-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
All humans are fallible
- Thread starter osgart
- Start date
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
There doesnt have to be any correlation there.
Audie
Veteran Member
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
No i am a fallible human interested in people's conception of the topic of righteousness.
Audie
Veteran Member
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
My belief is that none are righteous. I dont mind taking the risk of being wrong.
Righteousness is a tight wire act. It simply isnt possible to be right all the time. I wouldnt call faulthood sin though.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Sin is moral degeneracy. Faulthood is the inability to always be right.
A christian would say we are all born sinners.
I would say we are all born with faulthood.
I certainly see that there are plenty of sinners out there.
But i certainly see that there are people of decency out there as well.
A christian would say we are all born sinners.
I would say we are all born with faulthood.
I certainly see that there are plenty of sinners out there.
But i certainly see that there are people of decency out there as well.
Augustus
…
Collectively, humans are irredeemably flawed (violent, selfish, biased, etc). This has been the view of most societies throughout history who saw human society as tragic (doomed to repeat our failings in an endless cycle of rise and fall).
While some religions offered Divine salvation n the afterlife, some religious movements (Gnostics, Quakers, etc) started to see us as perfectible via the acquisition of knowledge. Many secular ideologies (Marxism, Secular Humanism, etc.) continued on this trend with the optimistic view of humanity where we can solve our problems as history progresses. Ideologies of temporal salvation are probably more far fetched than even Divine salvation, as while the latter has no evidence for it, and the former has plenty of evidence against it.
Thinking about individuals is somewhat meaningless, as society is the sum of its parts and human society is fallible and always will be. Ironically, our best chance at mitigating this is by building our societies around this fact. Unfortunately, the optimistic view of humanity is currently dominant and shows no sign of going away any time soon.
While some religions offered Divine salvation n the afterlife, some religious movements (Gnostics, Quakers, etc) started to see us as perfectible via the acquisition of knowledge. Many secular ideologies (Marxism, Secular Humanism, etc.) continued on this trend with the optimistic view of humanity where we can solve our problems as history progresses. Ideologies of temporal salvation are probably more far fetched than even Divine salvation, as while the latter has no evidence for it, and the former has plenty of evidence against it.
Thinking about individuals is somewhat meaningless, as society is the sum of its parts and human society is fallible and always will be. Ironically, our best chance at mitigating this is by building our societies around this fact. Unfortunately, the optimistic view of humanity is currently dominant and shows no sign of going away any time soon.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
*looks meaningfully at New Zealand*
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
I agree that society should plan against the worst human traits, and not adopt a program of human righteousness. Its only wise.
To me humans are capable of goodness, and destruction. I see both at work there.
Both forms of righteousness as cited are highly questionable as whether there are any righteous humans from the human perspective. Diogenes is still looking.
I can believe there are 'righteous' humans being those that are righteous by their sincere intent, but who, because this would be an anecdotal and subjective judgement.
dianaiad
Well-Known Member
There is a difference between being fallible and being unrighteous, I think. One cannot be infallible and make even one error.
..........and that error need not be a sin. It could be as simple as a tipo....er, typo.
But righteousness can be a continuum; almost always righteous, righteous sometimes, seldom righteous...
True, the Bible does state that if one breaks the 'law' or sins in one thing, one is guilty of breaking the whole thing. However, we can repent, get up and try again, yes? One can be forgiven, and eventually learn to choose the right thing all the time. At least, I think that's the plan....
So we can become righteous, gradually...but once one makes a mistake, one can never be called 'infallible,' can one?
The two concepts are not the same, it seems.
I think I would use the term righteous interchangeably with the way you use the term “people of decency”. It’s not possible to always be right, but there are those who make a decent effort to do so.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Certainly not infallible!
Righteousness does not seem real to me other then moral righthood. Righteousness in the sense of moral intention is attainable.
But righteousness in the sense of being without fault or error in judgment and action, i dont think that is attainable in this lifetime. We would be wise to plan for faultiness.
Imo, we are of the animal kingdom born with survival instincts, and are prone to a nature that seeks dominance, and selfishness. I know some very gentle kind people, that can get their blood boiling quite easily.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
They are highly questionable indeed in my eyes.
Perhaps there is an objective standard and humanity should go about finding it out. If morality is to do no harm, and also to do good to others when it is within our means to do so, isnt that objectively true.
Then somebody might say what is goodness and isnt that subjective. But i think its entirely within human awareness to know who, or what deserves what in a given situation.
Ellen Brown
Well-Known Member
Genesis 15
1After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
2And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus? 3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir. 4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir. 5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be. 6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.7 And he said unto him, I am the LORD that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.
An issue here is that there are so many differences in what is constituted as righteousness.