Thoughts Vs Actions

[Girder of Loins]

Yeah as I mentioned before, there are plenty of areas of the bible that suggest that actions are important.
Sounds like we agree!
Ken

Oh, thought you were saying James was a contradiction. Whoops! Misread your comment! I hate the internet! And yet I love it...

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Wheres this abstract domain where thought and action are completely divorced? Even if thoughts do not affect action literally, I think they have some effect. And even if 'my' violent thoughts do not translate into action for me, I think if we live in a culture that amoralises such thought simply because of this, it is still the case that such thoughts are likely to cause violence in someone somewhere. So amoralising inner life is a fallacy.

 

[TouchingTestimony]

Wheres this abstract domain where thought and action are completely divorced? Even if thoughts do not affect action literally, I think they have some effect. And even if 'my' violent thoughts do not translate into action for me, I think if we live in a culture that amoralises such thought simply because of this, it is still the case that such thoughts are likely to cause violence in someone somewhere. So amoralising inner life is a fallacy.

hear ye! hear ye! in complete agreement

 

[Ken-1122]

Wheres this abstract domain where thought and action are completely divorced? Even if thoughts do not affect action literally, I think they have some effect. And even if 'my' violent thoughts do not translate into action for me, I think if we live in a culture that amoralises such thought simply because of this, it is still the case that such thoughts are likely to cause violence in someone somewhere. So amoralising inner life is a fallacy.

Supposed I pass a person in need of help, but I think about helping him. would you assume my good thoughts might cause me to help someone somewhere else?
I'm not saying thoughts and actions are completely divorced from each other, I'm saying until the actions cause harm, no wrong has been committed.

K

 

[Girder of Loins]

Supposed I pass a person in need of help, but I think about helping him. would you assume my good thoughts might cause me to help someone somewhere else?
I'm not saying thoughts and actions are completely divorced from each other, I'm saying until the actions cause harm, no wrong has been committed.

K

Exactly! I could think of Nazi Germany and think of how they thought, but that doesn't mean I become a neo-Nazi. But if I do, someone call me out, please!

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Supposed I pass a person in need of help, but I think about helping him. would you assume my good thoughts might cause me to help someone somewhere else?
I'm not saying thoughts and actions are completely divorced from each other, I'm saying until the actions cause harm, no wrong has been committed.
K

OK sounds fair n certain situations, but I think as a community we ought to preach caution over thughts because they can influence actions. I think that thought causes (or influences) action is a tennet of CBT (a modern psychotherapy).

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Exactly! I could think of Nazi Germany and think of how they thought, but that doesn't mean I become a neo-Nazi. But if I do, someone call me out, please!

But you seem to be arguing from one case to all cases, and that might be a hasty generalisation. Just because thinking like a Nazi might not cause you to be a Nazi, it does not mean that therefore no thoughts whatsoever affect action. Did you know that there are reeducation programmes aimed at extremist Muslims aimed ar reorganising the way they see the world? There seems to be some virtue in watching over thought, sometimes anyway. A pragmatic divorce between thought and action only makes sense when there is no connection, but that is not always the case in practice.

 

[bricklayer]

Is it only our actions that we will be held responsible, or do we also have to account for our thoughts that do not translate into actions???

An act is triune in nature having intent-affect-effect.
We are held responsible for our sinful naure not our sinful acts.

 

[Ken-1122]

OK sounds fair n certain situations, but I think as a community we ought to preach caution over thughts because they can influence actions. I think that thought causes (or influences) action is a tennet of CBT (a modern psychotherapy).

How you prevent yourself from thinking certain thoughts? Please explain.

Ken

 

[Girder of Loins]

But you seem to be arguing from one case to all cases, and that might be a hasty generalisation. Just because thinking like a Nazi might not cause you to be a Nazi, it does not mean that therefore no thoughts whatsoever affect action. Did you know that there are reeducation programmes aimed at extremist Muslims aimed ar reorganising the way they see the world? There seems to be some virtue in watching over thought, sometimes anyway. A pragmatic divorce between thought and action only makes sense when there is no connection, but that is not always the case in practice.

Exactly. I made sure not to separate thought becoming action, as it does. But simply thinking something doesn't necessarily mean I will do it. If I think of killing babies, its probably not going to happen. If I think of eating a taco, and I'm hungry, it probably will happen. Thoughts vs actions are connected, but not at such an extreme degree that any thought will turn into the action form.

 

[TouchingTestimony]

as confused as ever

 

[Daniel25]

Is it only our actions that we will be held responsible, or do we also have to account for our thoughts that do not translate into actions???

We will be accountable, but concupiscence reduces culpablity.

 

[Ken-1122]

We will be accountable

Acountable for what? Our thoughts even if they dont lead to actions? Or our actions only?

but concupiscence reduces culpablity.

What??? How are you defining "concupiscence" and how are you defining "culpability"? because I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Ken

 

[Romanseight2005]

God looks at the heart, and we are told to take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. Finally, Jesus called lusting, adultery of the heart, and anger, murder of the heart. So it would seems that our thoughts do matter to God. However, our thoughts are isolated. They are more like dominoes. So, if a wrongful thought occurs, there is a progressive path, so to speak that those thoughts will take, and can be taken captive at any point. Likewise, if we have good thoughts, those thoughts can also be taken captive, so that they never bear fruit. The battle for our hearts takes place in our minds, so our thoughts are very important.

 

[hedrick]

Any legitimate concern about thoughts in Christianity comes from Jesus' teaching on intention. Jesus tends to focus on action, but he is also concerned about attitudes. It's not enough not to murder people. You shouldn't hate them either. My reading is that he isn't concerned about stray thoughts but about the kind of thing that's going to be reflected in action.

Some of the discussion has been about sexual thoughts. What he actually condemns is thinking about a woman in lust. However the word has the implication of wanting to possess something. One translation is "wanting to possess her." My reading is that this is not a kid imagining what it would be like to be in bed with his favorite movie star, but someone who sees women as sexual conquests, or as a possession rather than a partner.

A lot of current sexual ethics does turn on intent. E.g. the definition of sexual abuse looks at informed consent, and situations where someone is not going to be psychologically able to refuse an advance.

I'm not sure how widespread the "impure thoughts" thing is, but I don't think that's what Jesus was after. It would seem to result from combining Jesus' actual teaching with an emphasis on "purity" which is really characteristic of the Pharisees (one of the groups opposing Jesus), not Jesus himself. Jesus opposed the Pharisees on this. They taught that a Godly person should separate himself from impure people and influences. Jesus opposed tendencies in religion to draw a line separating the "good" people from the "sinners". His willingness to eat with "sinners" was one of the things that got him in trouble. Nor can I find anything in him that would lead to an emphasis on "impure thoughts." Indeed he seemed to be opposed to any concept that his followers could be good or pure. We were to be fruitful servants. But there's a difference between doing the right thing and thinking that by doing so we become better than anyone else.

There are situations, however, where something like purity may be an issue. Married people do sometimes find that they need to be careful about attraction to other women. And there are surely other situations you're being attracted to a person or an action in a way that is going to cause a problem.

 

[craftingtable]

Is it only our actions that we will be held responsible, or do we also have to account for our thoughts that do not translate into actions???

Anyone or anything that would punish you for thinking something is immoral.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Anyone or anything that would punish you for thinking something is immoral.

Even if the 'something' is deliberately and willfully planning and coordinating an act of murder?

 

[JadeTigress]

Even if the 'something' is deliberately and willfully planning and coordinating an act of murder?

Someone can think about it all they want. I'd think they were a bit off, but it's their mind to do with what they please. If they take action and actually commit that murder, though, that's obviously problematic.

 

[quatona]

Even if the 'something' is deliberately and willfully planning and coordinating an act of murder?

Personally, I have extremely little inclination for any sort of physical violence - to the point where I am tempted to say it isn´t even within the range of my options.

I really do admire persons who day in day out struggle with and are tempted by their inclination towards physical aggression and violence yet manage to abstain from it.

If you´d ask me who should get a price or reward - me or them - I´d say it´s definitely them.

 

[ivebeenshown]

Someone can think about it all they want. I'd think they were a bit off, but it's their mind to do with what they please. If they take action and actually commit that murder, though, that's obviously problematic.

Is the US government/public school system wrong for detaining those who plan attacks and travesties -- for example, bomb plotters and school shooting coordinators?