Fornication vs. Adultery Which is Worse and Why

Originally posted by CalJust
In my post I assumed such a common ground would perhaps be "is pride really a serious issue in the realm of human existence?"

Well I am talking about the notion that pride is the 'worst thing' possible in the human sphere which is what has been suggested.

Seeing as "pride" is also, according to my dictionary, "a feeling of self-respect and personal worth" and "satisfaction with your (or another's) achievements", I think it's rather counter-productive and fuzzy to use the word as if to mean the worst thing that humans can feel.

If it's a big broad brush you want to paint with, why not just declare "original sin" as the most immoral aspect of human nature and point out that it is ever-present in the explanation for all morally unsound actions by humans?

Just look at people's actions and decide if they meet a moral standard or not; if pride causes someone to do something immoral, so be it. Pride can also prevent or dissuade someone from doing something immoral, so it's probably best not to lump all consequences of pride in together.

Originally posted by CalJust
I did not express any opinion on the morality or otherwise of pride.

OK, then. So do you too think it is "the sin God hates the most"? Don't worry, I understand what you mean by "sin" and "God".

Originally posted by CalJust
All I said was that if you take any problem of human relationships - influding war - and trace it back to its roots, chances are pretty good that you will end up with pride.

I would say that you could also trace all manner of morally sound behaviour and trace it back to its root, cause or foundation, and the chances are pretty good that in many, many cases you will end up with pride.

Originally posted by FMF
I would say that you could also trace all manner of morally sound behaviour and trace it back to its root, cause or foundation, and the chances are pretty good that in many, many cases you will end up with pride.

Agreed.

There are clearly nuances to the word, and differences between the colloquial use (as per your dictionary definition) and the religious use, as per the RCC identification as pride being one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Wholesome pride, as in having accomplished a challenging task, is clearly not a bad thing, and can be encouraged.

So one should probably differentiate between the Biblical use of the term (e.g. pride as used in Proverbs) and the "good" kind of pride, aka "sense of achievement".

However, having said that, I still maintain that there is a "bad" kind of pride, which has as its objective the denigration of the "other".

Originally posted by CalJust
Agreed.

There are clearly nuances to the word, and differences between the colloquial use (as per your dictionary definition) and the religious use, as per the RCC identification as pride being one of the Seven Deadly Sins.

Wholesome pride, as in having accomplished a challenging task, is clearly not a bad thing, and can be encouraged.

So one shoul ...[text shortened]... that there is a "bad" kind of pride, which has as its objective the denigration of the "other".

The word "pride" doesn't really work for what you appear to be getting at. What about "arrogance", or "vainglory", or "egotism", or "sociopathy", or something else. "Pride" doesn't work unless you shear it of much of its actual and conventional meaning and then use it like its one of the aforementioned words. "Pride" is a force for good on many occasions and should not be distorted away from its subtleties of meaning.

Originally posted by FMF
. "Pride" is a force for good on many occasions and should not be distorted away from its subtleties of meaning.

Would you agree that Hitler's National Socialism and anti- Semitism was essentially based on pride? Was this a good thing?

Originally posted by CalJust
Would you agree that Hitler's National Socialism and anti- Semitism was essentially based on pride? Was this a good thing?

Do I think National Socialism was a good thing? If I disagree with you over the way the word "pride" is used, are you going to assume that my answer is "yes" and that I also think anti- Semitism is a good thing too? The word "pride" communicates what you want to communicate poorly.

Originally posted by FMF
Do I think National Socialism was a good thing? If I disagree with you over the way the word "pride" is used, are you going to assume that my answer is "yes" and that I also think anti- Semitism is a good thing too? The word "pride" communicates what you want to communicate poorly.

I was a baby then, but my mother lived through National Socialism. She said about the early years of the Nazi Reich: Hitler made us proud once more to be German.

Look at it any way you want to, NS was based on the concept that Aryans should be proud, that they were better than others.

I have already conceded that in certain instances, pride in achievement (especially in growing children) can be a good thing, but I am surprised that you cannot see, or admit, the downsides of pride and what it can lead to.

Originally posted by CalJust
I have already conceded that in certain instances, pride in achievement (especially in growing children) can be a good thing, but I am surprised that you cannot see, or admit, the downsides of pride and what it can lead to.

Of course "pride" has downsides. Don't be silly. But with "Pride" being a force for good on so many occasions, involving so many people, in so many situations, it seems rather daft to single it out and declare it to be the thing that Christians and their God figure "hate" the most.

I think the inability to empathise, for instance, is a far more clear cut issue underpinning morally unsound action. While pride is maybe just as positive as it can be negative, it's hard to see how an inability to empathise could be a force for moral good. Meanwhile you see it every time you come across Man's inhumanity to Man. For me, the supposed "sin"/immorality of "pride" is a non-starter as a coherent notion.

It would like declaring "love" is at the root of all evil, and then, when someone protests that "love" can be a force for good, you say 'Oh well I mean the "love" of bad and immoral things and the "love" of evil, not other "love"'.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
whats the difference between pride and being pleased with something you have achieved?

Healthy pride is a good thing to have and comes from knowing that what they've done has a positive effect on everyone. Common sense pride is good for the soul. It builds positive confidence.

Bad pride makes one feel superior to others and is selfish. It's the kind of pride that steps on others humanity.

God knows the difference, but many don't. We're all guilty of it to one degree or another. No one is entirely free of self pride.

Originally posted by FMF
Suzianne's claims about herself (and other Christians) [on Thread 162007 pages 3, 4 and 5] appear to be steeped in "pride" and are about a topic that ought surely to be a very important one to Christians: faith, hers and what she sees as the weak faith of "most" other Christians here. If she's committing "the sin God hates the most" here in public, ...[text shortened]... damental Christian issue, isn't it a little bit odd that no Christian has called her out for it?

I can't speak for Suzianne. I have challenged some of the things she has said here and there, but she never seems to reply back.

I'm not going to push her around. If she's not going to answer, then I hope she at least read my replies to her posts and gave them some thought.

Originally posted by beauroberts
Had an interesting Argumentative Essay come across my desk earlier this week that debated the topic of "Which is worse Fornication or Adultery?"

The paper was very well written and structured. The student made the argument that these are not the same things going under a different title. That both fornication and adultery were both a sin, but in the e ...[text shortened]... must be worse.

I was just curious what your thoughts on this particular debate were.

Beau

I agree with the student. I believe the vow to "forsake all others" refers to sexual intercouse with someone other than the marriage partner, which means no adultry. 😏

Originally posted by FMF
Suzianne's claims about herself (and other Christians) [on Thread 162007 pages 3, 4 and 5] appear to be steeped in "pride" and are about a topic that ought surely to be a very important one to Christians: faith, hers and what she sees as the weak faith of "most" other Christians here. If she's committing "the sin God hates the most" here in public, ...[text shortened]... damental Christian issue, isn't it a little bit odd that no Christian has called her out for it?

Really? Is this what you're down to? At least, one might hope this is your last try. And oh, btw, "divide and conquer" isn't really a good strategy when dealing with Christians.

The only reason I'm posting anything to you at all about this is I find it really absurd that you, of all people, are trying to paint me with the wide brush of pride. You're one of the worst here at prideful speaking. You calling me "prideful" is really the pot calling the kettle black. Give me a break.

How you think you're even qualified to speak on faith just blows my mind.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Really? Is this what you're down to? At least, one might hope this is your last try. And oh, btw, "divide and conquer" isn't really a good strategy when dealing with Christians.

The only reason I'm posting anything to you at all about this is I find it really absurd that you, of all people, are trying to paint me with the wide brush of pride. You're ...[text shortened]... . Give me a break.

How you think you're even qualified to speak on faith just blows my mind.

I think you making egocentric declarations about the strength of your own faith compared to "most Christians" in this community is more prideful and divisive than anything I have said.