Today, of course, is the Iowa Caucus. If previous polling is any proof of who will stand through for Iowa, we'll see:
Democrats
Clinton, Obama, Edwards
Republicans
Giuliani, Romney, Huckabee
Of those 6, the only candidate worth anything is Edwards. He has the experience that Obama lacks, the morality that Clinton lacks, and the knowledge that the Republicans lack that morality doesn't necessarily have a place in politics. He is a very Machiavellian candidate, which I like.
Sphere: Related Content
7 comments:
Morality is indistinguishable from legislation. Legislation is merely the putting into place of ONE morality to the exclusion of certain others, leading to the enforcement of that idea.
Does that change what you've said?
If I agreed with you, it certainly would. However, Christ never legislated anything. Rather, He seemed to take great offense with the Jewish leaders who did.
When we allow our nation to become a Theocracy, we start heading down exactly the same path as the ancient Jews.
Christ never legislated anything?
"I tell you, anyone who looks on a woman with lust has committed adultery with her in his heart."
"If you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift."
"But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery."
"But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 35or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is(BM) the city of the great King. 36And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. 37Let what you say be simply 'Yes' or 'No'; anything more than this comes from evil."
Etc.
Of course He did.
What He criticised the Jewish leaders for was being hypocrites (Matt 23) and for adding their own human traditions to God's law (Mark 7). Yes, God's LAW.
But what else did He say about the Law?
"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished." (Matt 5:17-18)
He had a pretty high opinion of the Law, since it came forth from God and all.
I didn't argue for a theocracy. I said that any law is a moral statement.
It's wrong to go faster than 25 mph in a school zone.
It's wrong to burn down someone's property
It's wrong to hold up a bank.
It's perfectly fine to stick a scalpel into a nearly-born baby's brain and then dismember her and 'birth' her that way.
It's perfectly fine for the gov't to force me to give them lots of the money that I earned.
It's wrong to kidnap a woman in order to protect her baby from the scalpel at the abortuary to which she is en route.
Etc.
So the struggle in gov't of a nation is WHOSE morality will be imposed, not WHETHER it will be. EVERY law is an imposition of morality on everyone else. Even a nation that makes no laws makes a moral statement - it's not a high-enough moral priority to make any laws governing behavior.
I still stand by my statement. He legislated *the Church* and not the political system. He preached that we should pray for our leaders, but understand that God put them in place for a reason. He also said "give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" - while this was specifically talking about taxes and tithes, it shows a very early "separation of church and state" policy. I interpret this as saying that politics and religion are separate.
God proved that He had power over human authorities throughout the Bible, but one specific occasion was when Paul and Silas were thrown into prison in Acts 16. An earthquake caused the jail cell to open. When the jailer saw it, he was afraid because he thought surely the prisoners had escaped, but Paul and Silas stayed right where they were. The point of this story: Yes, God has authority, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't submit to human authority.
Even Jesus submitted Himself to the human authorities. Yes, it was because everything was working together for God's plan of salvation, but the point remains that He submitted to human authority. Whenever any of the major figures of the New Testament were facing political trouble, they faced the leaders by working within the political system. None of them ever tried to change it. They certainly argued their own cases, and used what political tools they had at their disposal (such as Paul's being born a citizen of the Roman Empire), but they did not change the law.
He legislated *the Church* and not the political system.
Well, now you're changing the issue a bit. Your original statement was "morality doesn't necessarily have a place in politics".
Jesus criticised the religious leaders (read: governing authorities, since it was a theocracy) of His day for making bad laws, for hypocritically twisting around others, and straight-up disobeying still others.
And you're arguing that they had no responsibility to change?
Even Jesus submitted Himself to the human authorities.
Not b/c they were in the right or had authority over Him. It was b/c it had been planned from eternity past that He would be put to death unjustly.
None of them ever tried to change it.
Jesus' numerous criticisms of the way the Pharisees had changed the Law of God and refused to obey it themselves overthrow this assertion.
And did you have a response to my last paragraph that started with: "I said that any law is a moral statement." ?
Peace,
Rhology
"Morality is indistinguishable from legislation."
That's what I was bringing into question.
"since it was a theocracy) of His day for making bad laws, for hypocritically twisting around others, and straight-up disobeying still others."
How often do we do that? How can we be sure we're not doing that now? I, for one, am absolutely convinced that we are.
For instance, the sex offender laws we have right now are some of the worst laws from a human rights standpoint this country has ever had (although to say they are the worst would be a complete disservice to some of the groups that have been even more downtrodden than sex offenders in the past). Most of the people pushing the sex offender laws are Christians worried about kids. However, the vast majority of people who end up on a sex offender registry are not there because they would ever harm children, and the law doesn't discriminate between one sex crime and another. A man who is drunk and urinates in an alley is treated the same as a man who rapes 5-year-olds, as far as the sex offender laws are concerned. Both have committed wrongdoing, but one is not a danger to society and the other is. One should be punished only enough to make him change his ways, the other should be off the streets for life. But instead of these two rather sane alternatives, we have an insane alternative that is akin to what we expect to find when Revelations occurs - people having to register on government monitoring lists that choose where they are to live, work, and play. I'm tempted to draw a parallel to the Holocaust, but for the fact that the Holocaust was far more horrific and targetted people simply because of their race rather than sexual wrongdoings. The point remains, though, that the similarities are there. In some localities, housing is impossible for sex offenders to obtain, so they are forced to either move far away or choose to live as criminals, without registering, and with the very real possibility of being thrown back into jail.
Sex offender registries are a kind of open jail that requires the sex offender to pay all his own bills, but a jail that is every bit as prohibitive as a real prison. How is that even remotely humane? The answer: it isn't, and yet it's being perpetrated by Christians in the name of security.
That's how the Beast will come - in the name of security. And we'll all welcome him in, because we're all too hypocritical and blind to see the Truth. Christ is love, He is forgiveness, He is understanding, He is redemption. Christ offers people a second chance. His followers do not.
I'm a bit horrified, to be honest. I've responded.
Post a Comment