Unconditional love

[Gordon]

Jesus stayed dead too.

Your evidence, please.

Take a quick visit to your local undertaker, then add a dash of inductive reasoning into the mix and you'll be home and dry as regards the very obvious fact that 2/3 day dead people don't recover - ever.

If you are claiming a single-case exception from antiquity then please present evidence to confirm this - please note that anecdotes from credulous and possibly biased people don't count (unless your gullibility gets the better of you), since we know people make mistakes and lie - so if you want to establish that a really dead person didn't stay dead then you'll need a method that is independent of the risks of human artifice and fallibility.

[floo]

As there is no verifiable evidence to the contrary, it is a reasonable assumption that Jesus is a rotted corpse somewhere in the Middle East, as when one dies one stays dead!

There is documentary evidence to the contrary, Floo, so, I repeat, where is your evidence.

What documentary evidence? The Bible is NOT evidence.

[Outrider]

Jesus didn't use the analogy of a doctor for no reason.

In Jesus time, though, doctor was a latin word meaning 'expert' or 'teacher', hence why we have doctorates in all subjects, not just medicine.

Sin is spiritual ill-health, and as anyone who recognises that they have physical ill-health turns to the medical doctor, so those who have spiritual ill-health, such as a broken relationship with their creator, turn to Jesus for help to heal that relationship.  As such, it's a remarkably adult action.

Except that a) there is no evidence for 'spiritual' or 'sin' being meaningful terms; b) there is no evidence that 'spiritual ill-health' actually has any effect; c) there is no evidence that any remedial action has any 'spiritually' beneficial effect and; d) believing that we are inherently unworthy/broken/faulty/deficient is, by definition, infantilising.

Similarly, in the same way that you will probably ( ) pay attention to your GP as how to recover from an illness and reduce your risk of getting it again - 'take these pills, get some exercise, reduce your intake of alcohol, etc'. - so turning to Christ to deal with spiritual illhealth involves following his advice/instructions

Except that medical advice is regulated with a demonstrable track record of evidence to support the recommendations.

- such as 'keep out of the way of that which you know to be weakness; avoid those who you know lead you to such situations; etc.'  In other words, it does everything 'to address repeating the same mistakes'.

And you think needing to be given that sort of advice isn't infantilising?

As for "nor why a person feels the self to be so worthless to start with", I don't know of any Christian that this would apply to.  I'll agree that there may be some - Floo as a child and her family spring to mind as possible examples from what she has described over the months - but recognising illhealth doesn't necessarily equate to 'feeling worthless'.

Tell that to someone diagnosed with a mental condition...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Last time I looked Socrates stayed dead - so not quite the same outcome as is claimed for Jesus.

Jesus stayed dead too.

You hope.

[Gordon]

Last time I looked Socrates stayed dead - so not quite the same outcome as is claimed for Jesus.

Jesus stayed dead too.

You hope.

Not really - dead is dead: not a recoverable condition.

[Outrider]

You hope.

No, you hope - that's faith.

We look to trust that previously established patterns will remain consistent - that's expectation.

O.

[ekim]

BA

It is because if you don't hold it, the belief, you are excluded.
Therefore going to heaven excludes those who don't believe the right things.
Unconditional love excludes no one.

Rose, you seem to have got ideas about 'response to love' and 'love' mixed up.  'Unconditional love' depends on the source of that love, not the responder to that love.  Jesus made it very clear that the salvation that his death and resurrection instituted is open to every human being there is.  That is why it is unconditional - it doesn't depend on gender, race, academic ability, social status, even belief - it is available to ANYONE to access.

I have made reference to the relationship that humanity has with God, and contrary to what ekim says in one of his posts, that is true for everyone.  We may have a bad relationship with God, we may even believe that we 'have' a non-existent relationship with him (as ekim seems to suggest is the case for him) but the fact that that offer of salvation is still open to him means that there is a tie (if not a 'relationship') between him and God.

However, as with any relationship, the person on the 'receiving' end of it can choose to pull away from it for whatever reason, but as you have pointed out elsewhere on this thread, that doesn't mean that the initiator of the relationship doesn't still love that person unconditionally.

I'm not sure where you got those ideas about me from but for what it is worth my view of the Jesus situation and unconditional love would be something like this.  I would call the love from his God 'indifferent' rather than unconditional i.e. 'just as the sun shines on all no matter whether good or bad'.  It's just a constant radiance which you can either turn towards (hit the mark) or away from and towards the material world (miss the mark - sin).  Jesus introduced a way or method to 'hit the mark' and surrender to the Will of that God.  He was executed because his method and teaching conflicted with the Jewish religious establishment and rather than run away and hide he left it to the Will of his God as to whether he should live or die (His prayer.. O God, if it is possible,  let this impending destiny be averted, but only if it conforms to your will.).  I would say that the stories about his physical resurrection were created by a distraught band of followers desperate to sustain his religious method.  His followers did a better PR job than the followers of John the Baptist.  Any 'salvation' or progress towards a heaven would come from his method not his (penal substitute) death.

[Shaker]

As there is no verifiable evidence to the contrary, it is a reasonable assumption that Jesus is a rotted corpse somewhere in the Middle East, as when one dies one stays dead!

There is documentary evidence to the contrary, Floo, so, I repeat, where is your evidence.

There is documentary evidence that King Arthur cast Excalibur into the water only to have it caught by the Lady of the Lake, before he died and was transported to Avalon.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As there is no verifiable evidence to the contrary, it is a reasonable assumption that Jesus is a rotted corpse somewhere in the Middle East, as when one dies one stays dead!

There is documentary evidence to the contrary, Floo, so, I repeat, where is your evidence.

There is documentary evidence that King Arthur cast Excalibur into the water only to have it caught by the Lady of the Lake, before he died and was transported to Avalon.

Yes and documentary evidence that God doesn't exist in a holy books called ''The God Delusion'' and ''God is not Great''

[Rhiannon]

As there is no verifiable evidence to the contrary, it is a reasonable assumption that Jesus is a rotted corpse somewhere in the Middle East, as when one dies one stays dead!

There is documentary evidence to the contrary, Floo, so, I repeat, where is your evidence.

There is documentary evidence that King Arthur cast Excalibur into the water only to have it caught by the Lady of the Lake, before he died and was transported to Avalon.

That's a much better story than the one about God requiring torture of another so I can be reconciled to him. Can I believe the Arthur one please?

[Shaker]

By all means 

[Rhiannon]

Jesus didn't use the analogy of a doctor for no reason.

In Jesus time, though, doctor was a latin word meaning 'expert' or 'teacher', hence why we have doctorates in all subjects, not just medicine.

Sin is spiritual ill-health, and as anyone who recognises that they have physical ill-health turns to the medical doctor, so those who have spiritual ill-health, such as a broken relationship with their creator, turn to Jesus for help to heal that relationship.  As such, it's a remarkably adult action.

Except that a) there is no evidence for 'spiritual' or 'sin' being meaningful terms; b) there is no evidence that 'spiritual ill-health' actually has any effect; c) there is no evidence that any remedial action has any 'spiritually' beneficial effect and; d) believing that we are inherently unworthy/broken/faulty/deficient is, by definition, infantilising.

Similarly, in the same way that you will probably ( ) pay attention to your GP as how to recover from an illness and reduce your risk of getting it again - 'take these pills, get some exercise, reduce your intake of alcohol, etc'. - so turning to Christ to deal with spiritual illhealth involves following his advice/instructions

Except that medical advice is regulated with a demonstrable track record of evidence to support the recommendations.

- such as 'keep out of the way of that which you know to be weakness; avoid those who you know lead you to such situations; etc.'  In other words, it does everything 'to address repeating the same mistakes'.

And you think needing to be given that sort of advice isn't infantilising?

As for "nor why a person feels the self to be so worthless to start with", I don't know of any Christian that this would apply to.  I'll agree that there may be some - Floo as a child and her family spring to mind as possible examples from what she has described over the months - but recognising illhealth doesn't necessarily equate to 'feeling worthless'.

Tell that to someone diagnosed with a mental condition...

O.

Agree pretty much with all of this.

O, I don't know if you're familiar with my rather woolly definition of 'spiritual' but to me it means the part of us that needs attending to once our physical needs are met - it's the part of us that appreciates music and a sunset, and that wants to learn and love. Part of that - and it affects what you were saying about mental well-being also - is to have healthy boundaries, standards we set that we adhere to in order to be comfortable with ourselves. But it is up to the individual to decide where those boundaries lie, so long as they don't hurt others. Indeed, it is a part of self-worth to decide these things for ourselves.

It's now thought that depression and anxiety have low self-worth as a root cause. Living in a world that tells you that not only are you a sinner but that you will never stop being a sinner, indeed will sin every day, does nothing to help that. And of course when you do something good, kind or self sacrificing that is God working through you - not you.

A key to good mental health is self-acceptance. How can anyone accept themselves if they are told time and again that the only way they can be reconciled to God is through the barbaric torture and execution of (to Christians) the greatest and most loving man that ever lived?

[Outrider]

O, I don't know if you're familiar with my rather woolly definition of 'spiritual' but to me it means the part of us that needs attending to once our physical needs are met - it's the part of us that appreciates music and a sunset, and that wants to learn and love. Part of that - and it affects what you were saying about mental well-being also - is to have healthy boundaries, standards we set that we adhere to in order to be comfortable with ourselves. But it is up to the individual to decide where those boundaries lie, so long as they don't hurt others. Indeed, it is a part of self-worth to decide these things for ourselves.

That sounds to me like mental fitness - the mental corollary to physical fitness as a counterpart to physical health. You can be physically healthy but still not feel what you want to - you can be devoid of diagnosable mental conditions but still not be where or what you want.

It's now thought that depression and anxiety have low self-worth as a root cause.

A cause - unfortunately, with mental health, I get the feeling that we accept descriptions in place of diagnoses. 'Depression' is a symptom, it's not a condition - at the moment we don't have that good a handle on what the causes are, or the mechanisms by which they operate, so treating symptoms is the best that we can do and it needs to be done, but we need to bear in mind that a diagnosis of 'depression' is a bit like a diagnosis of 'leg pain': it doesn't differentiate between a flesh-eating virus, a fracture and neuralgia.

Living in a world that tells you that not only are you a sinner but that you will never stop being a sinner, indeed will sin every day, does nothing to help that. And of course when you do something good, kind or self sacrificing that is God working through you - not you.

We're amazing. Each and every single one of us is a marvel of biological achievement just by waking up in the morning. I despair of the mentality that looks at humanity, what it's achieved, the peaks (and troughs) of our capacity and says 'faulty', or 'broken' or 'imperfect'. It's a negative mentality - we can acknowledge our 'imperfections' without letting them define us.

O.

[Rhiannon]

O, I've had severe anxiety and improving self esteem (possibly through CBT) is part of the recommended recovery now. Maybe 'cause' isn't the right word, but low self esteem (often beginning in infancy) is recognised by experts as being one of the things that needs fixing on the way to recovery. I came through my CBT quite literally not knowing who I was because in forty-odd years I'd been fed so much shit about how weak and worthless I was, I believed it all. The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Part of healthy self esteem is accepting the imperfections; they make us who we are. But as you say, they don't define us; indeed, what we regard as our flaws can sometimes be utilised to the benefit of others and ourselves.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

O, I've had severe anxiety and improving self esteem (possibly through CBT) is part of the recommended recovery now. Maybe 'cause' isn't the right word, but low self esteem (often beginning in infancy) is recognised by experts as being one of the things that needs fixing on the way to recovery. I came through my CBT quite literally not knowing who I was because in forty-odd years I'd been fed so much shit about how weak and worthless I was, I believed it all. The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Part of healthy self esteem is accepting the imperfections; they make us who we are. But as you say, they don't define us; indeed, what we regard as our flaws can sometimes be utilised to the benefit of others and ourselves.

I don't come from a background populated by evil swivel eyed Christians but come from a background where for some status and material acquisitivism was the expectation. Therefore in the circles I could not avoid moving in I have felt that I was never seen to have arrived at the appropriate station in life by people who for some reason thought they had exceeded theirs.

But that has been a problem for ALL OUR ESTEEMS in todays society since we are constantly reminded of the personal inadequacy of ourselves in terms of what we have and our ability to get it.

It cannot help those in difficulty mentally to have a national leadership insisting that any problems they incur in the social Darwinian struggle are anything but their own fault nor a fellow population who agree with them.

[Outrider]

O, I've had severe anxiety and improving self esteem (possibly through CBT) is part of the recommended recovery now. Maybe 'cause' isn't the right word, but low self esteem (often beginning in infancy) is recognised by experts as being one of the things that needs fixing on the way to recovery. I came through my CBT quite literally not knowing who I was because in forty-odd years I'd been fed so much shit about how weak and worthless I was, I believed it all. The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Thankfully my Aspergers' went undiagnosed through childhood - whilst not having any justification for my behavioural differences created issues, at least I didn't have to put up with the significant stigma that would have been attached at that time to what is still pitched as a mental 'problem', but is really simply an acknowledgment of a difference in attitude.

CBT is widely prescribed for autistic children, and I'm in two minds on it. For some of the most severe cases it offers an opportunity to mimic acceptable behaviours without understanding them - affording them and their families opportunities to take part in everyday life that would otherwise be difficult - but it is predicated on the idea that understanding will follow the behaviour, and that simply isn't the case with autistics, necessarily. Instead you have little autistic robots, blindly following a script to afford other people comfort - as opposed, of course, given the nature of autism, to have autistic children probably following their own script to afford them comfort, often to the detriment of those around them.

Part of healthy self esteem is accepting the imperfections; they make us who we are. But as you say, they don't define us; indeed, what we regard as our flaws can sometimes be utilised to the benefit of others and ourselves.

I don't really like the term 'imperfections'. The implication there is that there is a perfect, somewhere - that variety of humanity is perfection, it affords us versatility and differing viewpoints. We aren't whole individually, we are part of a community, and perfection lies not in our individual capacity but what we can achieve as a collective.

O.
[/quote]

[Hope]

The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Not sure that a Christian upbringing leads to a belief that "the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it".  It certainly wasn't the case in my upbringing or that of my siblings; conversely, I have seen this method being used by families who don't subscribe to Christianity.

[floo]

Some posters bang on about my childhood experiences where religion is concerned. Undoubtedly it didn't do me any favours at all, however I am now 65 and well able to put things into perspective. I know for a fact there are some wonderful Christians out there like my own kids, for instance. However, decent Christians tend to be the ones who have a live and let live approach to the faith and don't try to impose it on others, they let their deeds do the talking. I have a problem with Christians, like some on this forum, who state as FACT something which is only a matter of belief with no evidence to substantiate their claims. They don't seem to take on board that the Bible isn't evidence when it comes to less than credible events like the resurrection. Saying there were eye witnesses means zilch! Eye witnesses claim to have seen the Angel of Mons and the Virgin Mary popping up in various places like Lourdes, YEH RIGHT!

I have no problem with people having a faith, providing they don't force it down the throat of others, use it as an excuse for abuse, or state as FACT something which is only a belief. 

[Hope]

Some posters bang on about my childhood experiences where religion is concerned.

I suspect that if you were to look at the breakdown of posts that refer to your childhood experiences, you would be responsible for a huge proportion oif them.

However, decent Christians tend to be the ones who have a live and let live approach to the faith and don't try to impose it on others, they let their deeds do the talking.

Have you tried to let your actions do the talking in a virtual world, Floo.   

I have a problem with Christians, like some on this forum, who state as FACT something which is only a matter of belief with no evidence to substantiate their claims. They don't seem to take on board that the Bible isn't evidence when it comes to less than credible events like the resurrection. Saying there were eye witnesses means zilch! Eye witnesses claim to have seen the Angel of Mons and the Virgin Mary popping up in various places like Lourdes, YEH RIGHT!

Yet, you are happy to believe in the all-powerfulness of science which is based massively on human assumptions and the problem that much is extrapolated from comparatively short-term results.  That isn't to say that science isn't worth exploring and/or following; just that faith and religion aren't in competition.

I have no problem with people having a faith, providing they don't force it down the throat of others, use it as an excuse for abuse, or state as FACT something which is only a belief.

So it's acceptable for you to force your own belief system 'down the throat of others, use it as an excuse for abuse, or state as FACT something which is only a belief', but no-one else is allowed to express their opinion, argue that the nature of evidence extends beyond merely the physical, or point out that documentary evidence is evidence.

[floo]

Some posters bang on about my childhood experiences where religion is concerned.

I suspect that if you were to look at the breakdown of posts that refer to your childhood experiences, you would be responsible for a huge proportion oif them.

However, decent Christians tend to be the ones who have a live and let live approach to the faith and don't try to impose it on others, they let their deeds do the talking.

Have you tried to let your actions do the talking in a virtual world, Floo.   

I have a problem with Christians, like some on this forum, who state as FACT something which is only a matter of belief with no evidence to substantiate their claims. They don't seem to take on board that the Bible isn't evidence when it comes to less than credible events like the resurrection. Saying there were eye witnesses means zilch! Eye witnesses claim to have seen the Angel of Mons and the Virgin Mary popping up in various places like Lourdes, YEH RIGHT!

Yet, you are happy to believe in the all-powerfulness of science which is based massively on human assumptions and the problem that much is extrapolated from comparatively short-term results.  That isn't to say that science isn't worth exploring and/or following; just that faith and religion aren't in competition.

I have no problem with people having a faith, providing they don't force it down the throat of others, use it as an excuse for abuse, or state as FACT something which is only a belief.

So it's acceptable for you to force your own belief system 'down the throat of others, use it as an excuse for abuse, or state as FACT something which is only a belief', but no-one else is allowed to express their opinion, argue that the nature of evidence extends beyond merely the physical, or point out that documentary evidence is evidence.

Oh dear Hope you don't get it do you? I doubt you ever will! 

You have no evidence, only a belief. You have never put up any credible evidence to support your faith, even though you claim you have. I am not the only one pointing this out to you!

[Rhiannon]

O, I've had severe anxiety and improving self esteem (possibly through CBT) is part of the recommended recovery now. Maybe 'cause' isn't the right word, but low self esteem (often beginning in infancy) is recognised by experts as being one of the things that needs fixing on the way to recovery. I came through my CBT quite literally not knowing who I was because in forty-odd years I'd been fed so much shit about how weak and worthless I was, I believed it all. The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Part of healthy self esteem is accepting the imperfections; they make us who we are. But as you say, they don't define us; indeed, what we regard as our flaws can sometimes be utilised to the benefit of others and ourselves.

I don't come from a background populated by evil swivel eyed Christians but come from a background where for some status and material acquisitivism was the expectation. Therefore in the circles I could not avoid moving in I have felt that I was never seen to have arrived at the appropriate station in life by people who for some reason thought they had exceeded theirs.

But that has been a problem for ALL OUR ESTEEMS in todays society since we are constantly reminded of the personal inadequacy of ourselves in terms of what we have and our ability to get it.

It cannot help those in difficulty mentally to have a national leadership insisting that any problems they incur in the social Darwinian struggle are anything but their own fault nor a fellow population who agree with them.

You do know that there are Christians who also judge others according to class, status, job and material wealth, right?

[Rhiannon]

The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Not sure that a Christian upbringing leads to a belief that "the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it".  It certainly wasn't the case in my upbringing or that of my siblings; conversely, I have seen this method being used by families who don't subscribe to Christianity.

What isn't shaming about telling a believing child, or a teenager, that their natural inclinations and mistakes fracture their relationship with God? For young people actions speak louder than words and it is no good telling them that God still loves them whilst simultaneously telling them that God can't be close to them because they can't get everything 'right'.

[Outrider]

What isn't shaming about telling a believing child, or a teenager, that their natural inclinations and mistakes fracture their relationship with God? For young people actions speak louder than words and it is no good telling them that God still loves them whilst simultaneously telling them that God can't be close to them because they can't get everything 'right'.

This is your natural inclination - that presumably God was happy enough to give you - but we're going to tell you that it's morally wrong despite it very obviously not causing anybody any pain or suffering. We're going to tell you that what you instinctively feel is fundamentally immoral and an offense to God, but don't feel that says anything about you...

Mixed signals much?

Hate the sin, love the sinner? How do you differentiate a person from the traits and characteristics that make them who they are?

O.

[Rhiannon]

O, I've had severe anxiety and improving self esteem (possibly through CBT) is part of the recommended recovery now. Maybe 'cause' isn't the right word, but low self esteem (often beginning in infancy) is recognised by experts as being one of the things that needs fixing on the way to recovery. I came through my CBT quite literally not knowing who I was because in forty-odd years I'd been fed so much shit about how weak and worthless I was, I believed it all. The irony is that much of it came from people who loved me and who wanted the best for me, and because of their own (Christian) upbringing believed the way to make me turn out right was to shame me into it. It's no surprise then that my relationships followed a similar pattern.

Thankfully my Aspergers' went undiagnosed through childhood - whilst not having any justification for my behavioural differences created issues, at least I didn't have to put up with the significant stigma that would have been attached at that time to what is still pitched as a mental 'problem', but is really simply an acknowledgment of a difference in attitude.

CBT is widely prescribed for autistic children, and I'm in two minds on it. For some of the most severe cases it offers an opportunity to mimic acceptable behaviours without understanding them - affording them and their families opportunities to take part in everyday life that would otherwise be difficult - but it is predicated on the idea that understanding will follow the behaviour, and that simply isn't the case with autistics, necessarily. Instead you have little autistic robots, blindly following a script to afford other people comfort - as opposed, of course, given the nature of autism, to have autistic children probably following their own script to afford them comfort, often to the detriment of those around them.

Part of healthy self esteem is accepting the imperfections; they make us who we are. But as you say, they don't define us; indeed, what we regard as our flaws can sometimes be utilised to the benefit of others and ourselves.

I don't really like the term 'imperfections'. The implication there is that there is a perfect, somewhere - that variety of humanity is perfection, it affords us versatility and differing viewpoints. We aren't whole individually, we are part of a community, and perfection lies not in our individual capacity but what we can achieve as a collective.

O.

[/quote]

It's a shame that there is still such a stigma around Aspergers. I guess the stereotype - Reid from Criminal Minds springs to mind - might not be helpful.

I hadn't heard that CBT is used for children with autism - I can't even begin to get how that works to be honest. I only have my own experience to go by but for me it works as a good treatment for symptoms - it will get you functioning normally again and give you a 'first aid kit' of things to draw on if/when things feel rough again. But it doesn't get down to the root causes and shed light on the whys of our dysfunctional thinking, and my experience is that it works best to take both approaches.

As for imperfections, I get where you are coming from but the reality is that there is no such thing as perfection. In transactional analysis (itself an imperfect system) one of the recognised human 'drivers' is 'be perfect' and 'be imperfect' is something I think we need to embrace.

That said, something I always tell my kids is that we are all perfect for who we are meant to be.

[Rhiannon]

What isn't shaming about telling a believing child, or a teenager, that their natural inclinations and mistakes fracture their relationship with God? For young people actions speak louder than words and it is no good telling them that God still loves them whilst simultaneously telling them that God can't be close to them because they can't get everything 'right'.

This is your natural inclination - that presumably God was happy enough to give you - but we're going to tell you that it's morally wrong despite it very obviously not causing anybody any pain or suffering. We're going to tell you that what you instinctively feel is fundamentally immoral and an offense to God, but don't feel that says anything about you...

Mixed signals much?

Hate the sin, love the sinner? How do you differentiate a person from the traits and characteristics that make them who they are?

O.

Indeed. It's been a relief to leave this stuff behind.