This is not my premise. The definition of a sociopath adds descriptions, one of which cites their incapacity for love. The Bible says God is love. Hence, a person that has no capacity for love does not have God.
This does not mean God does not care about them.
This does not mean God does not care about them.
Emotional love is not the kind of love your quoting.
"Love thine enemies" doesn't mean "join your enemies' camp, get on side and then love them", nor does it mean "con them, or yourself into agreement, so you can feel good about them". It means "love thine enemies" (love those you FEEL hatred for, or whom you fear). Ie. Non emotional and unbiased love. Emotional love is involuntary and is biased towards one's own advantage.
4 Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
Charity in this form of Greek is love. It is a little deeper than what you say. It is a mindset, shown to all.
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
Charity in this form of Greek is love. It is a little deeper than what you say. It is a mindset, shown to all.
@just me I think your position on sociopaths is fair. If God is love then sociopaths are people without God. However, I think that there are many sociopaths who are religious. Sociopaths will see themselves in whichever light suits them and their purpose, and if being religious fits into their concept of themselves then they will be very religious and use that as a tool to get what they want. Charity to them is not what it is to you and I. It is not about love and kindness, because those are concepts they cannot understand.
In my case, somebody who might be described as a sociopath is the reason that I started questioning my religious beliefs, because with them "turning the other cheek" is a very dangerous thing to do.
In my case, somebody who might be described as a sociopath is the reason that I started questioning my religious beliefs, because with them "turning the other cheek" is a very dangerous thing to do.
Last edited:
I don't really think it's fair to say that sociopaths are people without god because they possess deficits that most do not... It is wise to be wary, but not to judge.
I don't care if she spelled it correctly. This is immediately what I thought.
@just me You're basically a nice guy, but basically too stupid to be putting opinions requiring any sort of interpretation out there. Your reflections on the beauty of nature and of day to day life are awesome, but peddling the gospel of your own superiority is both dumb and diabolically proud.
@ruji Genius
@acd probably the least bigoted person on the forum and epically teasable+smart.
@Sriracha the most bs free person on the forum and smart.
(Found it easier to do that than to have to deal with anymore bullshit)
@ruji Genius
@acd probably the least bigoted person on the forum and epically teasable+smart.
@Sriracha the most bs free person on the forum and smart.
(Found it easier to do that than to have to deal with anymore bullshit)
Last edited:
I believe you may be the first to call me stupid. I'm in my sixties, so that must mean something. I believe you may have misinterpreted me. I attribute the things you might like about me to the Spirit of God. Your take on me reveals a lot about yourself. I actually think you quoted the scriptures first.
If you really wish to call me too stupid and dumb, I no longer have need of your words. You have become quite full of yourself lately. I liked the old Flavus much better. Good luck with your interpretation in the present and future. Christianity is a third person religion. It is about what He did. Take care.
I've noticed @acd has a nice habit of popping up in threads and balancing things in a subtle way when things get a bit fraught between posters, looks might she might be needed now.
I wonder if this is all an elaborate attempt to "show" Flavus how unfair his position on immigration is. However, I don't know that he's actually supported anti-immigration positions, just an idea about the evil of Islam, which is not really equivalent.
I dunno. I think strangely.
Anyway, as individuals, I don't have a strong opinion on them. Sure, they might try to manipulate me, but as long as I maintain clear boundaries, then....well, what're they going to do about it? It's not like I haven't dealt with shit like that. I'd be more worried about their physical power honestly.
As a group...I mean, obviously they're potentially bad for society, since not all of them are going to respond sufficiently to disciplining, or be disciplined enough, and doing a genetic screening to see who needs to be disciplined is costly. I do wonder, though if there's some benefit to having them around? I was going to say something intelligence-related, but the stats I've read don't bear that out...ah well. Perhaps less intelligence per se and more a mindset that lets them solve problems more effectively, feeling less influenced by popular opinion? No idea.
If this doesn't bear out, finding out the genetic causes so as to "cure" sperm or eggs with genes reflecting the tendencies might help. I'm on the fence as to how ethical that is though.
I dunno. I think strangely.
Anyway, as individuals, I don't have a strong opinion on them. Sure, they might try to manipulate me, but as long as I maintain clear boundaries, then....well, what're they going to do about it? It's not like I haven't dealt with shit like that. I'd be more worried about their physical power honestly.
As a group...I mean, obviously they're potentially bad for society, since not all of them are going to respond sufficiently to disciplining, or be disciplined enough, and doing a genetic screening to see who needs to be disciplined is costly. I do wonder, though if there's some benefit to having them around? I was going to say something intelligence-related, but the stats I've read don't bear that out...ah well. Perhaps less intelligence per se and more a mindset that lets them solve problems more effectively, feeling less influenced by popular opinion? No idea.
If this doesn't bear out, finding out the genetic causes so as to "cure" sperm or eggs with genes reflecting the tendencies might help. I'm on the fence as to how ethical that is though.
I'm peeved that someone would say that a blind or deaf person is defacto "without God". Sociopaths are blind/deaf when it comes to most emotions. From one Christian to another it is not worse to pronounce someone stupid, than to pronounce them irrevocably damned. The former has a solution: thinking more.
I'm sick of biases against what is essentially a disability. I've always been expected to do the moral dirty work, and rubbished for trying to be something other than how I was born. "Caring people" and "Christian people" are the worst in trying to push one into not even trying. I'm going to keep on trying to be a caring person and a Christian person, despite the hypocrisy of this, my getting the shits with condemning bias. The only reason I don't just hit refresh without posting is because sometimes a person has to care enough about themselves to say step off; and a Christian has to hope enough to say no one is beyond salvation.
Differences Between a Psychopath vs Sociopath
Society has conspired with Hollywood to put two seemingly-sexy psychology terms into our collective consciousness — psychopath and sociopath. Psychopath and sociopath are pop psychology terms for what psychiatry calls an antisocial personality disorder. These two terms are not really well-defined in the psychology research literature, and sifisymptoms of conduct disorder) in a childor young teen, they’re at greater risk for antisocial personality disorder.
Summary
Psychopathy and sociopathy are different cultural labels applied to the diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder. Up to 3 percent of the population may qualify for a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder. This disorder is more common among males and mostly seen in people with an alcohol or substance abuse problem, or in forensic settings such as prisons. Psychopaths tend to be more manipulative, can be seen by others as more charming, lead a semblance of a normal life, and minimize risk in criminal activities. Sociopaths tend to be more erratic, rage-prone, and unable to lead as much of a normal life. When sociopaths engage in criminal activity, they tend to do so in a reckless manner without regard to consequences.
Editing
Give up, can't edit properly . Grr.
Last edited:
I'm glad you posted that. They have distinct differences and I think people often get the two confused.