GraphicsGuy Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 I don't think love is unconditional. And I won't disagree with that sentiment, mwc. "Love" in and of itself is something that comes from within us. Without consciousness I don't think there could be anything that we term as love...but that's an entirely other conversation I think... My feelings on the issue is that whatever the hell we call "true love" should be unconditional. For example, I love my kids...even the two who want nothing to do with me right now. Nothing can change that. I would never reject them, nor stop loving them. I suppose if they became terrorizing dictators or serial killers perhaps my love wouldn't be quite so unconditional then...or would it? I mean, it would just about kill me to reject them and say they weren't my kids... And even as much as I hate my ex right now, a part of me still loves and pities her. To me the opposite of love is not hate. The polar opposite is complete indifference. Christianity states that God is love and that His love is unconditional. Christians are to be "Christ-like" yet when they practice this blatently obvious conditional form of love (rejecting those who deconvert) they are being anything but. That's my problem with them and that is what makes me so angry about the situations I hear about over and over and over. It seems as if those who break away from the rules and regs of religion end up understanding more about love and life than those who stay within its boundaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 And I won't disagree with that sentiment, mwc. "Love" in and of itself is something that comes from within us. Without consciousness I don't think there could be anything that we term as love...but that's an entirely other conversation I think... Okay. Agreed. It seems we're talking about different things. My feelings on the issue is that whatever the hell we call "true love" should be unconditional. For example, I love my kids...even the two who want nothing to do with me right now. Nothing can change that. I would never reject them, nor stop loving them. I suppose if they became terrorizing dictators or serial killers perhaps my love wouldn't be quite so unconditional then...or would it? I mean, it would just about kill me to reject them and say they weren't my kids... We are talking about different things. "Love" is a tricky thing to nail down. I don't know if "true love" is even really good enough. I'm going to totally mess this up but loving a child, like you describe, is different than choosing someone to love like a spouse/partner as I described. But people use "true love" and "unconditional love" in both situations which really muddies the waters. Perhaps that's where my problem in understanding tends to lie? I can see both though. And even as much as I hate my ex right now, a part of me still loves and pities her. To me the opposite of love is not hate. The polar opposite is complete indifference. I would tend to agree with you here as well. Indifference is probably the more accurate term (ie. what you would feel for a stranger or someone that is "meaningless" to you). As I have revealed in recent posts I felt nothing, indifference at best, towards my biological father but not hate. Christianity states that God is love and that His love is unconditional. Christians are to be "Christ-like" yet when they practice this blatently obvious conditional form of love (rejecting those who deconvert) they are being anything but. That's my problem with them and that is what makes me so angry about the situations I hear about over and over and over. "Christ-like" is tough to define. Tell me what "Christ" was like in a marriage. Tell me what "Christ" was like when his "partner" revealed "I'm not buying this whole 'jesus' thing anymore." I know it sounds trite but can you tell me what this "Christ" role model is like for these situations? He wasn't married but didn't believe in divorce and the only person that truly betrayed him on a personal level met a seriously bad end compared to those eleven that just abandoned him and returned later. His advice prior to this was "Those who aren't with us are against us." Does that sound familiar at all? Being rejected because you "turn away" *IS* "Christ-like." The "turn the other cheek" crap is to get converts. Turn enemies to friends. It's not for apostates. Not for "Judas." It seems as if those who break away from the rules and regs of religion end up understanding more about love and life than those who stay within its boundaries. I'm not sure how to respond to this. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 10, 2008 Author Share Posted January 10, 2008 We are talking about different things. "Love" is a tricky thing to nail down. I don't know if "true love" is even really good enough. I'm going to totally mess this up but loving a child, like you describe, is different than choosing someone to love like a spouse/partner as I described. But people use "true love" and "unconditional love" in both situations which really muddies the waters. Perhaps that's where my problem in understanding tends to lie? I can see both though. You've said a lot and I don't mean to ignore the rest, but I will for the time being (btw, I pretty much totally agree with what you wrote and you've given me a completely new spin on the "Christ-like" thing to think about)... What I've quoted from you here is one of the major issues. You've said it yourself...loving a child is different. Yet, look at all the people on here rejected by their parents! This is what really boggles my mind and absolutely disgusts me. How could you do that to your child (regardless of whatever age they might be)? As far as what you say about married couples, sure it makes total sense why someone might not be able to accept deconversion. It doesn't make it any less painful or disgusting in my opinion...but to reject your child? That's nearly on the level as the latest tragic news story...again, my opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 You've said a lot and I don't mean to ignore the rest, but I will for the time being (btw, I pretty much totally agree with what you wrote and you've given me a completely new spin on the "Christ-like" thing to think about)... What I've quoted from you here is one of the major issues. You've said it yourself...loving a child is different. Yet, look at all the people on here rejected by their parents! This is what really boggles my mind and absolutely disgusts me. How could you do that to your child (regardless of whatever age they might be)? As far as what you say about married couples, sure it makes total sense why someone might not be able to accept deconversion. It doesn't make it any less painful or disgusting in my opinion...but to reject your child? That's nearly on the level as the latest tragic news story...again, my opinion... Well, "the father" sits there waiting with open arms of "love," as long as you go to him in the manner he wants. So why shouldn't earthly fathers? Perhaps it's not so much rejecting as it is waiting for the child to "see the light" and return? But kids are just so stubborn don't you know? So they seal their own fate. Create their own "hell" as it were. I still the the whole problem is the xians sell, sell, sell with the "love" thing. Fire and brimstone was going out of style when I was young but my church did it and I didn't have a "loving" jesus beyond he'll pull your ass our of the coals. But the xian "love" (and just in society in general) I think builds us up for a fall. Especially when I've been reading lately about autism and the like where they experience "love" but can't express it as "normal" society tells everyone it should be expressed (as opposed to, say, narcissists who are really more just users but still have "love" in yet a more selfish way...to me the "godly" way). How many other problems arise from brain differences like that? When one group can/can't feel something the same way or can/can't express it the same way but a religion, or society, says it should be done a certain way? I just think the whole issue is a lot more complicated than it seems. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_raven23 Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Well, "the father" sits there waiting with open arms of "love," as long as you go to him he wants. So why shouldn't earthly fathers? Perhaps it's not so much rejecting as it is waiting for the child to "see the light" and return? But kids are just so stubborn don't you know? So they seal their own fate. Create their own "hell" as it were. Than's some pretty conditional love right there. And actually, it's not so much that conditional love is a problem in and of itself (it's just blatantly honest), but it seems like a problem when people lie to themselves and others, perpetuating the lie throughout modern culture that something that is conditional, isn't. We say we'll love someone forever. Worse, when we join with someone and take the marriage pledge (and it IS a pledge), we vow to stay with them no matter what. So not only do we involve our emotional love, we involve our loyalty and honor in the later seperation mess when we are clearly breaking a pledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 Than's some pretty conditional love right there. Exactly. I really can't see very many good examples in the religion. We're just kind of "brainwashed" into believing that there are good examples and that this "unconditional love" exists...when it doesn't. It seems that xians behave exactly how their role models do and not how their PR service tells us they do. Oddly enough even though we leave the religion we expect them to act better than their "gods." To live up to the lie they tell us and themselves. Perhaps we want them to see their hypocrisy? To accept at least some of the "blame." I think we know better though. The ability to see the hypocrisy isn't really something you can do while you're caught up in it. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have been able to. mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amethyst Posted January 10, 2008 Share Posted January 10, 2008 I too think unconditional love, at least in the case of two adults, is a fairy tale. It's been perpetuated by both organized religion and Hollywood for years. Would you love someone who had completely opposite beliefs and opinions from you? Well, okay, if they were your child or parent. But another adult you had recently met and were just getting to know? You could have sexual attraction, there's always that possibility, but love to the point of considering marriage? Seems unlikely. Didn't the Greeks or Romans have more than one word for love? Part of the problem with the English language is that we use the same word to describe both relationships between family members and romantic relationships. We don't have separate terms for the two different kinds of emotion. Perhaps separate terms are needed. I think the marriage vows, as they are now, are archaic. On the one hand they are very romantic, but on the other hand, they're not very realistic. That whole aspect of our society is overdue for change and it's mostly the religious fundies who have insisted in keeping it the same as it has been for the past 200 years or more. This is the 21st century, not the 18th. It's high time that the system is changed to allow flexibility in marriage, and the ideals of love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taphophilia Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I think the whole soul mate and finding my better half bit have influenced people in very unhealthy ways. A lot of people have an expectation of another person being just as an extention of themselves and don't allow the person, they are in a relationship with, their own identity. They believe that another person is supposed to make their lives better, when this doesn't happen they punish the other person for "failing'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 A lot of people have an expectation of another person being just as an extention of themselves and don't allow the person, they are in a relationship with, their own identity. As an observation, if someone did allow their partner to grow and learn couldn't that be viewed as unconditional love? At least from a subjective standpoint? I say that because my father often says that my mother loves him unconditionally. They believe that another person is supposed to make their lives better, when this doesn't happen they punish the other person for "failing'. I've experienced this first hand... At least that's how it felt to me. EDIT: Now that I think about it I may have reciprocated this approach somewhat unknowingly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purple Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 After reading/replying to ExConfusedChristian's topic regarding her spouse, my own experiences with my ex-wife, and having heard so many accounts of spouses/parents/siblings that reject those who deconvert from the faith: I want to tell those Xians that reject their deconverted and/or other religion believing family members that they DIGUST me. I want to ask them how and why they could do such a thing. Did you EVER really love the PERSON or just that they used to AGREE with you? Xians are SUPPOSED to show love yet this is an ultimate rejection of love. It says that YOUR version of love is small and narrow and is totally 100% CONDITIONAL. I am severely restraining myself from calling those of you who reject people who love you every name in the book. If someone rejects Xianity is doesn't mean they reject YOU. You have no clue how much it hurts to be rejected by someone you love in this manner. I would even venture to say that it hurts worse than being cheated on (though that is subjective). What's more important? People or doctrine? EDIT: Hehehe...my 666 post... When I think about the amont of people that told my husband he should get rid of me when I decoveted, including but not limited to his then pastor, and the youth pastor... makes me wanna throw up. OTOH, for me in many ways it was the best thing, although hard at the time, because he kind of told them all to take a flying leap. Their hatered shocked him and pushed him right out the door of fundelmentalism into liberal xianity. I'm very loved though, adn I don't know why. I'm in a poly relationship and can with total confidance say the people in my life would take on any group of monting hordes armed only with a table fork for me. It does beg the questiohn though where is the honor and courage of these other so called children of the most high, bah. Whiny lil bitches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jubilant Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 What a very thought provoking topic! The only "rejection" that I had on me after I deconverted was that of a few close friends from church; at the time it was very painful though. My mother, a Christian (the gentle relaxed type), was actually thrilled that I no longer believed because she feared the path I was heading down. When we stopped celebrating Christmas, rid ourselves of television, etc. she completely freaked out and we had many disagreements but she still loved me...she was just worried sick about her grandchildren and myself. My husband and I almost divorced because I was completely "batty" trying to please God, so most of my problems with family came from when I was a Christian, not afterwards. Even my Dad never stop loving me though he is one of those "Conspiracy Theorist" type of Christians. When it comes to one spouse deconverting, I am going to put myself back into the shoes of the still faithful spouse...IMO yes, what MWC stated does happen but in other cases, what we may perceive to be "rejection" is really the result of a deeply instilled and "real" concern about hell. I was ALWAYS worried about people I loved going to hell and being punished eternally, even though they were "Christians" because I didn't feel that their walk was sincere, KWIM? It was my concern for my children going to hell because my husband wasn't as serious in his Christian walk as I was that almost ended our marriage. I NEVER stopped loving my husband, but fear was the driving force behind my actions. IMO, the belief in a literal hell has more to do with ending marriages than anything. I remember the pain and misery, the uncontrollable crying that I did because I was sick over the whole thing all the time. My husband wanted to stay married, he was still a Christian at the time (he is no longer....YIPPEEE!!!), he went along with my unrealistic way of living because he loved me to death and he still does...I feel the same about him. The eternal hell doctrine is emotional abuse that causes normally sane people to act irrationally and is, IMHO, perhaps one of the leading causes for divorce when one spouse becomes an unbeliever. It wasn't because the other spouse stopped loving, it was the fear of their devonverted loved one going to hell. When one person truly loves another, the fear for them being tortured eternally can be overwhelming to the point that it can almost drive the believer insane, I know it almost did to me. An aside...this is not scientific by any means, just an observation from the boards here at Ex-C and Ex-C only: It appears that many of the divorces that have taken place within our community (though there are exceptions) are when the men stop believing, as at least four other women that I know of; Purple, Japedo, Madame M, and myself (at least 2 years after I stopped believing) still have/had believing spouses. I hope that no one jumps on me for saying this but I think, by nature, women tend to worry more so than our male counterparts and that can cause major stress...just thinking allowed here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 You bring up a good point, Jubilant. I think fear of hell may play a major role in the issue...at least in some cases. My ex's final question to me was, "you do realize you are going to hell now, right?" I'm am becoming fairly certain that fear of hell plus childhood issues is all that is keeping my ex within the fold. As for you final paragraph, well, I would tend to disagree. I am discovering that people are people regardless of gender. Men and women really aren't all that different...at least I don't think so. I'm quite certain there are just as many ex-xian men on this site with believing wives plus women whose men dumped them completely. All in all though, this covers the marriage end of things... ...does fear of hell cover a parent rejecting a child though? Personally, I kind of consider that an unforgivable "sin" (so to speak). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I'd be tempted to tell her I'd save her a seat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 Ohhhh...I so wish I had... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 meanwhile, in one of the Square States... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 This is one thread the evangelists probably won't touch with a ten foot pole. It's just too REAL. Funny, this is the kinda of post that summons them. So ego driven. I make statements like this here all the time, just to get them here to post. What's really funny (I bet) is the look on their face once they realize that saying that is just a manipulation to get them here, like reverse psychology. It works too! Like saying "they won't have the balls to reply" that will bring them emass. There is a LOT of ego in the fundies that venture here, many think they are sooooo filled with the holy spook, that "they" alone are up to the challenge. And lots of them keep posting away in the face of total defeat "because" they think "if just ONE silent reader here returns to christ it's worth it.." That's why I get so mad with them quite often. Looks like you had a fundy take the bait, congrats! This is always a good trick when you need an xtian to chew on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I think there are a couple of bible teachings that fundies use to separate them from unbelieving family and friends. The first is the oft repeated "do not be unequally yoked". The other is the one that teaches to turn the rebellious member over to the world for the destruction of the flesh, hoping that there will be so many trials in the world they will return to the faith. I don't know what provokes actual people to follow through with the teaching. Sometimes the shunning or just the threat of shunning in some extreme denominations is enough to keep people from leaving or drive them back in, because they lose everything (community and family wise) when they leave. So the shunning serves a purpose in that it is an attempt to force the person back into the faith. That's what kept me in the community and in submission for so any decades. I would have literally been cut off from my entire social universe. At the age of 17 I had no contacts outside and I was not emotionally strong enough to deal with that. So I went through with the ritual of baptism and became a full member of the community. The knowledge that I would be cut off kept me there until I had some outside contacts and emotional strength within myself. This stuff is really real. And I love GG's thread and the visual images of Christians bursting into flames. Somehow, just dumping them in the ocean is too tame and comfortable. It doesn't give them their dues. I wouldn't do this to the good Christians; just to the bad ones who worship religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 There is a LOT of ego in the fundies that venture here, many think they are sooooo filled with the holy spook, that "they" alone are up to the challenge. Ugh...reminds me of when I thought the Spook had called me to be a "prophet" and I started going to other Bible sites to call them back to "The Truth". Looks like you had a fundy take the bait, congrats! This is always a good trick when you need an xtian to chew on. What? Where? Did I miss something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWIM Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Looks like you had a fundy take the bait, congrats! This is always a good trick when you need an xtian to chew on. What? Where? Did I miss something? No not much, post #13 page one, not much to miss though... lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 I'm going to have to be the one who disagrees on this topic. I don't think love is unconditional. If it were we could just walk up to the first person we came across and "love" them. But that doesn't happen (very often at least). The idea is that when you hook up with someone you're interested in you get to know them. To see if you are "compatible" Hey mwc, there's a difference between loving a person in the kind of way you want to be married to them and loving them in the kind of way you would defend them because they're human. I don't think the first category exist for me and pretty much everybody belongs in the second category so far as I am concerned. Then there's also the friends category, which is somewhere in between these two. This stuff is really personal and I don't think anyone can write rules that work for every situation, or even for anybody except themselves. Philosophers have tried, but what kindergarten kid consults the philosophers when chosing a "bestest friend"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 13, 2008 Author Share Posted January 13, 2008 Re: Michael & Post #13 Oh, right...right...yes, I had ignored that post. It was nothing new. In fact, I had posted that exact same scripture passage in ExConfusedChristian's thread hours before that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 ...does fear of hell cover a parent rejecting a child though? Personally, I kind of consider that an unforgivable "sin" (so to speak). GG, YES. In denominations that believe in excommunication--you know the passage in 1 cor 5 (I think)--parents will go along with it for fear of hell of whatever. This includes various brands of Mennonites and Amish and possibly all JWs. You probably just forgot about Muslim fathers and their daughters who failed to fight off a rapist. People who believe that god created intelligent sentient beings in order to roast them for eternity apparently have no problem condemning their own off-spring. You children are fortunate to have such a tender loving father with such a sensitive conscience. Hopefully, one day those kids who rejected you will come to see who they rejected. My own father has no scrupples practicing the ban on me or any of his children if his church tells him to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 Re: Michael & Post #13 Oh, right...right...yes, I had ignored that post. Sometimes I think that's the least stressful way of dealing with them. As someone mentioned, indifference is pretty powerful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted January 13, 2008 Author Share Posted January 13, 2008 I just clued in...is that an actual skeleton(s) of cojoined twins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted January 13, 2008 Share Posted January 13, 2008 From the Mutter Museum of Medical Oddities, yes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts