Christians: Spiritual Condescension is NOT Love

FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
Christians: Spiritual Condescension is NOT Love

Okay... as I told Holy_Spirit_is_Welcome (and he has yet to respond to me), my definition of love must be quite different from the so-called "love" of Christians. Apparently, when I Christian invokes this word to a non-Christian, what it means is that the Christian holds out the hope (or possibly even has "faith&quotEye-wink that one day the non-Christian will accept Jesus as their savior. Implied here is the threat of hellfire and eternal torment, should the non-Christian continue to not accept Christ. At this point I'd like to invite everyone here to de-construct this notion of "love," which I have found in my experiences to be far closer to condescension.

Do I love people I don't know? Not really. The most I can say about someone I've never met is that theoretically I bear no ill-will toward them. At most, I am disinterestedly benevolent toward those I don't personally know.

Who wants to back me up here, and destroy once and for all the theistic notion that all-encompassing, condescending arrogance masked in spiritual overtones, with a tacit or express threat to the so-called "sinner," is NOT "love?" Being patronizing is NOT being "loving." The churches and pastors seem to be teaching people to call condescension in the name of Christ "love." I say this is one irrational precept we need to viciously dismantle right now. Who's with me?

“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Agree with me or I'll have

Agree with me or I'll have you tortured. Yeah. That's love.  NOT!


FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
And we're to believe that

And we're to believe that God tortures us for our sins out of his love for us, I presume.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
The concept of love, even if

The concept of love, even if we take god out of it, is so convoluted as to almost be indecipherable, but that doesn't make it any better for Christians.

We have a myth of unconditional love, mostly handed to us from religion.  We talk about it in marriage ceremonies, and parents say it to their children, and vice versa.  The truth is that feelings of warm compassion don't happen for no reason, and they aren't permanent.  We can fall in love, out of love, and remain ambivalent.  We can say we love someone despite what they do, when in reality we stay with them out of a feeling of responsibility, or guilt, or something else.  There are lots of different states of emotion to which we ascribe the word "love."

Even so, the Christian version of love doesn't match any of ours (humans).  Blackmailing someone (love me or go to hell) into saying "I love you" is something that I think everyone can agree is not love.  Show me any movie or book plot where someone forces someone into saying, "I love you," and I'll show  you the antagonist of the plot.

 

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
Exactly, we're not saying

Exactly, we're not saying Christians don't love their kids. But the "love" they claim to have for us is a euphemism for their misplaced faith that one day we'll see "the error of our ways," or whatever.

“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
FulltimeDefendent,Check out

FulltimeDefendent,

Check out the book, The Mind of the Bible Believer. It explains exactly how the ideas in the Bible, when believed, transform the person's mind. One of the things it talks about is how the Bible changes the meanings of words. For example, love is transformed into a different word, just as you describe. Also, a Christian is supposed to love everyone the same, no more no less. They are supposed to do this or they are in danger of sin. But it's not psychologically possible to love a stranger the same as you love your parents or children, so what ends up happening is that they diminish their love for their family and friends, treating them as they would strangers, and the only thing that joins them is their common belief in Jesus and the Law. They become extremely self-centered. Again, I'm talking about those who truly believe the things in the Bible, not just cafeteria Christians. The point is that the more strongly you believe the stuff in the Bible, the crazier you get.

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
natural

natural wrote:

FulltimeDefendent,

Check out the book, The Mind of the Bible Believer. It explains exactly how the ideas in the Bible, when believed, transform the person's mind. One of the things it talks about is how the Bible changes the meanings of words. For example, love is transformed into a different word, just as you describe. Also, a Christian is supposed to love everyone the same, no more no less. They are supposed to do this or they are in danger of sin. But it's not psychologically possible to love a stranger the same as you love your parents or children, so what ends up happening is that they diminish their love for their family and friends, treating them as they would strangers, and the only thing that joins them is their common belief in Jesus and the Law. They become extremely self-centered. Again, I'm talking about those who truly believe the things in the Bible, not just cafeteria Christians. The point is that the more strongly you believe the stuff in the Bible, the crazier you get.

Did the author of this book mention Memetics/Meme Theory at all?

Also, thanks for making that distinction between the total believers and the cafeteria Christians. I have some of the latter in my family and as condescending as I find their attitudes toward atheism and science, they don't treat their kids (my cousins) like strangers. Currently my biggest problem is finding something to talk about with them that doesn't make them uncomfortable. I'm glad I don't have those issues myself, and I can only hope that my brashness inspires my younger cousins to question the falsehoods they've been taught to accept as true. The rest of my family is pretty convinced that the older of their two kids (she's 17 now) is well on her way to rebellion. Poor girl isn't even allowed to read Harry Potter.

“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”


Edison Trent
Theist
Edison Trent's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-11-10
User is offlineOffline
Agreed.  True Christian

Agreed.  True Christian love is the undying willingness to do anything for someone while expecting nothing in return.  For example, it's shown vividly in this story.  It's why Jesus hung out with the sinners of His time - Luke 15:1-10 "Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him. And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them. And he spake this parable unto them, saying, 'What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance. Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth her friends and her neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I have found the piece which I had lost. Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.'"

And again, it's why Jesus did things like this - John 8:1-11 "Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, 'Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?' This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.' And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, 'Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?' She said, 'No man, Lord.' And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

As Christians, we must never forget that we are no better than the person next to us.  Love is the key to a person's heart.  Condescending attitude towards non-Christians are worthless and show that Jesus has no influence in our lives.  It's like Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."  Jesus' love is true love.


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
I have often wondered if any

I have often wondered if any theists would love someone enough to take another's place in hell? If this were a possibility , wouldn't this be the ultimate sign of love? How many would be willing to practice this form of love?

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
Edison Trent wrote:And

Edison Trent wrote:

And again, it's why Jesus did things like this - John 8:1-11 "Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, They say unto him, 'Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?' This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, 'He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.' And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, 'Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?' She said, 'No man, Lord.' And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more."

My bible (Amplified) has an annotation that says this story may not have happened. This story is missing in some of the older manuscripts and many that have it place it elsewhere in John. However, keeping with the character of jesus they chose to include it. My 2 cents anyways.

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
Edison Trent wrote:Agreed. 

Edison Trent wrote:

Agreed.  True Christian love is the undying willingness to do anything for someone while expecting nothing in return.

---

As Christians, we must never forget that we are no better than the person next to us.  Love is the key to a person's heart.  Condescending attitude towards non-Christians are worthless and show that Jesus has no influence in our lives.  It's like Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."  Jesus' love is true love.

This a good attitude. Trent, can I ask you a question? I'd like to know what your thoughts are about widespread belief in the end days/end times. I feel it's potential self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm not trying to provoke an argument. I happen to believe that there are many healthy attitudes concerning religion other than just atheism, but I think we can agree that people who "practice what they preach," so to speak, are relatively few and far between, and you seem to have some pretty mature views with regard to other theists, so I was wondering what you thought about this.

“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”


Edison Trent
Theist
Edison Trent's picture
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-11-10
User is offlineOffline
Cali_Atheist2 wrote:I have

Cali_Atheist2 wrote:

I have often wondered if any theists would love someone enough to take another's place in hell? If this were a possibility , wouldn't this be the ultimate sign of love? How many would be willing to practice this form of love?

In Romans 9:3-5 Paul says "For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever."

His idea here is that he would go to hell so that the Jews, God's chosen people, could be saved.  Very few would be willing to do this...I can only hope that I would have the strength to.

Cali_Atheist2 wrote:

My bible (Amplified) has an annotation that says this story may not have happened. This story is missing in some of the older manuscripts and many that have it place it elsewhere in John. However, keeping with the character of jesus they chose to include it. My 2 cents anyways.

Perhaps, I could be wrong about the story actually taking place but I think the main point here was to see that we should follow the example of Jesus in the Bible.

FulltimeDefendant wrote:

This a good attitude. Trent, can I ask you a question? I'd like to know what your thoughts are about widespread belief in the end days/end times. I feel it's potential self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm not trying to provoke an argument. I happen to believe that there are many healthy attitudes concerning religion other than just atheism, but I think we can agree that people who "practice what they preach," so to speak, are relatively few and far between, and you seem to have some pretty mature views with regard to other theists, so I was wondering what you thought about this.

Indeed, those who do practice what they preach are rare.  The end times are a very interesting subject, I don't necessarily have too many opinions on them.  I see Israel as a possible sign of them being close, but I don't hold my breath.  To those who want to bring about the end times through various means, I say fuck off.  If Divine Providence intends for something to happen, it will happen, and He doesn't need us trying to help him.  Trying to bring it about only needlessly wastes lives (i.e. wars in the Middle East), and who knows, it may not happen for a thousand years more.  Also, I find those who try to predict the "Second coming of Jesus" very annoying and foolish, there is no purpose in this, it only causes more trouble.  To sum it up, I'm not going to try to bring it about, prophesy it, try to predict it, or worry about it at all.  Divine Providence will come when He wants to.


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
Edison Trent wrote:[Indeed,

Edison Trent wrote:

[Indeed, those who do practice what they preach are rare.  The end times are a very interesting subject, I don't necessarily have too many opinions on them.  I see Israel as a possible sign of them being close, but I don't hold my breath.  To those who want to bring about the end times through various means, I say fuck off.  If Divine Providence intends for something to happen, it will happen, and He doesn't need us trying to help him.  Trying to bring it about only needlessly wastes lives (i.e. wars in the Middle East), and who knows, it may not happen for a thousand years more.  Also, I find those who try to predict the "Second coming of Jesus" very annoying and foolish, there is no purpose in this, it only causes more trouble.  To sum it up, I'm not going to try to bring it about, prophesy it, try to predict it, or worry about it at all.  Divine Providence will come when He wants to.

Unfortunately, not everyone can be as wise as you seem to be. I haven't figured out which is more damaging to christianity in the modern world. The Young Earthers, the evangelicals or the folks that believe the end is nigh because they all rank pretty high. When I was a christian there didn't seem to be many people like this running around our church. I never even knew someone would say the Earth is 6,000 years old until just a few years ago.

For the end-times, there's a man in Mississippi trying to breed perfect red heifers to send to Israel in anticipation of the second coming. I can't cite the verse, but there is an obscure verse, in the OT I believe, stating a perfect red heifer must be sacrificed in the temple around the time of the second-coming. These people scare me shitless and some of them have the ear of the dumbass president.

It's too bad that the liberal and moderate christians do not stand up to the minority that is making their faith a mockery. Of course this is the same for other countries, especially in the middle-east.

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


Omnibus
Posts: 47
Joined: 2007-11-11
User is offlineOffline
I bring this over from

I bring this over from another site

Quote:
...The Greek language has three words for love, which enable us to distinguish Christian love (agape) from passionate devotion (eros) and warm affection (philia). Jesus did not tell his disciples to fall in love with their enemies or to feel for them as they felt for their families and friends. Agape is a gracious, determined, and active interest in the true welfare of others, which is not deterred even by hatred, cursing, and abuse, not limited by calculation of deserts or results, based solely on the nature of God. Love does not retaliate (vv. 27-31), seeks no reward (vv. 32-36), is not censorious (vv. 37-38).

http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/agape-c.htm  

 

If this is the definition of what Christian love is, then contemporary Christians are Christian in name only. Based on observed behavior I bet most christians find this admonishment repugnant. Agape love has been perverted into something more self-serving, something to excuse the trespass into the private business of others, something to assuage the glee they enjoy when anticipating the suffering of dissenters. It has become justification to coerce and apply an assumed entitlement to control.

 

Too bad stupidity isn't poisonous.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
  Seems the argument is

  Seems the argument is Like , "Who has the most LOVE" or the most "AWE", as if trying to prove oneself ??? "Prove what?" said a Jesus / Buddha.  There is nothing to prove .  

 When this Atheist says no to the Theist, he is saying NO to the God of Abe and all concepts of separation; he is not saying no to the AWE. ( or "love" )

Xians = Sick Retardos, so LOVE = HEAL them .....  =    =    ..... all is ONE ....


Loc
Superfan
Loc's picture
Posts: 1130
Joined: 2007-11-06
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:Agree with

MattShizzle wrote:

Agree with me or I'll have you tortured. Yeah. That's love.  NOT!

Yea that's similar to what I wrote in my "Free will doesn't exist" thread.

Another aspect of this that annoys me is the human side. I have a friend on facebook whose status' usually involves some variation of 'I love jesus so much!" This got me thinking. How can you actually say you love someone you've never seen,heard,or whose very existence is uncertain.To the point of dying for that person.This to me is pure delusion. I know I used to say it too,but know I realise that love I professed for god was nothing more than my upbringing and fear.

Psalm 14:1 "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God"-From a 1763 misprinted edition of the bible

dudeofthemoment wrote:
This is getting redudnant. My patience with the unteachable[atheists] is limited.

Argument from Sadism: Theist presents argument in a wall of text with no punctuation and wrong spelling. Atheist cannot read and is forced to concede.


pyrokidd
Superfan
pyrokidd's picture
Posts: 253
Joined: 2007-02-03
User is offlineOffline
Red hot christian love...

I believe Christianity uses love to mean: "look at this poor misguided soul! As they are one of our fellow humans, we should make him/her enlightened to the truth!" because keep in mind, they seriously do believe in this crap. So in the spirit of good will, I suggest we "love" them too.(as defined above)

"We are the star things harvesting the star energy"
-Carl Sagan


Jiggles Vibe
Posts: 40
Joined: 2008-05-24
User is offlineOffline
A love Supreme

A Love Supreme, A Love Supreme, A Love Supreme. - John Coltrane 


Matt Churchman
Theist
Posts: 95
Joined: 2008-08-03
User is offlineOffline
Hey guys,I was reading

Hey guys,

I was reading through some the posts here so far and found them quite interesting.  For many human beings of all backgrounds love can often times become self-serving (this goes for athiests as well as theists).  We find ourselves doing things in the name of 'love' that are really not loving at all.  Either because they make us feel good or superior when we do them.  Standing in front of an abortion clinic screaming obscenities at preganant women can hardly be reconcilled with the concept of love as taught by biblical authors. 

To me love is both action, intention and emotion.  To love someone in the way Jesus teaches in the Bible is to show concern for their well-being. It is not self-centred, but other centred.  When Paul describes love in the letter to the Corinthians most of the traits outlined have to do with actions.  Most, if not all, of those traits are simply incompatable with selfishness.  I would tend to agree that many christians often manifest this kind of love imperfectly (as we all do).  It even becomes an excuse to further our own personal agenda. It really is unfortunate to say the least. I do understand this though.  The way our daily life and even our economy is structured it seems more and more difficult to allow yourself to put others above yourself. Our language is a reflection of our difficulty with grasping the concept of love.  By saying that we 'fall in love' we imply that we can also 'fall out of love'. It sounds more like a mistake than a choice.

Particularly there was one post that asked the question "how can you love a stranger?" or something about it being psychologically impossibile. This is something I've been thining about a little recently.  This is really just kind of a thought at this point but the way I see it everyone is 'loved' by someone.  Every person that I have disliked in my life is loved by someone who knows them better than I do.  The person in my life who knows me best loves me in spite of all my flaws in part because they understand where those flaws stem from. Anyone who has hated me has only hated who it is they think I am.  Understanding brings love while hatred or apathy is often the product of ignorance.  When I consider this it has lead me to beleive that everyone is lovable and although I may not have the opportunity to love a stranger in action I accept that if I were to know them I would certainly love them. Psychologocally or emotionally I have found this way of thinking helpful. This allows me to enter into relationships with love - caring, compassion and a concern for their well-being as a kind of psychological default mode. I know this was kind of rambley but I just thought it was an interesting question and thought I would start typing my way through it.

Great thoughts though guys. This thread was an interesting read.

Peace...and Love


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
That was cool Matt

That was cool Matt Churchman. Knowing yourself, your own fears and demons, is too know and to see others as yourself. That is compassion and empathy, and why love is all the answer. If this is why one admires Jesus or Buddha etc, that is good. It is wise to take what are good traits of others and to work at making them part of  yourself.

This is part of the reason for my pen name, as I see us all as equal in the ultimate sense of what we truly are. This is also why I am atheist, and a fan of the simple "good" story character Jesus and the Buddha, and others,  that so many admire.  WE are all the christ for those with the consciousness and good luck to see. This requires no dogma, superstition, nor idol worship. 

Thanks for caring.   


Wonderist
atheist
Wonderist's picture
Posts: 2479
Joined: 2006-03-19
User is offlineOffline
Matt Churchman

Matt Churchman wrote:

Particularly there was one post that asked the question "how can you love a stranger?" or something about it being psychologically impossibile. This is something I've been thining about a little recently.  This is really just kind of a thought at this point but the way I see it everyone is 'loved' by someone.  Every person that I have disliked in my life is loved by someone who knows them better than I do.  The person in my life who knows me best loves me in spite of all my flaws in part because they understand where those flaws stem from. Anyone who has hated me has only hated who it is they think I am.  Understanding brings love while hatred or apathy is often the product of ignorance.  When I consider this it has lead me to beleive that everyone is lovable and although I may not have the opportunity to love a stranger in action I accept that if I were to know them I would certainly love them. Psychologocally or emotionally I have found this way of thinking helpful. This allows me to enter into relationships with love - caring, compassion and a concern for their well-being as a kind of psychological default mode.

Excellent post, Matt. I particularly agree with this part.

My conception of 'love' has two somewhat different meanings. First there is the biological component, the physiological processes in the brain that are triggered by various conditions, and that we typically call 'love'. I believe there are specific chemicals, for example, such as oxytocin, which are associated with this feeling. Thus 'love' has a biological, evolutionary basis in humans.

However, there is a more abstract meaning to 'love' which can be thought of as a very general pattern of 'attraction'. In some philosophies it is personified as Eros. It can be thought of as part of a yin-yang duality of love-fear. Love is the attractive force, and fear is the repulsive force. The yin-yang concept comes in when you see that love can be viewed as fear and vice versa. Love of someone can be seen as fear of being alone or away from that person. Fear of something dangerous can be seen as love of your own survival.

It is interesting to play with these abstract concepts in your mind and see how they intuitively seem to work in reality.

Quote:
We find ourselves doing things in the name of 'love' that are really not loving at all.  Either because they make us feel good or superior when we do them.  Standing in front of an abortion clinic screaming obscenities at preganant women can hardly be reconcilled with the concept of love as taught by biblical authors.

Here's where the abstract idea of love plays a useful role. The abortion protestors have this concept that they are acting loving, but as you said, they are really not loving at all. They are really acting out of fear. Fear of hellfire, to be specific.

And here's where I throw my own twist on the yin-yang idea of love and fear. Add to these two concepts the idea of deception. Remember that "Deceiving people is easy. And the easiest person to deceive is yourself." I believe James Randi said that. If you are acting out of fear, but deceive yourself, you can claim that you are acting out of love. The yin-yang duality allows you to justify any fear-based action as a love-based one. But you can look at the effect of the action to see its true nature. If the action has a unifying effect, then it is truly a love/attraction based action. If it has a destructive effect, then it is fear/repulsion based. Attraction brings things together and repulsion breaks them apart.

So, how do we counter deception? Here, I toss in another idea, which I vaguely call intelligence. Intelligence is the ability to find a stable balance between fear and love, or attraction and repulsion. If you're driving a car, and you can't find the right balance between the accelerator and brake, then you'll either crash from going to fast, or go so slow that it takes too long to get to your destination. The intelligent thing would be to find the right balance to get to your destination quickly but not dangerously. That's the concept of stability.

The planets orbiting the sun have achieved a stable balance of velocity (fear) keeping them away from the sun, and gravity (love) pulling them toward the sun. If the velocity was too slow, the gravity would overwhelm, and the planet would crash into the sun, burning up. If the gravity was too weak, the planet would fly off into space. There is an intelligent balance which creates a stable orbit lasting billions of years.

Anyway, that's how you can use these ideas of love, fear, deception, intelligence, stability, and balance to think about all sorts of dynamic systems in an intuitive way.

So, going back to your post about the abortion protestors, we can look at the system and see that the protestors have an unbalanced fear. They fear hellfire, and think the Bible is telling them to induce shame in the women, to try to get them to stop what they're doing (fear-based). They have deceived themselves to think that this is a loving action. But the overall system is unbalanced and fear-based, creating unnecessary shame, and not helping the overall health of the population. Now, it's easier said than done, but you can now look to where you could apply some intelligence to the situation to come to a new balance. (I won't go into it.)

But the point here is that love is not the end goal. Love is not pure, love is not special. Fear is just as important for attaining a stable balance. Both love and fear are blind. It is the intelligent balance that is important. A mother can smother her children with too much love and emotionally cripple them. But children need love or they wither. They need a little bit of fear to manage their own survival, but too much fear is abuse.

Deception just confuses the issue and makes it harder to see through. Abuse disguised as love is common. Battered women run back to their abusive husbands. The key is to break the deception, apply some intelligence, attain a stable and healthy balance. "All you need is love" is too naive. I could go on and on, but I think you get the point.

Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!

Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!


Matt Churchman
Theist
Posts: 95
Joined: 2008-08-03
User is offlineOffline
natural

Thanks for this. Very insightful post.