the cost( get caught). So I am not making a moral decision to obey the law when driving there, but rather an amoral choice. Now, when I see little ones going to school, in a school zone, then my heart is in the right place, I slow down fearing for those kids safety and obey the law because I want to. .
What good is obeying a law, simply because it is the law, when the one you are obeying it for, can read your heart and know your true motives? | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/20/2008 7:23:28 AM | | You do not have to go to a church to pray and or love God . you can do that sitting at home. read your bible and understand it they way u understand the phrase to mean. This woman that approached you telling you what she did is insane. God told her nothing. nothing at all. some of the church people are way out there. just do what u feel is right and do ur best to live right. what others believe should have no bearing on your beliefs. all churches believe different ..well only one can be right. take a penticostal church for instance they wont let u in if ur female and not in a dress oh lets not forget u must have long hair. well that is upsurd. God never said that. that is the church people saying that. people who attend church are completley brainwashed. I ahve always said church goers are like brainwashed zombies running around yelling your going to hell, your going to hell. its jsut outrageous | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/20/2008 7:32:51 AM | E Kyro Message # 67
When it comes to trying to convince others that white is black and black is white, you seem to rarely disappoint. I liked your semantic juggling between the meanings of belief and faith in the context of Evolving62’s statement in his message # 59.
I respectfully suggest that it is you that seem a little confused about the difference between the meanings and correct usage of the words “belief” and “faith” than is Evolving62.
Evolving62’s usage of faith in the context of
teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children
is a correct usage of the word.
According to the Cambridge dictionary, belief is:
the feeling of certainty that something exists or is true:
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=6825&dict=CALD
Wikipedia defines belief as:
“Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.”
Wikipedia discusses the concept of belief adequately enough to explain how the process of belief works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief
It is usual for someone to have some rationale for holding to a particular belief, but beliefs may be held on the basis of supporting evidence, inadequate evidence or no evidence at all….some people hold to beliefs on the basis of “intuition”.
Faith on the other hand, according to the Cambridge dictionary is:
“great trust or confidence in something or someone:[“/quote] http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=27698&dict=CALD Wikipedia elaborates, by stating that Faith is: ”Faith is a belief in an idea that is unsupported, or contradicted, by evidence….” Wikipedia indicates that the word faith may be used in a formal sense “ Formal usage of the word "faith" is largely reserved for concepts of religion, where it almost universally refers to a trusting belief in a transcendent reality (therefore spirituality and spiritual immortality), or else in a Supreme Being and their role as a guide for people moving into an experience of such reality.” Or it may be used in an informal sense ” Informal usage of the word "faith" can be quite broad, and may be used standardly in place of either as "trust," "belief," or "hope"…” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith Evolving62 was using the word “faith” correctly in the formal sense of a religiously trusting belief in a transcendant reality. Faith is defined in the New Testament (Hebrews 11:1 )as
“Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” I am of the view that your analogy is not a valid analogy A more valid Joe the repairman analogy would be as follows. I ask you to recommend a good mechanic in your area and you tell me Joe's Garage can fix anything. On your say-so I go to Joe's with a [bold]belief[/bold] that he can fix my car. He does a great job and even fixes a couple other items that no one else has been able to. The next time my car breaks down I take it to Joe's with the [bold] belief [/bold] that he can repair it because in past he provided evidence that he is a top notch mechanic. When I drop my car off to be repaired, Joe tells me that for an additional $200 he can have my car exorcised of gremlins, which will, in the long run, reduce the incidence of vehicle mechanical malfunctions. Do I show [bold] faith [/bold] in Joe’s claim, and part with my $200 for a bit of voodoo mechanics…or do I show lack of [bold] faith [/bold] in Joe’s claim, by skeptically keeping the $200 in my own pocket? In other words do I feel sufficiently assured of the hope of getting rid of pesky gremlins, and thereby reducing my vehicle’s incidence of mechanical malfunctions even though the claim that gremlins exist is unsupported. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/20/2008 9:01:08 AM |
Excellent point Consigiere , Hebrews was a great help to me to get rid of both depression and the " false doctrine " that was a cause of it. Who here has kept all the laws ? Who here has done such great works that they are not just " filthy rags "in the sight of the Lord? If you believe that your following the law is the important thing, then what laws are greater than other ones?
I work with a chap who is very legalistic, so much so that he has technacalities that he speaks of, to account for what he might be doing wrong. He refuses to belong to any group other than his church, as he follows the doctrine of being divorced of this world as his "Apostle ( his sect believes their preacher is an apostle ) He will not have any dealings with a fellow Muslim co worker as he follows the advice to avoid all evil, and he happens to believe that is evil , same with known Gays . This chap even believes that breaking health laws is a sin, smoking or drinking for example, and wont associate with any who do.
I use this gentleman as an example of those that live as though following the law is the most important thing. Now, what is wrong with what he does? All those beliefs he espouses it can be argued , can be supported in the Bible. The problem is this, when you look at how Christ lived while on this earth, he himself did not follow those laws !
Yes I have met many christians also who create a whole doctrine of New Testament laws to add to the yoke of the Old Testament law.
I see some major malfunctions with this concept of being under law....and that is a person is never released from being under judgment. The purpose of the legal portion of Christ's ministry was to accomplish the fullfilling of the law, so legalistically, mankind would be removed from being under judgment, and become free to walk in the Spirit.
Christ fulfilled the law, yet at the same time He broke the customs and traditions and also the law on many occasions (sounds kinda silly, but)...the very first miracle Jesus ever revealed and began His ministry with, was the breaking of a tradition. Traditionally the best wine was to be served first, but Christ's miracle broke this tradition and the best wine was served last. There could be many spiritual insights regarding this simple miracle that demonstrate Christ's mission and purpose...The first shall be last and the last shall be first, was the message describing those who were first under God's covenant( the Israelites under the covenant of law) would be last to enter into the kingdom, and those who were last( the Gentiles who entered into the covenant of faith) would be the first to be given the kingdom. In regards to wine, this is symbolic of the covenant with God. When Jesus said that we cannot pour new wine into old wineskins, He was comparing the Old Covenant under the law and the New Covenant under grace, that would soon be revealed and manifested a reality, and He was saying that they cannot be mixed together. A little leaven , leavens the whole lump, in other words, even one tiny legalistic requirement, moots out the entire reality of grace.
And as you have also pointed out, no one has ever kept all the laws...not even God Himself. The commandment spoke by God was to not make any graven images of things in heaven, yet right after God gave this commandment, He broke the commandment and ordered the Israelites to also break the commandment by making graven images of things in heaven and placing them in the Ark of the Covenant. If this doesn't speak of the temporary purposes of the law intended by God, then it must certainly bring some confusion in a theology that sees the law as eternally established.
the law offers no help concerning the condition in the heart of man. And to be realistic what person doesn't have evil in thier heart to some degree, and if its in a person's heart is to lie, cheat, steal, murder, be unfaithful, etc.....the law won't help them, it will only bring them under judgment. We cannot eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil(the law) and live. The very thing that brings death is the law, so why on earth would God give us the poisonous food that only kills us spiritually, except in the temporary sense to instruct us to the greater reality of grace in Christ and save us out of this spiritual death brought on by the law.
Christ is the One who has all authority and His judgments bring life. Christ does not bring judgment upon us via the requirements of the law or no man will be saved.
Galatians 2:21
I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!"
Romans 10:4
Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.
Philippians 3:9
and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. | |
|
| depression brought on by Christianity?
Posted: 5/20/2008 1:47:44 PM | evolving62 in msg 59: Patterns such as the on going bleatings of the Intelligent Design brigade and teaching unsupportable faith based claims to children would be an example of this well thought out statement.
E.Kyro in msg 67: You are confusing "belief" and "faith" it appears. An analogy to explain the difference:
I ask you to recommend a good mechanic in your area and you tell me Joe's Garage can fix anything. On your say-so I go to Joe's with a belief that he can fix my car. He does a great job and even fixes a couple other items that no one else has been able to.
The next time my car breaks down I take it to Joe's with the faith that he can repair it because in past he provided evidence that he is a top notch mechanic. Therefore faith by definition is supportable whereas if it is unsupportable it is only a belief.
evolving62 in msg 69: From your previous dealings with Joe you now have knowledge based on evidence, and therefore have a supportable belief that Joe will do a good job.
Faith is belief without evidence, and in this scenario is unwarranted.
In this case, I have no real evidence that Joe's garage can fix anything. All I have evidence of is that his garage fixed the problems I had. I cannot even be 100% sure that they are properly fixed, because he might have done a bad job that would hold together for a few weeks and then break down in 2 months right when I need it to work.
I believe that a better example is from experience. I have been learning to drive lately and was recommended a driving instructor by my best friend, who learned with him. After several lessons, I developed a great deal of belief in his knowledge and instruction in his expertise in driving and his ability to teach that to me. At one point, he told me one thing that was flatly against the laws of physics. I told him so, and he simply replied that this is what he knows to be the way that cars work. However, I had such faith in his abilities by this point, that I ignored all reason, and took it on faith that it was far more likely that he was right, and I simply misunderstood how the laws of physics would work.
I have yet to drive anyone's car but his, or with anyone who might tell me if I am driving incorrectly. So I have no substantial evidence to suggest that he is not teaching me incorrect driving practices. I cannot accept that his qualifications as a driving instructor guarantee his ability, because there are numerous other driving instructors who don't teach people correctly.
I do not blind faith in him, as my faith is not based on nothing, but is based on experience, his qualifications, my friend's recommendation, and how I perceive my skills in driving as a result of his tutelage. But I cannot call this fact either, because I would need to have every one of his pupils over the last 40 years indepdendently assessed in order to determine his skills. So I have faith in him, and I trust his judgement in driving above anything I know about Science.
evolving62 in msg 66: I agree that I differ with your description of what I think regarding the teaching of unsubstantiated claims to children within the law.
Unfortunately, the law doesn't require us to prove anything is true for it to be taught. Many people have been taught that before Columbus, people believed the Earth to be flat, because the Church said so, when this is considered to be one of the biggest misconceptions in history, as this is patently clear to anyone who has studied the subject that the Church didn't believe this. The whole concept of a Flat Earth only arose after an anti-religious academic claimed that about the Church, on the basis of a novel.
Further, it depends on what you consider unsubstantiated. We cannot substantiate 99% of science, because it is based on Physics, and 99% of Physics is based on the assumption that invisible numbers exist, that we cannot see or detect, because they are imaginary. I kid you not. We take it on faith that these numbers exist, and that the world works as if they exist, even though we have no proof that they do exist, and we believe that we never will. They are scientifically untestable and yet we base science on them.
I can give you a personal example. I walked into someone's office once, and in 5 minutes, showed them how a screen that took over 2 minutes to pop up, could take only a few seconds, merely by changing the query. However, when they wanted the automated reports to be emailed with all the graphical formatting, instead of printed out and faxed over several pages, they had great difficulty in understanding why this would take several months to implement for each report. They could not see the difference between emailing and printing. However, the application was only designed to print the report with the formatting and the built-in facilities to save as a document did not include the formatting. To write a routine to do this manually would have meant manually writing the code that was written by thousands of programmers over the course of 10 years. So it would have taken several months at least. I had to contact customer support, and to speak to manager upon manager until finally I was speaking to the head of the application for Microsoft in the UK, only to be told that there was no way to do what I was required to do, and that there was no intention ot implement it for years.
Most of the time, I find that what people expect to be extremely easy to get a computer to do, is actually incredibly hard, and what people expect to be incredibly hard to get a computer to do, can easily be done in under 5 minutes.
I fixed my friend's internet connection today in 10 minutes, simply because I know that many routers keep their internet connection open, but stop allowing access every few weeks or months, working, until you logged onto them, as computers seem to forget they are running until you wake them up and say "hello", and then they remember they exist and go back to working again. It's like they have a person inside, that needs periodic personal contact.
This goes against all logic, as computers are technically machines and should not need such contact. But it works every time. So they do. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
