Chosinness and the Theology of Terror
Ryan, E. Scott, Journal of Instructional Psychology
Dr. E. Scott Ryan presents a new word, Chosinness, to describe a new and old metaphysic that, justifies criminality. He defines Chosinness as a sinful choice of choosing one God as one's God, only, to the detriment of others. Metaphysical analysis is applied to criminology in indicating how a metastasis of universal spiritual chosenness can develop into a criminal quasi-religious metaphysic of Chosinness. Although this criminological metaphysic of terrorism is evident in some Islamic terrorists, it is not confined to any one religion or belief system. Dr. Ryan cautions all of us as to the dangers inherent in any Chosinness, in our needing to know how to counter this criminal metaphysical metastasis at its source in educating ourselves, as well as others, in new and old ways of thinking and believing.
In looking back to September 11th, we can look forward and back with a new word lot a very new and very old Theology of Terror. Many religious and secular words have been used, but one new religious-secular word defines it best. That word is Chosinness, defined by me as a sinful choice wherein one God becomes one's God, only, to the detriment of others. That new word of Chosinness represents a metastasis of the old word of Chosenness, with the new meaning of a diseased distortion of the monotheistic concept of Chosenness into a "chosin" Theology of Crime contortion that sanctifies terrorism with theology.
Prior to September 11th, our monotheistic religions referred to an anti-God concept of evil; and since September 11th, there's been a new secular and religious adherence to an old intrinsic notion of evil ... in particular, a pro-God proclaiming evil that evokes a God of Terror.
In any war, military intelligence is necessary; and in this Theology of Crime War, it involves the militant metaphysics of evil that our prior intelligence failed to protect us from. Those religious leaders who taught us that evil is a mystery we can't understand have failed us, just as those secular academics who taught us that evil is an unreal religious fantasy have failed us.
The one lesson we've all learned from September 11th is that "never again" should such failures prevail. Nevertheless, we still encounter failed religious and political homilies that fail our need for counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism. Immediately after September 11, we announced to one billion Muslims that we were not an enemy of Islam; and within a year, we broadcasted Jerry Falwell's religious defamation of the Prophet, Muhammad, as a "demonic inspired pedophile." This Jerry meandering Falwellian Chosinness turns our need for a "never again" counter defense into an "ever again" offensive religious encounter that generates more hatred and conflict.
I recall the prayerful invocation of "deliver us from evil," in calling for deliverance from the religious evil of falling into the well of a Falwellian Chosinness ... in creating the most religious enmity for us at the worst time in our history.
It's been said that war is too important to be left to the generals, and politics is too important to be left to the politicians; and it should also be said that religion is too important to be left to the likes of Jerry "Immoral Minority" Falwell.
We do need to pray for deliverance from evil, but in so doing, we also need to think about evil. The problem with countering evil is that our religious prohibitions against committing it, and our secular prohibitions against discussing it, have left us bereft of any analytic foundation with which we can encounter it so as to counter it. The unfortunate consequence is that in attempting, but failing, to prohibit evil thoughts, we've succeeded in prohibiting attempts to really think about evil ... in prohibiting any thoughts about evil in prohibiting evil thoughts.
September 11 made us face our failures in facing up to the necessity of better counterintelligence for the purpose of better counter-terrorism. …