-
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!
Forgiveness
- Thread starter Fool
- Start date
Not for the antagonist. Created karma must be paid for. Can't unring the bell. Forgiving someone may pay off a small part of karmic debt for the victim. Nothing I do can wipe out your karmic debt, but I can ameliorate mine.
Cacotopia
Let's go full Trottle
I don't think Karma works. It's a justice system with the probability of chance. And encourages lazy justice.
Person A wrongs person B. Person B waits for Karma to affect person A, which could possibly ever happen.
Misfortune affects person C, explanation of misfortune was that person C was person A, and Karma is finally taking affect. If person C was a good person why is person C being punished for the actions of person A. Person C accepts Karma, and accepts misfortune like they deserved it somehow, when they had no personal hand in it as person C. Person C also might not seek to improve their own situation because person C now feels like they deserved punishment for another life.
How does that make sense to anyone.
Person A wrongs person B. Person B waits for Karma to affect person A, which could possibly ever happen.
Misfortune affects person C, explanation of misfortune was that person C was person A, and Karma is finally taking affect. If person C was a good person why is person C being punished for the actions of person A. Person C accepts Karma, and accepts misfortune like they deserved it somehow, when they had no personal hand in it as person C. Person C also might not seek to improve their own situation because person C now feels like they deserved punishment for another life.
How does that make sense to anyone.
for every action there is an opposite but equal reaction.
the scenario you gave is about retribution by person b, karma is about action. it isn't about personalities. it isn't about forgiveness either. karma is like the law it isn't a respecter of persons. it is a respecter of actions.
karma
Karma - Wikipedia
the third law of thermodynamics
or if you prefer
There is always an action and reaction; an advance and a retreat; a rising and a sinking; manifested in all of the airs and phenomena of the Universe. Suns, worlds, men, animals, plants, minerals, forces, energy, mind and matter, yes, even Spirit, manifests this Principle. The Principle manifests in the creation and destruction of worlds; in the rise and fall of nations; in the life history of all things; and finally in the mental states of Man.
Cacotopia
Let's go full Trottle
That does not carry over to the human social interactions, plenty of crime occurs with zero repercussions.
How would you equate one action to an entirely different action. Two people get married, wife cheats on husband with neighbor, files divorce, and wins alimony from husband, and takes custody of kids to spite him. Also makes husband leave house he bought and still has to pay for. If in this hypothetical arc of events the only fault of the husband was that he was at work all the time trying to provide for his family. And the sole reason the wife cheated was that she got bored.
What is the supposed equal and opposite reaction to these events?
Cacotopia
Let's go full Trottle
It doesn't work man, you are taking a law in physics and assuming it spreads to other areas of human existence, when Newton's laws of motion had nothing to do with psychology in the first place.
In other words, you took a definition and added your own flair to it, but are now saying they meant what you added as well.
Dishonesty.
In other words, you took a definition and added your own flair to it, but are now saying they meant what you added as well.
Dishonesty.
sorry but that should have been newton's law of motion
1. the husband made the job primary and the relationship secondary, or some other place holder 2. the wife focused more on her need for attention than she did the relationship.
goes to show that a piece of paper does not a relationship make; except on paper. obviously the relationship wasn't the more important thing in either person's life. works the same in any friendship. the wife's passive-aggressive behavior didn't attempt to save what was best for both, neither did the husband's drive for being the sole financial responsible party.
both the rich and poor have friends; so obviously wealth or prestige aren't necessary for a positive relationship.
1. the husband made the job primary and the relationship secondary, or some other place holder 2. the wife focused more on her need for attention than she did the relationship.
goes to show that a piece of paper does not a relationship make; except on paper. obviously the relationship wasn't the more important thing in either person's life. works the same in any friendship. the wife's passive-aggressive behavior didn't attempt to save what was best for both, neither did the husband's drive for being the sole financial responsible party.
both the rich and poor have friends; so obviously wealth or prestige aren't necessary for a positive relationship.
the law isn't about people. people are just objects like any other object. humans are limited to laws of physics and science. the law is universal as regards actions. doesn't matter if they're human, or non-human. your misconception was that reactions should be immediately observable. they don't have to be.
case in point: deterministic chaos
furthermore, this thread was about forgiveness and how that action has a reaction for either the victim, or the perpetrator of the negative action.
Last edited:
Forgiveness IMO is for you. You've got better things to do than waste any time harboring resentment.
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
You haven't been able to understand what I've been saying about this very thing- but this question may help a bit.
Why do you suppose Jesus asks the Father that others be forgiven, considering that the Father judges no one?
John 5:21-23
For, as the Father doth raise the dead, and doth make alive, so also the Son doth make alive whom he willeth; for neither doth the Father judge any one, but all the judgment He hath given to the Son, that all may honour the Son according as they honour the Father; he who is not honouring the Son, doth not honour the Father who sent him.
Why do you suppose Jesus asks the Father that others be forgiven, considering that the Father judges no one?
John 5:21-23
For, as the Father doth raise the dead, and doth make alive, so also the Son doth make alive whom he willeth; for neither doth the Father judge any one, but all the judgment He hath given to the Son, that all may honour the Son according as they honour the Father; he who is not honouring the Son, doth not honour the Father who sent him.
which son are you speaking of?
for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.
12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
You. The Son of Man.
the spirit isn't born of flesh, the spirit quickeneth/enlivens the flesh/form is formed by it and not the reverse.
you got your cart before the horse.
the name, exodus 3:14, tells us that i am of that I AM. The I AM that is in me is greater than me. The All that is in me is greater than the part of the all that i am.
our god is a consuming fire. i am prometheus
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
These are topics worthy of their own discussions. Let's not veer off.
1) If the Father judges no one, why is it appropriate (for you) to ask that He forgive?
And so that you may understand further:
2) Why is ignorance (of others) a prerequisite appropriate for this request?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
yeah well...
I wouldn't want to be the Roman soldier that drove the nails
or the soldier that dealt the whip
or the Pharisee that pointed the finger
or anyone in the crowd yelling.....give us Barabbas!
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you
I suppose there could be some leniency
if the Son is willing to turn the other cheek......
but if I were the Father .....
I would be inclined to SLAP that other cheek
(choosing a proper target of course)
love judges the actions and not the person. god is not a respecter of persons.
because of the lack of love; which leads to the light of understanding
Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
1) True. So then why ask of the Father on another's behalf? To what end?
2) True. So then why does the One of complete understanding relegate judgement to you, being of limited understanding?
forgive us our ignorance as we forgive those who are ignorant of us.
when one realized the Law of Love and acts from it, that is the ONE.
love is the illusion of two bodies being of ONE realization.
lord have mercy, lord have love