Republicus

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door." The Statue of Liberty (P.S. Please be so kind as to enter through the proper channels and in an orderly fashion)

Name:
Location: Arlington, Virginia, United States

Friday, April 21, 2006

Greek Orthodox Good Friday

8 Comments:

Blogger Rumour said...

jesus would be liberal i think.

12:03 PM  
Blogger John said...

Good point, rumour.

He chided wealthy people's arrogance and condescending and uncharitable attitutudes towards the underprivileged.

He championed the Poor.

He made no distinctions and ministered to lepers and prostitutes--social pariahs-- as much as to Jewish aristocrats and Roman officers.

He bucked the conservative, religious establishment of his day and was called satanic in the process by the "Religious Right" (if you will).

That should not imply that conservatives today approve of arrogance and condescending attitudes, that wealthy people by their very wealth are de facto guilty of something, that conservative philosophy doesn't help the poor, that conservatives make personal distinctions on character based on fortunes and misfortunes, and that they're sheep who don't like to rock the boat and initiate change.

Jesus was a pious Jew and interpreted the Torah (i.e. the Old Testament) literally (but knew how to read between the lines and understand the spirit-- not so much the letter-- of the Law, something some of today's literalists seem to have missed), and made plenty of judgment calls based on the morality inherent in the Tome.

He did not engage in the moral equivalence peddled by liberalism today as it attempts to level the playing field between right and wrong and Good & Evil (as compelled by their philosophical relativism and religious atheism).

He is often quoted as saying "Do not judge," but leaving it at that is just a "Get Out Of Jail Free" card played by the guilty who don't want to accept personal responsibilty and admit their fault.

Jesus' "Do not judge" quote was in the context of hypocrisy, that is, as guest Kelly recently quoted, and as paraphrased here: it ain't right to be nitpicking on the splinter in someone's eye while you have an entire beam in your own (and one that doesn't bother you one bit, like the limousine liberal with a private jet who harps about Joe & Jane's SUV).

But judging, in and of itself, is no sin.

His saving of the adulteress' life (who was traditionally identified--if not misidentified-- as Magdalene) from stoning in the Gospel of John has also been misused--if not abused-- as an example that Jesus didn't really condemn sexual sins, but what is disregarded in that notion is Jesus' parting words to her: "Go, and SIN no more."

Obviously, he made a judgment call right there (i.e. that adultery was a sin).

It wasn't about acceptance--or indulgence, for that matter-- of her behavior (her *sinful* behavior), but about forgiveness--provided it is followed by genuine repentance.

So yesterday's liberal--Jesus--is today's conservative who is trying to *conserve* that Judeo-Christian moral system established by Jesus.

Today's liberal wants liberalization of all that, and it helps the endeavor to excise Him--Jesus-- out of society, doing stuff like removing "Christ" from "Chritmas" by x-ing Him out with X-Mas, saying that He was non-judgmental, and that he was a "liberal" by today's secularist, morally-equivalent standard of liberalism.

11:46 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

John said, "But judging itself is no sin.

We are just warned that IF we judge we will be held to the same standard.

Luke 6: 36-42

36 Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.

37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: bcondemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

38 Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

39 And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind blead the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?

40 The disciple is not above his master: but every one that is perfect shall be as his master.

41 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

42 Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother’s eye.
---

Also...

"
He chided wealthy people's arrogance and condescending and uncharitable attitutudes towards the underprivileged.

He championed the Poor.
"

However, he did not force the giving hand. He did not take from the rich and give to the poor. He did not compel the rich man...but rather invited him to give all that he had...however hard that may be.

"He bucked the conservative, religious establishment of his day and was called satanic in the process by the "Religious Right" (if you will)."

Christ's point was that the so called religious right had strayed from the teachings of the prophets...that is far different from the cries of today's liberals who point out that today's 'religious right' are old fashioned and judgemental.


PS: John...I commented on your question on my blog.

11:50 PM  
Blogger John said...

Kelly said:

"Christ's point was that the so called religious right had strayed from the teachings of the prophets...that is far different from the cries of today's liberals who point out that today's 'religious right' are old fashioned and judgemental."

Yeah, as if today's New Age liberals are the modernists in their embracing of polytheistic, Stone Age paganism and righteous in their cries of: "We judge you to be judgmental!"

9:43 AM  
Blogger Douglass said...

Rumor, in today's Western societies the political application of the word 'liberal, is entirely divorced form the meaning of the word liberal.

When used politically, ‘Liberal’ is a synonym of the word 'socialist'.

John, It might be in your best interests to hold your horses on attacking paganism.

Why?

'paganism’ is a smear label applied to a polytheistic religion not based in Judaism.

It is a straw man, because there is no religion actually named 'paganism'.

We wouldn't want those stone aged-moral relativists to succeed in making you look bad ;)

10:20 AM  
Blogger John said...

Thank you, Douglass. Perhaps I should have used the descriptive "Idolatry." ;)

And yes, today's "liberalism" is a far cry from definitive, Classical liberalism, which is practiced in spirit today by the conservatives (who conserve the Classical, Western Tradition, the very tradition today's "liberal" want "liberation" from, including its theistic underpinnings).

11:12 PM  
Blogger Kelly said...

John said, the very tradition today's "liberal" want "liberation" from, including its theistic underpinnings

...but they do have their 'gods'.


That should not imply that conservatives today approve of arrogance and condescending attitudes, that wealthy people by their very wealth are de facto guilty of something

But we forget that their are just as many wealthy liberals (always willing to give away OUR money) in this country as there are wealthy conservatives.

12:12 AM  
Blogger John said...

Kelly said:

"John said, 'the very tradition today's "liberal" want "liberation" from, including its theistic underpinnings'

...but they do have their 'gods'."

"Theistic" in this context is Western monotheism, a belief in "*to theo to Avraaam,*" (i.e. the God of Abraham), the One True God, whereas "atheism"--in this context, is a rejection of that specific *theo* in favor of others, so I'm not including across-the-board equal-opportunity atheists who are so because of rational skepticism.

The latter are simply following the dictates of their intellect and conscience, but the former pose as the latter to attack Christianity while advancing their own "New Age" religion(s) (which have their roots in Old World ancient Babylon and primitive tambourine-thumping cultures).

"'That should not imply that conservatives today approve of arrogance and condescending attitudes, that wealthy people by their very wealth are de facto guilty of something.'

But we forget that their are just as many wealthy liberals (always willing to give away OUR money) in this country as there are wealthy conservatives."

Don't look at me. I got their number, and discern quite clearly the hypocritical double-standard.

12:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home