How Do Believers Creat Such Human Harm?

Op Ed art. For Herald Leader,
Optional titles: version 10, Oct 19

Is God on Our Side
or
Righteousness or Champ Grace?;
Or - "
How we use faith to put ourselves on God’s side.

One of the great challenges for any faith today is finding a way to stay in creative dialogue with the world so that each can be enriched by the other. Religion should be an engine of civil discourse. But where are the practitioners of openness in our polarized society? Why are these voices absent? Are they just in hiding, shy, fearful, paralyzed or too righteous in their own belief systems?

One cause for this absence may be religious persuasion. We are trained in our churches to believe that our faith has God’s favor. We have the "true faith," the right way, while others do not. We feel secure in faith-led back and white thinking. Never do we judge others so easily, cheerfully and comfortably as when we do it from religious convicting. Is this to make God into a tribal god, favoring only "out side" while being jealous of other "gods."

Christians have long been taught that they are the rightful successors to the Jewish covenant of God’s chosen. Christians are now the chosen ones. The Hebrew bible is called that "Old Testament." Christian scriptures are called the "New Testament." Jews were labeled and despised long ago as "Christ killers." Many have taught and believed they lost God’s favor and are doomed.

Religious conviction seems to train the mind in "either-or", "we versus them", right or wrong, black or white thinking. Polarized thinking, "my way or the highway." become the eyeglasses through which one views the world. A trickle down blindness effect occurs. We become addicted to quickly judging in order to stay comfortable with our world views. Talk radio and cable news often seems drunk with polarizing.

Actually, Jesus of Nazareth gave us one remedy in a few words: "Why do you notice the splinter in your neighbor’s eye when you do not see the plank in your own?" In other words, only when we are aware of ourselves can we avoid this most common human flaw. .

The crux of the situation seems to be this. If faith is a gift, should we judge others by our individual gift of faith? To judge another’s faith as not favored is to use an undeserved gift as a hammer against another. Religious faith can become a self-righteousness fueled by a cheap grace.

From early times, one finds the sad history of terrible abuse of those who did not agree to the "right teaching," or orthodoxy of those Christians in power. Orthodoxy quickly became an idolatry of the "only way" to this mystery we call God.

Currently, religious tribalism appears everywhere in many forms. For example, radical Muslims are simply doing to each other what historically some Christians have done to each other for many centuries. We cannot say religious tribalism is not found among us. It is a terrible betrayal of faith, but it is not new. Christians taught Muslims well in the Middle Ages by conducting nine Crusaders aimed to take back the Holy Land from Muslim rule.

Any church that becomes a have for "us verus them" thinking is not only misreading the bible but teaching a false, fearful and harmful faith. Such faith, wrongly conceived, spurs us find enemies everywhere and poisons civil dialogue. Some media feed on this polarizing. It is their meat and potatoes. Some church pulpits are even used for political polarizing. Yet civil discourse and the very existence of real democracy both here and abroad may depend upon ordinary people waking up to these differences in the way faith and language are used.

We could stop polarizing by learning to listen. Here is a new but challenging way to begin that dialogue. Instead of starting the conversation with your point of view, start by saying something you appreciate about the other’s viewpoint. " I like your ideas or position on ....." but then admit you do not always agree with everyone who supports your views. "But I do not agree with all those who support this view as I take this position and have these reasons".... This is a significant challenge if one is accustomed to their position and the "only God given one". But this kind of start offers real promise of authentic dialogue. .

   
If we are all Gods children and faith is a free gift, then we should honor each other’s different paths. To love my neighbor as myself means that I must honor my neighbor’s spiritual journey. For the common good and to prevent polarizing, we should strive k to understand the diversity of our Wisdom traditions.

How We Humans Easily Misuse Faith

Op Ed art. For Herald Leader, "Kentucky Voices"

Optional titles: version 10, Oct 19

Is God on Our Side
or

Righteousness or Champ Grace?;

or "On the psychology of faith";

Or - "

How we use faith to put ourselves on God’s side.


   One of the great challenges for any faith today is finding a way to stay in creative dialogue with the world so that each can be enriched by the other. Religion should be the engine of civil discourse. But where are the practitioners of openness in our polarized society? Why are these voices absent? Are they just in hiding, shy, fearful, paralyzed or too righteous in their own belief systems?

    One cause for this absence may be religious persuasion. We are trained in our churches to believe that our faith has God’s favor. We have the "true faith," the right way, while others do not. We feel secure in faith led either/or, back and white thinking. Never do we judge others so easily, cheerfully and comfortably as when we do it from religious convicting. Is this to make God into a tribal god, favoring only "out side" and being jealous of other "gods."

    Christians have long been taught that they are the successors to the Jewish covenant of God’s chosen. They are now the chosen ones. The Hebrew bible is called that "Old Testament," Christian scriptures are called the "New Testament." Jews were labeled and despised long ago as "Christ killers." Many have taught and believed they lost God’s favor and are doomed.

    Religious conviction seems to train the mind in "either-or", "we versus them", right or wrong, black or white thinking. Polarized thinking, "my way or the highway." become the eyeglasses through which one views the world. A trickle down blindness effect occurs. We become addicted to quickly judging in order to stay comfortable with our world views. Talk radio and cable news often seems drunk with polarizing.

    Actually, Jesus of Nazareth gave us one remedy in a few words: "Why do you notice the splinter in your neighbor’s eye when you do not see the plank in your own?" In other words, only when we are aware of ourselves can we avoid this most common human flaw. .

    The crux of the situation seems to be this. If faith is a gift, should we judge others by our individual gift of faith? To judge another’s faith as not favored is to use an undeserved gift as a hammer against another.

    Religious faith can become a self-righteousness fueled by a cheap grace.
From early Christian times, one finds the sad history of terrible abuse of those who did not agree to the "right teaching," or orthodoxy of those in power. Orthodoxy quickly became an idolatry of the "only way" to this mystery we call God.

     Currently, religious tribalism appears everywhere in many forms. For example, radical Muslims are simply doing to each other what historically some Christians have done to each other for many centuries. It is a terrible betrayal of faith, but it is not new. Christians taught Muslims well in the Middle Ages by conducting nine Crusaders aimed to take back the Holy Land from Muslim rule.

    Any church that becomes a have for "us verus them" thinking is not only misreading the bible, but teaching a false, fearful and harmful faith. Such faith, wrongly conceived, helps us find enemies everywhere and poisons civil dialogue. Some media feed on this polarizing. It is their meat and potatoes. Some church pulpits are used for political polarizing. But civil discourse and the very existence of real democracy both here and abroad may depend upon ordinary people waking up to these differences in the way faith and language are used.

    Individuals and groups can stop polarizing by learning to listen. Here is a new but challenging way to begin that dialogue. Instead of starting the conversation with your point of view, start by saying something you appreciate about the other’s viewpoint. " I like your ideas or position on ....." but then admit you do not always agree with everyone who supports your views. "But I do not agree with all those who support this view as I take this position and have these reasons".... This is a significant challenge if one is accustomed to their position and the "only God given one". But this kind of start offers real promise of authentic dialogue. .

    If we are all Gods children and faith is a gift, not something deserved or earned, then we should honor each other’s different paths. Each spiritual journey is unique. And beautiful. For the common good and to prevent polarizing, we should seek to understand the diversity of our Wisdom traditions. Our very first view of "the holy" comes not in concepts but in wonder and awe in the presence of mystery.

Comment and feedback invited.  

"Uncommong Knowledge" Any Rand and Wall Stret

Ayn Rand and Wall Street

Re: Uncommon Knowledge with Pter Robinson. This link:
http://www.hoover.org/multimedia/uncommon-knowledge

IF you wanta quick overview of how the public has been cooned
by the Fed, C0ongress, the banks and wall street:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjwa1GgZGPQ  

This YouTube vkideo is the bset overview I have found.

The heirs of Any Rang’s objetivist libertarianism are, I suggest: 1) the deregulation of the union of Wall Street with international gandking; 2) the collapse and recession of 2998; 2) the outsourcing of conscience of Wall Street investors, 4) t he betrayal of the Middle Class of this country ; and the paralysis of the government via radical politics and influence of lobbyists in Congress.

The hidden idolatry in free market capitalism means that its proponents cannot and will not see the damage to the common welfare. What is surprising is that so many thinning parapet and even thinking Christians are still so enthralled with her ideas. Free market capitalism becomes a fetish, actually closed to other views. Her views have become a cult, unwilling to be criticised.

1) Rand’s assumption about human nature do not match the scientific nor the Christian understanding of human nature. Rand simply decades as "invalid" concepts whch oppose her philosophy. An invalid concept invalidates every proposition or process of thought in which it is used as a cognitive assertion.

http://www.aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/

2) Rand herself refused any dialogue wiht ohter philospphers. Her presuemd Ojectiveism was in fact paranoid of other views or any critique. We had a Libertarians participatn an active member of our Spiritual Growth Network group, meeting weekly for 20 years. He was always hostile to other views, opnely critical, unaware of his deep unresolveld prevalejnt anger toward his own father which he projected everywhere. Once I challenged him to conside tha the GI bill for our vterans after WW@ was what constructed our middle classl Basically there was no middle class until then. College and university education was only for the elite untkil then. He finally agreed, but there was no change. I find libertarians "drunk" with theri own idea.s

3) A good case can be mad ethat proponens of Objectivism, hasve gone viral withy subjective defense. See ling: Ayn kto and: Has Objectivism Gone Subjective?

4) Do your own research: pllaces to start:
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/critobj.html

5) Free market capitalism can find no justification int eh Hebrew Bible or the New testament. A case can be made and should be considered that the untrammeled power of money is destroying our country, that the unlimited power of money now underway in Washington, has been furled by this uncritical "objetivist" philosophy of Rand. It continues passionate for deregulation, for banks too big to fail, and a society governed by the financial elite. What is ironic is that the Republican candidate for President criticizes Obama ‘s failures while espousing the precise aims which produced the most recent crisis.

6). A thorough and objective analysis of "objetivism" will, I believe, reveal that "Ayn Rand was a truculent, domineering cult-leader, whose Objetivist pseudo-philosophy attempts to ensnare adolescents with heroic fiction about righteous capitalists. "

See link:
http://world.std.com/~mhuben/critobj.html

7) Do your own research and return to dialogue with Paschal Baute

However, my faith influences my philosophy.  Either in the Hebrew bible o its encapsuloation in Jesus as the Wisdom of God, I can find no room for the philosopoy of Ayn Rand. It sim0ly doe snot fit and cannot be made to fit.  This is why I contineu to be surprised that thinking Christians can still espouse this teaching.  Even on the philosophical level, no mainstreat philosopher today regards her philosphy as worthy of interest or critique.  She repeatedly refused dialogue.

Please excuse my un-caught typos. I amvisually handiapped and my usual editor is out of town.

Paschal, Oct 7, 2012

Recommended Radng: The Betrayal of the American Dream; an analysis of what has happend by two independent journalisst

Also Irrational Exuberance;
and the book by Rabbi Jonathan Sachs
The Great Partnership: Science and Religion. .