The hypocrisy of judging

When I watch television or read the news, I am so often saddened to see just what a judgmental people we have become. Sure, we have always judged one another, but as of late we seem to be seriously more vicious in our attacks.

We judge one another on a wide range of areas, race, gender, orientation, religion, financial status, education, clothing, speech, body-language, etc...

I take a lot of heat from my Christian friends (yes, I still have some, the ones that know its not personal). I am often accused of being anti-Christian, I am not. I tend to ride them tough since they are the dominant religious group in the United States. Riding Muslims hard would work if I lived in Saudi Arabia or some place that is an Islamic state, but in today's America the point would be completely missed by most.

Here is an example of one aspect of where Christianity is failing I think:


I will be the first to admit that I have some serious issues where it comes to the Westboro Baptist Church (frightening that the church's homepage is the "GodHatesFags.com" site). Surprisingly, my biggest issue with them is not their strong dislike of homosexuals or their completely tasteless tactics of protesting, but the use of their children in their protests. Hate is something that has to be taught, Denis Leary put it so well:


What chance do these children have to be anything more than their parents? I do not even want to think about the pain and anguish that one of their children will go through if they grow up and find themselves to be LGBTQ.

What does the Bible say about judging and the law

---

One of the most famous quotes from the Christian Bible on this subject is the King James Version of Matthew 7:1; "Judge not, that ye be not judged", but look at what follows it.

7 Do not judge and criticize and condemn others, so that you may not be judged and criticized and condemned yourselves.

2 For just as you judge and criticize and condemn others, you will be judged and criticized and condemned, and in accordance with the measure you [use to] deal out to others, it will be dealt out again to you.

3 Why do you stare from without at the very small particle that is in your brother’s eye but do not become aware of and consider the beam of timber that is in your own eye?

4 Or how can you say to your brother, Let me get the tiny particle out of your eye, when there is the beam of timber in your own eye?

5 You hypocrite, first get the beam of timber out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the tiny particle out of your brother’s eye.

Matthew 7:1-5 (AMP)
My experience is that this is proven true by the realization that what we dislike and hate in others, hence judge as wrong, are nothing but the reflection of what we dislike and hate within ourselves. No, I am not accusing the members of the Westboro Baptist Church of being homosexual (gay men everywhere are breathing a large sigh of relief).

Some say that we dislike and hate what we do not know and that causes fear, but I think that is more a response to our sense of lack in knowledge and experience and most people hate having fear within themselves.

People like the members of Westboro and sadly others who are just looking for justification for their distrust of anything different often use the Law of Moses and the Levitican Code as their weapon of choice.

They almost always pick and choose which parts are valid, the parts that address themselves are overlooked; their favorite foods (bacon, ham, shrimp and lobster), the availability of cheap cool clothing from Walmart (mixed threads), cheaper meats (non-Kosher), touching the skin of dead pigs (football), etc. My personal favorite is that I have yet to meet the Christian man who has the balls to put his wife out during her monthly menses.

It has become the common belief that the Law of Moses is there by God's direct intent, literally the will of God, but Jesus tells us that is not necessarily the case:

8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

Matthew 19:8 (KJV)
So we know that parts of the law are there by the knowing of Moses, not by God's decree, how do we determine which is which?

The answer is a few chapters away, Jesus not only tells us the basic framework for all the law , but gives us a direct key to its implementation:

35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Matthew 22:35-40 (KJV)
emphasis mine
If you apply the Law through the filter of Love, you will never use it as a tool of destruction against another, how would you honestly bludgeon your brother to death in the name of love?

Big and little "T" truths

In recent months, there has been an increase in the number of people asking how traditional religion and scripture can have any relevance in their lives since it has so many archaic ideas that do not translate into their day-to-day lives, the one most often asked of me is slavery.

This is the answer I gave on Facebook in a discussion on this exact topic, thanks to Chris DeMarco for starting and hosting this thread:

As a student of Comparative Religion and having read many scripture of many differing religions, including the Bible and Quran, one of the things that becomes obvious is that scripture must be placed into the context of the cultures in which they were written.

The Old Testament was written in the cultures at the end of the Bronze Age, including Nomadic, Judaic (as in the kingdom) and Egyptian amongst others. The New Testament is written from the cultural view of the Roman Empire and the Quran from the 7^th Century culture of Arabia.

Many followers of these religions think the rules and regulations that are handed down are the laws by which man is to live by for the rest of time, no. They are all examples of what constitutes a moral and ethical life in the times and places they were written.

For example, the slavery references are for their day. Today most of the world finds slavery to be abhorrent, but how one treats their slaves in a world where it is common-place, can be done ethically or not. When you place these "laws" into culture and time, they make sense, to a degree. Outside of their context, they seem primitive and they are.

Of course one day, the things we think of as "normal", moral and ethical may well be fairly primitive to our descendents, will we attempt to enforce our cultural ideals onto their world? We'll see when the next Religious Avatar comes along and creates the next great religion.

---

What most people are unaware if, is that there are two kinds of truth. Truth with a capital "T" is the ultimate Truth, it is the non-changing Truth, no matter what happens. Truth with a little "t" is the truth that changes, based on time, place and situation.

For example, Truth with a capital "T" is that you are a spiritual or energy being having a corporeal experience in a physical body.  This Truth never changes, it truly is eternal.

An example of truth with a little "t" would be that you are having that corporeal experience in the Roman Empire, with slavery is part of your daily existence.  How you treat those slaves in a moral and ethical fashion becomes truth with a little "t" because slavery will cease to be acceptable in the world that you live in, it is changed.

When looking at religion or scripture, remember that the Truth is always in there, even when it is obscured by the truths of the time and place it is written.

Science vs. Religion

There has recently been a resurgence of the argument between those of a Religious bent and those who are more Secularist.  When I was a kid it was purely a Science vs. Religion argument of Evolution vs Creationism, in recent years, the moderate religionists have re-framed the argument as Evolution vs Intelligent Design.

As far as I can tell, Intelligent Design is basically Creationism expressed in such a way as not to refer to a specific religious character, the God of Abraham, Jesus and Mohammed.

This is hardly a new concept in the ongoing battle of Science vs Religion.  In the Christian world, this has been going on since the Second Century with Tertullian vs. Origen.  At some point it was decided; that which could be seen or studied would be in the realm of Science and that which could not would be the realm of Spirit and by default the Church.

As science developed from the 18th century onwards, various views developed which aimed to reconcile science with the Abrahamic creation narrative.

Wikipedia: Creationism
We could go on and on with the history of the observed conflicting with the beliefs in many cultures and religions throughout history, not really what I want to do, but Wikipedia offers a good place to start here.

A Different Perspective

---

I look at this "battle" and cannot help but giggle since I see the need for one or the other to be right and the other to be wrong to be nothing more than an expression of the Ego.  What if there was a way for both to be right?

When I read Moses' creation story in Genesis I am truly impressed with just how close his history is with what Science says in the Theory of Evolution, not bad for someone who lived 3200 years ago.

Science and Religion are not really in conflict, because in fact their true subjects of study are completely different and not at odds.

Science is the study of how the Universe is put together, the laws that apparently underline those structures and how they interact with one another.  Science is the realm of actual history, what actually physically happened and how it occurred.  If you want to insert the concept of God into Science, it only would be "How he did it."

Religion is actually the study of why.  Why would a Benevolent Deity go to all this trouble, what is the point?  The historical questions that often get written about for these explanations most often are based on tribal mythology and allegorical explanation, not fact.  Now many Religionists are going to take offense at this, I have attacked the inerrancy or the infallibility of their Scripture.

So to me, and those like me, Science explores how this amazing thing we call reality is structured and put together, Religion explains the why and seeks to help me to re-engage with that higher part of myself called Spirit.

A Defense of Religion

I happen to be a fan of Bill Maher, I think he is fun and entertaining. I recently re-watched his film "Religulous" and also ran into a short series of interviews with Bill Moyers "on Faith & Reason", as well as a few other items and it started me thinking about the current views of many people regarding organized religion and what many religionists likely view as the new "War on Religion."

About the same time I ran across the following cartoon which really sums up the issues that many non-religious people have with organized religions and their followers:

Let's be honest with ourselves, Religion in many ways has asked for the harsh eye that has been placed on it in recent years. Religion has been used to justify every darkness that lies in the heart and soul of man and the more that one looks into it, the easier it becomes to question if Religion has any validity in the world.

Believers think that they are following the will of God as they see it, as such, they are not usually willing to negotiate their positions.  This is actually fine, believe what you will and act on it in YOUR life, and that is where most religionists lose the game.

Green Stamp Theology

---

People often try to spread the truth of their beliefs into the world and try to persuade others to act in accordance with what their religion teaches. There is often a problem with this in that those who are so busy "spreading the word" are not often as diligent in their practice of the word, I call this "Green Stamp Theology."

When I was a kid, my Mom would shop often at certain stores where they would give you "S&H Green Stamps" with each purchase. You would take the stamps and fill the books with them and then go to the redemption center and use them to buy items, an early customer rewards program.

As a theology, it works this way, it doesn't matter what I do as long as I can get   X   number of people to believe the way I do, I can buy my way into the eternity of the chosen. If you ask them, they will nearly always deny this, but this is the outcome of their actions.

Where Religions Lose It

---

I recently heard an interesting statement;

Religions are grand, lofty ideals.
Religious followers, now that's something else.

Fortunately, the problem is not the religions, but the followers. OK, I know you are wondering how this works...

We will use Christianity in this example, but it works for any religion.

Jesus taught a philosophy that made sense to him. He understood what he was trying to pass along to his followers and particularly his disciples. From the writings that have come down to us, I would say that John "got it" more than any other, at least from his writings.

Sadly, the many generations that followed have not understood it, but have done their best to keep it alive.  For the most part, they succeeded, the Gospel of John has survived 1800+ years and is still available to read and study today, now as to if the current interpretation of it has anything to do with the original, that may be another issue (thanks a lot Irenaeus).

As time goes on, those who understood the teacher passed on and left those who understood less and less of the original teaching. This is just the way things go, as time goes on, the teaching becomes a tradition and then a dogma. Once it becomes dogma it is etched in stone and any that attempt to reinterpret it are viewed as anathema.

Add to this the insertion of Ego that inevitably comes along, the teaching becomes "The Teaching" and sooner or later it goes from being a presentation of Truth to the "One and Only Truth" with all others being false gods and lies of whatever form evil takes, in Christianity it would be Lucifer, the Devil.

Religion's Saving Grace

---

Fortunately, there is a saving grace for religion in general, for those who truly seek it out and sift through all that gets piled on top of it, the original truth that was expressed by the teacher is still there. This core truth is often buried under dogmas and theologies, tradition and canon but to those who would search, they will find Truth.

⁷Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
⁸For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

Matthew 7:7-8 (KJV)

Jesus said: "Recognize what is before your face and that which is hidden from the you will be revealed to you. For there is nothing hidden which shall not be made manifest, nor buried which shall not be raised."

Gospel of Thomas saying 5
This is the saving grace of Religion, if Truth is there, it will remain forever.

Time and tradition may pile on many things to the original source but if you will engage your heart and spirit and be willing to be a touch of an archeologist in your studies, you will reveal the Truth underneath. Turn your brain on, it was given to you for a reason. Pray and/or meditate on your studies, inspiration will almost always follow and point you in the right direction.

Religion is not really about "others" out there, but about YOUR relationship to the Creative Source of the Universe. It is your job to grow within that relationship, let others concern themselves with their growth.  Feel free to share knowledge with those that want it but never enforce your thoughts, beliefs or otherwise onto others, there is more than plenty of examples of how quickly that will fail in the world around us and sadly they are collectively called Religion.

Respect, not Tolerance

In today's world, we are often told that tolerance is a good thing, I disagree. Tolerance should be a good thing, but as I see it, there is an inherent judgement in the term that the dictionary definition only hints at.

Tolerance

1. capacity to endure pain or hardship : endurance, fortitude, stamina
   
   
2. a: sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own
   b: the act of allowing something : toleration
   
   
3. the allowable deviation from a standard; especially : the range of variation permitted in maintaining a specified dimension in machining a piece

Merriam-Webster.com
When we talk about people being tolerant of others, we are usually referring to the second definition, to have sympathy or to indulge, do you not see a judgement in there? Both imply that you are allowing something lesser than yourself or position. When we say Group A should tolerate Group B the implication is that Group A is right and the other is lacking but must or should be allowed.

Strangely, this often requires the members of Group B to make use of the first definition, to endure the scorn of Group A.

Recently, in the fields of Politics and Religion, we often see the third definition employed in an attempt to negate the need for the second definition. Group A believes it has the truth or some perceived standard that should be enforced upon the rest (not that they often live up to it themselves).

So what is the alternative?

²Respect - verb

1. a: to consider worthy of high regard : esteem
   b: to refrain from interfering with <please respect their privacy>
   
   
2. to have reference to : concern

Merriam-Webster.com
When others disagree with your positions, beliefs or lifestyle, do not judge them to be inferior to yourself by tolerating them, but respect them for what they believe.

In the gospels of the Christian New Testament, Jesus said to love those who persecute you, fantastic idea though rarely practiced in today's world. You cannot love something or someone you do not respect, so tolerating others is to demean them.

You may not agree for whatever reason, but not only is that difference what is supposed to make the United States so great, but if you respect vs tolerate their opinions, you leave an open space to discuss those differences. What an idea, an opportunity to learn, to grow and to better one's self through expanding your frame of reference.

So Respect differences, not Tolerate them.