I think "God" is a problem for humans, because God, if he exists, is beyond our capacity to verify. And because there are so many ways in which God has been understood, it only leads to endless speculations.
Those that think that God has given them special priviledge or rights can act arrogantly or presumptively toward others, who differ in their understandings. And those that think that God has revealed all that needs to be known in scriptures, are doubly dangerous.
Some have thought that "God" was a projection of our wishes, others think that "God" is a fulfillment of our wishes. These views are underwritten by psychological science.
Anthropologists understand myth as a cultural value in describing "God" and these myths bring meaning to life in various cultural contexts. But, is meaning important when meaning skews the real world of values?
Sociologists understand that communities of faith are ways that humans find significance, value and belonging and sometimes, even their very identity. But, the basis of our identity is multi-dimensional. We are identified by our families of origin, our religion, our country, our friends, our social connections, our jobs, our personalities, and what we value most.
Each of these social sciences are not interested in whether there is really a "real God" who exists, but the practical reasons, and implications of such belief.
If one believes that family is the most basic foundation of identity, an individual's life is formed by the values that are held within the family. But, American society has dissolved family connections through many avenues of pursuing the American Dream. And the pursuit of the American Dream has led to countless divorce, child neglect, blended families, domestic abuse, and a de-valueing of family, as a whole.
The child so formed in such an environment of disorder and chaos, leaves the child with little to identify with, and a depth of loss that cannot be filled easily with finding other solutions. These need a healthy dose of therapy and help from others in society.
These children can experience osterizicism and criticism from the "Chrstian world" where things are "nice and neat". The attitude can be: "What's wrong with "That" family", or " We don't want our children to be influenced by "them". The child so labelled suffers doubly from isolation and a sense that everything is their fault.
So, "God" is useful to promote moral outrage at those who need what society needs to give. The "Christian Ideal" is seldom the real truth of the matter, no matter how devout or devoted. And Christians should be honest about this. Otherwise, there is no hope for anyone.
"God" is useless, as far as I am concerned for real solutions in the real world. Christians need to stop running to be "christian" and attempt to be human and learn to be a real person in a real world with real needs.
I used to believe in "God" as anesthesia to my pain. And I used "God" as a replacement for self-acceptance and coming to terms with reality. If God accepted me, then I could have permission to accept myself. But, self-acceptance is taking responsibility for one's own personal choices and decisions and not looking to communities, whether of faith or not, to validate one's choice, and commitments.
Reality is painful because there are many problems in the world and no theology, scripture, doctrine, church, or christian will "fix it", because the world is broken beyond repair. And our only hope is recognizing that and being there for another, while attempting to rectify what we personally think will help most.
Showing posts with label personal identity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label personal identity. Show all posts
Friday, April 9, 2010
Monday, November 30, 2009
Self Interest, Altruism, and American Freedom
American freedom is provided for many "convictions" of consciences, as we believe in the "rule of law". The religious term conscience according to "Tradition", while the Scientists are seeking a way to maintain "peace" in a diverse and global world. Can altruism be "taught" or "should it be taught"?
I believe that tradition can be formative, but does not have to be. Conscience dwells in man as an innate nature. It is only when there has been a conditioning that has diminished or humiliated another where conscience can be deadened. A deadened conscience can be a reactive response to a lack of acknowledgement. Humans want to be affirmed, as they are social beings, and not just physical beings.
Nazism arose as a reaction to the humiliation of the German nation, after WWI. according to some historians. Hitler's rise to power was the "need" of the German population to have a sense of identity and pride in thier nation. Nationalism was borne on the heels of revenge.
I believe because we are self=identifying individuals, that we must become aware of what our identifiers are and seek negotiation with those that have different identifiying factors. This is in the interest of both parties. I do not believe that self interest is wrong or bad, it just is, and it should be, because without a "self" there is no way of protecting against another taking advantage of the other.
So, recognizing our self=interest, being honest about our values and commitments, and then proceeding to make negotiations when it regards one's public life, is the epitome of freedom.
Altruism, on the other hand, is a scientific undertaking, these days. Scientists want to provide peace and are seeking to understand and/or train people into altruistic goals or purposes. To do this, many think that religion is useful. People that identify with religion usually have poor self development or self esteem or they have been taught that it is selfish to seek self interest. These are pawns in the hands of the unscrupulous. This is when America's laws should provide protection from such"preying hands".
If anyone tells you that they are seeking to "turn your eyes outward", instead of "inward" (as Luther termed "sin"), then run and take an interest in yourself. Otherwise, you will become someone else's training ground.....
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Transitions to New Realties
Change and transition are always a part of life. But, when transitions happen in one's life before the development to integrate them, it causes harm and great pain. I am speaking in personal terms of child development and the social realities of the family.
Since we are physical and historical beings, we are bound to develop within real historical realities of family, which is influenced by the culture it entertains.
In American society, where culture is diverse, there are many kinds or types of families. And these families are free to choice how they will raise their children, as long as it does not interfere with society's laws.
Society protects individual's, including children, from abuse. There are child protection agencies and social services that seek to intervene when family fails. And domestic violence groups protect women from abusive partners.
Psychologists and anthropologists have understood that we are social animals. We need social groups to meet human needs, as we develop personal identities. Experience in groups are what make for identification.
In fact, in studying Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, it was found that soldiers form a more formiable bonds to their fellow soldiers, than previous family bonds. This reality brings much heart-ache and re-adjustment to the military family, when the solier attempts to transition back into civilian life.
Adoptive and foster parents have discovered and sometime been forewarned that some children develop "attachment disorders" because of their chaotic or abusive families.
Teachers are aware of how much the parents involvment or uninvolvment affects the child's success in school. And problems at home distract student learning.
These realities are challenges to all of us, so that society will remain stable. And children can develop to fully functioning human beings.
Although family affects how the child develops in his "self-identity", i.e. who he is, what he stands for, and what he believes in and why, professors are bound by duty to expose their students to the wider world of knowledge, where children grapple with ideas and ideals that form and shape the world. These are no small or insignificant goals.
Our free society allows for free exchange of ideas and ideals. We should value more the "intellectual journey" of young adults. These are the future of America and the world. We should support those that attempt to form them in their thinking and not circumvent or suppress free information.
The Church has been challenged in this regard , in its understanding of faith, tradition and science. Today's reality of Darwinian evolution is no less daunting. And some deem this as an attack on faith altogether.
America was founded on the understanding that The Church is not the epitome, but man is. Man is created by his creator with certain inaleinable rights. These rights must be protected and sacralized by the Church. Otherwise, we disregard the person for Tradition. And Tradition is what needs changing, if it inhibits personal and societal development.
Our government forms policy that creates our political and social realities. Govenment must be protected from undue pressure from special interests groups. America or any free government needs to make policy on fact, not fiction, fantasy or fanaticism.
I think the family is a good start.
Since we are physical and historical beings, we are bound to develop within real historical realities of family, which is influenced by the culture it entertains.
In American society, where culture is diverse, there are many kinds or types of families. And these families are free to choice how they will raise their children, as long as it does not interfere with society's laws.
Society protects individual's, including children, from abuse. There are child protection agencies and social services that seek to intervene when family fails. And domestic violence groups protect women from abusive partners.
Psychologists and anthropologists have understood that we are social animals. We need social groups to meet human needs, as we develop personal identities. Experience in groups are what make for identification.
In fact, in studying Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, it was found that soldiers form a more formiable bonds to their fellow soldiers, than previous family bonds. This reality brings much heart-ache and re-adjustment to the military family, when the solier attempts to transition back into civilian life.
Adoptive and foster parents have discovered and sometime been forewarned that some children develop "attachment disorders" because of their chaotic or abusive families.
Teachers are aware of how much the parents involvment or uninvolvment affects the child's success in school. And problems at home distract student learning.
These realities are challenges to all of us, so that society will remain stable. And children can develop to fully functioning human beings.
Although family affects how the child develops in his "self-identity", i.e. who he is, what he stands for, and what he believes in and why, professors are bound by duty to expose their students to the wider world of knowledge, where children grapple with ideas and ideals that form and shape the world. These are no small or insignificant goals.
Our free society allows for free exchange of ideas and ideals. We should value more the "intellectual journey" of young adults. These are the future of America and the world. We should support those that attempt to form them in their thinking and not circumvent or suppress free information.
The Church has been challenged in this regard , in its understanding of faith, tradition and science. Today's reality of Darwinian evolution is no less daunting. And some deem this as an attack on faith altogether.
America was founded on the understanding that The Church is not the epitome, but man is. Man is created by his creator with certain inaleinable rights. These rights must be protected and sacralized by the Church. Otherwise, we disregard the person for Tradition. And Tradition is what needs changing, if it inhibits personal and societal development.
Our government forms policy that creates our political and social realities. Govenment must be protected from undue pressure from special interests groups. America or any free government needs to make policy on fact, not fiction, fantasy or fanaticism.
I think the family is a good start.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
What I Am Reading...
I have been reading and am committed to finish some books within the week.
One is on "Ten Philosophical Mistakes" by Mortimer J. Adler, I have just finished. I have learned that there is a difference in intellect and sense perception. This difference distinguishes the human from the animal kingdom.
I have also learned that potentialities are what distinguishes the differences in behavior from the animal and human. And I believe that liberty is the only means of attaining and developing potential.
I also am thinking through "natural state", "the state of nature" and "social contract", and the development of "constitutional government" as the "ideal" of the real historical understanding of "context".
Another book I am beginning, " The Discovery of Freedom" (Man's Struggle Against Authority), by, Rose Wilder Lane and "A Plea for Liberty", a mixture of writers writing on the topic of liberty.
I plan on furthering my understanding and education in what has interested me.
I find the topic of liberty always pertinent to man's "identity", but especially in today's climate of maintaining a "social agenda", which politicizes the "moral", at the costs of other necessary truths. I must resolve what I believe to be the undermining of what makes the human different from the animal. And that is the diversity and uniqueness that is only granted under a "constitutional republic" ( or is it a "liberal democracy"?).
One is on "Ten Philosophical Mistakes" by Mortimer J. Adler, I have just finished. I have learned that there is a difference in intellect and sense perception. This difference distinguishes the human from the animal kingdom.
I have also learned that potentialities are what distinguishes the differences in behavior from the animal and human. And I believe that liberty is the only means of attaining and developing potential.
I also am thinking through "natural state", "the state of nature" and "social contract", and the development of "constitutional government" as the "ideal" of the real historical understanding of "context".
Another book I am beginning, " The Discovery of Freedom" (Man's Struggle Against Authority), by, Rose Wilder Lane and "A Plea for Liberty", a mixture of writers writing on the topic of liberty.
I plan on furthering my understanding and education in what has interested me.
I find the topic of liberty always pertinent to man's "identity", but especially in today's climate of maintaining a "social agenda", which politicizes the "moral", at the costs of other necessary truths. I must resolve what I believe to be the undermining of what makes the human different from the animal. And that is the diversity and uniqueness that is only granted under a "constitutional republic" ( or is it a "liberal democracy"?).
Friday, July 31, 2009
Let's Get Ugly
Ugly is only understood by some standard. And standards are defined by whatever "standard" the culture agrees upon. This is a cultural "norm". And cultural norms help to maintain social order. Social order is good for society's functioning, so that people can live in "peace".
Our nation of laws provide the standards that represent good leadership, as leaders should obey the law. And the law protects us from "invasions" of different kinds; invasions of privacy (identity), invasions of property (trespassing), for example. We are a people that believe in "equality under law". Therefore, we "trust" that others will respect the law and not trespass, but acknowledge and accept the social contract.
Some, though use the law to their advantage. These are ugly people. They lack character because they do invade, but in a "legal way". I do not respect, nor should anyone else respect such leadership.
Those who do evil should be held accountable by any means available, as they should learn that these invasions are never to be overlooked, but learned from. Power does not affirm others in lawlessness.
But, just as those who use the law for their advantage, those who revolutionize also do. These are the ones who have made history in challenging the status quo. The revolutionary understand that there is a higher principle that must be maintained, otherwise others will suffer under invasions of the ugly. These are the rights of individual liberties that protect invasions of personhood.
A gentler and kinder way, is the way of reform. Reformers work within the system to make it change, without upsetting the whole social order.
One must decide whether the ugly is worth fighting, forsaking, or furthering in a different way. The choice and decision must be a personal commitment of value and vision, as one will pay a cost, whichever way one chooses to change evil into good.
Our nation of laws provide the standards that represent good leadership, as leaders should obey the law. And the law protects us from "invasions" of different kinds; invasions of privacy (identity), invasions of property (trespassing), for example. We are a people that believe in "equality under law". Therefore, we "trust" that others will respect the law and not trespass, but acknowledge and accept the social contract.
Some, though use the law to their advantage. These are ugly people. They lack character because they do invade, but in a "legal way". I do not respect, nor should anyone else respect such leadership.
Those who do evil should be held accountable by any means available, as they should learn that these invasions are never to be overlooked, but learned from. Power does not affirm others in lawlessness.
But, just as those who use the law for their advantage, those who revolutionize also do. These are the ones who have made history in challenging the status quo. The revolutionary understand that there is a higher principle that must be maintained, otherwise others will suffer under invasions of the ugly. These are the rights of individual liberties that protect invasions of personhood.
A gentler and kinder way, is the way of reform. Reformers work within the system to make it change, without upsetting the whole social order.
One must decide whether the ugly is worth fighting, forsaking, or furthering in a different way. The choice and decision must be a personal commitment of value and vision, as one will pay a cost, whichever way one chooses to change evil into good.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Borderlines or Border Lines?
Border lines define boundaries. And boundaries define "self", others, social groups, and nations. Boundaries are maintained by the "laws" or "rules" . These rules or laws define what is "approved" or "disapproved". These laws and rules maintain the identity and values of a certain "culture".
In American culture, where the individual is "free", the group identifiers are as many as there are types of people. This leaves room for the individual to find a place where personal values are upheld and the individual can give back in the place where the culture is condoning of those personal values.
Border lines are therefore, important as they define identity and formulate what is of ultimate value. But, borderlines are a different matter. Borderlines are defined by their personality disorder. Borderlines fear abandonment, reject before they are rejected, use self destructive and mutilating behavior to affirm their self hatred and low self-esteem. They flucuate their ideation and disgust of others, which hinders intimacy, and have tendencies toward implusivity. These people feel "bad" and empty. They lack a definitive identity, as they have lacked the nurturance that develops identity, so trust is of uptmost importance for these.
So, how do social structures that define themselves by their rules and laws "help" define the borderline, when the borderline themselves, feel as if they don't fit, or fear abandonment and rejection without any reasonable reason?
It is imperative that those in the public spheres of influence are informed about the generalities of mental illness, so that they do not exasparate the problem within these individuals. Individuals with certain mental illnesses need medication, counselling, and "help", not condemnation and criticism.
I find that the Church sometimes does nothing to help these individuals, as fundmentalists do not adhere to psychological science. Fundamentalists deny that any reality is real, except the spiritual. These live in denial and hinder others from embracing reality and taking responsibility for their life.
It is imperative in this day and age, that we take advantage of what modern science has given us. We should not live in the Dark Ages when we had no options available to us. And we should never ostericize, criticize, or condemn what we don't understand.
In American culture, where the individual is "free", the group identifiers are as many as there are types of people. This leaves room for the individual to find a place where personal values are upheld and the individual can give back in the place where the culture is condoning of those personal values.
Border lines are therefore, important as they define identity and formulate what is of ultimate value. But, borderlines are a different matter. Borderlines are defined by their personality disorder. Borderlines fear abandonment, reject before they are rejected, use self destructive and mutilating behavior to affirm their self hatred and low self-esteem. They flucuate their ideation and disgust of others, which hinders intimacy, and have tendencies toward implusivity. These people feel "bad" and empty. They lack a definitive identity, as they have lacked the nurturance that develops identity, so trust is of uptmost importance for these.
So, how do social structures that define themselves by their rules and laws "help" define the borderline, when the borderline themselves, feel as if they don't fit, or fear abandonment and rejection without any reasonable reason?
It is imperative that those in the public spheres of influence are informed about the generalities of mental illness, so that they do not exasparate the problem within these individuals. Individuals with certain mental illnesses need medication, counselling, and "help", not condemnation and criticism.
I find that the Church sometimes does nothing to help these individuals, as fundmentalists do not adhere to psychological science. Fundamentalists deny that any reality is real, except the spiritual. These live in denial and hinder others from embracing reality and taking responsibility for their life.
It is imperative in this day and age, that we take advantage of what modern science has given us. We should not live in the Dark Ages when we had no options available to us. And we should never ostericize, criticize, or condemn what we don't understand.
Sunday, April 5, 2009
Various Thoughts on Identity
I have had numerous thoughts today on identity from different sources of "inspiration". The Theme of them all is unity and diversity.
Our American identity is formed around our freedoms to be different. The government for the most part, is to protect those freedoms so that we live in peace. While this is what is provided under the Constitution through our leaders pledge to uphold the values of the individual, lately, those individual values have been challenged. Just this morning I read an editorial about our government stepping in to settle disputes between conflicting parties. So, in effect, the management and leadership of a privately owned business cannot settle its disputes with employees through union leadership without government interference. This is a cumbersome way to protect the interests of "WHO"? The Common Good, as in socialism? The government's interest in a paternalistic determination of free persons salaries?
The other news story was about the African American that killed 4 police officiers and how the "black community" is suggesting that the crime happened because of the oppression of the "black population". It is the issue of minority rights. My son said to me that the terms "nigger", "chicano", or "wussie" was used not to label a certain ethnic group, but to describe certain attitudinal and lifestyle behaviors. Those who have attitudes that "life owes them something".
These labels, and the government's determination to intervene have to do with a "rights attitude". One has the rights attitude of market economics, while the other has the rights attitude from "bitter experiences".
Today's sermon was another thought sifter. Since it is Palm Sunday, it was on the Cross. The pastor preached on solidarity of identity with Jesus in our experience. Usually those in America, and the West in general, have not identified in this way as there life is not challenged in the ways in which Jesus' life was, as we are, for the most part, not persecuted, to the point of death. Nor is our government set up to disregard the "rule of law".
While sitting there, I was struggling with the image that this made about "god". God demands, takes, and undermines identity. We are to identified with Christ to the point of death and this is called discipleship. The pastor called it identity Theft.
Identity Theft means that someone has cheated, stollen, and killed someone of their identity. And this is what Christian faith is about? God is not the "giver", "gifter", and "blesser" of life and the "Giver of personal identity", but a demanding, jealous and deterministic God. And all of that is validated by Scripture and theology.
The pastor said that this was to be every Christian's identity, as we should all "be like Christ". That is the "ideal", but this is utter nonsense, when it comes to the real world. Otherwise, we would be telling those who suffer under various "evils" to accept our "lot in life" as "god's will" and "design". When others do wrong, then we are to serve them and allow evil to prevail (believeing in an afterlife, where God will meet out just desserts. But, this also meanswe must believe in a personal God and the afterlife, which not all believe.). This view is absurd and not workable unless all Christians are to be followers of whatever "leadership" is around.
The pastor called for submission. While submission is a positive trait for trustworthy leadership, it is co-dependent for untrustworthy leadership. This is the "call" for discernment, as "otherwise", this is where abused wives are told to submit to their husbands, as Scriptures demand. There is no simple choice, when it comes to living life in this world.
I find that personal identity must be strong enough to resist such tactics of subversion, while allowing another difference. The aforementioned killing of the police officiers was an identification of "victimhood". The government's determination of another's lifestyle is undermining to personal value and choice, which undermines diversity for unity. We can never seek unity first, without affirming diversity without discrimnating against someone. Affirming diversity first will lead to understanding difference, while also affirming commonality of human identification factors. This is an important way to approach life in this world today, where diversity has been used as a means of demand, without leading to understanding of difference....
Our American identity is formed around our freedoms to be different. The government for the most part, is to protect those freedoms so that we live in peace. While this is what is provided under the Constitution through our leaders pledge to uphold the values of the individual, lately, those individual values have been challenged. Just this morning I read an editorial about our government stepping in to settle disputes between conflicting parties. So, in effect, the management and leadership of a privately owned business cannot settle its disputes with employees through union leadership without government interference. This is a cumbersome way to protect the interests of "WHO"? The Common Good, as in socialism? The government's interest in a paternalistic determination of free persons salaries?
The other news story was about the African American that killed 4 police officiers and how the "black community" is suggesting that the crime happened because of the oppression of the "black population". It is the issue of minority rights. My son said to me that the terms "nigger", "chicano", or "wussie" was used not to label a certain ethnic group, but to describe certain attitudinal and lifestyle behaviors. Those who have attitudes that "life owes them something".
These labels, and the government's determination to intervene have to do with a "rights attitude". One has the rights attitude of market economics, while the other has the rights attitude from "bitter experiences".
Today's sermon was another thought sifter. Since it is Palm Sunday, it was on the Cross. The pastor preached on solidarity of identity with Jesus in our experience. Usually those in America, and the West in general, have not identified in this way as there life is not challenged in the ways in which Jesus' life was, as we are, for the most part, not persecuted, to the point of death. Nor is our government set up to disregard the "rule of law".
While sitting there, I was struggling with the image that this made about "god". God demands, takes, and undermines identity. We are to identified with Christ to the point of death and this is called discipleship. The pastor called it identity Theft.
Identity Theft means that someone has cheated, stollen, and killed someone of their identity. And this is what Christian faith is about? God is not the "giver", "gifter", and "blesser" of life and the "Giver of personal identity", but a demanding, jealous and deterministic God. And all of that is validated by Scripture and theology.
The pastor said that this was to be every Christian's identity, as we should all "be like Christ". That is the "ideal", but this is utter nonsense, when it comes to the real world. Otherwise, we would be telling those who suffer under various "evils" to accept our "lot in life" as "god's will" and "design". When others do wrong, then we are to serve them and allow evil to prevail (believeing in an afterlife, where God will meet out just desserts. But, this also meanswe must believe in a personal God and the afterlife, which not all believe.). This view is absurd and not workable unless all Christians are to be followers of whatever "leadership" is around.
The pastor called for submission. While submission is a positive trait for trustworthy leadership, it is co-dependent for untrustworthy leadership. This is the "call" for discernment, as "otherwise", this is where abused wives are told to submit to their husbands, as Scriptures demand. There is no simple choice, when it comes to living life in this world.
I find that personal identity must be strong enough to resist such tactics of subversion, while allowing another difference. The aforementioned killing of the police officiers was an identification of "victimhood". The government's determination of another's lifestyle is undermining to personal value and choice, which undermines diversity for unity. We can never seek unity first, without affirming diversity without discrimnating against someone. Affirming diversity first will lead to understanding difference, while also affirming commonality of human identification factors. This is an important way to approach life in this world today, where diversity has been used as a means of demand, without leading to understanding of difference....
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Scripture's Impact on the Individual and Personal Identity in American Society
Scripture has been useful to impact the individual's "self-concept" as a special creation of God. A life filled with purpose and a future hope of rewards fill the heart of every evangelical believer. But, these understandings are a limited view of what it means to be "human".
These believers for the most part have "experienced" God's grace and seen it's manifestation within "community", where the experience is re-enforced with "belonging". Believers who believe that God inhabits these communities range the gambit from fundamentalists who believe in the literal understanding of Scripture, to the charismatic, who "finds" meaning not just within
Scripture, but also in ongoing "revelations" of the "Spirit". There are many colors in between these distinctives, which are "translated" into community through the understandings of Scripture.
Paul Tillich understood the continual "division" of the "Protestant Principle". But, the divisions have not always been along the lines of Scripture but also understandings of "god", and culture. The Jewish religion broke down in understanding of sectarians (Essenes), resurrection of the dead (Pharisees) or no resurrection (Sadduccees). Religion defines itself in numerous ways.
Individuals within traditions come to understand themselves as identified with these interpretive understandings. Meaning and significance come along with a sense of belonging and value.
But, these "messages" of significance, meaning and belonging are not just understood within religious traditions, but also other social structures, such as family, vocation and ethnicity. Individuals do not have the fullest understanding of the "human" without these social contexts. As apart from social contexts, the individual ceases to "belong" and in a sense, ceases "to be". We are known and we know, as we experience communal ways of understanding, as well as embracing the "otherness of the other".
American identity, in this sense, is a unique one, as it allows individuality in understanding and places significance of the individual's importance to society as a whole. Apart from the individual's unique understandings, giftings, and inclusion, society suffers from a lack of innovation, or creativity, which hinders the colorfulness of the "whole of society" and limits what it means to be "human".
These believers for the most part have "experienced" God's grace and seen it's manifestation within "community", where the experience is re-enforced with "belonging". Believers who believe that God inhabits these communities range the gambit from fundamentalists who believe in the literal understanding of Scripture, to the charismatic, who "finds" meaning not just within
Scripture, but also in ongoing "revelations" of the "Spirit". There are many colors in between these distinctives, which are "translated" into community through the understandings of Scripture.
Paul Tillich understood the continual "division" of the "Protestant Principle". But, the divisions have not always been along the lines of Scripture but also understandings of "god", and culture. The Jewish religion broke down in understanding of sectarians (Essenes), resurrection of the dead (Pharisees) or no resurrection (Sadduccees). Religion defines itself in numerous ways.
Individuals within traditions come to understand themselves as identified with these interpretive understandings. Meaning and significance come along with a sense of belonging and value.
But, these "messages" of significance, meaning and belonging are not just understood within religious traditions, but also other social structures, such as family, vocation and ethnicity. Individuals do not have the fullest understanding of the "human" without these social contexts. As apart from social contexts, the individual ceases to "belong" and in a sense, ceases "to be". We are known and we know, as we experience communal ways of understanding, as well as embracing the "otherness of the other".
American identity, in this sense, is a unique one, as it allows individuality in understanding and places significance of the individual's importance to society as a whole. Apart from the individual's unique understandings, giftings, and inclusion, society suffers from a lack of innovation, or creativity, which hinders the colorfulness of the "whole of society" and limits what it means to be "human".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
