blog traffic analysis
This is Previous-Essay <== This-Essay ==> Following-Essay Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words. {Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.} ========================================================== %MANIPULATIVE CONTENTIOUS RELIGIOUS LEADERS SINS+010907 %MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE ULTIMATE CONCERNS COMMANDMENTS+010907 %TACIT IMPLICIT CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVES SCRIPTURES+010907 %ONLY HOLY TEXTS EMPIRICAL EXISTENTIAL OBJECTIVE+010907 %CAUSE EFFECT CONSEQUENCES THINK CONCLUSION MINDS+010907 %IDOLATRY DOMINATION SYSTEM CONTROLS BLESSED SURE 010907 It is helpful to note that contentious religious leaders often behave as if one of just two mutually exclusive propositions should be the ultimate basis for all decision making and behavior. Expressed in the form of commandments which are presented as categorical imperatives from God, the two mutually exclusive commandments might read: 1. Thou shalt consider ONLY texts of holy scripture as relevant to how you SHOULD behave with and towards each other. 2. Thou shalt consider ONLY empirical objective evidence of the consequences of how you DO behave with and towards each other --- as bases for drawing conclusions about how you SHOULD behave with and towards each other. Contentious religious leaders' beliefs and behaviors with and towards each other in these regards are often expressed only by what they tacitly DO, and not by what they overtly say in any analysis of the implicit categorical imperatives which are operative in their own lives. Their tacit behaviors say that these beliefs should not be articulated, not be talked about, not be analyzed, not be debated, and not be evaluated in terms of the consequences which flow from treating just a few them with ultimate respect, honor and support. Might contentious religious leaders who behave in the above contrasting tacit ways --- be engaged in tacit idolatrous behaviors, and be suffering from the blinding consequences of such tacit idolatrous behaviors? Might they be unable to see what the consequences of their idolatrous behaviors are; and so continue them in tragically disintegrative ways? Might these considerations be relevant to contentious religious behaviors related to reflexive intimate/sexual: thoughts, visions, dreams, hopes, aspirations and behaviors of religious leaders who are engaged in contentious/alienative relationships? Who will talk about these questions openly and honestly? Is there any good reason for not integrating aspects of the various ways of religious leaders approaching issues, questions and each other? Has God commanded that there should be no integrative behavior among contentious religious leaders? If so, why would She do that? Might it be that domineering religious leaders have been using the image of God as a device with which to manipulate, control and dominate their followers and each other? Might such use of the image of God be blasphemy? Might it be contrary to the spirit of Holy Spirit? Might She get angry about such manipulative behavior? (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy) ==========================================================