Boundaries vs. Sacrifice: A Biblical Audit of "Things You Don't Owe Anyone"

This is a fascinating exercise in theological reflection. The graphic provided—"Things You Don’t Owe Anyone in 2026"—focuses heavily on modern psychological concepts of boundaries, self-preservation, and emotional autonomy.

From a Biblical perspective, many of these points contain wisdom regarding human limitations, yet they often exist in tension with the radical Christian call to sacrificial love, hospitality, and self-denial.

Here is a blog post comparing and contrasting these points with Scripture.

As we enter 2026, social media is flooded with advice on how to protect our peace. A recent viral graphic by Dr. Natalya (@elnatherapy) lists ten things we "don't owe anyone," ranging from immediate access to a palatable personality.

While these boundaries are healthy tools for mental wellness, the Christian life often calls us to a different standard—one that values boundaries but prioritizes Kingdom service. Let’s look at these ten points through the lens of Scripture to see where they align and where they diverge.

---

1. Immediate access to you.

The Graphic: "Urgency doesn't create obligation." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: Jesus frequently withdrew from urgent crowds to pray and rest. In Luke 5:16, we read, "But Jesus often withdrew to lonely places and prayed." He did not heal everyone who was sick in Israel; He followed the Father's timing, not the crowd's urgency.

• Contrast: While we need rest, we are also called to be interruptible. The Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37) stopped for an urgent need that wasn't his "obligation."

• Verdict: Biblical. Even God Incarnate had boundaries on His availability to commune with the Father.

2. Details about your life.

The Graphic: "Your choices don't need defending." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: Proverbs warns against over-sharing. Proverbs 13:3 says, "Those who guard their lips preserve their lives, but those who speak rashly will come to ruin." We are not obligated to cast our pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6).

• Contrast: However, Christians do owe an explanation for their faith. 1 Peter 3:15 commands, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have."

• Verdict: Context matters. We guard our private lives, but we must be open about our Witness.

3. Gratitude for what harmed you.

The Graphic: "'But it made you stronger' is crap." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: The Bible never commands us to call evil "good." We do not thank God for the sin committed against us.

• Contrast: Scripture teaches that God redeems suffering, which is different from ignoring it. Romans 5:3-4 states, "We also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character..." Joseph told his brothers, "You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good" (Genesis 50:20).

• Verdict: Nuanced. We don't thank the abuser for the abuse, but we thank God that He can repurpose the ashes for beauty.

4. Availability outside your capacity.

The Graphic: "Overextension isn't generosity." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: Moses was rebuked by his father-in-law Jethro for trying to do too much alone. Jethro told him, "What you are doing is not good. You and these people who come to you will only wear yourselves out" (Exodus 18:17-18). God honors our physical limits (Psalm 103:14).

• Contrast: Sometimes, God calls us to give beyond our natural ability, relying on His strength. 2 Corinthians 8:3 praises the Macedonians who gave "as much as they were able, and even beyond their ability."

• Verdict: Wisdom required. We must respect our creation limits, but be open to supernatural empowerment.

5. Unhealthy optimism vs. honesty.

The Graphic: "Naming what's real isn't pessimism." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: The Bible is full of "Lament." An entire book (Lamentations) and many Psalms (like Psalm 88) are dedicated to honest expressions of grief, anger, and darkness. God desires truth in the "inward being" (Psalm 51:6).

• Contrast: We grieve, but not as those without hope (1 Thessalonians 4:13). Biblical honesty always eventually turns its face toward God's faithfulness, even in the pit.

• Verdict: Highly Biblical. Toxic positivity is not a fruit of the Spirit; truth is.

6. Performing happiness for others.

The Graphic: "You're allowed to be flat, tired & quiet." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: Jesus wept openly at the tomb of Lazarus (John 11:35). He was "overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death" in Gethsemane (Matthew 26:38). He did not perform happiness for the disciples.

• Contrast: We are commanded to "Rejoice in the Lord always" (Philippians 4:4). However, biblical joy (chara) is a deep-seated confidence in God, not a performative bubbly mood.

• Verdict: Biblical. Authenticity is honored over performance.

7. Emotional regulation for others.

The Graphic: "You're not here to manage feelings." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: We are responsible for our own actions. Galatians 6:5 says, "for each one should carry their own own load" (referring to personal responsibility). We cannot repent or feel for another person.

• Contrast: We are actually called to help regulate the community's peace. Romans 12:15 says, "Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn." We are our brother's keeper in the sense of influence and care.

• Verdict: Tension. We cannot control others, but we are called to influence them with gentleness (Proverbs 15:1).

8. Access to your space.

The Graphic: "You decide who comes in & when." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: Prudence is wise. Nehemiah built a wall to protect his people. Jesus refused to walk in Judea for a time because the Jews sought to kill him (John 7:1).

• Contrast: The New Testament is radical about hospitality (philoxenia - love of strangers). Hebrews 13:2 says, "Do not forget to show hospitality to strangers, for by so doing some have shown hospitality to angels without knowing it."

• Verdict: Contrast. While safety is valid, the "my home is my fortress" mentality clashes with the biblical command to be a haven for others.

9. A "better attitude" about life.

The Graphic: "Reality doesn't improve with denial." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: As mentioned in point 5, denial is not faith. Abraham did not deny his old age, yet he believed God (Romans 4:19).

• Contrast: However, we are commanded to watch our attitude. Philippians 2:5 tells us, "In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus." Grumbling and complaining are explicitly forbidden (Philippians 2:14).

• Verdict: Distinction. We shouldn't deny reality, but we must choose a mindset of trust rather than bitterness.

10. Making yourself easier to swallow.

The Graphic: "Respectfully, let them choke." Biblical Comparison:

• Agreement: The Gospel is offensive. Galatians 1:10 asks, "Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? ... If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ." We should never water down Truth to be "palatable."

• Contrast: We should not be "hard to swallow" because of our own rudeness or pride. Romans 12:18 commands, "If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone." Our speech should be "full of grace, seasoned with salt" (Colossians 4:6).

• Verdict: Warning. If people "choke" on the Truth of Christ in you, that is expected. If they "choke" on your arrogance or abrasiveness, that is sin.

The crux of the tension the graphic represents Therapeutic Culture (which prioritizes self-preservation and mental health), while the Bible teaches Kingdom Culture (which prioritizes holiness and sacrificial love).

They are not mutually exclusive, but they have different focuses. Therapy asks, "Is this healthy for me?" The Gospel asks, "Does this glorify God and serve my neighbor?"

Here is how three specific biblical commands challenge and refine the points in the graphic.

---

1. The Command to "Deny Yourself" (Mark 8:34)

"Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me."

The Conflict:

The graphic’s underlying premise is: Protect your peace.

Jesus’ premise is: Kill your pride.

How it affects the points:

• "Details about your life" / "Access to your space": The graphic says you don't owe anyone access. Jesus teaches that our lives are not our own; they were "bought at a price" (1 Cor 6:20).

  • The Biblical Shift: We don't deny ourselves to enable abusers—that is not God's will. But we do deny our preference for isolation when God calls us to serve. We might open our home (hospitality) even when we feel like being alone, not because we "owe" the guest, but because we owe Christ obedience.

  • Practical Application: You set boundaries not to hoard your energy for yourself, but to steward your energy so you can pour it out effectively for the Kingdom.

2. The Teaching on "Meekness" (Matthew 5:5)

"Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth."

The Conflict:

The graphic’s tone, particularly point #10 ("Let them choke"), suggests a defensive, perhaps even abrasive, stance toward others.

Biblical Meekness (Greek: Praus) was used to describe a warhorse: Power under control. It is not weakness; it is strength that chooses not to crush.

How it affects the points:

• "Making yourself easier to swallow": The graphic suggests if people don't like you, that's their problem ("Let them choke").

  • The Biblical Shift: Jesus was "hard to swallow" because of His truth, never His arrogance. Meekness means we speak the truth (even hard boundaries), but we do it with "gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15).

  • Practical Application: If someone violates your boundaries, the "meek" response is not to ghost them or snap at them, but to firmly and gently restate the line. You don't perform happiness (Point #6), but you also don't indulge in rudeness.

3. Paul’s Urging to "Esteem Others Higher" (Philippians 2:3)

"Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves."

The Conflict:

This is the most direct challenge to the graphic. The graphic lists things you "don't owe." Paul implies a debt of love (Romans 13:8).

How it affects the points:

• "Emotional regulation for others": The graphic says, "You're not here to manage feelings."

  • The Biblical Shift: While we cannot control others' emotions, "valuing others above ourselves" means we care how our actions affect them. We don't walk on eggshells to enable dysfunction, but we do exercise tact. Paul says, "If eating meat causes my brother to stumble, I will never eat meat again" (1 Cor 8:13). He restricted his own freedom (rights) out of love for the weaker person.

• "Availability outside your capacity":

  • The Biblical Shift: "Esteeming others" means we want to be available. However, because we are finite humans (not God), acknowledging our "capacity" is actually an act of humility. If I try to be the Savior to everyone, I am not esteeming them; I am indulging my own messiah complex.

  • Practical Application: I value you enough to say "No" to your request now, so that I don't burn out and become useless to you and God later.

---

Summary Table: The Therapeutic "Self" vs. The Biblical "Steward"

Graphic Point	Therapeutic View ("Me Centered")	Biblical View ("Christ Centered")
"I don't owe you access."	My time is mine to protect.	My time is God's; I steward it carefully so I can serve well.
"I don't owe you a better attitude."	My feelings are valid; I won't fake it.	My feelings are real, but I bring them to God (Lament) so I don't sin against you.
"Let them choke."	I don't care what you think of me.	I care about your soul, so I will speak truth, even if it offends you, but never to hurt you.
"Overextension isn't generosity."	I must stop when I'm tired.	I stop when God says stop (Sabbath), trusting Him to handle the rest.

The Verdict

The graphic is a shield—it protects you from harm.

The Gospel is a seed—it calls you to die (safely in Christ) so you can bear fruit.

We use the boundaries in the graphic not to build a fortress where we are the king, but to build a temple where we are healthy priests, ready to serve when the Master calls.

Here are "Scriptural Scripts"—practical phrases that allow you to hold the boundaries from the graphic while maintaining the biblical posture of meekness, self-denial, and esteeming others.

These scripts replace "walls" (which shut people out) with "fences" (which define your stewardship).

---

1. The "Immediate Access" Boundary

The Graphic: "Urgency doesn't create obligation." The Biblical Tension: You need to rest (Jesus withdrawing), but you want to value the person (Esteeming others).

• Instead of: "I’m busy. Stop texting me."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I want to give you my full attention because you matter to me, but I can't do that right now. I’m stepping away to recharge. Let’s connect at [Time] when I can truly listen."

• Why it works: It affirms their value ("You matter," "truly listen") while obeying the need for rest. It denies the "self" that wants to be the hero who fixes everything immediately.

2. The "Capacity" Boundary

The Graphic: "Overextension isn't generosity." The Biblical Tension: You want to serve, but you are finite (Stewardship).

• Instead of: "No, I’m not doing that. I'm tapped out."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I would love to help, but I know my limits right now. If I said yes, I wouldn't be able to serve you with a cheerful heart or excellence. I have to decline so I can be faithful to what’s already on my plate."

• Why it works: It references 2 Corinthians 9:7 (cheerful giver) and stewardship. It admits weakness (Meekness) rather than projecting arrogance.

3. The "Emotional Regulation" Boundary

The Graphic: "You're not here to manage feelings." The Biblical Tension: You cannot carry their load (Galatians 6:5), but you must weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15).

• Instead of: "That sounds like a 'you' problem. Don't dump this on me."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I can see this is really heavy for you, and my heart hurts with you. However, I can't fix this or carry this emotion for you—only Jesus can do that. I can pray with you right now, but then I need to step back."

• Why it works: It offers "Burden Bearing" (prayer/empathy) without "Load Carrying" (responsibility). It points them to the true Savior, denying the "savior complex" in yourself.

4. The "Privacy" Boundary

The Graphic: "Your choices don't need defending." The Biblical Tension: You don't cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6), but you avoid being secretive or deceitful.

• Instead of: "None of your business."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I appreciate you asking, but I’m keeping that between me and the Lord for now. I’m guarding my heart on this issue until I have more clarity."

• Why it works: It uses spiritual language ("Guarding my heart," Proverbs 4:23) to explain the silence. It is polite but firm.

5. The "Truth/Let Them Choke" Boundary

The Graphic: "Making yourself easier to swallow... let them choke." The Biblical Tension: You must speak truth (Ephesians 4:15), but you must seek peace (Romans 12:18).

• Instead of: "This is who I am. Deal with it or leave."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I know this might not be what you want to hear, and I don't say it to hurt you. But I have to stand firm on this because of my convictions. I value our relationship, but I value my obedience to God more."

• Why it works: This is the definition of Meekness (Power under control). It asserts the boundary clearly but frames it as obedience to God rather than rejection of the person.

6. The "OHere are "Scriptural Scripts"—practical phrases that allow you to hold the boundaries from the graphic while maintaining the biblical posture of meekness, self-denial, and esteeming others.

These scripts replace "walls" (which shut people out) with "fences" (which define your stewardship).

---

1. The "Immediate Access" Boundary

The Graphic: "Urgency doesn't create obligation." The Biblical Tension: You need to rest (Jesus withdrawing), but you want to value the person (Esteeming others).

• Instead of: "I’m busy. Stop texting me."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I want to give you my full attention because you matter to me, but I can't do that right now. I’m stepping away to recharge. Let’s connect at [Time] when I can truly listen."

• Why it works: It affirms their value ("You matter," "truly listen") while obeying the need for rest. It denies the "self" that wants to be the hero who fixes everything immediately.

2. The "Capacity" Boundary

The Graphic: "Overextension isn't generosity." The Biblical Tension: You want to serve, but you are finite (Stewardship).

• Instead of: "No, I’m not doing that. I'm tapped out."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I would love to help, but I know my limits right now. If I said yes, I wouldn't be able to serve you with a cheerful heart or excellence. I have to decline so I can be faithful to what’s already on my plate."

• Why it works: It references 2 Corinthians 9:7 (cheerful giver) and stewardship. It admits weakness (Meekness) rather than projecting arrogance.

3. The "Emotional Regulation" Boundary

The Graphic: "You're not here to manage feelings." The Biblical Tension: You cannot carry their load (Galatians 6:5), but you must weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15).

• Instead of: "That sounds like a 'you' problem. Don't dump this on me."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I can see this is really heavy for you, and my heart hurts with you. However, I can't fix this or carry this emotion for you—only Jesus can do that. I can pray with you right now, but then I need to step back."

• Why it works: It offers "Burden Bearing" (prayer/empathy) without "Load Carrying" (responsibility). It points them to the true Savior, denying the "savior complex" in yourself.

4. The "Privacy" Boundary

The Graphic: "Your choices don't need defending." The Biblical Tension: You don't cast pearls before swine (Matthew 7:6), but you avoid being secretive or deceitful.

• Instead of: "None of your business."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I appreciate you asking, but I’m keeping that between me and the Lord for now. I’m guarding my heart on this issue until I have more clarity."

• Why it works: It uses spiritual language ("Guarding my heart," Proverbs 4:23) to explain the silence. It is polite but firm.

5. The "Truth/Let Them Choke" Boundary

The Graphic: "Making yourself easier to swallow... let them choke." The Biblical Tension: You must speak truth (Ephesians 4:15), but you must seek peace (Romans 12:18).

• Instead of: "This is who I am. Deal with it or leave."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I know this might not be what you want to hear, and I don't say it to hurt you. But I have to stand firm on this because of my convictions. I value our relationship, but I value my obedience to God more."

• Why it works: This is the definition of Meekness (Power under control). It asserts the boundary clearly but frames it as obedience to God rather than rejection of the person.

6. The "Optimism vs. Honesty" Boundary

The Graphic: "Naming what's real isn't pessimism." The Biblical Tension: Refusing to lie (Truth), while maintaining hope (Faith).

• Instead of: "Stop with the toxic positivity. Life sucks right now."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I know God is good, but right now things are really hard. I’m in a season of lament, like the Psalms. I’m not ready to look for the 'silver lining' yet; I just need to be honest about the struggle."

• Why it works: It validates the pain without denying God's goodness. It invites the other person into a biblical understanding of grief (Lament).

---

Summary of the Approach

When you use these scripts, you are essentially saying: "I am setting this boundary because I want to love God and love you better. If I burn out, fake it, or resent you, I am failing at love."ptimism vs. Honesty" Boundary

The Graphic: "Naming what's real isn't pessimism." The Biblical Tension: Refusing to lie (Truth), while maintaining hope (Faith).

• Instead of: "Stop with the toxic positivity. Life sucks right now."

• The Scriptural Script:

  "I know God is good, but right now things are really hard. I’m in a season of lament, like the Psalms. I’m not ready to look for the 'silver lining' yet; I just need to be honest about the struggle."

• Why it works: It validates the pain without denying God's goodness. It invites the other person into a biblical understanding of grief (Lament).

---

Summary of the Approach

When you use these scripts, you are essentially saying: "I am setting this boundary because I want to love God and love you better. If I burn out, fake it, or resent you, I am failing at love."

Conclusion

The world advises us to build walls to protect our "self." The Bible advises us to build boundaries so that our "self" is healthy enough to be poured out for others.

In 2026, by all means, stop performing fake happiness and stop accepting abuse. But do not become so guarded that you miss the messy, exhausting, beautiful call to love your neighbor as yourself.

12 Cognitive Biases

 Each one is a gut punch and a mirror . Work to do, I have.

Black Widow Goes to Therapy | Fandom IRL

We May Visit Each Other in Dreams Soon, Scientists Did It Already

Some people don't have internal monologue - TomoNews

Could We Record Our Dreams? [Science Video] | Geeks are Sexy Technology News

Could We Record Our Dreams? [Science Video] | Geeks are Sexy Technology News

Is the Internet rewiring our brains?

Is the Internet rewiring our brains?

FacePlant of the Day - Debunking Christianity: The God of the Bible Knows Nothing About Modern Psychology and Why it Offers No Real Solutions

John Loftus has again made an attempt to argue that the Bible is deficient and the Christianity has no solutions to the conundrums of life. He keep professing his view point but has of yet failed to provided any really good reason to agree with him. Does this post change his fail record? Nope.

A study done by Nicholas Epley from the University of Chicago tells us all believers think God agrees with what they do about a host of non-related issues.

Hmmm...a study that shows that all believers hold the same viewpoint? Does that really make sense?  I mean really? Does the study include every Christian? Every Muslim? Epley didn't ask me what I think. I'm a Christian. And I don't agree that God agrees with me. One of the reasons why I am a Christian is because I want to agree with  God. I want to know what God thinks about what I should do so I can do it instead of "leaning on my understanding". Do these people who come to such conclusions that God agrees with believers ever read Proverbs 3:5,6 or Isaiah 55? From the start we are not agreeing with God, about anything, by default. Being a believer means that I think I need to agree with God, not the other way around.  So my very existence demonstrates that not all believers would agree with that survey, therefore it's conclusions are flawed. Let's see more fail.

We know this. And it's dangerous. If this study shows us anything at all it should make believers less certain of what they pontificate about. In fact, this study falsifies faith itself, for there is no independent way to determine what God thinks, if he exists at all. Believers simply create their own religion, their own Gospel, and their own God in their own image.

There is an independent way to determine what God thinks: the Bible.  God isn't going to tell you anything that is going to contradict or undermine scripture. And an honest reading of scripture clearly demonstrates a coherent and ordered way to look at the world. People like John Loftus will disagree with that but for the moment set aside whether or not it is true and just judge it for what it says. Anyone who can read can understand what the commandments are and with study can learn to apply them.  Whether or not you agree with whether or not it's true of binding on you is quite another issue. An honest reading of the scripture in context will not produce the failed interpretation that Loftus gets of promoting racism, slavery, or misogyny. People who get such nonsense don't read the Bible as carefully as they would something else that they agree with.


There is something else, a few corollaries that need highlighted. What believers think about God is also what believers think that God thinks about God. Why not? Not only this, but what believers think about God is dependent on what they think of their parents and themselves to a large degree.

If you are a born-again Christian you are agreeing with God that you need a savior and God's constant guidance because you are too flawed and enslaved by sin to make correct and proper judgments apart from God's help! Therefore John Loftus' corollaries are wrong along with the inital conclusions. 

The real causes of one's beliefs are almost never addressed and since that's the case believers cannot offer real solutions because they aren't to be found in the Bible.

Written like a man who has never been born-again or knows what it's like to have a change of heart.

In the Bible people who are selfish, unruly, prideful, lustful, divisive, unforgiving, doubting, lazy, liars, disobedient, un-pure in heart, and who cannot love their enemies, are simply told not be like that.

Nope,. When we look at their lives, we see God come along side and mold them into people who are unselfish, humble, self-controlled, forgiving, faithful, industrious, honest, courageous,  obedient, pure in heart,  and lovers their enemies. If I can name a single person in the Bible that disproves Loftus he is wrong and I can name several: Abraham, Moses, Jacob, Joseph, David. Jeremiah, Isaiah, Daniel, and many many others. They grew as people through their relationship with God.

[Yes, yes, I know, the New Testament promises God's Holy Spirit to help, but if that's the case then why didn't he communicate his will more effectively so that eight million Christians would not have slaughtered themselves during and after the Protestant Reformation?]

 Eight Million? Really? I would really like to see how he counts that. And let's face it the reason for amy schisms is people doing what Loftus does - making it up as they go insteasd of depending on God.

In any case, I think this can be tested when it comes to the supposed "spiritual gifts" Christians claim to have been given by their God.

This oughta be good. Can he show that there are no spiritual gifts in play today or ever?




First, I'll grant that faith is self-fulfilling such that someone who was raised to feel guilty or raised to loathe themselves that personal faith can help them.

Ever really looked in the mirror? Ever measured your righteousness along side what the scripture says righteousness is? It doesn't take being raised in Christianity to do that. Lofuts likes the OTF so much but interesting enough, that isn't brought in when he wieighs the truth claims of Christianity.

 It doesn't matter what kind of benevolent or forgiving or gracious God they had faith in though. That's why believers will forever struggle with their faith because it has to overcome how they were raised.

Oh wait, you mean people lean on their own understanding instead of what God has revealed? Yup. 

That's why some believers are optimists while others are pessimistic, why some have little trouble believing while others forever struggle with it, while some feel forgiven while others always feel guilty, why some believers view God as a harsh judge while others picture a jolly Santa Claus, why some believers hate anyone who argues against their faith (after all, doesn't God?) while others love non-believers and wish to help them, why some Christians like the Old Testament while others like the New Testament, while some like picturing non-believers in hell while others deny the existence of hell or mitigate its horrors, and the list goes on and on.

It's true that there are these broad range of perspectives among people who claim to be Chrtistians. People have opinions and will push them on others. So what? That doesn't matter. This is why 

⁵ Trust in the Lord with all your heart
    and lean not on your own understanding;
⁶ in all your ways submit to him,
    and he will make your paths straight. - Proverbs 3:5-6

You have to know scripture for yourself. The Bible addresses every single things Loftus is offering as to how people think. The Bible is clear enough to tell us which of those persepectives is God's and which are not.  As my own relationship with God has grown and I have found out more and more about God, I've had to change my own views about many, many things because they did not align with scripture. It's called growth. 

But whatever believers think of God or themselves they think God shares that same view. For some believers this is tragic. For others it's liberating, and there are various responses in between. The real causes of one's beliefs about God or themselves are almost never addressed, and since that's the case they cannot offer real lasting solutions.

Loftus does make a point. The "that's what my momma taught me" reason isn't good enough. However we can and should do better than that. 

Believers have psychological problems due to the experiences they have had in life. Only psychological probing can offer lasting healing. A person who has trouble with faith doesn't need a Bible verse. He or she needs to understand why trusting is a problem for him or her. A stingy person doesn't need to be told to tithe. He or she needs to know why security is a problem. A hateful person doesn't need to just hear the parable of the Good Samaritan. He or she needs to understand where his hatred comes from.

The insecurity comese from an inabillity to trust God. Hatred comes from sin. The Bible is clear on this and how to get around it. 

That's why preachers like Joel Osteen are so successful even though evangelicals are not happy he doesn't preach "true" doctrine. It's because he's offering some real solutions to the problems that afflict people, including believers. He merely uses the Bible as a platform for offering some good psychological advice that people could get from listening to Dr. Phil (although they both annoy me). Preachers who preach "true" doctrine alienate their people with guilt, with hate, with self-loathing, and fear.

True doctrine does not produce guilt, hate, or self-loathing, or fear. Those come about from rejecting the Gospel and trying to do things on your own. 

So let's test this. Take for example the lists of "spiritual gifts" in the New Testament:

Most of these aren't "miraculous" gifts given by God even on Christian terms, and I think none of them are. God doesn't give these gifts. People gain them mostly by their upbringing. Identifying them is merely identifying who you are. I'd like just once for evidence that a person who was brought up to be stingy to have the gift of giving, or a shy unassuming person who was given the gift of leadership, or dense person without common sense or education given the gift of teaching, and so forth.

So laying hands on a sick person and they are healed, is not a miracle?  A person who was brought up to be stingy could not have been raised a Christian and according to Loftus' own delusions that people are in the religion they are in because of upbringing, his own "proof:" can't happen.

Folks this just does not happen, ever!

Lofuts' is wrong. God does raise shy people to leadership, make stingy people generous, and uneducated people int prolific teachers. I've seen God do it.. For example there have been many great teachers with minimal education in the Black church given that for year black people were not granted access to education. Charles Harrision Mason, had a thrd grade education, yet God used him to found my denomination and he was an awsome leader,. preacher,  and teacher - but of course he did pray 6 hours a day. - staying plugged in to the Holy Spirit. 

Where the Bible does help believers it's self-fulfilling because of one's faith, or based on what anyone could figure out for themselves without it.

So many things wrong with that sentence. 

 But it offers no real solutions to the problems that afflict people because modern psychology had not yet arisen. In the Bible the only solution offered to people is to have faith in God, in his Word, and/or in the Holy Spirit--self-fulfilling things like that.

Modern Psychology is not able answer ever question about why we do what we do nor can it because we don't always know. "The wicked know not why they stumble."  And that applies to everyone of us.

The Book of Proverbs might be thought of as the exception but the practical advice in it could be figured out by anyone without divine inspiration at all. It only talks about the consequences of one's actions and why doing bad things will not be good for one's future. It doesn't speak to why we are who we are and how to fix that.

The Proverbs do tell us why we are who we are - we are sinners. And if we want to change that we have to obey God's instructions. Much of what the Proverbs teach about does indeed  include the consequences of your own actions but it's done in a way to keep you from having to figure it out through trial and error. But becausse we refuse to humble ourselves and obey God, many of us end up "figuring it out" by a lot of trial and much costly error that could have been avoided. 

In the Bible God knows nothing about modern psychology. I wonder why? Why is it there is nothing in the advice offered in the Bible except that which was understood by the ancient people of that time? Oh, I know. It's the same reason why Martians who visited us never spoke about anything but current events: That Which Disconfirms UFOs From Mars Also Disconfirms God’s Existence

Just how much does the Bible know about modern psychology? I'd argue that it's a lot.  Take the prescription of tithing as a vehicle for learning how to be giving. There are all kinds of psychological treatments that revolve around changing a character trait by performing tasks that cause desirable habits to form in ones's life.  Developing a habit of tithing teaches you to give. It changes your attitude towards otherse. God knows how we tick and this is an example .

Debunking Christianity: The God of the Bible Knows Nothing About Modern Psychology and Why it Offers No Real Solutions

Steven Pinker Argues That People Are Now Less Violent

Image by Better Than Bacon via Flickr

Dr Steven Pinker does not believe that human race is becoming more violent but instead argues that violence is decreasing. I think he's completely crazy. However he has arguments and has written papers and given lectures defending his position.





Here is a short presentation:


Here is a longer presentation:


I'm planning a longer response but in the meantime here is rebuttal to his conclusions.

Refuting Steven Pinker’s “A History of Violence” by Jonathan Shockley
Delusions of peace by John Gray

I think that this actually illustrates a passage in the Old Testament

13 “From the least to the greatest, all are greedy for gain; prophets and priests alike, all practice deceit. 14 They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. ‘Peace, peace,’ they say, when there is no peace. 15 Are they ashamed of their detestable conduct? No, they have no shame at all; they do not even know how to blush. So they will fall among the fallen; they will be brought down when I punish them,” says the LORD. - Jeremiah 6:13-15

Sure God was speaking to Jeremiah's contemporaires but it sure matches today also.

Related articles

• RSA - The Better Angels of our Nature - Steven Pinker (martinspribble.com)
• Steven Pinker has a blinkered appreciation of war and peace | the big issue (guardian.co.uk)
• Do you agree with Steven Pinker - is violence in decline? | Madeleine Bunting (guardian.co.uk)

Iron Man 2: A-Rusted Development? | Psychology Today

Psychologist Dr Robin S. Rosenberg wrote a really cool article analyzing Iron Man 2 from a psychological point of view. Check it out!


Iron Man 2: A-Rusted Development? | Psychology Today

FacePalm of the Day #123 - Debunking Christianity: Feuerbach Was Right All Along, We Create Our Own Gods

John Loftus recently posted the following on his blog:

Some people might be interested in knowing that humans are creating their gods in their own images.

For many religious people, the popular question “ What would Jesus do?” is essentially the same as “What would I do?” That’s the message from an intriguing and controversial new study by Nicholas Epley from the University of Chicago. Through a combination of surveys, psychological manipulation and brain-scanning, he has found that when religious Americans try to infer the will of God, they mainly draw on their own personal beliefs. Link

I think most Christians would totally disagree because we recognize that what Jesus would do in most situations is markedly different than what we would do by default without Him. Skeptics and Atheists can't have it both ways. On one hand they say that God is a moral monster whom commands evil acts that we know are evil and would never do today. On the other, they say that Christians are merely projecting their own personal beliefs on what is right and moral behavior. I don't think these positions can be reconciled with one another.

I find it interesting that the questions asked during the study were "hot-button" political issues regarding same-sex marriages, homosexuality, abortion, and other social issues that most Christians are very vocal about and have firm Biblical basis. These are also "easy" issues for most Christians. Statistically, one is far less likely to be attracted to someone of the same sex than one from the opposite. Of course more Christians would be against homosexuality than for it - that's easy. The study doesn't mention studying how people's brains respond to things that they do or did that the Bible speaks against us. You know the things....one struggles with or gave up because they don't think it's a sin because they liked to do it?  For example: what about pre-maritial and extra-maritial sex? The Bible is very clear about it, but our society is so lax on it that even some committed Christians would rather condemn and call-out homosexuality but are silent on adultery, un-wed  mothers and pornography. As if homosexuality is the worst possible thing you can do. It isn't. 

Being a born-again Christian means publicly acknowledging that we have attitudes and behaviors that are not like God and that we need to change. It is not about God agreeing with us. We agree with God. To do this day there are things that God is against that I wish He weren't. I recognize the need to align my thoughts and deed with Him because He is not going to change. 

The truly facepalm worthy thing about this study is that it doesn't address the things that God cares about that would handle all the other issues that they did ask about. A better study would be to look at how brains react to Jesus' teachings as they appear in the Gospel. Like to the question "Who do men say I [Jesus] am?" What do people think about Peter's answer! I assure you that an Evangelical and Unitarian will react differently.

Debunking Christianity: Feuerbach Was Right All Along, We Create Our Own Gods

Gender, A Helpful Infographic | The Angry Black Woman

 This is an interesting infographic. Gender should not be equated to sexual orientation. However gender is not a continuum it is something you are born with and is determined by your chromosomes. Two "X" chromosomes equal female. An "X" and "Y" chromosomes makes you "male". There is no between when everything goes normal. Cases of hermaphrodites and the extremely rare case of having neither genitalia are not  different points. Gender is biological. You have no more choice over your gender than you do over what anyone else does. Or who your parents are.  Or where and when you are born. You can't change any of these things, why do you think you should have the right to change your gender?

Gender, A Helpful Infographic | The Angry Black Woman

Related articles

• INFOGRAPHIC: Facebookers' Age, Gender And Location (allfacebook.com)
• Augmenting a Live Talk with Overhead Projector Style Infographics (infosthetics.com)
• Infographic of the Week (w5blog.com)
• Historical Perspective On Gender Wage Gap [INFOGRAPHIC] (businessinsider.com)

Calvinistic Cartoons: Dangerous Dogma

Calvinistic Cartoons: Dangerous Dogma

Superhero Psychology - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Here is a video of real psychologists discussing whether or not characters like Batman are insane. They also discuss supervillians. Looking at such questions are real interesting and help in understanding psychology in such "case studies".



Crazy Sexy Geeks: Superhero Psychology Part 1 - Batman from Alan Kistler on Vimeo.

Link Ink: Chris Evans as Steve Rogers, 'Pushing Daisies' as a Comic, and Superhero Psychology - ComicsAlliance | Comics culture, news, humor, commentary, and reviews

Debunking Christianity: What Best Debunks Religion: Studying Science Or the Humanities?

John Loftus has pointed to a news article suggesting that students who major in Humanities are more likely to walk away from religion than those who are into the sciences. I'm not surprised by that. The humanities have men and our natures as the standard and relatively equal. However, in the sciences we can see objective truth. There are absolutes. There are well defined and predictive description of nature outside of opinion and emotion. When it comes to history, psychology, sociology, and the like they drive on emotion and one can argue about what is right and wrong and you can't really pin down truth because outside of God you have no rule brick and standard to examine truth claims. I think this is why I like science and engineering better. The truth is you need all the disciplines to understand our reality. If you try to apply sociology to Physics you miss a lot but you also miss much the other way. You need both. If anything in such of things as history, I can see the hand of God just as well as I can physics. I don't really see how people can deny design of the created order and how can people also deny that in order for the world to be just as it is today - billions of choices were made that made things happen as they are. Do we really think that it was by happenstance - that it's not going somewhere? I think that takes more faith.

Debunking Christianity: What Best Debunks Religion: Studying Science Or the Humanities?

Debunking Christianity: John Shook on the Psychology of Religion

Here is an interesting video I found out from John W. Loftus blog. Philosopher John Shook gives a lecture about the psychological underpinnings of why some people are religious. Take a look at his arguments. He makes the assumption that atheism is correct and then in that frame of mind tries to explain religion.




In the interest of being fair, why not listen to a presentation by a real psychologist, Paul Vitz, on where atheism comes from.



Debunking Christianity: John Shook on the Psychology of Religion