Forgiveness

[SalixIncendium]

How many people going to therapy today wouldn't need to bother if they only understood that their own background was filled with people who weren't perfect, who made mistakes, or worse, who were made into monsters by their own past?

7

 

[SalixIncendium]

I disagree with your counselor.

I disagree with your disagreement.

Should one wish I’ll will on the person that hurt them? Or maybe your just saying they should just be indifferent toward the situation. Personally someone who has done me wrong naturally brings out feelings so being indifferent is irrelevant.

There is a vast difference between not forgiving someone and wishing them harm.

 

[SalixIncendium]

That's your choice.

I've already forgiven @Moon for disagreeing.

 

[SalixIncendium]

View attachment 76342

Well, yeah, but it's also peaceful knowing you're right.

 

[PureX]

Righteous indignation can be very addictive. And therefor, debilitating.

Just sayin'.

 

[SalixIncendium]

And I disagree with you. Haha!!! This is so funny.

I forgive you for disagreeing as well.

This is fun. I feel so peaceful right now...

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Depends what the transgression is.

Sometimes, things are unforgivable.

To forgive the forgivable is a choice which if not taken, is rather a question of personal stubbornness and self-harmful pride.

In a multitude of [painful] ways however, life offers the opportunity for one to experience the healing aspect of learning how to forgive that which one thought one never could.

It is in the self-transformative qualities of accomplishing this, even once, that the priceless gift of self-trust and the blessing of true compassion is acquired.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Righteous indignation can be very addictive. And therefor, debilitating.

Just sayin'.

And yet forgiving is an act of self-empowering.

 

[Koldo]

If we take the dictionary definition of "forgive" to mean letting go of anger and resentment, then I agree with the OP.

However, I think there's a bit more to it than that when it comes to forgiveness. In order for me to forgive someone for an act, they must display some form of contrition. There needs to be a desire for forgiveness. In the case that someone things the act was acceptable, I can move past the act and let go of anger and resentment without actually forgiving the person for what they've done.

After all, their actions are about them, not about me.

That's it. I see forgiveness as much more than letting go of anger. It also involves cancelling a debt. It means the person in question doesn't have to do anything (more) to make up for what they have done.

While letting go of anger is necessary for my well-being, forgiveness is not.

 

[Koldo]

I am saying there should be no shoulds. Whatever you feel you feel and to go against your feelings is dishonest. What's the point?

Do courts of law forgive criminals and let them walk the streets? Why then should others forgive a wrongful action? It makes no sense.
When you forgive someone who committed a wrong it is like saying what they did was okay, but it wasn't okay, so you are not doing that person any favor to let them think it was okay.

One thing thay annoys me is when people say they have forgiven someone, but they still want to see that person being punished by law (or by God). If one wants the other to pay for his crimes, that's not forgiveness, right?

 

[PureX]

That's it. I see forgiveness as much more than letting go of anger. It also involves cancelling a debt. It means the person in question doesn't have to do anything (more) to make up for what they have done.

While letting go of anger is necessary for my well-being, forgiveness is not.

I agree that forgiveness includes to idea of a debt or amends being owed. But I still think that forgiveness is internal. Meaning that I forgive both the offense and any presumed debt related to it within myself. But that does not erase that debt on behalf of society, or the offender. That responsibility still stands. I am simply letting go of it within myself. Just because I no longer require or expect any amends does not absolve the offender of that requirement or expectation.

 

[Koldo]

I agree that forgiveness includes to idea of a debt or amends being owed. But I still think that forgiveness is internal. Meaning that I forgive both the offense and any presumed debt related to it within myself. But that does not erase that debt on behalf of society, or the offender. That responsibility still stands. I am simply letting go of it within myself. Just because I no longer require or expect any amends does not absolve the offender of that requirement or expectation.

If the very person that has been directly affected by the act has forgiven the perpretator, how can the society (which was only indirectly harmed, and necessarily to a much lesser degree) not follow suit? I am thinking on terms of retributive and restorative justice, since we are talking about some kind of debt. I am saying this because it could still make sense to send someone to jail to prevent more crimes being committed by that person (which opens a can of worms that would require showing what is the appropriate number of years in those scenarios rather than merely doing it for however many years satisfy our society as we do right now, but I digress), and that wouldn't necessarily have anything to do with any kind of debt.

But more importantly, I was talking about people forgiving and yet wanting to see the forgiven person to be punished by the State/God. This is not mere indifference to their fate. And this is why I find it annoying, for it is not true forgiveness.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Should one forgive? I say yes, otherwise they get eaten up with anger & bitterness.

I tend to agree with this, but also I don't see such as a requirement. It probably all depends upon the circumstances and the individuals involved. I've noticed all too many consumed by their hatred towards those who might have harmed them or their relatives - as if they just couldn't enact enough revenge on the individual who caused such. Voted into Hell obviously - if such was eternal pain. But then forgiveness might actually enable change in the one who harms - not that often probably - but it is always a possibility. Many others will never change however.

Mostly, I have found that not forgiving is more akin to holding on to harms, and hence more harmful to oneself - given that the actions of others shouldn't so much influence one's life, if one truly wants the autonomy that one should have and hopefully strive for.

 

[PureX]

If the very person that has been directly affected by the act has forgiven the perpretator, how can the society (which was only indirectly harmed, and necessarily to a much lesser degree) not follow suit? I am thinking on terms of retributive and restorative justice, since we are talking about some kind of debt. I am saying this because it could still make sense to send someone to jail to prevent more crimes being committed by that person (which opens a can of worms that would require showing what is the appropriate number of years in those scenarios rather than merely doing it for however many years satisfy our society as we do right now, but I digress), and that wouldn't necessarily have anything to do with any kind of debt.

But more importantly, I was talking about people forgiving and yet wanting to see the forgiven person to be punished by the State/God. This is not mere indifference to their fate. And this is why I find it annoying, for it is not true forgiveness.

An offense against any individual within a collective endangers all the individuals within the collective. It's why collective societies make laws intent on stopping such abuses. Also, any individual within the collective that commits an offense against others in the collective then owes it to the victim and the collective to amend that offense.

I can forgive the offense within myself, but the responsibility for amending the offense within our collective still stands. I don't have the right to forgive on behalf of the collective within which I am a member. Nor do I have the right to forgive on behalf of the offender.

 

[ChristineM]

I was just talking to my counselor about this since forgiving a loved one is an issue for me. She said what she tells her clients is that there is no "should" when it comes to forgiveness since every person and every situation is different. She also said she thinks that religion puts too many expectations on people to forgive and I could not agree with her more.

:WINNER:

 

[ChristineM]

Some things cannot be forgiven. I can live with that

 

[Koldo]

An offense against any individual within a collective endangers all the individuals within the collective. It's why collective societies make laws intent on stopping such abuses.

That is indeed one of the reasons, although not the only one.

Also, any individual within the collective that commits an offense against others in the collective then owes it to the victim and the collective to amend that offense.

I can forgive the offense within myself, but the responsibility for amending the offense within our collective still stands. I don't have the right to forgive on behalf of the collective within which I am a member. Nor do I have the right to forgive on behalf of the offender.

Sure, but since this is not a rebuttal to what I have stated I have nothing to comment.

 

[RestlessSoul]

It is through forgiving, that we are forgiven.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't forgive, unless the offender earns it.
Happens rarely.
But I sometimes forget, which unfortunately
mimics forgiveness.
Do not get on my **** list, people.

 

[PureX]

That is indeed one of the reasons, although not the only one.



Sure, but since this is not a rebuttal to what I have stated I have nothing to comment.

I was not rebutting your comments or position, only clarifying my understanding of it.