IDENTITY=Behavior There are no CAUSELESS crimes or innocent evils

by Terry 89 Replies latest watchtower bible

Terry

Everybody deserves a 2nd chance?
No.
Why do they? Where does this "right" come from?
Nature itself is most unforgiving of error.
Survival is often either/or.
The animal either takes the correct action or it is breakfast. No 2nd chances.
Humans have so much of a cushion with a technology-society that they indulge in notions far removed from reality by trying to change the core personality.
You don't change a criminal with therapy; you make them smarter at fooling you about themselves (or, fooling themselves about themselves.)
You can convince a drunk to refrain from drinking but they are still an alcoholic.
An alcoholic is not potentially violent.
But, a killer or molester is. Why give them (instead of a 2nd CHANCE) a 2nd OPPORTUNITY to destroy somebody?
All the therapy, group sessions, education and such in the world doesn't change anybody into something beyond their own nature.
Put a cannibal in a tuxedo and remove the bone from their nose and send them to college. They are still a cannibal.
When they look at you across the dinner table what do they see?
I don't know how many people know about boxing and boxers, but; a boxer well-trained to make the "correct" moves always reverts to his orignal (natural) style when he is hard-pressed. Always. You cannot train it out of him.
We all have natural moves, thoughts, appetites and dispositions. You can teach us to act differently ("act"). But, we are still acting.
sammielee24

An alcoholic is not potentially violent.
But, a killer or molester is.
By whose standards do we derive this notion? For every woman battered by an alcoholic, the answer might be a little different. Kind of like saying a crack addict or meth addict isn't potentially violent yet the numbers of violent crimes by addicts as a result of addiction is high. Humans have the ability to reason, plan and communicate their value collectively since they have evolved enough to understand that their survival as a species depends a great deal on those abilities. Doesn't make them cushy. Makes them human and means they have found a way to continue on. sammieswife.
writetoknow

If what you are stating is truth then people cannot change? If they cannot change then they do not have a free will? Or they have one, but they aren't allowed to uses it? And if they do not have free will then they cannot help the evil they do. So if we judge them it is of no purpose but to protect ourselves.
Judging them would have to be based on society rules. Perhaps the murder feels his rules are better then society so he/she has a right to take someones life. Rather then a nation going to war. Is that antisocial?
Ultimately base on you conjecture the stronger or the larger group the more power sets the standards and it has nothing to do with morality such as Hitler.
If we run your thoughts from start to end then people are either good or bad from birth so there is no need of child education or teaching them society rules. Help groups are of no value and of course we know faith is to blame for all evils.
People are going to smoke or not, people that give up drinking and drugs were just doing them for a joke it really wasn't an addiction that they broke.
False teachings would have no effect on people. Advertising is a waste of money because it has no influance in peoples lives.
Must be why Christ did not seperate sins into human degrees. My sin is better then your sin because according to human standards I didn't do what you did. Or perhaps some of us are just born more special then other people.
Ex Jehovahs Witnesses became a part of organization/stay with it after being born into it because every issues was determined for them so they had a right to judge a God given right because it was from God. They liked that special feeling of being better then everyone else on earth. They liked the safety of judging others - how sweet and how simple.
When people live in fear they are judgmental of others the one motivate they have in life is to protect themselves from any envolment with humans they judge not to like. The don't want to be hurt again. If one of our children would come home and say they broke the laws base on the crap in this thread- do you want to see how fast a partent would try to correct the matter. If an employee gave this line of bull you'ed laugh.
People do know better just like all of us do including criminals they just want you to believe that don't. And yes they can change I have personally know many that now have much different lives. So because the majority doesn't changes lets protect ourselves by saying none of them do.
Its like looking at trees your whole life and then reasoning they aren't trees. Let nature itself teach you. Who of you can say you don't know someone in life that change?
Wow wow thank God we have people that have inspired us to love and believe in the good of human race. Thank God people have given their lives to allow us time to change.
And above all thank God for his amazing grace.
Terry

An alcoholic is not potentially violent.
But, a killer or molester is.
By whose standards do we derive this notion? For every woman battered by an alcoholic, the answer might be a little different. Kind of like saying a crack addict or meth addict isn't potentially violent yet the numbers of violent crimes by addicts as a result of addiction is high. Humans have the ability to reason, plan and communicate their value collectively since they have evolved enough to understand that their survival as a species depends a great deal on those abilities. Doesn't make them cushy. Makes them human and means they have found a way to continue on. sammieswife.
I should have put "potentially" in quotation marks to mean: there is nothing potential about alcholism. A killer/molester is not potential, but, actual.
The alcoholic is a danger in a different way. Not all alcoholics beat their wives or drive the wrong way in traffic. Contrast this with killers who cannot be killers UNLESS they kill and molesters who cannot be molesters UNLESS they molest.
The distinction blurred the point I was making.
writetoknow

Not many years ago people held the view that it was bad "blood" if you came from bad "blood" then that the reason you do "bad".
Pretty simple that way no one has to think about it at all. If my parents stole then the children will steal.
Dad beats mom son beats his wife.
Dad sexually abuse children the children will abuse their children.
But if one person breaks the "cruse" and does not do as bad "blood" does to their kids it must mean people can changes.
In fact wasn't that similar to what happen in the book of Ezekiel were the people were mad at God saying the sons are paying the price for the fathers sins. Ezekiel said I believe that no more would people say those words if a man was a hundred years old and he sinned he alone would be held accountable for his actions.
Sound like an old story with a new twist. But if you are without chastening, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.
Many of children that are adults that were abuse are great parents so people can learn from other peoples sins.
Many children that have been abuse continue the cruse and can't seem to pull out of it. So it depends on what side you want to be on the negative side or the hopeful positive side? Some hope that it will be at another age they will learn to stop the abuse some believe it can't stop after a certain age?
God say this is what some of you where... I don't think He meant baby baptism but that another whole matter.
Terry

If what you are stating is truth then people cannot change? If they cannot change then they do not have a free will?
Change? Free Will?
Behavior can be changed. Identity cannot. An alcoholic can choose not to drink. The craving is still there and always remains. Having the will to change that drinking behavior exists in about 11% of alcoholics. The stats are awfully bad for free will.
Free will would consist of what? What would the obstacle to free will look like? A person who is homosexual could simply choose to be heterosexual. A pederast would simply choose to prefer older females. Right? Wrong!
I am arguing our nature. You are arguing social "fairness" and getting exercised at the UN fair aspect of nature.
Life is not fair. Nature is not fair. Some people are born with twisted spines. Some are born blind. It is unfair. Some are born with twisted character and moral blindness. It is unfair.
Dealing with what IS gets us closer to a safe world that lamenting what is NOT.
Terry

Ultimately base on you conjecture the stronger or the larger group the more power sets the standards and it has nothing to do with morality such as Hitler
If you live all by yourself you can pretty much do as you please. But, in a social setting you are forced (by others) to not interfere with the group. The larger and stronger the group the more enforcement will exist.
No social group among man or animal is without enforcement of social norms which are merely practical behaviors which preserve harmony and allow efficiency. As the groups become less and less rational and more and more autocratic the individual vanishes as an entity. Only slaves and slavemasters are left.
Terry

If we run your thoughts from start to end then people are either good or bad from birth so there is no need of child education or teaching them society rules. Help groups are of no value and of course we know faith is to blame for all evils.
There is no such entity as "good" or "bad".
These are values attached to behaviors as interpreted by social groups.
What helps is "good" and what hurts is "bad".
Nobody is born behaving socially. So your observation doesn't apply to anything I said or intended to say.
Terry

That I would agree with, but everyone can't be that honest or seperate the two. I don't think JW's had it right, but they did not have it all wrong on some of the basic. I believe the creation was subjected to fultility as stated in Romans and is a waiting be set free by Christ and the Son's of God. Governments are part of the fultility allow to keep things in check.
A furniture maker who builds chairs that collapse the first time somebody sits in them is at fault and cannot blame the chair. God is the maker (according to faith) of man and man collapsed the very first time a load of moral responsiblity was placed on him.
The "futility" is in attributing perfection to either man or God.
For God to have a "plan" to set man "free" is just silly and inefficient.
Why?
God needed to make his chair correctly the first time and not come up with an elaborate scenario to rescue the chair from faulty workmanship.
If God has foreknowledge he was irresponsible in subjecting humankind to "futility" just to pull of a hero's rescue.
This is what is known among psychiatrists as the Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome. It consists of causing severe distress in one's children of a life-threatening nature and then heroically rescuing them from death.
It is a vile mental illness.
What kind of God is this?
Terry

False teachings would have no effect on people. Advertising is a waste of money because it has no influance in peoples lives.
Your example actually helps prove my point!
We are drawn to and attracted by the things which appeal to us. We go to a buffet and select only the food that appeals to us. The food, you'd say, "affects us". But, we respond to our own desire and are not changed by the food.
Advertising introduces us to the opportunity to experience something which appeals to an aspect of our own nature or desire. Advertising cannot create within us a desire we do not already have. We merely respond once our natural appetite is stimulated.
How many women are stimulated (by advertising) to by WWF Smackdown videos or Girls Gone Wild? It appeals to men.
How many men are stimulated (by advertising) to freshen their private area with scented douche?
It just doesn't work that way, my friend.

IDENTITY=Behavior There are no CAUSELESS crimes or innocent evils

Share this