|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 134 OF 237 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-30-20 | | optimal play: <Big Pawn: ... I still think that not *many* people think like this. Deism isn't a fringe view. ... I think deism is a fringe worldview, taken by just a few.> That's contradictory but I take it you meant "Deism is a fringe view." I suspect it's more prevalent than you think, but we won't get bogged down in that. <Jesus' words do not apply to all all the time so you have to look at the context. In this context, Jesus was speaking to the Jews. We know this because Jesus told Paul, who wrote in Corinthians, that Jews require a sign and Greeks require wisdom.> Yes, in the context of that passage Jesus was speaking to the Jews, but then Jesus' ministry was confined to Galilee and Jerusalem, so he was always speaking to the Jews. Yet via the Gospel Jesus continues to speak to all people down through the ages. I don't know what you mean by <Jesus told Paul, who wrote in Corinthians ...>? <People look around, think about life and realize that God exists.> As simple as that?
<Find me an abortionist who think they are worshiping God when they sacrifice their children. You have to be careful not to equivocate on the word God.> Obviously an abortionist does not worship the God and Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ! In fact quite the opposite! This is what I meant by "the nature of their 'god'". You say that "People look around, think about life and realize that God exists", but their actions express their belief. The word "God" or "god" is in fact ambiguous, and therein lies much of the problem. |
|
| Mar-30-20 | | optimal play: <diceman: ... While I get the question, I'm not even sure it relates to this. This is simply human emotion making this big because it is here and now.> Yes, in Australia the total number of deaths from the Chinese virus stands at 17 with 4,163 cases out of a population of 25 million. Nevertheless, the whole country has been shut down, just like everywhere else. Now of course shutting down the country has undoubtedly minimised the number of cases and therefore deaths, but we don't shut down the country to minimise car accident deaths (to use your example). The Lord indeed works in mysterious ways so all we can do is trust Him and keep the faith. |
|
| Mar-30-20 | | thegoodanarchist: <BP> thanks for the list! |
|
| Mar-31-20 | | Big Pawn: Philosophical thought of the week 3-31-20
Liberalism is, at its core, about being "liberated" from God. That is, liberalism is about rebelling against God and as such, Satan was the very first liberal. |
|
| Mar-31-20 | | optimal play: Liberalism is, at its core, about being "liberated" from anything. What's the difference between a liberal and a leftist? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlI...
<Left or Liberal?> |
|
| Mar-31-20 | | Big Pawn: Maybe some make a distinction between left and liberal but in the US, it's basically the same thing. Both are in rebellion against God. They believe in everything that is anti-Christian, such as homosexuality, abortion, silencing Christians. They also both believe in other such nonsense such as affirmative action, not enforcing the border, anti death penalty for even murderers (only death penalty libs and "leftists" agree on is abortion), feminism, socialism, anti business, welfare state and the list can go on. There are too many similarities between libs and leftists to make a distinction between them. It's their rebellion against God that is at the root of their entire worldview. The modern concept of liberalism came out of The Enlightenment, which was distinctly anti-Christian, but Satan was the first to rebel and then go on to justify his rebellion. Liberalism is the science of justifying sin. |
|
| Mar-31-20 | | Count Wedgemore: This topic is hard to debate without agreeing on some definitions first. Today the term 'Liberalism' means one thing in the USA and a totally different thing in the rest of the World. My impression is this: what is usually meant with 'Liberal' in an American context is really a social liberal, not an economic one. Nevertheless, yeah, the classic liberal is about being liberated from anything, as <optimal play> noted. It is first and foremost about freedom; freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc. But for the modern US Liberal it's not really about that at all anymore, but all about progressivism and "social justice". Let me put it this way: the modern US Liberal is getting increasingly more <illiberal>. The obsession with political correctness and identity politics has greatly contributed to this sad state of affairs. A disturbing development. So what happened? My thesis is that Liberalism (*real* liberalism, that is) in the United States was hijacked by the Cultural Marxists who changed the basic premise: from defenders of freedom to enemies of freedom. I think this seismic shift in US politics and philosophical discourse started to happen around the time of FDR and his New Deal programs, so early 1930s. That was also the time when Keynesian ideas of state intervention in the economy began to take hold. |
|
| Mar-31-20 | | Big Pawn: <count: My impression is this: what is usually meant with 'Liberal' in an American context is really a social liberal, not an economic one.> Agreed. And by <social> what we really mean is moral. People with liberal morals are <liberated> from what God wants us to do. <But for the modern US Liberal it's not really about that at all anymore, but all about progressivism and "social justice".> "Social Justice" meaning complete rejection of God's morals and replacing them with man's morals. <Let me put it this way: the modern US Liberal is getting increasingly more <illiberal>> I disagree here. I think modern liberalism is the predictable result of the liberalism you described, which may be thought of as Enlightenment liberalism. <The obsession with political correctness and identity politics has greatly contributed to this sad state of affairs> Yes. It's a way of <enforcing> liberal morals, which are not suppressed by God's law. <So what happened? My thesis is that Liberalism (*real* liberalism, that is) in the United States was hijacked by the Cultural Marxists who changed the basic premise: from defenders of freedom to enemies of freedom.> Not hijacked. It's just that the time was ripe for enforcement to be actualized. The slow and systematic undermining of Christian morality has finally come to a critical point where the libs could take over. <I think this seismic shift in US politics and philosophical discourse started to happen around the time of FDR and his New Deal programs, so early 1930s. That was also the time when Keynesian ideas of state intervention in the economy began to take hold.> There was a lot going on at that time that put liberalism on the fast track, but it had been in force in a very big way since the Enlightenment. If you study the philosophy of the time around the Englightenment, before and after, it's clear that it's anti God. They realized that the Christian worldview needed to be undermined in order to "free" people, which meant that eventually people would be "free" and have the "liberty" to do what <they want> rather than adhere to old fashioned traditions (read: christian morality). So now people are <free> to have same sex *marriages*. People are free to flaunt homosexuality in public. People are "free" and have the "liberty" to bring little children to the library where a transvestite can read to them, thus inculcating them with liberalism at a formative age. People are "free" to ban the ten commandments from public places now. What I'm getting at is that liberty and freedom are not always good things, so when people say, "the liberals from back in 1700 were the <good libs> because they just wanted freedom and liberty", they're wrong, because those devious libs knew exactly what trajectory the Enlightenment was on. Just look at how the Enlightenment, which was an attack on theism, an attack justified by a new weapon: science. The Enlightenment philosophers said that they don't need God anymore because we have <reason>. In reaction to this, post Enlightenment philosophers, like Kant, attacked the limits of <pure reason> to lead us to the truth, thus insulating theism from the attacks of the Enlightenment. The Enlightenment was a sharp and terrible turning point in philosophy and it's the direct source of political correctness today. It's the where the modern school of liberalism was founded. It might not seem it, if you think that it's as simple as "the original libs just wanted freedom and liberty and that's always good" but it's not that simple. However, if we go all the way back, Satan is the first to rebel against God, the first to <liberate> himself from God's law, the first to <reason> his own new ways of thinking and doing things, of putting pleasure before righteousness, which is what liberalism is all about. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | optimal play: <Big Pawn: Maybe some make a distinction between left and liberal but in the US, it's basically the same thing.> Prominent American radio talk show host, columnist and author, Dennis Prager does not think liberalism and leftism is the same thing. He lists six major distinctions between the attitudes held by liberals as opposed to the attitudes held by leftists: 1. Race
2. Capitalism
3. Nationalism
4. View of America
5. Free Speech
6. Western Civilisation
<Both are in rebellion against God.> Okay, so despite the distinctions listed above, both liberalism and leftism do have one thing in common; they are both in rebellion against God. <There are too many similarities between libs and leftists to make a distinction between them. It's their rebellion against God that is at the root of their entire worldview.> Got it.
<The modern concept of liberalism came out of The Enlightenment, which was distinctly anti-Christian ...> How was the Enlightenment distinctly anti-Christian? <Satan was the first to rebel and then go on to justify his rebellion.> Why do you think God continued to tolerate Satan's presence, even after his rebellion, as described in chapters 1&2 of Job? |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | optimal play: <Count Wedgemore: My thesis is that Liberalism (*real* liberalism, that is) in the United States was hijacked by the Cultural Marxists who changed the basic premise: from defenders of freedom to enemies of freedom.> I agree.
BP is really talking about modern American liberalism or American neo-liberalism, as distinct from classical liberalism which came out of the Enlightenment. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | optimal play: <Big Pawn: If you study the philosophy of the time around the Englightenment, before and after, it's clear that it's anti God.> Can you give examples?
<What I'm getting at is that liberty and freedom are not always good things> Didn't God give us liberty and freedom?
Isn't it instead the abuse of liberty and freedom which is not good, rather than the liberty and freedom itself? Aren't liberty and freedom inherently good? |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | diceman: <Count Wedgemore:
My impression is this: what is usually meant with 'Liberal' in an American context is really a social liberal, not an economic one.> How are you defining a, "economic liberal?" |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Count Wedgemore: <diceman> Classic economic liberalism is more concerned with economic freedom than equality. They praise the virtues of the free market and small government. In the USA today these are features more seen on the right side of the political spectrum, like the so-called libertarians for instance. While the present day US Liberals are more statist, government intervention, even outright authoritarian in their economic views, while liberal in their moral, social and cultural views (even though, as I'm sure we agree on, they are getting increasingly illiberal and intolerant when it comes to opposing viewpoints). I hope this clarifies my point. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | technical draw: Hello, Big Pawn. I dropped by to say hello, The corona virus forced me to re-up to chessgames since I can hardly do anything. I hope we can have some good conversations on various topics. Right now I am writing about Christian and Jewish eschatology. I also use humor in this rather dull theme. Like the following: An Australian student went to Japan to study architecture. He learned fluent Japanese. When he got back to Australia and met a Japanese girl. Speaking English he invited her to dinner. He wanted to surprise he by speaking Japanese. So he says (in Japanese) "I think you are very beautiful and I would like to go out with you again". The girl was surprised and opened her eyes wide and said, "Sorry, I don't speak Japanese" |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | thegoodanarchist: < optimal play: <Big Pawn: Maybe some make a distinction between left and liberal but in the US, it's basically the same thing.> Prominent American radio talk show host, columnist and author, Dennis Prager does not think liberalism and leftism is the same thing. He lists six major distinctions between the attitudes held by liberals as opposed to the attitudes held by leftists: 1. Race
2. Capitalism
3. Nationalism
4. View of America
5. Free Speech
6. Western Civilisation >
Can you name a US liberal politician who isn't aligned with Leftists on #1,3, and 4? Retired ones, like Joe Lieberman, don't count. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | thegoodanarchist: good joke, <td>! <He wanted to surprise he by speaking Japanese. So he says (in Japanese) "I think you are very beautiful .... > Anata wa utsukushii desu |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | technical draw: <thegoodanarchist>: Anata wa utsukushii desu
Is that you are very beautiful or I don't speak Japanese? |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | thegoodanarchist: It is the one I cited: <he says (in Japanese) "I think you are very beautiful .... > I deleted the part that I didn't know how to say. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: <OP: Aren't liberty and freedom inherently good?> No. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: <op: How was the Enlightenment distinctly anti-Christian?> It's a cross between humanism and scientism. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: <op: Why do you think God continued to tolerate Satan's presence, even after his rebellion, as described in chapters 1&2 of Job?> You'd have to ask God any "why" questions I think. My guess would be that God uses Satan to sift the wheat. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: <op: optimal play: <Big Pawn: If you study the philosophy of the time around the Englightenment, before and after, it's clear that it's anti God.> Can you give examples? >
I think it requires delving deep into the philosophical work of the time. It's not something you can just cut and paste a paragraph of. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: <technical draw: Hello, Big Pawn. I dropped by to say hello, The corona virus forced me to re-up to chessgames since I can hardly do anything. I hope we can have some good conversations on various topics. > Hi <td>, I'm glad to see you are hanging in there and it's nice to see you back on cg. I just came back too, for about the same reason. I hope to attract good posters who can post here in my forum seriously, substantively and with insight. I'm trying to make this happen by posting my philosophical (or perhaps theological) thought for the week. Please contribute if you have something insightful to say. <Right now I am writing about Christian and Jewish eschatology.> I am very interested to read whatever you want to share. I find both Jewish and Christian eschatology to be fascinating, and well timed in the current season of plague and pestilence. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Big Pawn: < thegoodanarchist: < optimal play: <Big Pawn: Maybe some make a distinction between left and liberal but in the US, it's basically the same thing.> Prominent American radio talk show host, columnist and author, Dennis Prager does not think liberalism and leftism is the same thing. He lists six major distinctions between the attitudes held by liberals as opposed to the attitudes held by leftists: 1. Race
2. Capitalism
3. Nationalism
4. View of America
5. Free Speech
6. Western Civilisation > >
I don't agree with Prager on a lot of things. God doesn't even find His place on this short list of six issues, yet, your belief in God or lack thereof is fundamental to any and all worldviews. Anyone can list those little issues, like race and such, and it informs no one of anything they haven't already thought of or realized, but bringing it all back to the root cause, which is rebellion against God, hopefully brings the kind of insight that I want others to share here as well. Everything about liberal culture is an expression of antiChristianity and it is antiChrist. |
|
| Apr-01-20 | | Count Wedgemore: <Big Pawn: If you study the philosophy of the time around the Enlightenment, before and after, it's clear that it's anti-God> While it is true that the Enlightenment, and some of its most prominent representatives, was anti-Christian in its polemic against the Church (take some of the French revolutionaries, for example), the way Liberalism developed in the 19th century I don't see such a clear juxtaposition between it and Christian morality. Granted, roughly speaking the focus was on reason as opposed to faith, and secular ideals as opposed to religious values, but many 1800-liberals were not all anti-Christians, some were Christians themselves. And take a political giant as long time British PM William Ewart Gladstone, a leading social reformer in his day, and vastly inspired by liberal ideas of equality of opportunity and social reform (like fighting poverty). Yet, he was a fervent believer, an evangelical Christian throughout his life. And even if we go back to your founding fathers; most, if not all of them, were heavily influenced and inspired by classic liberal ideas spurn out of the Enlightenment. Yet, even the most secular-oriented of them, like Thomas Jefferson, cannot by any means be viewed as being hostile to Christianity. Au contraire, it was the best of both worlds, Id say. Religious and secular ideals found common ground in upholding a moral society based on individual responsibility and working for the common good but with compassion towards others - a moral imperative that united both Classical Liberals and Christians. There was no disconnect - at this point in History, although this would come later. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 134 OF 237 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
