Superiority Complex.

[JJWhite]

Was it Plato who said something like that it never makes sense to get offended... cuz if the person didn't mean to offend you, then it would be wrong to assume that he did and to get offended, and if he did mean to offend you, then you're giving him exactly what he wants by getting offended.

 

[Wicked Willow]

Just a general observation: sometimes the truth hurts, and sometimes the hurt of truth is the only thing some people will respond to.

Perhaps part of the onus is on the receiver of opinion to receive the opinion with grace and assume that the giver of opinion gave it on good faith. Rather than getting angry and offended as an immediate response, why not probe deeper into the meaning of the giver of opinion?

As someone else said on this forum, it takes a selfish person to notice that someone else is being selfish. In the same vein, perhaps only a self-centred person will take offence with anything said, while a patient person will always see the other or larger side of the story. Why not be that patient person?

As I said: I don't feel insulted by people who think that my dissent is based on metaphysical corruption. I feel a little sad for them, seeing how they cannot bring themselves to even consider my POV, but that doesn't stop me from seeing theirs.

Context is everything, of course. There are people who only speak what they regard as uncomfortable "truth" - and there are those who are only eager to verbally smite their perceived enemies.

 

[Wicked Willow]

Hmmm... good point...this reminds me of something that happened during the time of Prophet Muhammad.

Well, part of the law in Madeenah at the time was that if you drank alcohol in public you'd receive a certain number of lashes. (I know that this probably sounds harsh, etc...but this is not my point in this discussion.) So, when one of the companions drank and was receiving his punishment, some of the other companions started saying some condemning remarks to him for doing what he did... (How could you's and have you no faith sort of stuff)... immediately, the Prophet stepped in and said... "Do not be SATAN'S ALLIES AGAINST your brother." His point was, the man drank, he's getting his punishment per the law, that should be the end of it... no need to make the guy feel bad about it...

By telling someone he's 'under Satan's influence', one might actually be helping Satan out by pushing him further away.

That's an interesting tale!
It reminds me of the customs of an African tribe: when one of them transgresses, he is brought before the whole community. But instead of deriding and ostracising him, each person present steps forth and relates something positive about the culprit. "He helped me carry a heavy load of wood when I was weak from an illness". "He is an excellent host." "He taught me to play the drums." and so on and so forth.
Repeat offenders are virtually unknown in that society.

Something similar can be observed in Norway: Norwegian prisons are *very* lax, and focus pretty much on encouraging the inmates to become better persons by treating them as humanely as possible. And again, their quota of repeat offenders is significantly lower than anywhere else.

If you treat people like beasts, they become beasts.

 

[ephraimanesti]

However, let's assume for a moment that you *have* found the "One Truth", and that everybody who hasn't done so yet is essentially blind to it, doomed to stumble down some dead-end street unless they're brought to the light.

Do you think that telling them that they're Satan's playthings will convince them of the error of their ways, given that they don't believe in Satan to begin with? Or will that statement only harden them further, driving them even further down the road they are traversing?

Point well taken.

People sometimes point to the fact that Jesus, as per the gospels, called some people nasty names - but do you think that this led to the salvation of the parties he addressed thus? Or did it increase their antagonism?

Our Lord's "nasty names" consisted primarily of "Woe unto you, Scribes, Pharisees, Hypocrites . . . ."(Matthew 23:13-29) directed at those whose hearts had hardened, whose minds had closed, and who were victimizing others--primarily the poor--by the gross misuse of their "religious authority." These He did, indeed, condemn in the strongest of terms.

However, the rest of our Lord's pronouncements--for example, His praying for forgiveness for those who were crucifying Him--were expressions of Love and Compassion. His anger was towards the hypocrites and the poseurs, not the "unsaved."

And last but not least, what was it that brought you around? A preacher telling you that you were a pawn of the Evil One - or was it the Spirit?

Well, it is ALWAYS the Spirit Who does the touching of the Heart necessary for conversion, but the Spirit has to have something material and concrete to work with, as in: " 'Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.' How, then, can they call on the One they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the One of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them?" (Romans 10:13-14)

There were many people in my life preaching the Gospel to me--wives, mother-in-laws, eventually my children--but if i had to pick one, it would be my 3rd and last wife whose primary testimony to me was her willingness to stick by me in spite of the abuse i heaped upon her personally and through her Church. (i actually spent some time in jail for shooting out the windows at the Church she attended to "get even" with them for "stealing her affections". How twisted is that?)

Anyway i saw something in her life that i wanted and her Pastor laid out for me what i had to do to appropriate that "something"--or rather Someone--for myself. It took a while for me to swallow my hatred of Christianity and Christians, but eventually, with the Spirit's help, i came around. (MAY HE BE FOREVER PRAISED!)

Of course, if your God exists, he may work in many ways; so maybe you *can* be instrumental in someone's salvation, by telling him just the right words in the right situation, guided by the Spirit. But for the most part, I don't think that it's words that bring people to the light, even if they're quotes from the Bible. If what you believe about the spiritual state of us Non-Christians is correct, then only God can save us. Literally.

Well, again, i thinK the Holy Spirit needs something to work with, and i see preaching and sharing the written Word as necessary to provide a foundation upon which the Spirit can build.

Going along with what you and others have said, it is obvious that one can choose preaching and quotes which highlight God's Love and Grace or, on the other hand, use preaching and quotes which threaten and condemn. i would agree that the former are much more effective than the latter.

ABBA'S FOOL,
ephraim

 

[JJWhite]

It reminds me of the customs of an African tribe: when one of them transgresses, he is brought before the whole community. But instead of deriding and ostracising him, each person present steps forth and relates something positive about the culprit. "He helped me carry a heavy load of wood when I was weak from an illness". "He is an excellent host." "He taught me to play the drums." and so on and so forth.
Repeat offenders are virtually unknown in that society.

I can really appreciate that. My BS is in education, and working with kids has really taught me this lesson first hand.

Something similar can be observed in Norway: Norwegian prisons are *very* lax, and focus pretty much on encouraging the inmates to become better persons by treating them as humanely as possible. And again, their quota of repeat offenders is significantly lower than anywhere else.

People are always on my case for being so lax with my kids, but I honestly don't see them being any the worse for it. Actually, whenever I've succumbed to the social pressures of family and friends and tried a harsher approach, my kids always act WAY worse.

My kids do have a bit of an attitude with anyone who treats them disrespectfully though, which people tend to see as ill-mannered. (At least, they do until they get into their teens. At that age, they learn to deal with any disrespect more wisely.)

My Norwegian grandma always proudly says that I took after the 'Christophersons'.

If you treat people like beasts, they become beasts.

Prophet Muhammad said, "Gentleness is not placed in anything but that it beautifies it, and harshness is not placed in anything but it makes it ugly."

I try to live by that... sometimes my kids do drive me crazy though, and I forget.

 

[Wicked Willow]

I thought this might fit here quite well:

"Sometimes harsh words or physical intervention may be called for. Patience safeguards our inner composure: we are in a stronger position to judge an appropriately non-violent response than if we are overwhelmed by negative thoughts and emotions. It is the opposite of cowardice, which arises when confidence is lost as a result of fear. Being patient means we remain firm even if we are afraid." - The Dalai Lama

 

[Catherineanne]

On that note, I do not see "under the influence of Satan" as an insult.

That's because you are far too much under the influence of satan to see it.



And now a point to consider. Given that the Bible says that satan is the prince of this world, who do you know who is 100% immune to the influence of satan in their life? The last person that I am aware of with this gift was the Lord himself. Since then, nobody.

Which means that this 'under the influence' comment is, in fact, without meaning.

 

[Catherineanne]

As someone else said on this forum, it takes a selfish person to notice that someone else is being selfish. In the same vein, perhaps only a self-centred person will take offence with anything said, while a patient person will always see the other or larger side of the story. Why not be that patient person?

Recognising a particular comment as an insult is not the same thing as being insulted by it. What people say is about them, not about us.

Allowing someone else to insult us is giving them power over our emotional responses. This is rarely a sensible course of action.

 

[Greg1234]

That's because you are far too much under the influence of satan to see it.


And now a point to consider. Given that the Bible says that satan is the prince of this world, who do you know who is 100% immune to the influence of satan in their life? The last person that I am aware of with this gift was the Lord himself. Since then, nobody.

Which means that this 'under the influence' comment is, in fact, without meaning.

Exactly. I would not say that there is anybody immune to these influences, but the statement is primarily meant to outline the force which is allowed to rule an entity. Some still take it as an insult. Some don't.

 

[Dragons87]

As I said: I don't feel insulted by people who think that my dissent is based on metaphysical corruption. I feel a little sad for them, seeing how they cannot bring themselves to even consider my POV, but that doesn't stop me from seeing theirs.

Context is everything, of course. There are people who only speak what they regard as uncomfortable "truth" - and there are those who are only eager to verbally smite their perceived enemies.

I'm sure we agree there...somewhere.

Recognising a particular comment as an insult is not the same thing as being insulted by it. What people say is about them, not about us.

That's true. I suppose it then depends on how you treat the statement you regarded as an insult.

"A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger." Proverbs 15:1

Allowing someone else to insult us is giving them power over our emotional responses. This is rarely a sensible course of action.

When you say you won't allow someone else to insult you do you mean you will beat up anyone who does, or train your patience so that you're "uninsultable"?

 

[sentipente]

When you say you won't allow someone else to insult you do you mean you will beat up anyone who does, or train your patience so that you're "uninsultable"?

I think she meant the latter.

 

[b&wpac4]

When you say you won't allow someone else to insult you do you mean you will beat up anyone who does, or train your patience so that you're "uninsultable"?

I don't think I've ever been in a fight over words, only over actions. Someone hits me then, well.. they'll learn not to next time.

 

[razeontherock]

So, what makes a skeptic hold out his/her hand?

So far (and this is only my personal observation) the acts of salvation I see going on, from doctors dropping whatever they are doing, risking everything to go to Haiti after the earthquake to a gentle word to a worried son or daughter in the ER waiting room--all of the varied saving acts that take place day by day from the most basic to the most sacrificial, it all feels separated from the creeds and dogmas and supernatural claims, all the symbols, traditions and prayers that belong to Christianity. Even when it is being done by Christians.

Somewhere in there you said something about a need, but you didn't develop that idea, mostly because you don't feel such a need. I am a deathbed conversion, so I do. And I've depended on Him for my very life on countless, prolonged occasions. There's gotta be a need, and ya gotta wanna.

The only legitimate need is seeing the awfulness of your own sin, so in a way I'm a bastard child. I'm ok with that.

 

[razeontherock]

If you say "You, b&w, are under the influence of Satan" then you have personalized it, making it an insult

Actually, that's about the most loving thing a person can say if they're correct. Jesus said it, and it wasn't to insult them. I'm sure they took it as an insult, because they were, you know ... under the influence of satan.

I wish I had somebody around all the time to consistently point out to me everytime I began co-operating w/ satan. Oh wait a minute, I DO! So then I long to know Him more, to recognize His voice more clearly ...

 

[razeontherock]

T
It reminds me of the customs of an African tribe: when one of them transgresses, he is brought before the whole community. But instead of deriding and ostracising him, each person present steps forth and relates something positive about the culprit. "He helped me carry a heavy load of wood when I was weak from an illness". "He is an excellent host." "He taught me to play the drums." and so on and so forth.
Repeat offenders are virtually unknown in that society.

This also was a standing habit with my first Pastor. I wonder if he knew about this tribe?

 

[Dragons87]

I think she meant the latter.

I certainly hope she did. Unclear sentences make for unclear intentions.

I don't think I've ever been in a fight over words, only over actions. Someone hits me then, well.. they'll learn not to next time.

Hehe. Is the reason why you haven't ever been in a fight over words because you don't actually physically know the people on CF?

 

[MahaSudarshanChakra]

I dont see "being under the influence of Satan" as an insult as long as Satan is taken to be the metaphor for a generic ignorance about truth. I dont of course believe in any real demons trying to lead us away from God but only as a personification of the darkness enveloping the soul ( the darkness that veils the vision of the divine).

 

[Eudaimonist]

Actually, that's about the most loving thing a person can say if they're correct.

No, not if they are correct. The loving aspect depends on intent and the perceived likelihood of shared values and worldview. Everyone will naturally assume that they are correct if they were to say such a thing, and they are no less loving if they are mistaken. (Their admonishment may be less effective at producing good results, but I wouldn't say that someone is unloving if they have made an error of judgment.)

That is simply not helpful to say to someone is not a Christian. It usually comes across as saying: "You can't possibly be right. Only *I* can be right. May God have mercy on you for lacking my personal superiority of discernment."

Perhaps for other Christians it would be helpful. I see little problem with members of a moral community, having accepted certain values and beliefs, to admonish one another for failure to live up to those values. I suspect that it is good to do with tact, but that assumes a rejection of authoritarianism on the part of the moral community.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[b&wpac4]

Actually, that's about the most loving thing a person can say if they're correct. Jesus said it, and it wasn't to insult them. I'm sure they took it as an insult, because they were, you know ... under the influence of satan.

I wish I had somebody around all the time to consistently point out to me everytime I began co-operating w/ satan. Oh wait a minute, I DO! So then I long to know Him more, to recognize His voice more clearly ...

I disagree. I think it was a clear insult and one that has caused much pain.

 

[Gwenyfur]

Actually, that's about the most loving thing a person can say if they're correct. Jesus said it, and it wasn't to insult them. I'm sure they took it as an insult, because they were, you know ... under the influence of satan.

I wish I had somebody around all the time to consistently point out to me everytime I began co-operating w/ satan. Oh wait a minute, I DO! So then I long to know Him more, to recognize His voice more clearly ...

I gotta differ with you on this one...