 |
QuakerInfo.com Forum
A place to discuss Quakers and Quakerism
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sorianofan
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 328
|
 Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 6:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| The individual is always inserted into and qualified by the community. Individual salvation is never achieved apart from collective liberation. Otherwise it is merely an illusion, a self-indulgent preoccupation with personal sin. |
I would have to disagree. Did individual salvation not exist in societies that are generally corrupt? That is a corruption of a term.
In Aristotle's Ethics, people must me moral regardless to how immoral society as a whole is. of course, the ultimate goal is that everyone is moral, but iuf everyone is not moral that does not excuse personal initiative.
So, the illusion is that an individual is moral simply because society has created seemingly moral structures. The truth is that the individual is only moral when the individual and the individual alone takes the initiative to be moral. Therefore, individiual morality cannot possibly be the result of colelctive action. Collective action is the result of personal morality. Without personal morality and thus individual morality, colelctive action is corrupt and is immoral or amoral. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andrew
Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Wed May 25, 2005 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sorianofan wrote: |
I would have to disagree. Did individual salvation not exist in societies that are generally corrupt? That is a corruption of a term.
In Aristotle's Ethics, people must me moral regardless to how immoral society as a whole is. of course, the ultimate goal is that everyone is moral, but iuf everyone is not moral that does not excuse personal initiative.
So, the illusion is that an individual is moral simply because society has created seemingly moral structures. The truth is that the individual is only moral when the individual and the individual alone takes the initiative to be moral. Therefore, individiual morality cannot possibly be the result of colelctive action. Collective action is the result of personal morality. Without personal morality and thus individual morality, colelctive action is corrupt and is immoral or amoral. |
I wonder why heterodox opinions are always referred to as "corruptions" among the orthodox? I wonder how the orthodox would react if their own views were uniformly referred to as "corruptions"? Oh, wait, I don't have to wonder -- I can already hear the trumpets blaring in the distance....
Well, we have two different perspectives and two different interpretations based on two very different understandings. I would agree with those theologians who assert that the idea of the isolated righteous individual who maintains the purity of his personal faith and achieves his salvation while surrounded by a sea of moral evil is an illusory one, and that the salvation of the individual is entirely relative to the society in which he or she lives. To paraphrase the Bodhisattva vow, we are all equally damned and we are all equally saved or, as a Russian pietist once put in (I don't have the quote at hand at the moment) to be saved means to be in hell with the rest of humanity for the love of God. We sink or swim together.
"Salvation is not a private transaction between the individual and God, but a social reality of transformed relationships." -- Darrell Guder, "Missional Church" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sorianofan
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 5:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| wonder why heterodox opinions are always referred to as "corruptions" among the orthodox? I wonder how the orthodox would react if their own views were uniformly referred to as "corruptions"? Oh, wait, I don't have to wonder -- I can already hear the trumpets blaring in the distance.... |
heterodox, orthodoxwhat? Trumpets? You totally los tme.
| Quote: |
| Well, we have two different perspectives and two different interpretations based on two very different understandings. I would agree with those theologians who assert that the idea of the isolated righteous individual who maintains the purity of his personal faith and achieves his salvation while surrounded by a sea of moral evil is an illusory one, and that the salvation of the individual is entirely relative to the society in which he or she lives. |
That is absolutely ridiculous,you have no evidence of this. There were never ever any happy and good people who have achiever personal salvation in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Ancient Rome, the Mongol Yoke, or any empireor society that was on the most part not purely moral?
The reason you are corrupting the term "individual salvation" because by its very definition of terms, it is purely personal and it has nothing to do with society. Our society nowis in a war, can YOU not have personal salvation? That is simply illogical and therefore your interpretation cannot possibly work.
| Quote: |
To paraphrase the Bodhisattva vow, we are all equally damned and we are all equally saved or, as a Russian pietist once put in (I don't have the quote at hand at the moment) to be saved means to be in hell with the rest of humanity for the love of God. We sink or swim together.
"Salvation is not a private transaction between the individual and God, but a social reality of transformed relationships." -- Darrell Guder, "Missional Church" |
Are Bodhishattva or Gulder God? Are they all knowing for that matter?
If not, let's hold them to the standard of logical interpetation. What they say lacks logic. Many a theologeon and philosopher have concluded that people can be moral, but a moral society makes more moral people. Common sense would dictate this is so. After all, good people exist and live well in the worse conditions. In better conditions, more of these people are nurtured and vise versa. Your all or nothing approach to individual salvation makes it infinitely impossible for anyone to achieve salvation by your standards.
It is even more difficult to grasp how compelling people with violence to pay taxes to make seemingly moral social programs exist somehow fits into your guidelines of individual salvation as being 100 percent reliant on the salvation of the whole. This view is further compromised by the fact that society was and is debatably corrupted by such government institutions.
And to invoke a respected authority, the bible, it time and time again seperates the slaves to sin and the slavesto righteousness. Those who die and those who recieve eternal life. Not coincidentally, Paul very explicity says salvation is the result of personal faith. This is all reliant on individuals and has nothing to do with the actions of other individuals creating the salvation for the collective whole. After all, if one glutton existed in a society,is everyone doomed by your standards? Therefore,your terms are illogical and I cannot see, after all the concerns I have stated, can possibly be correct.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. If I thought the world was flat, I would be entitled to that. However, if insisted the world was flat to you and was unwavering with altering my defintion of the world, wouldn't I be discredited? Unless you can somehow show what you espouse is logical, I will have to respectively say that what you said cannot be true, and I am taking this issue so seriously, because I believe people need to be very careful concerning how they arrive to and hold beliefs. If we are happy with being illogical with our opinions, we have wars, hate, racism, and all other forms of illogical attitudes and beliefs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 1108
Location: Minneapolis
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sorianofan wrote: |
| You are certainly entitled to your opinion. If I thought the world was flat, I would be entitled to that. However, if insisted the world was flat to you and was unwavering with altering my defintion of the world, wouldn't I be discredited? Unless you can somehow show what you espouse is logical, I will have to respectively say that what you said cannot be true, and I am taking this issue so seriously, because I believe people need to be very careful concerning how they arrive to and hold beliefs. If we are happy with being illogical with our opinions, we have wars, hate, racism, and all other forms of illogical attitudes and beliefs. |
Sorianofan, if you hold that, in order to converse with you, everyone has to demonstrate that whatever they say is logically airtight, you are in for a great deal of frustration in relationships. No one is obligated to accept your justifications, and your logic is not as pristine as you seem to believe.
The salvation you speak of is a conception, not a specific, clearly delineated reality. It is a word applied to a vast spectrum of life experiences. This undermines the very notion that one can distinguish clearly between the saved and the unsaved.
The points Andrew made with his own words and quotes were also not precise but metaphorical, and the point I take away is, only by caring (lavishly, irrationally, with no thought for the morrow!) for the creatures and the world around us, striving to leave ego and self-interest behind, can we transform ourselves. Whether we will succeed in transforming the world is not a question we can answer, but everything meaningful in our lives comes from the effort. Our personal purity is not the point, but may be a potential result--again, relatively rather than absolutely speaking. There is no such thing as absolute purity.
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew
Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sorianofan wrote: |
| Are Bodhishattva or Gulder God? |
God? Who's that? Never heard of him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sorianofan
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Andrew wrote: |
| sorianofan wrote: |
| Are Bodhishattva or Gulder God? |
God? Who's that? Never heard of him. |
Exodus 3
14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.
That God I guess. I was merely discussing the authoritaviness of the belief given. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sorianofan
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 11:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Sorianofan, if you hold that, in order to converse with you, everyone has to demonstrate that whatever they say is logically airtight, you are in for a great deal of frustration in relationships. No one is obligated to accept your justifications, and your logic is not as pristine as you seem to believe. |
My logic is not perfect and nor is anyone who is mortal. However, one must excercise some sort of logic so that their beliefs can be assessed at an extent beyond the authority of the speaker alone. So, regardless of what you think of HOW I converse, I ask WHAT of my logic is particularly wrong for whatever reason. It may be. However, we need a logical framework for discussion, otherwise we neglect our powers of intellect.
| Quote: |
| The salvation you speak of is a conception, not a specific, clearly delineated reality. It is a word applied to a vast spectrum of life experiences. This undermines the very notion that one can distinguish clearly between the saved and the unsaved. |
Of course it is not a reality because it is infinitely indescribable and unknown. However, we can all agree one should live well with love and compassion. Isn't it self-evident that individuals can live with love and compassion when society as a whole might not? Certainly. However, youespouse the opposite. I ask why, that's all, what neccessitates an entire society to be saved so that the individual is?
| Quote: |
| The points Andrew made with his own words and quotes were also not precise but metaphorical, and the point I take away is, only by caring (lavishly, irrationally, with no thought for the morrow!) for the creatures and the world around us, striving to leave ego and self-interest behind, can we transform ourselves. Whether we will succeed in transforming the world is not a question we can answer, but everything meaningful in our lives comes from the effort. Our personal purity is not the point, but may be a potential result--again, relatively rather than absolutely speaking. There is no such thing as absolute purity. |
And there is no such thing as individual salvation being totally reliant on the whole unless the very definition of individual salvation would be the result of when society as a whole achieves a salvation. I would think something like individual salvation, the personal struggle of reorienting one's mind and the individual living and feeling a certain way is a heck a lot more personal than a societal construct controlling the salvation of all! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 1108
Location: Minneapolis
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Of course it is not a reality because it is infinitely indescribable and unknown. However, we can all agree one should live well with love and compassion. Isn't it self-evident that individuals can live with love and compassion when society as a whole might not? Certainly. However, youespouse the opposite. I ask why, that's all, what neccessitates an entire society to be saved so that the individual is? |
I espouse no such thing. I espouse we stop worrying about our personal salvation and dedicate ourselves to relieving genuine suffering in the real world. If our own salvation follows, so much the better, but let's not put the cart before the horse. Remember, this thread is about charity, and what you have *espoused* is the view that your freedom to be charitable or not is more important than whether the work actually gets done. I disagree. This is not a matter of logic but priorities. My top priority is relieving suffering of fellow creatures. Yours is allowing the opportunity for personal salvation, whatever on earth that means.
| Quote: |
| And there is no such thing as individual salvation being totally reliant on the whole unless the very definition of individual salvation would be the result of when society as a whole achieves a salvation. I would think something like individual salvation, the personal struggle of reorienting one's mind and the individual living and feeling a certain way is a heck a lot more personal than a societal construct controlling the salvation of all! |
Once again, I don't find the abstract phrase "salvation" to be very meaningful. Working to relieve suffering in the world, that I understand. If doing that work gets you saved, more power to you.
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sorianofan
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 328
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
I espouse no such thing. I espouse we stop worrying about our personal salvation and dedicate ourselves to relieving genuine suffering in the real world. If our own salvation follows, so much the better, but let's not put the cart before the horse. Remember, this thread is about charity, and what you have *espoused* is the view that your freedom to be charitable or not is more important than whether the work actually gets done. I disagree. This is not a matter of logic but priorities. My top priority is relieving suffering of fellow creatures. Yours is allowing the opportunity for personal salvation, whatever on earth that means.
Once again, I don't find the abstract phrase "salvation" to be very meaningful. Working to relieve suffering in the world, that I understand. If doing that work gets you saved, more power to you. |
I find that a very strange belief to hold, when it requires taking money people at gun point, distributing it in a dubious matter, and having massive social reprecussions. It is rather simple and I have been saying this all along. You can never have a moral society, moral person, charitable act, or charity at all unless people choose to be charitable. A charitable society and moral can never be made at the point of a gun or fear of the sword. Individuals make up society, and individuals must be moral for society to be. So if you want such a colelctive salvation (for a lackof a better term) you have the cart before the horse, simply because you think that with violence you can create morality and help people, when it is upto people to help each other and themselves. IT is all individual initiative, coercion is simply immoral. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
james
Joined: 11 Jun 2004
Posts: 1108
Location: Minneapolis
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The prophets, pretty much down the line, wore themselves out trying to bully the people of Israel into taking justice for the downtrodden seriously, on threat of death from above.
Of course, it didn't work, and thousands of years later we're still breaking the backs of the poor. So maybe you're right. We should just wait for people to start being nice on their own. They will eventually. Right?
_________________
James Riemermann
www.nontheistfriends.org
www.liberalquakers.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew
Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| sorianofan wrote: |
Exodus 3
14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you. |
Psalm 137:9
"Thrice blessed, who with just rage possessed,
and deaf to all the parents' moans,
Shall snatch thy infants from the breast,
and dash their heads against the stones."
Well! I rather like this God chap,
he seems a decent fellow,
I avert my eyes, doff my cap,
And hearken to him bellow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew
Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 1:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| james wrote: |
The prophets, pretty much down the line, wore themselves out trying to bully the people of Israel into taking justice for the downtrodden seriously, on threat of death from above.
Of course, it didn't work, and thousands of years later we're still breaking the backs of the poor. So maybe you're right. We should just wait for people to start being nice on their own. They will eventually. Right? |
Oh, James, James, James! The important point is not whether people suffer miserably from lack of adequate medical care, or whether they die slowly from lack of proper nutrition, but whether the general populace feels as if they are actually *required* to contribute to the care of others. I mean, really, what would Jebub think?
"The work of the world does not wait to be done by perfect people."
-- Satan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John
Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 481
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If society, and not the individual is responsible for one’s salvation then there is no such thing as personal morality. We need be no better than we are forced to be. If our actions, however heinous and immoral, are mutually agreed upon to be acceptable then there are no consequences, since God (if He exists at all) does not care what we do as individuals. On the other hand, under this moral system we now have an interest in forcing our neighbors to conform to standards of publicly acceptable behavior, speech and thought by any means necessary. We’re justified in attacking anyone who is judged to be non-conforming in belief, action, or speech. After all, it’s our own salvation they are threatening. It is only the societal end that matters, not the personal means by which it is achieved.
Coincidentally, we are now justified in focusing our attention away from any personal faults that we alone can voluntarily remedy. We no longer have to confront our own immorality and bad behavior. After all, it is all those other people who are in need of change and we’ll stop at nothing to make sure it happens. The end justifies the means. One happy outcome is that if we spend enough time pointing fingers at others and regulating them we’ll have none left in which to contemplate our own behavior. We can always feel morally superior to some other person whose behavior obviously needs more attention than our own. And by participating in the regulation and persecution of others we paint ourselves as upright, socially conforming, admirable people both publicly and in our own minds.
Such thinking has given us Communism, the Inquisition, and Nazi Germany, among other human tragedies. All of this is made possible by the abandonment of logic in favor of emotionalism. Rather than engaging in honest debate, the practitioners of this kind of thinking seek to devalue and discredit their opponents through personal attacks, guilt by association, and exaggerated distortion of their opponents’ positions. There is no absolute truth. Truth is a matter of consensus and public hysteria. Reality is defined by public policy.
The real tragedy is that communication with such people is impossible because logic has no value when the truth is a constantly changing public consensus driven by emotion. Without logic there can be no productive discourse.
_________________
John Price |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andrew
Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 23
|
| Posted: Thu May 26, 2005 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hark! Hark! the wolves do bark;
The righteous are coming to town:
Some with books, and some with crooks,
And some in sheepskin gown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
John
Joined: 05 Nov 2002
Posts: 481
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Fri May 27, 2005 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Res ipsa loquitur.
_________________
John Price |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
