Please don't hate me either. Please love me by telling me of one bible following church. I really want to find one. I'm sure they'd be happy to have me. I don't cause trouble and just want to know who the real bride of Christ is and follow Jesus.dontperish wrote: ↑Wed Feb 01, 2023 9:35 am God hates those who do and keep sin ...
Psalm 5:5-6 KJVS
The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity. [6] Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the Lord will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.
God's love is shown at the stake in Christs death but outside of being in Him via the gospel ...you get God's hate and wrath.
Look up that word hate ....
It means utterly a enemy to hate!
God's true people will hate all sin vs living in it via worldliness and false doctrines and over looking sin to be united to any false way. God hates the false way too Psalm 119:104
It's called the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Truth for a reason.
Repent of all sin or perish ...
What do we mean by "hate"?
Re: What do we mean by "hate"?
0 x
-
PetrChelcicky
- Posts: 781
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:32 pm
- Location: Krefeld, Germany
- Affiliation: none
Re: What do we mean by "hate"?
I see slavery mostly through the lens of Beecher-Stowe - and following her, slavery was not so much a result of hate, but of carelessness (and sometimes not even carelessness, but weakness of basically well-meaning people).
Carelessness or ruthlessness is not an intense emotion, but rather the contrary - lack of emotion.
Saying that carelessness is no hate doesn't mean we don't have to observe and control it in ourselves. But in a sense it is inevitable. We normally are able to love (to care), but this means focussing on a certain person for a while. Which implies not focussing on other persons. And for the sake of recreation we may sometimes need to stop focussing on anyone.
As I have said before, I agree with Bootstrap that our love as Christians is not limited by group solidarity. But I don't draw the conclusion that we have to love everyone, but that we are allowed to love anyone (even is he/she is a member of our own group).
We are sometimes (but only sometimes) able to steer our love/care into a certain direction. But we cannot make a list of objects who "deserve" our love/care more a less (like "vulnerable minorities"). And we cannot generalize this list as a direction for anyone. It's fine with me, if someone cares for an Hispanic immigrant. But if the immigrant in drunk stupor drives a car and runs over a pedestrian, someone has to care for the pedestrian, too. Even if the pedestrians are no vulnertable minority. That means: It's the best when not everyone cares for the same person or persons.
Carelessness or ruthlessness is not an intense emotion, but rather the contrary - lack of emotion.
Saying that carelessness is no hate doesn't mean we don't have to observe and control it in ourselves. But in a sense it is inevitable. We normally are able to love (to care), but this means focussing on a certain person for a while. Which implies not focussing on other persons. And for the sake of recreation we may sometimes need to stop focussing on anyone.
As I have said before, I agree with Bootstrap that our love as Christians is not limited by group solidarity. But I don't draw the conclusion that we have to love everyone, but that we are allowed to love anyone (even is he/she is a member of our own group).
We are sometimes (but only sometimes) able to steer our love/care into a certain direction. But we cannot make a list of objects who "deserve" our love/care more a less (like "vulnerable minorities"). And we cannot generalize this list as a direction for anyone. It's fine with me, if someone cares for an Hispanic immigrant. But if the immigrant in drunk stupor drives a car and runs over a pedestrian, someone has to care for the pedestrian, too. Even if the pedestrians are no vulnertable minority. That means: It's the best when not everyone cares for the same person or persons.
0 x
-
Ken
- Posts: 16245
- Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 12:02 am
- Location: Washington State
- Affiliation: former MCUSA
Re: What do we mean by "hate"?
How do you get that from Harriet Beecher-Stowe? She was an affluent white woman from Connecticut who in adulthood moved to Cincinnati where her father was a university president. And she spent her time there hobnobbing with the literary world there. She had no first-hand experience with slavery and never even lived in the south. She never even visited the deep south to see real industrial slavery first-hand but only visited across the border to Kentucky where slavery was legal but the brutal and large-scale forms of plantation slavery were uncommon. It wasn't her first-hand experiences with slavery that inspired her work. She claimed to have had a vision of a dying slave during a communion service which inspired her to write Uncle Tom's Cabin.PetrChelcicky wrote: ↑Sat Feb 11, 2023 2:45 pm I see slavery mostly through the lens of Beecher-Stowe - and following her, slavery was not so much a result of hate, but of carelessness (and sometimes not even carelessness, but weakness of basically well-meaning people).
Carelessness or ruthlessness is not an intense emotion, but rather the contrary - lack of emotion.
In any event, the real message of Beecher-Stowe is the inhumanity of slavery. Well-meaning people didn't accidently or carelessly stumble into owning slaves. Where do you get that message from her? Society deliberately and systematically dehumanized slaves in order to justify and maintain the institution of slavery. It is only in a society in which Black people and slaves are deliberately and systematically dehumanized that you can ever "carelessly" own another human being. And it is this dehumanization of Black people that justified and propped up 200 years of slavery followed by another 100 years of Jim Crow segregation. And that also makes racial hatred and fear common and easy to foster.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
-
PetrChelcicky
- Posts: 781
- Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 2:32 pm
- Location: Krefeld, Germany
- Affiliation: none
Re: What do we mean by "hate"?
Ken,
when I referred to Beecher-Stowe, I meant this as an excuse: I am not really savvy about slavery. But whatever Beecher-Stowe did or didn't know about slavery - she is in my eyes rather good at depicting different kinds of human insufficiencies. And that is a finesse or sophistication. A common propagandist would have depicted the average slave owner as a hateful person like "Simon Legree", but she doesn't do so. She starts with the Shelby family who are basically well-meaning but to weak to resist the temptation when it comes. (But the temptation couldn't come, if the law wouldn't allow to sell a slave, it's a problem of the institutions.) Which in the end means that Uncle Tom ends in the hands of Simon Legree.
If we are interested in sinners (ourselves or others) we should distinguish. There are not so much people who bear hate as an intense emotion ("if it damages him, all the better"), but much more people who don't care ("dunno if it damages him and don't bother") and quite a lot of people who are well-meaning but weak ("it might damage him, but what can I do?"). I think all three kinds of people must be treated in different ways. (As a teacher, shouldn't you agree?)
And that's why I protest against the present fashion to use the word "hate" inflationarily.
Nobody would argue: "You don't hate me, that means you love me." But it is just as absurd to argue: "You don't love me, that means you hate me." Between love and hate there are a lot of other attitudes.
when I referred to Beecher-Stowe, I meant this as an excuse: I am not really savvy about slavery. But whatever Beecher-Stowe did or didn't know about slavery - she is in my eyes rather good at depicting different kinds of human insufficiencies. And that is a finesse or sophistication. A common propagandist would have depicted the average slave owner as a hateful person like "Simon Legree", but she doesn't do so. She starts with the Shelby family who are basically well-meaning but to weak to resist the temptation when it comes. (But the temptation couldn't come, if the law wouldn't allow to sell a slave, it's a problem of the institutions.) Which in the end means that Uncle Tom ends in the hands of Simon Legree.
If we are interested in sinners (ourselves or others) we should distinguish. There are not so much people who bear hate as an intense emotion ("if it damages him, all the better"), but much more people who don't care ("dunno if it damages him and don't bother") and quite a lot of people who are well-meaning but weak ("it might damage him, but what can I do?"). I think all three kinds of people must be treated in different ways. (As a teacher, shouldn't you agree?)
And that's why I protest against the present fashion to use the word "hate" inflationarily.
Nobody would argue: "You don't hate me, that means you love me." But it is just as absurd to argue: "You don't love me, that means you hate me." Between love and hate there are a lot of other attitudes.
0 x