How does one learn prejudice? How do you explain that little children have prejudices? -- They do have them. Goleman, in his book "Emotional Intelligence" says that prejudices are emotional reponses that we have learned early in our childhood -- from the environment. A child does not learn prejudices because it would have fear. Children are not able to separate between Jews and Christians -- their parents are, and they teach them to do so. And Goleman remarks that these early resonses stay with us, no matter what we do. We can learn to see that we have prejudices -- but because of the early stage at which they were implanted into our minds, they have a firm and special place, forever. We can learn new behaviours and new values -- but the "first sight" effect will be ruined by that prejudice, no matter how hard we try not to have that prejudice, no matter how well we know that is is just prejudice.
I guess that's the problem with labels. Categories are rarely representative. I think you asked the same question somewhere else... I remember answering the one about the animals. It's only semi-relevant to the thread, but John provided some handy tips for Christian-watching that I'll post here Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!: (I left out one on how to recognize non-Christians - those who don't accept His message) We know that we have come to know him [Christ] if we obey his commands. The man who says, "I know him," but does not do what he commands is a liar... (1 John 2:3) This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did. (1 John 2:5) This is how we know who the children of God are and who the children of the devil are: Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God; nor is anyone who does not love his brother. (1 John 3:10) This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life for us. And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers. (1 John 3:16) Let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. This then is how we know that we belong to the truth (1 John 3:18) And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us. (1 John 3:24) This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God (1 John 4:2) This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. This is love for God: to obey his commands. (1 John 5:2) We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin (1 John 5:18)
(I remember how disappointed I was when I learned there was a book on Emotional Intelligence - I thought it was something I invented!) I have yet to read it, though Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I think it's because we learn who we are by relating to our environment. I child growing up in an unprejudiced household is probably exposed to a more diverse range of "acceptance", and less "unknowns" that may give rise to fears - rational or irrational. True, the labels aren't there yet, but actions speak louder than words. If the parents/community are consistently seen hating...dogs, for instance, that child will grow up with an acquired hatred, and therefore prejudice, against dogs. How parents and people relate to unknowns might have a similar (even greater) effect. If the parents are consistenly fearful/superstitious/distrustful of new or unknown things, children will develop the same attitude towards this "nebulous nothingness". It might even give a name to it - a label that identifies this fear, in order to get some grip on it. Fear of the unknown is a breeding ground for prejudice, if you ask me. Yes, and it's really sad that people grow up in environments that encourage such reactions. But I grew up in apartheid South Africa without developing the active prejudice that was prevalent in the society of my parents and grandparents. I grew up with the Bible, in a Christian family, and it never once occurred to me to develop a prejudice against anyone. But so did many other Christians, and they were convinced blacks were "naturally inferior" (although I think the evolutionary debate provided more ammunition for it than the Bible ever could). So the I'm very certain Christianity wasn't the determining factor, although it was used as a crutch. But my parents and grandparents were too involved in addressing the real issues that affected people: healthcare (one grandfather was a missionary doctor) and education (the other was a professor at the only black university in SA, even though he studied under Karl Barth in Switzerland) to have time for egotism. It did creep in sometimes, in the form of politics, but it never overrode their callings. Fortunately, children have a smaller probability of causing lasting damage with their misconceptions. They feel a greater natural affinity towards love than hatred, and they can be shaped or abused by either until well into their teens; that's why loving authority, healthy families and good friends are so important. It's adults who persist in willful hatred who do the most damage, and to more than just the immediate generation. You can see the hardness in the eyes of someone who's prejudiced - almost as if it's greater than them - and it affects their children. My point is, people do grow up in paradigms that shape them - and children are under the mercy of many influences. But a change in paradigm can free them and is possible. Maybe I do have subconscious racism ingrained in me somewhere, but it doesn't rule my thoughts. I can deal with it when it sticks out its ugly head. Addressing the roots of prejudice - lack of love, fear, anger, and egotism - makes prejudice itself seem a distant enemy. I got my sense morality not from society, or even my parents, but ultimately from Christ. But if it wasn't for a personal relationship, I would have been a product, not a child.
Jenyar You emphasise on the fact that children are prejudiced towards things because of their parents influence. Not wholly true - ever heard children in the playground teasing the "fat" kid, or name calling the one who wears glasses, or ridiculing any disability some other kid may have. Believe it or not Jenyar, kids are able to be prejudiced all by themselves.
not so. babies are sponges. they are learning from the time they blink and see the world for the first time. even before then. children soak up information from their parents like polyacrylate.
LOL.... you're saying that kids are brainwashed and can't think for themselves - I can tell you they can.
Ads, I think it is referred to as a 'Christian West' because so much of the West's political background and belief structure is so entrenched in Christianity. As an example, we must consider that in so many States of the West the Lords Prayer is recited before each sitting of houses of Parliament, Higher Courts, some Government Schools, etc. We are given a bible to swear on when giving an oath. The President of the United States is sworn in a bible, etc. Such images and practices will naturally result in the West been deemed to be the 'Christian West'. Christians may be in a minority in the West, but its system of politics and law and social/cultural norms are deeply rooted in early Christian beliefs. The States and Nations in the West were foundered by Christians and it has created a stain on the future generations which have followed. There may be more Christians in the Middle East, but it doesn't change the fact that the West, unlike the States in the Middle East, were foundered on Christian values and beliefs which have come through to today's generation. The constitutions of many Western States have a Christian value base. _________________________________________________________ As to the topic of this thread, women in Christianity, as in most religions that exist, are given a lower status rating. Women in Christianity (and in other religions) aren't valued the same as a man. As much as people can say no, women and men are seen to be the same in the eyes of a Christian God, the practices of the Christian Churches fail to provide any backing to such claims. The fact that women have had to struggle so much to just make it to the priesthood in the Church of England sort of reiterates my point. And the fact that they are still refused the position of Bishop further proves my point. There are still people within the Church who are fighting the fact that women have been allowed to become priests. The Catholic Church is still refusing to budge on the issue of women priests. Women will continue to be viewed as secondary in religion because the forefathers of these religions were just that... forefathers.. as in male. And lets face it, when religions such as Catholicism and other Christian religions, as well as Islam and Judaism began their existence, women were only good for giving birth, cooking, cleaning and lying still and thinking of England while the husband's breath steamed up her cheeks while he tried for more heirs. Shame that Christianity and other religions still view women in that role.
"Shame that Christianity and other religions still view women in that role." Well said Bells - Good post!
Vienna, How am I supposed to know?! We call people the way they want to be called. If they say that they want to be called "Jews", we'll call them "Jews", if they want to be called "Christians", we'll call them "Christians". I don't feel summoned to decide who fits a certain category or not. I go by what the people say they want to be called.
LOL... earlier you seemed to have a problem with who to call true Christians and Christians. Do you know what a Christian is?
Yes i see your problem Rosa, the word Christian is problematic isn't it. Well you can start using another term, its longer but it is more definitive. When you see a true Christian don't call them a Christian anymore call them a "Follower of the Messiah" In that way you can get away from the name "Christian" that has been taken over by people who are not followers of The Messiah Immanueal. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
G'Day Bells A lot of that is just echos of tradition. I know that the politicians recite the Lords prayer and they all swear an oath on the bible before they enter office and yes the USA president does swear an oath to enter office. But in swearing an oath on the bible they clearly show that they are not Christians opps Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ... Ummm Followers of The Messiah Immanueal Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! because the Messiah told His followers not to swear oaths. It is written in the bible itself read this: The Messiah Said: Mathew: 5: 33-37 “Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform your oaths to the lord, but I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for that is Gods throne; nor by the earth, for that is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your Yes be your Yes and your No be your No. For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.” Followers of the Messiah will never swear oaths for anything. That includes a oath take in court, one taken by the president, one taken by army recruits and many other oaths of office. i am so happy you braught up the example of the oaths of office, people who swaer oaths on the bible may as well be spitting on the bible, for not only does it show that they are not followers of the Messiah it shows who they are actually swearing their oaths two. But let your Yes be your Yes and your No be your No. For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.” The evil one is satan and we know who is in control of the kingdoms of this world Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I understand why you have this misconception. "christians" first became intertwined with the empire of Rome when constantine sought to become emperor. He made a sales pitch to "christians" to join with Him and kill his rivals. In return constantine agreed to promote "christianity" as the religion of state. Before constantine Christians... opps... Followers of the Messiah where killed when found, the state saw them as a threat to the empire. So yes "christians" did influence the states of europe but it was a religion that was not true to the teachings of Immanuel. the very fact that they took up arms to fight for constantine automatically removed them from their claim as being followers of The Messiah. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
I will call people whatever *they* want me to call them. Like I said: I don't feel summoned to judge who "fits" the description of a "true Christian" and who doesn't.
What is wrong with my name? Is it too rosy for you? You may call me RM -- but only if this stands for "RosaMagika" in your mind. I'll know (and God will know too!) if, by this abbreviation, you actually had something else in mind.
That's true. Maybe I'm using a too narrow definition of prejudice, or maybe a too theoretical one. But how do those kids know that someone is "fat", or that wearing glasses is "funny"? I think it's because they're trying to establish and come to terms with their own identity, and things that make other children obviously different can't be identified with - so it gets rejected. It's a continuous dialogue between the self and the other, a natural process of cognition and understanding, but I think parents need to teach children that language. The seed of love and tolerance is there, but it has to be watered.
Well then, what do you make of this passage: (Exodus 13:19) Moses took the bones of Joseph with him because Joseph had made the sons of Israel swear an oath. He had said, "God will surely come to your aid, and then you must carry my bones up with you from this place." Or, how about Psalms 119? I have taken an oath and confirmed it, that I will follow your righteous laws. Also, you say "Followers of The Messiah will never swear oaths for anything, etc...". First of all, I'm assuming that "Followers of The Messiah" is just a fancy word for Christians. If my assumption is correct, then I would assert that your saying "If someone takes an oath, they are not a Christian" by saying "Followers of the messiah will never swear oaths for anything". Am I to believe that I'm excluded from the kingdom of heaven since I took an oath during jury duty?
