Christian Reconstructionism

[heretic888]

Uh...we do realize that the argument for removing all discussion of civil rights from the law and from practice trashes ALL civil rights legislation and two hundred years or so of legal precedent, including the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States?

Apparently not.

Although you could attribute such thinking to the failings within our own education system. Money for bombs is more important than money for textbooks and teachers, I guess.

 

[heretic888]

The bible does not contradict itself.. you simply do not understand it... and you never will without G-d Himself teaching you the hidden symbolic codes and the bible's true message, which + - 98% of those who call themselves christians do not know. If anyone sincerely wants to know and has an open heart, PM me and I would be more than happy to help/explain, but if your heart is not right with G-d, don't bother, it's better that you stayed in the dark.

Christ said "In vain do ye seek me, teaching instead the doctrines of men."

Kettle. Pot. Black. Indeed.

Sure there is a 'pneumatic' layer to the teachings of the New Testament, juxtaposed to the 'psychic' understanding most give to it. But, clear evidence you don't understand this pneumatic teaching is:

1) If you don't have at least a basic understanding of core Greek philosophical concepts, terminology, and an accurate translated version of the Greek New Testament.

2) If you think the core of the New Testament has anything whatsoever to do with a 'personal savior' or having one's pitiful little ego-self living forever and ever in some lofty paradise.

I think Saul of Tarsus said it best with, "The letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life".

And yes, by the way, the Bible does contradict itself repeatedly at a literal, historical level. Namely, because different people wrote the different books. At no point during the individual books' creations were they intended to be part of some large corpus.

Hell, just compare the "Paul" of Galatians to the "Paul" of Titus if'n you don't believe me. Or, compare the "Jesus Christ" of Mark (a Jewish apocalyptic prophet with leanings toward Kabbalah and Sophiology) to the "Jesus Christ" in John (a symbolic expression of the Platonic Logos principle).

Or, you might actually do some historical research and look at the really old Christian writings like the Gospel of Thomas --- which is a lot more straightforward and exoteric in its portrayal of Christian teachings.

Ta ta.

 

[rmcrobertson]

Sigh. The question of, "individual," vs. "social," responsibility has been discussed and debated again and again and again, in left circles. For the last two centuries. The most easily-available source of discussion remains Cornel West, "Race Matters," which specifically takes up the issue of the libs/Left focusing too much on social and historical issues and the Right's ignoring them.

One also blames bad social support for education for this sort of thing. But let's not forget--there're some LOUSY teachers out there!

 

[hardheadjarhead]

That's the kind of fuzzy thinking that got us here in the first place.

"Here" being...???

Now that you've encapsulated the entire concept of liberalism into one post, please tell us where we are, exactly.

Do you buy into the reactionary notion that we are declining as a culture? Do you, like so many others, propose there was a time in America's history where we were more moral or possessed of rock like values? When exactly would that be?

Would it be during the Colonial era, when Americans drank five times the amount per capita than we do today? Would it be during the Industrial Revolution, when we permitted children as young as five to work in factories? How about the labor struggles of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and the murder of labor activists? Do we ignore the Puritan witch hunts, the slave trade, indentured servitude, the wholesale slaughter of Indian women and children? How about the denial of women the right to vote for the first 144 years of this nation's history?

Please tell me WHEN this pristine and pastoral time was, if you buy into the myth that we are in "decline"...so far I haven't been able to find a time where things were really any better.

Incidentally, if you'll note...the "left" has been at the forefront of many of the battles to combat those aforementioned evils. Look up "liberal" in the dictionary and you'll probably find it synonomous with "progressive." We're the folks that got your mother the vote, and we're the folks that gave you the weekend.

Regards,

Steve

 

[Marginal]

The problem with most of the "solutions" suggested by the Left is that they discount, as always, personal responsibility.
The litany of the liberal is: Society is the problem; Government is the answer; and people are malleable.
Throw more money and more programs at a problem and it will go away.

The converse of that is looking over the ruins of a burst dam and pointing out the first pebble that dislodged before a crack began to form and eventually destroyed the entire structure. (Along with the town downriver)

The engineering wasn't unsound. It was the pebble's fault!

Personal responsibility is important, but you can't discount how one's environment shapes one's development and subsequent choices.

 

[heretic888]

The converse of that is looking over the ruins of a burst dam and pointing out the first pebble that dislodged before a crack began to form and eventually destroyed the entire structure. (Along with the town downriver)

The engineering wasn't unsound. It was the pebble's fault!

Personal responsibility is important, but you can't discount how one's environment shapes one's development and subsequent choices.

Like the whole nature/nurture issue, I am really surprised people are still arguing over this kinda stuff...

... isn't it plainly obvious that delineations between 'individual' and 'society', while in a sense useful, are just horridly arbitrary?? How exactly does one tease apart individual merits from societal/environmental conditioning?? The two are inexplicably intertwined.

Its similar to the fantasies that some biologists have that the influence of genes and DNA (going so far as to claim that DNA "encodes" or "contains data" about certain behavioral traits) can somehow be made magically distinct from the influences of the material environment. Apparently, we humans inherited a genetic system that puts out a lot of information but doesn't take any in. Intriguing.

And, since all this individual vs society stuff is the ideological basis for everyone's philosophical constructs, this would probably explain why the Left and the Right are so horridly off-base in so many endeavors. And, furthermore, why those with a Better Way tend to so commonly get left to the shadows.

Ta ta.