Respect for diversity without respect

[public hermit]

I am saying we should see people in the right light. If we see people as possessing all the inherent goodness that people can have, even though they may not often show it, then good feeling will usually come. But one does not concentrate on the feelings he wants. Rather, it is better to concentrate on the mental attitudes toward others that are healthy.

Yeah, I can get on board with this. If we truly see people in the right light, the proper feelings should come. When they don't, the problem is most likely in how I'm seeing them. But, still, some people are so ornery ( I don't exclude myself; I can be really hard to be around at times).

 

[2PhiloVoid]

OK, you sat through diversity training. There you were told that, in your workplace, you will be expected to treat everybody with respect, regardless of race, creed, gender or national origin.

OK, yes, you can put on a cheesy smile and put on a show of respect. But do you also feel a sincere respect for say, a Muslim, sitting next to you?

In particular, if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell, can you at the same time feel respect for that person?

And if you do not feel respect, how do you sincerely show respect? Or do you elect to show respect that is not sincere?

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

A cheesy smile isn't really needed to 'see' another person as made in the Image of God. On the other hand, a cheesy smile might be needed if and when another person turns out to be a psychopath, and in such a case, any cheesy smile I put on will be a sincere one.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I agree with most of your post, but it disturbs me that you, or anyone, thinks they deserve hell.

It's perhaps the single worst teaching in Christianity.

I think it's important to highlight that when I say "hell" I'm not talking about a place of eternal conscious torment and separation from God. I think C.S. Lewis puts it best when he says of hell, "It's not that God sends anyone to hell, it's that there is something in us that will become hell unless it is nipped in the bud." Or what N.T. Wright would describe as one's own progressive self-dehumanization. I think St. Isaac also has some wisdom when he describes hell not as a place distinct or separate from heaven, but that heaven and hell are the same place, in a sense that hell is only hell because those "in hell" wish it to be so.

Now one might argue that that doesn't really matter, because I'm still saying I deserve "the worst", whatever "the worst" may be. But I'm not really talking about anything other than what happens when a neglectful gardener stops caring about the weeds in his garden, and they soon overtake the garden and choke the life out of all the good plants. I don't think I deserve hell because I think I deserve for God to punish me forever; I'm saying that through neglect or malice I encourage weeds to grow, I am doing it to myself. So that I have nothing and no one to blame but myself for my sins. I don't get to pawn responsibility for my actions onto someone else, when I hurt another person, I alone bear the responsibility for that injury I have caused. It's not about punishment, it's not about torment, it's not about that. It's about my responsibility over my own behavior, thoughts, words, and actions.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[BNR32FAN]

OK, you sat through diversity training. There you were told that, in your workplace, you will be expected to treat everybody with respect, regardless of race, creed, gender or national origin.

OK, yes, you can put on a cheesy smile and put on a show of respect. But do you also feel a sincere respect for say, a Muslim, sitting next to you?

In particular, if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell, can you at the same time feel respect for that person?

And if you do not feel respect, how do you sincerely show respect? Or do you elect to show respect that is not sincere?

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

I just treat everyone with a mutual respect and go from there. I don’t judge people by their race, gender, religion, nationality, etc I judge them by their actions and the way they conduct themselves.

 

[Ken-1122]

I think it's important to highlight that when I say "hell" I'm not talking about a place of eternal conscious torment and separation from God. I think C.S. Lewis puts it best when he says of hell, "It's not that God sends anyone to hell, it's that there is something in us that will become hell unless it is nipped in the bud."

This idea that because I am human I am naturally evil and bad is something I do not buy into. Though not perfect, I am basically good. If you call Hell, that which I will become if left to my own devices, then Hell is something very good, because I am good.

 

[Tinker Grey]

@ViaCrucis, I appreciate your considered response. When I was still a Christian I would have answered similarly. I kind of like @Ken-1122's response. It highlights the basic problem. How does one live thinking that all I do, even if good, is as filthy rags. I had a discussion with my home group about this many years ago. They insisted (as per their understanding of the Bible) that if an atheist helps an old woman across the street and no one but the atheist and the old woman knows (no possibility of reward, etc.), then it is still evil.

My response was "did the old woman think it was evil?". I forget how the conversation ended. But the gist of my thinking is that if nothing but good came of it, it is silly to call it evil.

This is from a meme that I won't post here. Things God says:

• You're nothing without me
• If you even think about leaving ...
• You don't deserve me
• You'll never find anyone as good as me
• You brought this on yourself
• I know best
• You're a terrible person and you need me to be better
• You're not worthy of my love
• I'm only doing this because I love you
• Don't listen to anyone who doesn't understand what we have

This may seem like an exaggeration, but perhaps you can see how the Bible and Christian teaching can be seen as this.

The idea that if someone doesn't love God they deserve to be locked in its basement to be tormented for eternity in whatever form it takes is an insult to human dignity.

 

[ViaCrucis]

@ViaCrucis, I appreciate your considered response. When I was still a Christian I would have answered similarly. I kind of like @Ken-1122's response. It highlights the basic problem. How does one live thinking that all I do, even if good, is as filthy rags. I had a discussion with my home group about this many years ago. They insisted (as per their understanding of the Bible) that if an atheist helps an old woman across the street and no one but the atheist and the old woman knows (no possibility of reward, etc.), then it is still evil.

My response was "did the old woman think it was evil?". I forget how the conversation ended. But the gist of my thinking is that if nothing but good came of it, it is silly to call it evil.

This is from a meme that I won't post here. Things God says:

• You're nothing without me
• If you even think about leaving ...
• You don't deserve me
• You'll never find anyone as good as me
• You brought this on yourself
• I know best
• You're a terrible person and you need me to be better
• You're not worthy of my love
• I'm only doing this because I love you
• Don't listen to anyone who doesn't understand what we have

This may seem like an exaggeration, but perhaps you can see how the Bible and Christian teaching can be seen as this.

The idea that if someone doesn't love God they deserve to be locked in its basement to be tormented for eternity in whatever form it takes is an insult to human dignity.

The problem with calling the good work evil in this scenario is, I'd argue, a lack of what Lutherans call the distinction between Law and Gospel, and the distinction between the two kinds of righteousness. The Lutheran tradition emphasizes that there are two kinds of righteousness: Righteousness before God, which is called a passive righteousness because it is something one receives not something one does; and Righteousness before the world/before human beings, which is called an active righteousness because it is something one does rather than receives.

When someone--an atheist or a Christian, it doesn't matter--helps a little old lady across the street it is an active righteousness. It would be silly to call that evil when the little old lady has benefited. It certainly wasn't evil to her, it certainly wasn't evil before our fellow human beings. But neither would it be righteousness before God. And on this I think it's important, I'm not saying that God looks at the act and says, "Not good enough, little worm"; I'm saying that if I wanted to brag about it God wouldn't be impressed by me bragging and boasting. And, even more importantly, I don't have to brag and boast or try and impress God. God doesn't need me to impress Him. That's the point. The point isn't "You're not worthy of my love", the point is "I already love you and you don't need to earn it." Thus the passive righteousness is God saying, "You don't need to earn my love, you already have it: Here it is, for you." This is also why Lutherans speak of objective justification, that Jesus' death and work to redeem the world wasn't so that people could, if they crossed their t's right and dot their i's correctly, escape wrath and get a good afterlife. But that Jesus has already justified all (we look to Romans 5:18 as an example of this).

It's not about me having the right beliefs, the right ideas, the right thoughts, the right deeds, the right set of X, Y, Zs. It's that God already loves me, God has already accepted me in Jesus long before I was even around. When I say I deserve "death and hell", I'm not saying God thinks I deserve death and hell, or that I need to impress God and love Him or please Him or whatever in order to avoid a bad afterlife. I'm saying I bear guilt for what I do (the Law), but that God says "What guilt? You're righteous." (Gospel). God says this not on the basis of what I say, do, or believe; but on the basis of Jesus and what Jesus says and does. God doesn't say this in response to my faith; God says this and that gives me faith. I.e "subjective justification", through faith which I receive I believe God when He says, "I love you, you're forgiven."

I would also add: I don't think anyone deserves to be locked in a basement to be tormented for eternity. Nor do I believe anyone will.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Tinker Grey]

The problem with calling the good work evil in this scenario is, I'd argue, a lack of what Lutherans call the distinction between Law and Gospel, and the distinction between the two kinds of righteousness. The Lutheran tradition emphasizes that there are two kinds of righteousness: Righteousness before God, which is called a passive righteousness because it is something one receives not something one does; and Righteousness before the world/before human beings, which is called an active righteousness because it is something one does rather than receives.

When someone--an atheist or a Christian, it doesn't matter--helps a little old lady across the street it is an active righteousness. It would be silly to call that evil when the little old lady has benefited. It certainly wasn't evil to her, it certainly wasn't evil before our fellow human beings. But neither would it be righteousness before God. And on this I think it's important, I'm not saying that God looks at the act and says, "Not good enough, little worm"; I'm saying that if I wanted to brag about it God wouldn't be impressed by me bragging and boasting. And, even more importantly, I don't have to brag and boast or try and impress God. God doesn't need me to impress Him. That's the point. The point isn't "You're not worthy of my love", the point is "I already love you and you don't need to earn it." Thus the passive righteousness is God saying, "You don't need to earn my love, you already have it: Here it is, for you." This is also why Lutherans speak of objective justification, that Jesus' death and work to redeem the world wasn't so that people could, if they crossed their t's right and dot their i's correctly, escape wrath and get a good afterlife. But that Jesus has already justified all (we look to Romans 5:18 as an example of this).

It's not about me having the right beliefs, the right ideas, the right thoughts, the right deeds, the right set of X, Y, Zs. It's that God already loves me, God has already accepted me in Jesus long before I was even around. When I say I deserve "death and hell", I'm not saying God thinks I deserve death and hell, or that I need to impress God and love Him or please Him or whatever in order to avoid a bad afterlife. I'm saying I bear guilt for what I do (the Law), but that God says "What guilt? You're righteous." (Gospel). God says this not on the basis of what I say, do, or believe; but on the basis of Jesus and what Jesus says and does. God doesn't say this in response to my faith; God says this and that gives me faith. I.e "subjective justification", through faith which I receive I believe God when He says, "I love you, you're forgiven."

I would also add: I don't think anyone deserves to be locked in a basement to be tormented for eternity. Nor do I believe anyone will.

-CryptoLutheran

Thank you for taking the time to write all that. I am not going to parse it. It feels like we're at risk of being OT for E&M and certainly for this thread.

I will say that much of that I said as a believer. But, part of my point is that regardless of how ViaCrucis reads the Bible, you know that many other fellow Christians do not.

Have ever heard anyone pray this way:

I have.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

This idea that because I am human I am naturally evil and bad is something I do not buy into. Though not perfect, I am basically good. If you call Hell, that which I will become if left to my own devices, then Hell is something very good, because I am good.

Yeah, I don't buy into it either and I've never really had to. I guess I'm fortunate I was raised by only minimally religious parents.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

@ViaCrucis, I appreciate your considered response. When I was still a Christian I would have answered similarly. I kind of like @Ken-1122's response. It highlights the basic problem. How does one live thinking that all I do, even if good, is as filthy rags. I had a discussion with my home group about this many years ago. They insisted (as per their understanding of the Bible) that if an atheist helps an old woman across the street and no one but the atheist and the old woman knows (no possibility of reward, etc.), then it is still evil.

My response was "did the old woman think it was evil?". I forget how the conversation ended. But the gist of my thinking is that if nothing but good came of it, it is silly to call it evil.

This is from a meme that I won't post here. Things God says:

• You're nothing without me
• If you even think about leaving ...
• You don't deserve me
• You'll never find anyone as good as me
• You brought this on yourself
• I know best
• You're a terrible person and you need me to be better
• You're not worthy of my love
• I'm only doing this because I love you
• Don't listen to anyone who doesn't understand what we have

This may seem like an exaggeration, but perhaps you can see how the Bible and Christian teaching can be seen as this.

The idea that if someone doesn't love God they deserve to be locked in its basement to be tormented for eternity in whatever form it takes is an insult to human dignity.

It's amazing how some people --- i.e. those we sometimes call pastors ---- can take a bit of Bible (like Isaiah 64:6), basically read it without really understanding it, and turn around and teach an entire Sunday morning brigade of adults and children just enough to scar them for the rest of their lives.

 

[Tolworth John]

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

Why?
Please can you quote the philisophical ideas that teach you to treat others with respect?

 

[Ken-1122]

Why?
Please can you quote the philisophical ideas that teach you to treat others with respect?

Why would anyone need a philosophical quote in order to know to treat others with respect?

 

[Miles]

OK, you sat through diversity training. There you were told that, in your workplace, you will be expected to treat everybody with respect, regardless of race, creed, gender or national origin.

OK, yes, you can put on a cheesy smile and put on a show of respect. But do you also feel a sincere respect for say, a Muslim, sitting next to you?

In particular, if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell, can you at the same time feel respect for that person?

And if you do not feel respect, how do you sincerely show respect? Or do you elect to show respect that is not sincere?

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

It is possible to sincerely respect others and yet disagree with them. Decorum, common courtesy, and benevolent intentions go a long way toward making this possible. Unless somebody defines respect as conforming to everybody else's opinions, I don't see a problem here.

I am also a free thinker, in the literal sense rather than the social movement. Do you respect my total freedom to think as a fellow thinking being with my own point of view? If so, then maybe we can engage in meaningful dialog.

For what it's worth, I have regular conversations about philosophy and theology with a fundamentalist Muslim and an Atheist. We've known each other for 15 years, and get along just fine. We disagree on points, but the respect between us is mutual as far as I'm aware.

Hopefully someday the bigotry against race, religion, gender and national origin will be a thing of the past. However, recent trends in diversity training may exaggerate differences and perpetuate stereotypes rather than emphasizing our shared humanity. Teaching people to view each other as "the alien other", rather than as thinking feeling beings much like themselves is counterproductive. There is much injustice in this world. Only by acknowledging it can we solve it, but perpetuating new injustices isn't the way.

 

[YahuahSaves]

OK, you sat through diversity training. There you were told that, in your workplace, you will be expected to treat everybody with respect, regardless of race, creed, gender or national origin.

OK, yes, you can put on a cheesy smile and put on a show of respect. But do you also feel a sincere respect for say, a Muslim, sitting next to you?

In particular, if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell, can you at the same time feel respect for that person?

And if you do not feel respect, how do you sincerely show respect? Or do you elect to show respect that is not sincere?

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

I can't tell by your OP if you're a believer or not.

But to state it from Gods perspective, he is no respecter of persons, meaning he doesn't show favoritism when dealing with sin.

Reference: Romans 2:2-16

As Christians we're called to also not show favortism, by way of not judging unbelievers. We are called to share the (gospel) truth, but concerning fellow Christians, we are urged to correct the sin we see in others (mercifully), in order to help them stay on the right path

Personally, I can still see a person underneath the sin, so I tend to try to focus on them and not the sin itself (or the point of view I don't agree with, in the case of unbelievers). However, this is generally speaking, because this process of separation gets more difficult the closer the relationship is with a person.

 

[YahuahSaves]

I had a discussion with my home group about this many years ago. They insisted (as per their understanding of the Bible) that if an atheist helps an old woman across the street and no one but the atheist and the old woman knows (no possibility of reward, etc.), then it is still evil.

Unfortunately, this is what religion does to the word of God. Jesus hated religious hypocrisy.

 

[stevevw]

OK, you sat through diversity training. There you were told that, in your workplace, you will be expected to treat everybody with respect, regardless of race, creed, gender or national origin.

OK, yes, you can put on a cheesy smile and put on a show of respect. But do you also feel a sincere respect for say, a Muslim, sitting next to you?

In particular, if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell, can you at the same time feel respect for that person?

And if you do not feel respect, how do you sincerely show respect? Or do you elect to show respect that is not sincere?

As a freethinker, I find it my goal to both feel respect and to treat others with respect.

I think there is respect for Human Rights like the natural right that everyone has the right to belief, political views, freedom of speech, dignity, justice for all regardless of race, gender etc.. So in that sense I can respect a Muslim or anyone's right to their beliefs or creed. But how that can realistically be applied is another situation in a pluralistic society.

For example using Muslims as an example in a western nation. Despite the rhetoric that all cultures have a right to express and live their beliefs or creeds Muslim belief is subordinate to western beliefs. In fact Christian beliefs/views are subordinate to western ideology.

So people have to suppress their beliefs and views depending on the dominant view of the country or organization they belong to. There is not really any such thing as an equal respect for all races, beliefs, genders and creeds in a so called free society. .

 

[Estrid]

I agree. Diversity more often than not, is not a strength.

Not sure what is more common than what, but
New York City is more or less the capital
of the world, and certainly from day one has
been made up of every sort of person you
can imagine.

 

[Estrid]

Why would anyone need a philosophical quote in order to know to treat others with respect?

Same kind of person who needs a
list of absolute rules to relieve them
of the burdensome responsibility
of using the brain that God is presumed
to have given them.

Should you steal food to save a starving
child, or righteously let her starve?

Eze peeze if you have a quote.

 

[AFLady71]

"if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell"....

That is God's area of expertise...not ours to judge.

 

[Estrid]

"if you think that the person in the next cubicle deserves to go to hell"....

That is God's area of expertise...not ours to judge.

You might mention that to some of your
more pushy brothers. They've told me where
I was headin'.