Empathy

[Free2bHeretical4Him!]

Let me ask all of you who feel so strongly about empathy, being a vehicle to promote LGBT. Do you feel the same way about divorce? Both are equally destructive sins ... But I would wager you find empathy a legit extension of Christian compassion towards those divorced. Because it doesn’t make you feel uncomfortable. What about empathy towards those who cause so much division in the church with their gossip and slight lies, twisting the truth ever so slightly to imply something that is not there but still remain close enough to the truth they can appease their own conscience.

It is “my opinion” modern day Christianity spotlights the sins of “perversion” to circumvent and deflect the destructive sins of gossip, lies and divorce permeating the churches in America. Grace, mercy and compassion are catch phrases used within the walls of church. I have bailed on organized religion which exalts the sacred cow of orthodoxy, and have chosen to live out my faith in Jesus as my God leads me.

Hugging and comforting a gay man who is carrying a broken heart around after breaking up with their partner, does not mean I support his lifestyle. It simply means I can relate to my fellow mankind in their pain and suffering at the base level of humanity. We are all broken. We all hurt. We are all afraid. We all sin. We all need Jesus … I think Jesus would approve of that kind of compassion. The church? Not so much. But I do not serve or love the institution of the church, just the people in it who are being duped in to a false sense of piety and supposed defense of the Gospel.

Just my opinion …

 

[partinobodycular]

No, I didn't confuse you with him since you shared a few brief details about your living arrangements not so long ago. However, if you're doing well wherever you are at the moment, then that's great to hear.

Let me assure you that no matter where I am, I'm doing well. I've been gifted with two uniquely complimentary things, apathy and faith.

 

[zippy2006]

Let me ask all of you who feel so strongly about empathy, being a vehicle to promote LGBT. Do you feel the same way about divorce? Both are equally destructive sins ... But I would wager you find empathy a legit extension of Christian compassion towards those divorced.

One can support the divorced without promoting divorce, just as one can support someone struggling with homosexual inclinations without promoting homosexuality, but divorce advocacy groups are seldom if ever set on undermining Christianity, whereas LGBT advocacy groups are constantly set on undermining Christianity, to the point that they have convinced many people that if they do not promote LGBT they are not [insert buzz word here, whether it be "empathetic," "compassionate," "humane," etc.]. If divorce advocacy groups popped up that were hell-bent on undermining Christianity or which attempted to co-opt and alter Christianity to make it a servant to the group's cause, then of course we would be suspicious of folks pandering on with insinuative phrases about "supporting the divorced."

So your argument doesn't really connect with the reality of the way divorce is approached. The analogy doesn't make sense.

 

[partinobodycular]

And that's the point, isn't it? This whole issue is a smokescreen for things like the LGBT lobby. Christianity is at best tangential, and at worst an obstacle that needs to be removed.

For me personally, I couldn't care less what some LGBT lobby wants. What I care about is that what's on the inside of a person is being judged by what's on the outside, or even worse, that it's being judged by what's in a name. I also couldn't care less about what their sexual orientation is, I'd much rather judge them by the content of their character.

But character can be difficult to codify in a law, and so the innocent can be condemned right along with the guilty, not because they're unrighteous, but simply because they're unfortunate enough to be different.

I'm not saying that every LGBTQ person deserves to be in a church. I'm just saying that they deserve to be judged by who they are, not what they are.

Laws condemn people because laws can't judge hearts... but we can at least try.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

One can support the divorced without promoting divorce, just as one can support someone struggling with homosexual inclinations without promoting homosexuality, but divorce advocacy groups are seldom if ever set on undermining Christianity, whereas LGBT advocacy groups are constantly set on undermining Christianity, to the point that they have convinced many people that if they do not promote LGBT they are not [insert buzz word here, whether it be "empathetic," "compassionate," "humane," etc.]. If divorce advocacy groups popped up that were hell-bent on undermining Christianity or which attempted to co-opt and alter Christianity to make it a servant to the group's cause, then of course we would be suspicious of folks pandering on with insinuative phrases about "supporting the divorced."

So your argument doesn't really connect with the reality of the way divorce is approached. The analogy doesn't make sense.

I think his underlying premise, which he might not be expressing as directly and poignantly as may be possible, is that there seems to be an amount of hypocrisy coming from those on the Right in that they maintain their own unabated sins and yet continue to rail against those on the Left for their sins (which are made out to be so very much 'worse' than those had on the Right).

On this point, I would agree with him. There seems to be a lack of empathy and compassion among those on the Right going around these days, a lack which they excuse and dress up in a veneer of "righteous indignation," all the while they gallop around with their own equally egregious sins (one of which is................................. a lack of empathy and/or compassion for others; another is the obvious presence of fornication, adultery and divorce among those who are straight).

However, where the Left goes wrong while citing the hypocrisy of the Right is in marrying up their existential psycho-social plights with the wagon train of socialist/neo-communist/critical re-adaptations (via philosophers like the late Foucault). There are folks on the Left who, in their distress, don't realize that Neo-Marxism isn't the antidote to what is ailing the world; but a lot of people around the world think it is.

The truth is, we're all infected by Modern Philosophy in one form or another, Left or Right, and we all need to do constant, daily soul searching and re-thinking. I just happen to think Jesus is the antidote to existential angst and bad philosophy rather than popular politics.

 

[o_mlly]

There seems to be a lack of empathy and compassion ...

There are some disordered behaviors that do not warrant one's empathy but do warrant fraternal correction. Charity in all things.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

There are some disordered behaviors that do not warrant one's empathy but do warrant fraternal correction. Charity in all things.

Would you like to be more specific? Remember, I'm a philosopher, and I'm going to require specifics about other people's notions of "rightness" rather than clouded innuendo, even those that fall from the mouths of other, fellow Christians. Especially those who deem themselves to be in positions of certainty.................................................................................. and in the context of this particular thread, I don't think I've thus far appealed to offering amnesty to sins that, for lack of a better term, are in need of "fraternal correction."

That's not what this thread is about. Obviously, if we take Paul's long list of sins in Romans 1 and work backwards, we immediately encounter some items that need, as you've said, "fraternal correction." But if we start from the beginning of Paul's list, where Paul himself begins, I'm not so sure that requires, or should require, "fraternal correction."

 

[o_mlly]

Would you like to be more specific? Remember, I'm a philosopher, and I'm going to require specifics about other people's notions of "rightness" rather than clouded innuendo, even those that fall from the mouths of other, fellow Christians. Especially those who deem themselves to be in positions of certainty.................................................................................. and in the context of this particular thread, I don't think I've thus far appealed to offering amnesty to sins that, for lack of a better term, are in need of "fraternal correction."

That's not what this thread is about. Obviously, if we take Paul's long list of sins in Romans 1 and work backwards, we immediately encounter some items that need, as you've said, "fraternal correction." But if we start from the beginning of Paul's list, where Paul himself begins, I'm not so sure that requires, or should require, "fraternal correction."

See post #15.

Empathy is a passion, ie., a movement of the soul to act. Passions may be disordered, ie., not in conformance to God's will. Our reason, properly informed, regulates emotions allowing us to discern whether the feeling is ordered or disordered.

Empathy for one who is doing evil would move us to intervene. Empathy for one who is doing good would move us to affirm that action as good.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

See post #15.

And to your post #15, you can see my post #225-----the whole post, not just the part that appears below for convenience.

Empathy

I'm not an 'empathy only' moralist. Rather, I'm a 'compassion first' existentialist. I've always had a hard time figuring out which philosophical box I fit into, but 'compassion first' existentialism would seem to suit me quite nicely... then again I'm probably too dim-witted to even know what...

www.christianforums.com

 

[2PhiloVoid]

See post #15.

Furthermore, just so there's less misunderstanding between us, where 'empathy' is applicable, I only have the minimal, common usage of empathy in mind as per the present reported usage from Mirriam-Webster's. That's all I have in mind. Not the more elaborated, revised promulgations and attempted reifications that either the Left or the Right are pushing upon that one, singular term. In this minimal reference, I find no reason to either ignore it or to value it above and in place of the norm of Christian Compassion that all Christians should be expressing every day of their lives for those around them.

Definition of EMPATHY

the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another; also : the capacity for this… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[o_mlly]

Christian Compassion that all Christians should be expressing every day of their lives for those around them.

The other emotion of compassion should be noted. I am and should be sympathetic with every other sinner for I am one myself.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The other emotion of compassion should be noted. I am and should be sympathetic with every other sinner for I am one myself.

Compassion is not the same as sympathy, but even so. I'm not addressing the difference between which value we might adopt or not adopt.

I'm addressing the need for all of us who are Christian to adopt the entire range and package of what Christian Love is and is supposed to not only be defined by, but as to how it is to be implemented. Y'know.................all of the sort of ongoing, extensive correction and exhortation that Paul the Apostle had to give to the very troubled church in Corinth. Paul had to apparently spell it out for them because they were too dysfunctional to figure out the Will of Christ for themselves.

 

[zippy2006]

But character can be difficult to codify in a law

Laws do not judge character. Laws judge acts.

 

[zippy2006]

I think his underlying premise, which he might not be expressing as directly and poignantly as may be possible, is that there seems to be an amount of hypocrisy

Yes, and I answered that argument, showing why it is faulty.

There seems to be a lack of empathy and compassion among those on the Right going around these days, a lack which they excuse and dress up in a veneer of "righteous indignation," all the while they gallop around with their own equally egregious sins (one of which is................................. a lack of empathy and/or compassion for others; another is the obvious presence of fornication, adultery and divorce among those who are straight).

All you are saying is, "The right is not empathetic enough, and we need to be empathetic." That's not a charge of hypocrisy, it's a begging of the question of the whole issue that is being discussed in this thread. You're committing a logical fallacy, not managing an argument for hypocrisy.

 

[Free2bHeretical4Him!]

One can support the divorced without promoting divorce, just as one can support someone struggling with homosexual inclinations without promoting homosexuality, but divorce advocacy groups are seldom if ever set on undermining Christianity,

The above underlined sounds a bit like an oxymoron to me. How can you be a divorce advocacy group, in any way shape or form and not be undermining the values of Christianity? Weird statement …

whereas LGBT advocacy groups are constantly set on undermining Christianity,

This is the world system which we must operate in and navigate through. It is the training ground where our faith is tested and refined. I just happen to think mainstream, evangelical Christianity chooses to point its finger of self righteous indignation at the “sins of perversion“, in order to circumvent dealing with all the “destructive sins” practiced on a regular basis by common everyday church folk.

Sorry brother, but the church doesn’t need to worry about “external advocacy groups”, of any kind, undermining Christianity. Mainstream evangelical Christianity is self imploding right in front of the whole world and its system. Nothing new really. Paul rebuked the leadership at Corinth for not dealing with the wickedness within its own walls, sexual relations between the son and his fathers wife, pointing out to them this was well known among those outside the faith, and was undermining their witnes.

to the point that they have convinced many people that if they do not promote LGBT they are not [insert buzz word here, whether it be "empathetic," "compassionate," "humane," etc.].

Who are the many people to whom you refer? Christians, or just moral people who are already a part of the world system , who are easily swayed by whatever agenda driven philosophy coming from either the left or right? Here is the kicker my friend … it is my opinion, our adversary is using the LGBT advocacy groups to undermine and quell the very divine light we are to be demonstrating to a world in darkness.

He has just as much contempt for those he is using as pawns to further entrench the world in darkness as he has for those who should be shining the light of the Law of Love. By having us question the virtues of empathy/sympathy, and causing us to redefine or redirect the validity of them in practice towards people held in bondage, he is playing us believers against each other; all in the name of standing for and protecting the truth.

Sorry, but no group, religion, man or office should dictate to us when, where, how or to whom we demonstrate love; expressed through empathy or sympathy, regardless of how the church tries to redefine them.

If divorce advocacy groups popped up that were hell-bent on undermining Christianity or which attempted to co-opt and alter Christianity to make it a servant to the group's cause, then of course we would be suspicious of folks pandering on with insinuative phrases about "supporting the divorced."

Again. The church is doing a fine job of undermining itself without any assistance or influence from without.

So your argument doesn't really connect with the reality of the way divorce is approached. The analogy doesn't make sense.

Guess we differ on this point but my use of the “divorce analogy” makes perfect sense to me.

blessings

 

[FireDragon76]

I see zero evidence Jesus has anything in particular against gay people. This cloaking of contempt in piety is nothing but anxiousness in the face of the fact that the Church has largely made itself not only irrelevant, but illegible and incoherent, and some are looking for victims for their vain theo-political projects.