Perception varies as much as individuals differ. Nations, groups, kings, leaders, philosophers, and peoples have existed and acted according to a set of beliefs and ideals throughout history. The Butter Battle Book by Dr. Seuss[1] is a perfect illustration of how wrong perceptions can impact a group of people. The same problems developed in the Dr. Seuss story have repeated themselves since the beginning of time. Is it possible for people to overcome their differing perceptions to live in harmony with one another?
The primary difference that separated the characters of the Butter Battle Book from one another was the issue over how to butter their bread. One group buttered their bread from the bottom while the other side buttered their bread on the top side. Dr. Seuss was a master at portraying important truths or values through simple children’s stories. This story is no different. Think about any conflict between people in history, and break the event down into its simplest form. Most likely, the source of the conflict will be nearly as silly as whether to butter their bread butter side up or down.
Anti-Semitism existed in Germany and central Europe for centuries before World War II and the Holocaust. Germans readily accepted Hitler’s hate of the Jews by accepting his propaganda. What separated the Jews from Germans? Were the Germans really a superior race? Not at all; they simply believed the simple untruths that seeped into their belief system. It caused support for a war against the Jews which was not grounded in a real threat, just a supposed one. A more recent example is of the Mormon church towards African-Americans. Their doctrine taught that to be black was a result of the curse of sin, thus, no blacks would enter the kingdom of God. Of course, this belief is based on a false premise, but the idea remains the same: separation because of simple misunderstanding.
The issue relating to the time period during and following the decline of the Roman Empire was an issue between Christians and Muslims. Several Crusades and countless battle ensued because of simple differences between the two sides. This is not written to say that everyone should think the same way, but that everyone should be free to believe as they wish. How many lives could have been spared had the Christians and Muslims been willing to allow each other freedom to believe and worship as they wish without imposing their respective beliefs on one another by force. Many serious divisions between people would not occur if more thought were given to what it is that actually separates them. Most of which are truly absurd and ridiculous.
Fair and honest communication between differing groups is also necessary. Religious freedom should not mean that we do not discuss our beliefs with one another, but that we do not allow differences to drive us to hate one another. Perhaps both sides could be benefited by truths that the other holds.
The major problem that results from these insignificant differences is the division that it creates. In the story, the two opposing groups built a wall to keep the other out of their land. When a “line in the sand” is drawn like the wall that separated the Yukes and Zooks, protection of those of like beliefs through the educational system is necessary. Pledges are devised to retain the loyalty of its progeny. The wall must also be defended. The enemy must be made hideous, atrocious, and unlike one’s own people. The emphasis focuses on the differences rather than the similarities. Just as the story portrays, the similarities between the Yukes and Zooks were much greater than the differences. Both sides were similar in many ways; in fact, the only difference noted was how they butter their bread.
Defense of belief began with a simple defense of the wall. When differences are emphasized and separation occurs, the human response forces a defense of “correctness.” It seems to be a natural response to defend what one believes to be true. This response, if God-given, is a good response that compels individuals to be prepared to have a reason for believing what they believe. The problem, however, is the issue with perception. What someone perceives to be true is that person’s reality. In other words, the things that an individual or people group believes, those things become that person’s reality or truth. It may not be truth or reality, but it is that person’s reality. To be able to defend what one believes is good. To be willing to listen to another’s arguments for the sake of seeking truth is better. The greatest caution is to make sure that what one believes is reality or truth.
The danger in defense of one’s beliefs is the escalation factor. First, remember that individuals should have a solid foundation in truth before they should be willing to take a stand on anything. Second, ask if one is defending their beliefs, how far they are willing to go to impose those beliefs on someone else? In the story, it started with a simple switch which seemed to work for some time, but soon a defense was made that rendered the switch useless. The situation escalated on both sides of the wall until finally a weapon was constructed which, allegedly, would annihilate everything on the other side of the wall. Is the annihilation of all opponents the ultimate goal for Christians? God forbid! The primary message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is about how God wants all mankind to live with him in heaven for eternity. If all that is accomplished is the destruction of adversaries, then Christians have failed to understand the intent of God’s message to them. Unfortunately, Christians have done this to each other as well, not just to their opponents.
Will mankind ever live in harmony, communicating to each other peacefully? Not until the world is in submission to Jesus Christ will the people of the world live in harmony. Does that mean that no one should try to be at peace with each other? No, all attempts should be made to understand each other better. Beliefs should be thoroughly examined and defended peacefully. If a building were on fire, and someone went in to warn the inhabitants of the imminent danger would such an individual be able to do so peacefully? Yes, but to the occupants the rescuer may be perceived as loud and threatening especially if they are not aware of the danger. The same problem can occur for Christians trying to share the truth of God’s Word, warning of the imminent danger of hell’s fires. The Christian can be perceived as loud, obnoxious, or even threatening. It is the responsibility of the Christian to be aware of the possibility of being misunderstood, and he must be willing to be patient. To give up would be a heartbreaking failure. Just as a simple children’s story taught the reader great truth, let this reader accept the truth of God’s Word for what it is: truth.
The primary difference that separated the characters of the Butter Battle Book from one another was the issue over how to butter their bread. One group buttered their bread from the bottom while the other side buttered their bread on the top side. Dr. Seuss was a master at portraying important truths or values through simple children’s stories. This story is no different. Think about any conflict between people in history, and break the event down into its simplest form. Most likely, the source of the conflict will be nearly as silly as whether to butter their bread butter side up or down.
Anti-Semitism existed in Germany and central Europe for centuries before World War II and the Holocaust. Germans readily accepted Hitler’s hate of the Jews by accepting his propaganda. What separated the Jews from Germans? Were the Germans really a superior race? Not at all; they simply believed the simple untruths that seeped into their belief system. It caused support for a war against the Jews which was not grounded in a real threat, just a supposed one. A more recent example is of the Mormon church towards African-Americans. Their doctrine taught that to be black was a result of the curse of sin, thus, no blacks would enter the kingdom of God. Of course, this belief is based on a false premise, but the idea remains the same: separation because of simple misunderstanding.
The issue relating to the time period during and following the decline of the Roman Empire was an issue between Christians and Muslims. Several Crusades and countless battle ensued because of simple differences between the two sides. This is not written to say that everyone should think the same way, but that everyone should be free to believe as they wish. How many lives could have been spared had the Christians and Muslims been willing to allow each other freedom to believe and worship as they wish without imposing their respective beliefs on one another by force. Many serious divisions between people would not occur if more thought were given to what it is that actually separates them. Most of which are truly absurd and ridiculous.
Fair and honest communication between differing groups is also necessary. Religious freedom should not mean that we do not discuss our beliefs with one another, but that we do not allow differences to drive us to hate one another. Perhaps both sides could be benefited by truths that the other holds.
The major problem that results from these insignificant differences is the division that it creates. In the story, the two opposing groups built a wall to keep the other out of their land. When a “line in the sand” is drawn like the wall that separated the Yukes and Zooks, protection of those of like beliefs through the educational system is necessary. Pledges are devised to retain the loyalty of its progeny. The wall must also be defended. The enemy must be made hideous, atrocious, and unlike one’s own people. The emphasis focuses on the differences rather than the similarities. Just as the story portrays, the similarities between the Yukes and Zooks were much greater than the differences. Both sides were similar in many ways; in fact, the only difference noted was how they butter their bread.
Defense of belief began with a simple defense of the wall. When differences are emphasized and separation occurs, the human response forces a defense of “correctness.” It seems to be a natural response to defend what one believes to be true. This response, if God-given, is a good response that compels individuals to be prepared to have a reason for believing what they believe. The problem, however, is the issue with perception. What someone perceives to be true is that person’s reality. In other words, the things that an individual or people group believes, those things become that person’s reality or truth. It may not be truth or reality, but it is that person’s reality. To be able to defend what one believes is good. To be willing to listen to another’s arguments for the sake of seeking truth is better. The greatest caution is to make sure that what one believes is reality or truth.
The danger in defense of one’s beliefs is the escalation factor. First, remember that individuals should have a solid foundation in truth before they should be willing to take a stand on anything. Second, ask if one is defending their beliefs, how far they are willing to go to impose those beliefs on someone else? In the story, it started with a simple switch which seemed to work for some time, but soon a defense was made that rendered the switch useless. The situation escalated on both sides of the wall until finally a weapon was constructed which, allegedly, would annihilate everything on the other side of the wall. Is the annihilation of all opponents the ultimate goal for Christians? God forbid! The primary message of the gospel of Jesus Christ is about how God wants all mankind to live with him in heaven for eternity. If all that is accomplished is the destruction of adversaries, then Christians have failed to understand the intent of God’s message to them. Unfortunately, Christians have done this to each other as well, not just to their opponents.
Will mankind ever live in harmony, communicating to each other peacefully? Not until the world is in submission to Jesus Christ will the people of the world live in harmony. Does that mean that no one should try to be at peace with each other? No, all attempts should be made to understand each other better. Beliefs should be thoroughly examined and defended peacefully. If a building were on fire, and someone went in to warn the inhabitants of the imminent danger would such an individual be able to do so peacefully? Yes, but to the occupants the rescuer may be perceived as loud and threatening especially if they are not aware of the danger. The same problem can occur for Christians trying to share the truth of God’s Word, warning of the imminent danger of hell’s fires. The Christian can be perceived as loud, obnoxious, or even threatening. It is the responsibility of the Christian to be aware of the possibility of being misunderstood, and he must be willing to be patient. To give up would be a heartbreaking failure. Just as a simple children’s story taught the reader great truth, let this reader accept the truth of God’s Word for what it is: truth.
[1]Dr. Seuss, The Butter Battle Book adapted for video, http://www.youtube.com/