evidently you never had siblings. we fought. we made up. we loved.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Love your enemies
- Thread starter Unveiled Artist
- Start date
Evidently you have never seen someone close to you have her arm decapitated by a terrorist bomb
Evidently you have never been beaten to the ground and held down while your children's pushchair is launched into the flow of moving traffic
Evidently you have never been violently raped
I am not talking of childish bickering here, i im talking of deliberate violence.
i've had 1st person experience of violence, physical and psychological.
does it help justify apathy because someone isn't immediately related to their antagonist?
Last edited:
Evidently you've never had real siblings.
Only family can be so vicious, thieving, & abusive.
Then one can the difference between true hatred
& mere disdain, loathing, detesting, & hostility.
5h!t happens. you either get stuck in it, or grow as it composts.
i was psychologically, physically, and sexually abused by immediate relatives. if you can't trust your parents, your guardians, who can you trust?
i'm a survivor only in the sense that i'm still alive. i finally realized they weren't doing it to me because there was something personally wrong with me. there was something wrong with them personally. what was wrong? the lack of love is inevitably why someone harms another, or the lack of love for all
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
It is clear that you have never been faced
with a really real life situation to challenge that.
"Work toward solving the problem".
What you are talking is pure cant. "Higher level"
"Guide toward greatness"
I was in the hospital for nearly three weeks, I
continue to have screaming nightmares, and
other symptoms of ptsd, years later.
I would certainly have blown his head off if I
could have, and you want "best"? Who knows
what he did to who, after me. Is he still alive?
Are they?
BEST would have been if I could have killed him.
Fixing them??? You cannot fix a sociopath
or a psychopath. I cannot imagine the trauma
even having to see him again. And you want me
to try to fix him. And you see him cooperating
in my effort to guide him unto goodness.
I've no hate, I do not dream of revenge, no
more than if I had been attacked by a rabid
bear.
To somehow claim that I have a moral or
religious obligation to "love" that person is
insane, and a further assault.
Experiencing good healthy hatred keeps us sane & grounded in reality.
Love for all of one's fellow humans is dangerous...& not even possible for most of us.
Audie
Veteran Member
Grounded in reality is right.
The bible is not grounded in
reality, and often enough has
some very insensible advice that
is against human nature.
Last edited:
in reality hatred is a long term emotion that doesn't lead to healthy living. anger is healthy; when expressed immediately and in context.
transferred, projected, and prolonged anger and apathy are not grounded in reality. they lead to unhealthy attachments. reality is now. it isn't someplace in the future, past.
dealing with what is dangerous now is necessary for the well being of self. dealing with it afterwards should not be about vengeance. it should be about restitution and insuring that the perpetrator has reformed. preservation of self is first and other second in an immediate and uncontrolled act of violence.. you can't help someone when you're drowning.
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
All of that is simple, well known and obvious.
And it applies when it applies.
You are, though, completely failing to see what
R and are talking about.
Also harmful to one's health is to suppress hatred...deny its
existence...& let it eat away at one's psyche while attempting
unconditional love for all humans. That is not what's best in life.
hatred is not healthy. first i'm accused of not knowing what violence is from first person experience. then i'm accused of not understanding you.
anger is healthy. hatred is a long term emotion that involves an attachment to something that was temporal. people do negative things out of hatred, the lack of love. hatred causes people to transfer a temporal event into long term actions because of similarities that are not necessarily justified and the person behaves that way because of a trigger.
you are attempting to justify hatred as healthy. it isn't
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.” - Frank Herbert - Dune
― Frank Herbert, Dune
Last edited:
no,
hatred is a long term bias for a short term, temporal experience. guns are neither good/bad.
Some experiences aren't so short term, nor are the effects.
About hatred vs forgiveness....
If Catholic Church management had more hatred, & less
forgiveness, they'd have had the vile perps arrested, &
put in prison for life. Instead, they forgave, & sent these
vicious pedophiles back out to continue raping their
unsuspecting flock's children.
To hate evil people can serve the greater good.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
We're not giving them love to expect their love in return. It's not for their benefit but for our own. If we can't give love [assuming it is easy for a minute], then what does that say about us?
Of course your feelings are justified. I'm talking more about your internal values that shape who you are (if love is a part of that?) not dejustifying your feelings based on your experiences.
Sorry to hear that. Nothing too much to say on that....
I would push (for sake of OP, nothing personal) that you don't have to accept these people's actions to love them "as a human being". You don't have to talk to them, associate, you don't even have to like them because of their actions. If I were you, I'd go no where near them. Love doesn't mean you accept their actions and it definitely doesn't mean you have to accept them because of the criteria you put on who you love and who you don't.
Does your love need to depend on other people's actions or should it depend on yours actions despite the other person's actions?
'cause I see love benefiting the person who gives it regardless the other person's behavior. This would mean if I met you in person, I'd see (spit-balling) hopefully someone who expresses love and one whose love isn't taken away by someone else's lack of healthy values (well, that's an understatement, I know).
I would hopefully not see someone crippled out of giving love because of someone else's lack of it.
I understand your justification, of course. For the sake of the OP, objectively wouldn't it make sense that our love should benefit us regardless the other person's actions?
Cause if we don't love others as human beings because of other people's actions, what does that say about us as people who can't forgive for our sake "Not" for others?
Of course your feelings are justified. I'm talking more about your internal values that shape who you are (if love is a part of that?) not dejustifying your feelings based on your experiences.
Sorry to hear that. Nothing too much to say on that....
I would push (for sake of OP, nothing personal) that you don't have to accept these people's actions to love them "as a human being". You don't have to talk to them, associate, you don't even have to like them because of their actions. If I were you, I'd go no where near them. Love doesn't mean you accept their actions and it definitely doesn't mean you have to accept them because of the criteria you put on who you love and who you don't.
Does your love need to depend on other people's actions or should it depend on yours actions despite the other person's actions?
'cause I see love benefiting the person who gives it regardless the other person's behavior. This would mean if I met you in person, I'd see (spit-balling) hopefully someone who expresses love and one whose love isn't taken away by someone else's lack of healthy values (well, that's an understatement, I know).
I would hopefully not see someone crippled out of giving love because of someone else's lack of it.
I understand your justification, of course. For the sake of the OP, objectively wouldn't it make sense that our love should benefit us regardless the other person's actions?
Cause if we don't love others as human beings because of other people's actions, what does that say about us as people who can't forgive for our sake "Not" for others?
Last edited:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Do you believe giving love is a reflection of yourself and who you are or is your love dependent on other people based on their actions and not your own?
I'd summarize that those who did you and your loved ones wrong shouldn't cripple you out of love. I Know this is an understatement but in general, wouldn't our love reflect the person who gives it and not cripple that person based on whether the other person receives and should receive it or not?
Anger and harsh feelings for others are justified in many cases. It's human nature. That's quite different than making these feelings the essence of your values. I don't like people who kill. Of course they should be reprehended and suffer consequences for their actions for the safety of the community and person. That doesn't change I do not care for killing regardless of the other person's actions. But sometimes our values are broken because of our experiences and unfortunately made secondary for the wellbeing of another.
Why let our experiences break who we are IF who we are is based on our reactions to other people's behavior and not our own?
(Both posts are pretty much the same I noticed. I think this one is clearer).
Last edited:
I think we have different ideas of what love is, i see it as a strong emotional attachment, a strong affection for someone.
I don't see how loving terrorists, murderers and rapists would be beneficial to me. It would only instill resentment and hatred of myself for caving in to their abuses to humanity. As it stands i live with the scars every day. I dont need reminders
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Hm. I can't think of another word for it. I see our positive values a reflection of ourselves. So, if I forgive someone (though very very hard) it's not for their benefit but for my own. It's how I want to be and see others. It also telling myself that regardless what the other person does, I stand up for me and "you can't harm me". This is ideal, of course. I've been through a lot too. Just contextually, when I see you I shouldn't say "she is a hater" because of someone else. Of course we do hate etc. I'd hopefully say "she sees people out of positivity" despite anyone who tries to knock her down.
Of course, not everyone has this type of value. I'm just not keen that our values have to be broken or shaped by someone else.
Basically, I don't define people by their actions. If I did, gosh, I'd be a hermit.