Couldn't have said it better myself...

[Evangelicalhumanist]

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, that's not the way to approach it. The Catholic Church agrees. From Wikipedia:

"Perfect contrition (also called contrition of charity) is a repentance for sin that is motivated by faith and the love of God. It contrasts with imperfect contrition, which arises from a less pure motive, such as common decency or fear of Hell."

Fear of hell can be a useful motivator to change your behavior to start with but you're supposed to go beyond that. It's spiritually immature.

 

[Heyo]

a less pure motive, such as common decency

 

[We Never Know]

View attachment 67675

Its the threat of hell for some and the threat of jail for some others

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

We're talking about repentance for sins. The point of Christianity is to strive for holiness, not to be socially acceptable.

 

[Sand Dancer]

Yes, that's not the way to approach it. The Catholic Church agrees. From Wikipedia:

"Perfect contrition (also called contrition of charity) is a repentance for sin that is motivated by faith and the love of God. It contrasts with imperfect contrition, which arises from a less pure motive, such as common decency or fear of Hell."

Fear of hell can be a useful motivator to change your behavior to start with but you're supposed to go beyond that. It's spiritually immature.

I didn't get beyond that in my earlier foray into Christianity.

 

[Brian2]

View attachment 67675

Said what? That Christians are bad people on leashes? That hell is not what is taught in scripture? That humanists don't realise how bad they actually are? Something else?

Christians are bad people who realise it and have repented and trust that God is changing them to be better people.
Humanists have not realised yet how bad they are and that they need to repent.
I don't see that eternity in hell is taught in scripture. IMO it is that if Jesus judges someone as unworthy of eternal life they will be tormented for a time in the lake of fire until justice has been served and their body and soul are destroyed.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Said what? That Christians are bad people on leashes? That hell is not what is taught in scripture? That humanists don't realise how bad they actually are? Something else?

Christians are bad people who realise it and have repented and trust that God is changing them to be better people.
Humanists have not realised yet how bad they are and that they need to repent.
I don't see that eternity in hell is taught in scripture. IMO it is that if Jesus judges someone as unworthy of eternal life they will be tormented for a time in the lake of fire until justice has been served and their body and soul are destroyed.

And your apparent approval for that "torment" suggests, to me, that you might not be an altogether good person. I don't accept the need for torture ever. Incarceration, for me, is about keeping society safe. Punishment is essentially useless. It doesn't prevent anything, merely takes revenge for what has already happened.

Humanists don't see people as "bad" from the get-go. We think that is a ridiculous notion, and unworthy of the teaching of any scripture.

 

[Aštra’el]

I have never once claimed to be a “good person”. I am not.

From my perspective, there are no “good” or “bad” people. There are only people… people of a complicated nature whose thoughts, choices and behavior I may or may not approve of. This does not make them “good” or “bad”.

Whatever awaits at the end of life- be it Game Over, New Game +, or alternate endings- does not really have an impact on who I am and who I choose to be. Afterlives can be fascinating to contemplate… but I am who I am because I operate in harmony with my True Will, with no regrets, and because I understand who and what matters to me… in this life, here, now, in this moment.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Humanists have not realised yet how bad they are and that they need to repent.

Well that is laughable, given that humanists are more likely to be in touch with their human nature, and of life itself, and hence understanding of where 'evil'/bad behaviour originates. Given they will not subscribe to the laughable notions as to such portrayed in religious texts.

 

[Brian2]

And your apparent approval for that "torment" suggests, to me, that you might not be an altogether good person. I don't accept the need for torture ever. Incarceration, for me, is about keeping society safe. Punishment is essentially useless. It doesn't prevent anything, merely takes revenge for what has already happened.

Humanists don't see people as "bad" from the get-go. We think that is a ridiculous notion, and unworthy of the teaching of any scripture.

Incarceration is actually punishing people by depriving them of freedom, as well as keeping society safe.
When it comes to protecting society forever, an eternal incarceration sounds worse than just getting rid of those who do evil and at the same time not letting them off the hook for being such a--holes while alive on earth and so giving them their just deserts for their actions in life. Torment does not necessarily mean torture. Torment can come from seeing what they missed out on by doing what they did in life.
Whatever happens it is the revenge that God will give, so it will be just and for the good of all whether we want to see that revenge or not.
I don't see people as bad from the get go and don't see that taught in the Bible, but do see that evil exists in people and I can see it in how people behave. That is what the Bible teaches.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Well that is laughable, given that humanists are more likely to be in touch with their human nature, and of life itself, and hence understanding of where 'evil'/bad behaviour originates. Given they will not subscribe to the laughable notions as to such portrayed in religious texts.

Why would you think they are more in touch with themselves, or life?
They seem to lack imagination which suggests a very narrow veiwpoint on life, IMO.

 

[Brian2]

Well that is laughable, given that humanists are more likely to be in touch with their human nature, and of life itself, and hence understanding of where 'evil'/bad behaviour originates. Given they will not subscribe to the laughable notions as to such portrayed in religious texts.

So it sounds like you realise your need for repenting of some things that you do. (iow stop doing them) but you don't see your need of forgiveness, and why should you if you think that this life is all there is.

 

[Brian2]

I have never once claimed to be a “good person”. I am not.

From my perspective, there are no “good” or “bad” people. There are only people… people of a complicated nature whose thoughts, choices and behavior I may or may not approve of. This does not make them “good” or “bad”.

Whatever awaits at the end of life- be it Game Over, New Game +, or alternate endings- does not really have an impact on who I am and who I choose to be. Afterlives can be fascinating to contemplate… but I am who I am because I operate in harmony with my True Will, with no regrets, and because I understand who and what matters to me… in this life, here, now, in this moment.

Actions of people are good or bad and the actions of some people would class them as more bad than good imo.
We all do bad things and need the forgiveness that is offered to us.
Operating in harmony with the will of God is better than operating in harmony with our true will. Our true will might not be right according to God and is not always right. Finding out what the will of God is and following that is better than following our own wants.
But why would someone who is not a believer do that?

 

[metis]

View attachment 67675

The notable Jewish sage, Maimonides [the RAMBAM], said that if we're mainly doing good so as to go to heaven, then we're doing it for selfish reasons. Instead, he said we should appreciate our time on Earth given to us and to also help and make the experience of others more pleasurable.

 

[Mock Turtle]

So it sounds like you realise your need for repenting of some things that you do. (iow stop doing them) but you don't see your need of forgiveness, and why should you if you think that this life is all there is.

I think the existence of guilt and conscience points to most humans recognising bad behaviour. It all depends probably upon how honest one is with oneself and as to how one monitors one's own behaviour as to these two having any effects. And this requires no spiritual or religious beliefs - just the usual being honest, having some abilities of control, and probably having a decent set of morals.

I do believe in forgiveness - of oneself as much as others - but purely from a practical point of view, given that I have observed what not doing so often does to people who cling to such things. Not believing in an afterlife is a completely separate issue to me, and such would still not affect what I believed as to conscience and guilt. Just rather too simple to expect forgiveness from some higher being - and is why I'm not particularly enthused with Catholicism.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Why would you think they are more in touch with themselves, or life?
They seem to lack imagination which suggests a very narrow veiwpoint on life, IMO.

Perhaps, but one might aim it the other way, and accuse the religious of having a rather overactive imagination. If one was to do a survey, I would think the non-religious are more practical and down to earth than much of the religious, given that many would likely believe what psychology tends to show us and where the religious might feel less inclined as to such. So they would likely know more about their own emotional nature, as well as to thinking, and not place such as resulting from somewhere else - like a religious explanation.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

The notable Jewish sage, Maimonides [the RAMBAM], said that if we're mainly doing good so as to go to heaven, then we're doing it for selfish reasons. Instead, he said we should appreciate our time on Earth given to us and to also help and make the experience of others more pleasurable.

And in doing so, you acknowledge and celebrate your connection to others. This can be extended outward to include all creatures, and the planet itself -- and should be, because we are not only connected to it all, an intimate part of it all, we also ultimately depend on it all.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Incarceration is actually punishing people by depriving them of freedom, as well as keeping society safe.

Which is why I suggested that it is not, in and of itself, useful. Punishment does not build character -- learning does. So incarceration that subsumes punishment as part of its purpose will never, ever do as much overall good as incarceration that subsumes learning and self-improvement as part of its purpose.

Psychologically, we use several everyday words—positive, negative, reinforcement, and punishment—in a specialized manner. Positive and negative do not mean good and bad. Instead, positive means you are adding something, and negative means you are taking something away. Reinforcement means you are increasing a behavior, and punishment means you are decreasing a behavior. Reinforcement can be positive or negative, and punishment can also be positive or negative. All reinforcers (positive or negative) increase the likelihood of a behavioral response. All punishers (positive or negative) decrease the likelihood of a behavioral response.

The most effective way to teach a person or animal a new behavior is with positive reinforcement. In positive reinforcement, a desirable stimulus is added to increase a behavior.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Perhaps, but one might aim it the other way, and accuse the religious of having a rather overactive imagination. If one was to do a survey, I would think the non-religious are more practical and down to earth than much of the religious, given that many would likely believe what psychology tends to show us and where the religious might feel less inclined as to such. So they would likely know more about their own emotional nature, as well as to thinking, and not place such as resulting from somewhere else - like a religious explanation.

A religious explanation doesn't cancel out understanding how our minds work.
It just explains how we are so well designed, and why praying changes us our psyche.