June 15, 2010
Profiling
The best way to stop a discussion on immigration is for someone to toss in the ‘racial profiling’ remark. Something similar happens in the church. When we talk about one another’s spiritual characteristics invariably someone will toss in a cautionary ‘thou shalt not judge’ and thus ends discussion. The truth is that the Bible offers spiritual profiles on believers, as well as unbelievers. “For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.” (Matt 24:24 NIV)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----Words have meanings so phrases can carry ideas. But you can know you are dealing with an intellectual cheat when he uses phrases as words. Phrases are not words, yet “racial profiling” and “thou shalt not judge” are synonyms meaning, “Shame upon anyone resisting what I want.” If a purple man wanted to rob the bank and did so, killing several of your friends and neighbors in the process, then fled the scene, no one would look for a white man, or a black man, or a Latino. Everyone would make good use of profiling and be on the watch for a purple man . Now I don’t know of any purple race, but if it were a white man who robbed the bank, no one would have any qualms whatsoever with not suspecting any blacks or Latinos. Or visa versa. Racial profiling is used with blessing in law enforcement, except when the law involves illegal aliens. Then it is off limits. This illuminates the bait and switch involved with using a phrase for a word. What is wrong is to consider every white man to be a bank robber if one robs a bank, or to consider every Latino to be an illegal alien because millions of them have crossed the border illegally. These are fallacies of generalization, not racial profiling. Yet an intellectual cheat will take the meaning of the fallacy of generalization and graft it into the phrase “racial profiling” to shame you into agreement.
-----Likewise, if you call such a man an intellectual cheat, he will then spout off an equally dishonest line of defense, “Thou shalt not judge.” Indeed Jesus said, “Judge not, that you be not judged.” (Mat 7:1) But Paul said, “Is it not those inside the church you are to judge...Drive out the wicked person from among you.” (I Cor 5:12) What’s up with that? Are Paul and Jesus going to debate this in heaven? If so, is Paul going to have the harder time debating because he also said, “Then let us no more pass judgment on one another,” or is Jesus because He also said, “And why do you not judge for yourselves what is right?” Or shall we just dump the whole Bible and walk away because both Paul and Jesus said to not judge and to judge. I think it wiser to study the Bible and dump the usage of phrases as words.
-----The Bible uses words to make meaningful phrases within certain contexts. After Mat 7:1, Jesus went on to say, “For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged...Why do you see the speck...in your brother’s eye...but not the log...in your own...first take the log out of your own eye, then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.” (Mat 7:2-5) I certainly would not want to be judged by one who judges for his own benefit. But being judged by one who judges for benefit itself, mine as well, is a correctional matter to be cherished. So Jesus also said, “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment, “ (John 7:24) and Paul told the Corinthians to reaffirm their love for the one of whom he had commanded, “Drive out the wicked person from among you.” The benefit of the right judgment had been achieved and the one judged then stood ready to benefit as well. It is only when we allow phrases to convey the constructs of their words within the contexts of their presentations that we escape the judgment of being found a stupid cheater.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment