Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ah I see, then you and PassTheChocolate are indeed talking about different definitions of forgiveness.
PassTheChoco is looking at forgiveness from a wholly encompassing point of view (with included pardons and clean slates). While you are viewing it from the "removing vindictiveness and unhealthy victimhood" point of view.
i am looking at it from what promotes healing, health, and well being, and is grounded in medically and psychologically sound practices supported by mental health professionals (such as counseling, therapy, psychology, and addiction recovery programs).
it sounds like PassChoco rejects those sound practices out of hand which is for me a red flag for "extremist"
sort of like someone saying "the medical profession is a bunch of quacks." their credibility takes a huge dive.
i am looking at it from what promotes healing, health, and well being, and is grounded in medically and psychologically sound practices supported by mental health professionals (such as counseling, therapy, psychology, and addiction recovery programs).
it sounds like PassChoco rejects those sound practices out of hand which is for me a red flag for "extremist"
sort of like someone saying "the medical profession is a bunch of quacks." their credibility takes a huge dive.
Well, when the words are vague, it can really hurt a struggling individual. But PassTheChoco seems to have said that one can(not "has to") move on from being victimized and hurt and "unhealthy" without "forgiving." And in that sense, views the culture of "compulsory forgiveness" in order to heal as quackery.
I doubt that PassTheChoco supports vindictiveness or unhealthy forms of victimhood-self-identification.
I am in agreement with both of you, and I think if there were better words to distinguish nuanced concepts of forgiveness, then you'd both be in agreement too.
Well, when the words are vague, it can really hurt a struggling individual. But PassTheChoco seems to have said that one can(not "has to") move on from being victimized and hurt and "unhealthy" without "forgiving." And in that sense, views the culture of "compulsory forgiveness" in order to heal as quackery.
I doubt that PassTheChoco supports vindictiveness or unhealthy forms of victimhood-self-identification.
I am in agreement with both of you, and I think if there were better words to distinguish nuanced concepts of forgiveness, then you'd both be in agreement too.
It is not forced it is voluntary so in that sense it is not compulsory.
However if a person desires to move forward in their healing then yes it is a voluntary step that is required. Look at the thread title. And how the OP relates forgiveness to anger and hatred.
Healing includes releasing the anger and hatred. Some of Choc's posts seem to favor the anger and hatred. That is not healing. That is an obstacle to healing. Anger and hatred are part of the symptoms of disease and injury that we seek to address and release and heal.
Thetefore hanging on to hatred and anger are hanging on to the injury which prevents healing. We are in effect continuing to inflict injury on ourselves by marinating in corrosive battery acid.
It's like someone with smokers cough and respiratory problems being told they would improve by giving up cigarettes. They dont want to give up smoking to improve those problems. What I hear in the posts is people don't want to give up their hate and anger and so they get upset when they are pointed towards the benefits and role of forgiveness in improved health and well being.
Is a person who continues to smoke healthy? No. Is a person who hangs on to hate and anger healthy? No. Health and healing are moving through the hate and anger. And recognizing they too are a sickness to heal.
Hate and anger are a problem to address and heal. That is not demonizing them any more than it is demonizing cigarettes to say they hurt you. It is recognizing what hurts you and harms you. So a person can voluntarily choose health healing peace and we'll being.
Happy joyous and free. You don't have those if you hang on to hate and anger.
I think you can forget and move on without forgiving.
I'd only forgive if they had remorse, took responsibility, took the steps to fix it, and made sure they never did it again.
Otherwise, what's the point besides some pithy platitude you can make a stupid meme out of?
Sort of I think. It is not that one ever completely forgets..the pain, terror and mistrust may always remain, but I believe we are able to let go and let life continue. Sometime, and hopefully not too often, the past experiences arise and grab us by the collar and shake the snot outta of us.
It is these times when we really have to fight to retain our sanity and stop ourselves from withdrawing from life because we start telling ourselves we are (fill in with assorted self-deprecating words) and we begin to wonder what others think of us because something happened to us...or who knows the truth of what happened..or how stupid were we to let that happen...OR....
Eventually we come to terms that evil stupid people do evil stupid things and generally at random.
And every once in a while we get satisfaction when we read about how fate/karma comes around and our perpetrator gets what they have done 10 times over...that for me personally tells me all I need to know...
It is not forced it is voluntary so in that sense it is not compulsory.
However if a person desires to move forward in their healing then yes it is a voluntary step that is required. Look at the thread title. And how the OP relates forgiveness to anger and hatred.
Healing includes releasing the anger and hatred. Some of Choc's posts seem to favor the anger and hatred. That is not healing. That is an obstacle to healing. Anger and hatred are part of the symptoms of disease and injury that we seek to address and release and heal.
Thetefore hanging on to hatred and anger are hanging on to the injury which prevents healing. We are in effect continuing to inflict injury on ourselves by marinating in corrosive battery acid.
It's like someone with smokers cough and respiratory problems being told they would improve by giving up cigarettes. They dont want to give up smoking to improve those problems. What I hear in the posts is people don't want to give up their hate and anger and so they get upset when they are pointed towards the benefits and role of forgiveness in improved health and well being.
Is a person who continues to smoke healthy? No. Is a person who hangs on to hate and anger healthy? No. Health and healing are moving through the hate and anger. And recognizing they too are a sickness to heal.
Hate and anger are a problem to address and heal. That is not demonizing them any more than it is demonizing cigarettes to say they hurt you. It is recognizing what hurts you and harms you. So a person can voluntarily choose health healing peace and we'll being.
Happy joyous and free. You don't have those if you hang on to hate and anger.
"voluntary step that is required" is another nuanced phrase that seems contradictory or incorrect to some people. To be required most often means to not be "voluntary." But again, the definitions are vague. Perhaps by "voluntary", you mean something more like "autonomous" rather than "optional" or "discretionary."
PassTheChoco is saying that some crimes and criminals can only bring more hurt and unhealthiness when you try to "forgive" them (whether to accept the crime or the criminal person or whatever else is meant).
They think there are "positive" and "healthy" forms of anger and hatred, and maybe there are (given that we and some other animals evolved with them). You can't fight someone with full and raging motivation if you don't have anger and hatred (although raging motivation can sometimes be blinding, in some contexts it can be empowering).
If you "accept" the anger and hatred, then they are no longer "disease" nor "injury."
This is one of the big concerns when it comes to labeling diseases, for example, homosexuality was thought of as a mental disorder previously, while misogyny was not at some points. Once you "accept it" and don't feel hurt by it, it's hard to label it "something that needs healing."
Let's take hatred of Hitler or Nazis for example. Hitler CAN be forgiven, and then one might feel better than Hitler or no longer influenced by Hitler's attacks. But some might view that as excusing the attacks and an unhealthy way to cope almost like Stockholm-Syndrom. After all, it can't "really" be forgiveness unless you completely excuse all the crimes. Rather then, one can keep positive anger as the fuel to motivate a positive historical memorial. But if you forgive Hitler, then you shouldn't be saying anything mean about Hitler or rehashing his crimes.
to put it simply, mental health professionals have more credibility than you do.
Well, that was predictable. Except you're arguing an absolute that is proven false every day. I'm not. I never said people should never forgive. I'm saying it's not necessary. And some mental health professionals actually agree.
And they have a formal education. That's it. They don't all come from some special pool of objectivity. They're just like anyone else, products of their own deeply held beliefs that even a Harvard Education may not change. Faith-based counseling is actually a thing. It is an oxymoron. But it's allowed. So, like faith, forgiveness is a belief. It's a feels thing. It's not science. Studies might show that it helps this or that, but there is no science to suggest that it is necessary for recovery.
Last edited by PassTheChocolate; 04-05-2018 at 09:20 AM..
Some of Choc's posts seem to favor the anger and hatred. That is not healing. That is an obstacle to healing. Anger and hatred are part of the symptoms of disease and injury that we seek to address and release and heal.
I don't favor anger or hatred. I accept them as being normal human responses. They are not disease.
Quote:
Thetefore hanging on to hatred and anger are hanging on to the injury which prevents healing. We are in effect continuing to inflict injury on ourselves by marinating in corrosive battery acid.
We don't "hang on" to anger and hatred. We feel them and we feel them for a reason. Those reasons are what determines healthy or unhealthy. If you hate black people = unhealthy. If you hate those who hate black people = perfectly normal.
Quote:
It's like someone with smokers cough and respiratory problems being told they would improve by giving up cigarettes. They dont want to give up smoking to improve those problems. What I hear in the posts is people don't want to give up their hate and anger and so they get upset when they are pointed towards the benefits and role of forgiveness in improved health and well being.
That's a false equivalency and not even close to anything I said. You hear that because your belief system is being threatened by it. Mischaracterizing my position is an example of the demonizing that I'm addressing. It's dishonest and you should stop.
"voluntary step that is required" is another nuanced phrase that seems contradictory or incorrect to some people. To be required most often means to not be "voluntary." But again, the definitions are vague. Perhaps by "voluntary", you mean something more like "autonomous" rather than "optional" or "discretionary."
PassTheChoco is saying that some crimes and criminals can only bring more hurt and unhealthiness when you try to "forgive" them (whether to accept the crime or the criminal person or whatever else is meant).
They think there are "positive" and "healthy" forms of anger and hatred, and maybe there are (given that we and some other animals evolved with them). You can't fight someone with full and raging motivation if you don't have anger and hatred (although raging motivation can sometimes be blinding, in some contexts it can be empowering).
If you "accept" the anger and hatred, then they are no longer "disease" nor "injury."
This is one of the big concerns when it comes to labeling diseases, for example, homosexuality was thought of as a mental disorder previously, while misogyny was not at some points. Once you "accept it" and don't feel hurt by it, it's hard to label it "something that needs healing."
Let's take hatred of Hitler or Nazis for example. Hitler CAN be forgiven, and then one might feel better than Hitler or no longer influenced by Hitler's attacks. But some might view that as excusing the attacks and an unhealthy way to cope almost like Stockholm-Syndrom. After all, it can't "really" be forgiveness unless you completely excuse all the crimes. Rather then, one can keep positive anger as the fuel to motivate a positive historical memorial. But if you forgive Hitler, then you shouldn't be saying anything mean about Hitler or rehashing his crimes.
It must be some other type of "forgiveness" that they are talking about. Most often, they don't seek to stop the law from coming down fully, but still, think they are "forgiving" because they are trying to put their own vindictiveness aside, not necessarily granting a full pardon.
Am I understanding this right, Tzaphkiel?
you can't stop the law. One's personal opinion about forgiveness shouldn't effect the safety of people around them.
Since you OP mentioned people of faith there may be another stumbling block for them that may not allow them to forgive. My mom is of the fundamentalist variety and I've seen other posters of similar sects mention this. They believe without repentance there can be no forgiveness. My mom brought up a woman who had forgiven the man who abused her daughter and it resulted in the girl's suicide. I said I was astounded that she could do that because I'm pretty sure I could not. My mom actually called that woman stupid because the man was unrepentant and repentance was REQUIRED for forgiveness. Then she went into scriptures and all that while I sat there with my mouth open. They honestly believe God will destroy/torture the unrepentant so it's hard to see them feeling any different toward someone who has not begged for forgiveness.
I'm not a believer but it's reasonable to me. There are two people involved in this process. It's as if the victim is forcing the offender to be a part of the gig. "You're doing to take this forgiveness whether you like/know it or not!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
