Things that cause Hatred, like a false belief of Hatred

[Isaac]

I've been thinking about something since I heard the news in Nashville and I am comfortable sharing it after pondering it for a # of days. I also assume and hope that this type of conversation is something like-minded people begin pushing everyone to have more often. I think that will happen but I worry that most of the people who agree with this might be fearful of speaking up.

Slowly, because it takes time for people to age and harvest to come from seeds, I think that we are seeing something that is just as dangerous and harmful as actual, real, Hatred:

That is, people saying and causing others to deeply believe that anyone who disagrees with them Hates them. The careless and reckless overuse of the word HATRED.
I would add phobia as well, Except I think that that's just more of a self-rationalization, I think both terms are a self-rationalization of an emotionally immature person who is incapable of coping with the reality that others disagree with them. (Similar to the, "that person at work hates me!" No they don't hate you, they just disagree with you, and you don't know how to process it so you apply an extreme label as an easy mental way of understanding something you don't want to accept)
But the overuse and over application of the concept HATRED actually CREATES HATRED in the people who falsely believe that others hate them.
This is crystal clear in a case like nashville.

I think the time has come for those who agree to begin pushing for this conversation to occur in public more often.
Falsely believing or convincing others that people have hatred for them who actually do not, doing this creates as much hatred as anything else is these days.

I'm starting to see it so clearly. Those who go around encouraging people to believe anyone who doesn't agree with their beliefs has "hatred" for them and "wants them dead", those people are as responsible for the Nashville situation as are anyone who actually has true hatred toward the person of the shooter.

 

[Galaxiom]

Those who go around encouraging people to believe anyone who doesn't agree with their beliefs has "hatred" for them and "wants them dead",

The god of your religion gives an ultimatum firmly embedded in hate.

"Believe in me now or suffer eternal damnation in hell". Hate doesn't get much worse than that.

 

[Isaac]

Do you mean,

"choose to believe in me and get eternal salvation and joy and happiness?"

If I don't work, I'll starve to death also. Does that make the world a hateful place? Or does that make me a person with a choice?

It only seems hateful if you choose not to believe in what God tells us about our actual situation.

If someone is rescuing you from drowning in the ocean, do you blame him for describing your condition and giving you a way out?

But it would be rational to feel that way about him if you believed that he was just making up a story about your condition out of spite.

That is why we both feel our position seems rational.

You will know them by their fruits.

Strange for our religion that you think is built on hate that everywhere I go churches across America are spending their time for free helping reach out and help poor and hurting families be restored to happiness and love and purpose. That doesn't seem hateful to me.

Is doing this to little school children what you would consider love? That's what they are saying these days. It's the latest and greatest thing that secularism has achieved.

 

[Isaac]

One of their activists filled with most likely some kind of resentment based on a mostly false belief murdered six innocent people. Is there any sense of delicateness or acknowledgment or self-reflection?

Nope! Other people who were also misunderstood just got killed because of it.
Let's grieve for ourselves some more... And foment more of the same false belief which could lead to more of the same incident.

This is what pathological narcissism looks like.

 

[Galaxiom]

Is the Christian "Relationship with God" Healthy? - Daylight Atheism

Part of A Book of Blood Many evangelical Christian organizations tout what they see as the ultimate benefit of their belief system - the chance to have a

www.patheos.com

 

[Isaac]

For most relationships that would be a logical conclusion. But a relationship with the person who created the universe is necessarily and it would make sense for it to be, very different.

If there is an all-powerful God that demands that you surrender to him but then also promises a wonderful Life and Future if you do, what is there left to analyze? You can call that healthy or unhealthy or compare it to other things you do or don't like, but I simply choose to see that it is. It is therefore I will take him up on his offer.

There is freedom and joy found in surrendering to the Creator the way that we were meant to do by being created. Seeing ourselves as if we were God and we could choose to have a different existence is rebelliousness to him.

Obviously any relationship that looked like this to a great deal of precision on earth wouldn't make sense. That's why God is God and we are we.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Isaac, you and Galaxiom started off with an exchange where Galaxiom talked about the promise of eternal punishment for non-believers and you mentioned eternal salvation for believers. This is the ultimate "carrot and stick" approach, but both are wielded by the same person... well, entity. An authoritarian entity who is silent in modern times. Why silent now but not 2000 years ago?

The whole issue with the "reward" for believing in God is that the presentation offered by modern preachers exactly matches purveyors of fraudulent investments. There is the promise of a rich reward but never any evidence, just some claims by others that they also believe it is a great investment. But nobody who has ever actually reached the point of investment payoff comes back to tell us how great it is. Now, the flim-flam artist will tell you that you must keep the faith. If you decide to withdraw, you are told that you will lose your investment. You are chastised for your lack of faith. You are told that there is no way to recover that investment early. And there is no proof that your investment is well-guarded. You don't find out about the sanctity of that investment until you die. At which time, if you were wrong, you have no recourse for all the investment you wasted.

You said, "You will know them by their fruits." But the problem is that we DON'T know of the ultimate fruits of this relationship because we don't get return visits. Oh, wait... the advertising brochure contains various testimonials, but it was written over 2000 years ago and those offering any statement at all are long dead, so cannot be further questioned and cannot even be corroborated as having gotten their rewards through the prescribed methodology.

The analogy of fraudulent investment is that religious investment requires your TIME, but if the payoff is a fake, the ONLY thing that you had on this Earth WAS time and you wasted it following a scam. One day out of seven to keep the Sabbath holy - there goes 14% of your time right there. Then tithing 10% of the remainder, which was earned by some amount of time spent at work. If you have a 40-hour work week, you lose 24 hours for Sabbath and 4 hours of your working time for tithing, so 28 hours/168 per week which is 1/6th of your adult life. Plus, depending on your religion, special events (holidays) and special obligations (holy months) and a strict regimen of prayer. Time that you could have used for something else.

 

[Galaxiom]

For most relationships that would be a logical conclusion.

Many people are in relationships with other human beings where they have been taught to thoroughly believe that the absuive partner is doing the right thing by them. Stockholm Syndrome is one manifestation of it.

 

[Isaac]

I guess the part that confuses me is you speak as if this relationship is negotiable.

In other words, everything you're saying makes more sense if I was choosing to be or not to be in a relationship with someone, then I would say I would rather you not be God and not tell me what to do.

Your whole position is premised on the assumption that this is a negotiable optional relationship. Mine isn't. That's why each of our positions seem rational to us

 

[Isaac]

One of the most frequent testimonies I hear in all self-improvement groups, is the freedom and relief that people found when they stopped trying to play God and run their own life but rather submitted themselves to god. Believe me it's freeing brother, not constraining.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Except that the Zen attitude allows me the same freedom. You say you submit to the will of God. I say "stuff happens" and all I need to do is adapt the Serenity Prayer - to change what I can change, accept what I can't change, and learn to tell the difference. I don't need any mysticism to get there. I just need to recognize that many complex things happen around me. I cannot expect to understand them all. But I don't need to say "God works in mysterious ways" to understand it. I don't need to say "We aren't meant to know God's plan" to accept that things will happen that I did not expect and could not have anticipated.

You don't want to run your own life... but you do anyway. All that happens is that you introduce a filter (WWJD) on what you do and apply it. But you still make that choice.

Religion IS negotiable. I have negotiated my way out of being enslaved by it. There is no "father figure" looking over my shoulder and tallying a list of "attaboy" and "awshit" moments. When I die, there is no celestial judgment. I might be judged by those still alive when I croak, but the verses of Ecclesiastes says what needs to be said:

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. (Ecclesiastes 9:5 NIV).

Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom (Ecclesiastes 9:10 NIV).

 

[Isaac]

For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward, and even their name is forgotten. (Ecclesiastes 9:5 NIV).

Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom (Ecclesiastes 9:10 NIV).

I'm glad that you find that verse something significant to direct our lives, because the dead in that case is referring to those who choose to face permanent spiritual death.

As Oscar Wilde once said, 'The truth is rarely pure and never simple.' Perhaps it's not so much that you're angry at the truth itself nor followers/believers, but rather at the messy and complicated reality it reveals. After all, it can be easier to cling to comfortable illusions than to face the harsh light of truth.

"The truth hurts. But being angry at it won't change it."

They also say something that has been true for me so many times in life. Ultimately it helped me but it didn't feel that way at first:
the truth shall set you free... but first, it'll really piss you off

 

[The_Doc_Man]

the dead in that case is referring to those who choose to face permanent spiritual death.

I'm quoting from the NIV, so if it varies from the KJV, you'll know where the difference originates. If you read Ecclesiastes 9 from the beginning, it says

1) So I reflected on all this and concluded that the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God’s hands, but no one knows whether love or hate awaits them. 2) All share a common destiny—the righteous and the wicked, the good and the bad, the clean and the unclean, those who offer sacrifices and those who do not. 3) This is the evil in everything that happens under the sun: The same destiny overtakes all...

11) I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all. 12) Moreover, no one knows when their hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so people are trapped by evil times that fall unexpectedly upon them.

There is NO segment of Eccl 9 that talks about facing permanent spiritual death. Based on Eccl 9, ALL die the same death. The resurrection didn't really become a thing until the New Testament rolled around. Others who review and analyze Eccl 9 see it the same way I do - all people face the kind of death described in Eccl 9:5, the total death.

Remember (and I've said this before), I use the Bible as a cultural reference and I don't doubt it contains useful advice. The mysticism and spirit-world interactions have no value to me, but this passage offers culture-based insights known to the people from 2200 to 2500 years ago (the far ends of the estimate of the age of Ecclesiastes).

 

[conception_native_0123]

there's a lot of hatred surrounding the LGBTQ atmosphere. and some of it comes from INSIDE that group, but not much I would say. Seems like most comes from outside of it.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

there's a lot of hatred surrounding the LGBTQ atmosphere. and some of it comes from INSIDE that group, but not much I would say. Seems like most comes from outside of it.

Adam, can you clarify that statement? I think I know what you are saying, but there may be something I'm missing and I consider this a point that needs to be explored, particularly in the wake of the recent NC shooter event.

 

[Cotswold]

Galaxion in #2 summarised hate and its possible origin in religion. And The Doc Man in his observation #7 of the huge time wasting aspects of religion I have to totally agree with.

I would like to state that I have nothing against religion and that I understand many people derive support and great comfort from their belief. Which in itself cannot be wrong.

Everyone to their own but I'll not be involved in any of it having shifted from agnostic to atheist a lifetime ago,

But is there really religion? Or is it simply an advanced branch of superstition with a controlling self-serving hierarchy demanding unconditional subservience? But offering only conditional and vague hope in return.

 

[Isaac]

Adam, I agree that there have been totally wrong approaches to this issue by religious people.

Most modern Christian churches all across the nation have recognized this and reigned it in, reminded people that LGBT people are not to be personally treated in an unloving manner, even if we may "hate" the outward psychological, spiritual and physical consequences OF those actions.

In other words, there is (and should be) a difference between treating a person with love vs. refusing to condone or validate everything they say, do, or believe.

I doubt this is any different from most people reading this. You may hate many ideas I write, but you probably don't feel it's acceptable to hate me myself as a person, right? And so on with everyone we have to interact with in this world.

Charity is different than agreement, although you wouldn't know it to hear either (some religious) OR secularists talk nowadays.

I can recognize that in past years, there has been too much loathing of the personal individuals in the LGBT community. Many if not most religious people have recognized that and made the correction. But the response of the LGBT community was essentially, "too little, too late. we don't care what you've corrected, we now want to keep going and demand that we not stop until every human being is required by law to outwardly assent to everything we believe and do, validate and affirm it, etc. etc". THAT response was ALSO wrong, and just as wrong/intolerant.

@conception_native_0123 , the thing I am pointing out in this thread is not meant to be a complete summary of the whole issue both past, present and future. If it were, I would agree with your response.

I am just pointing out one facet of the situation which I believe is undeniable at the present: Too many people in or allied with the LGBT community are feverishly teaching themselves and their members/children that ANYONE and EVERYONE who doesn't fully and totally agree with and affirm their beliefs and actions, 100%, literally 'hates' them and wants them dead'.

I don't care whether you're a Christian, Muslim, atheist, Hindu, scientist, philosopher, man, woman, child, boy: That teaching is simply inaccurate as a matter of objective fact. NOT everyone who is unwilling to agree with or validate everything you do and believe, Hates you. Those things simply don't add up, no matter who you are or where you're from.

And I think it's starting to matter. If you teach a child that everyone in a certain group HATES them, and they really internalize that belief, it can lead to them hating that group back in return, and killing them.

That's the only point this thread was meant to make.

2 wrongs do not make a right, and in fact, that's almost certainly a major factor/reason in why the people in Nashville got murdered.

 

[Isaac]

controlling self-serving hierarchy

Self serving? Sincere, taking-it-seriously Christians are by a long shot the most giving, selfless people I've met in a lifetime.

The ones I've known have spent the majority of their time, day after week after year, literally helping everyone they come across, for free.

Sure, the structure of the rules is self-perpetuating, but so is every organization in the world.

And yeah, there are any # of bad people in churches, mankind mis-uses every Label, Organization, Belief system, and even Science to accomplish evil ends, that will never change, humans are human.

but I think controlling self-serving is a bit of a broad stroke given the reality that every neighborhood I've lived in depends mostly on those churches (you refer to) for every type of good work imaginable, just about...

 

[Isaac]

And, frankly, one of the most fundamentally childish responses we make in life is to immediately write-off anyone who genuinely doesn't agree or validate something we think, "Oh, they just hate me". I mean c'mon folks, we teach our 10 yr olds to be more self-honest than that....

Immediately concluding "that person hates me" is the laziest form of avoidance of intellectual honesty there is.

I could have easily decided Doc and Galaxiom hate me years ago, but I'm too honest for that. They each are sincere people doing the best they know how to posit views they believe are right, helpful, and good. I'm not stupid; I know that. Now we need to promote that kind of honest assessment on all sides, rather than allowing some groups to dispose of entire areas of disagreement with the simple "Oh. They must hate me".

I had to teach my 8 yr olds "No, your teacher doesn't hate you" 100 times when they were growing up. But we're reluctant to recognize the same thought patterns in adults..

 

[Pat Hartman]

there's a lot of hatred surrounding the LGBTQ atmosphere

The left believes that if you disagree with them it is a hate crime. I don't hate anyone. Hate is a non-productive emotion and obviously does more harm to the person who feels the hate than to the object of the hate. We don't have a way of projecting the hate to cause harm to the object of our hate so hate just hurts the hater. It is almost like hate is reflected back into your own soul and blackens it. Maybe that is why liberals are the way they are today. They hate everyone who disagrees with them.
If I disagree with a black person I am a racist.
If I disagree with a woman I am a misogynist.
If I disagree with - fill in the blanks

That doesn't mean that I approve of subjecting children to drag shows or giving them books with explicit sex or violence.