Indifference to History and Consequences

Started by Mark Brown, October 11, 2019, 09:31:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

readselerttoo

Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on October 12, 2019, 03:43:48 PM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 12, 2019, 12:28:03 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 12, 2019, 11:37:56 AM
Quote from: The Augsburg ConfessionArticle XVI: Of Civil Affairs.
Of Civil Affairs they teach that lawful civil ordinances are good works of God, and that it is right for Christians to bear civil office, to sit as judges, to judge matters by the Imperial and other existing laws, to award just punishments, to engage in just wars, to serve as soldiers, to make legal contracts, to hold property, to make oath when required by the magistrates, to marry a wife, to be given in marriage.

They condemn the Anabaptists who forbid these civil offices to Christians.

They condemn also those who do not place evangelical perfection in the fear of God and in faith, but in forsaking civil offices, for the Gospel teaches an eternal righteousness of the heart. Meanwhile, it does not destroy the State or the family, but very much requires that they be preserved as ordinances of God, and that charity be practiced in such ordinances. Therefore, Christians are necessarily bound to obey their own magistrates and laws save only when commanded to sin; for then they ought to obey God rather than men. Acts 5:29.


It does not require any particular form of government, just this:
1) So long as the government requires you not to do wrong, obey.
2) When the government requires you to do wrong, disobey.

Charles is correct when he says "There are dozens and dozens, probably hundreds of political orders." (although they're mostly variations on just a few themes)


Unless the reductio back to the origin of political order is God then any other origin is considered atheism.  We the people design what has been pre-ordained as God's order into what we as Americans believe to be a sound and orderly way of strucuring life together as a society.  But the originator is God not humans.

Did God pre-ordain the Israelite monarchy; or did God allow the sinful humans to follow their own plans to be a nation ruled by a king like the other nations around them?

You haven't reduced back to the origin.  Regardless of what sinners do within the order God has provided an arena into which people organize themselves politically.  Whether the choices they make and fate produce good or evil is what history presents.  Israel politically is no exception

pastorg1@aol.com

#31
Just returned from the Rare Book Section of the Library of Congress and a private viewing of the contents of Lincoln's pockets.

Humility was there: newspaper articles critical of his presidency, a five dollar Confederate bill, spectacles fixed with a bit of twine...

After Lincoln's death, his secretaries found among his papers an undated manuscript now generally known as the "Meditations on the Divine Will."

In that manuscript, Lincoln wrote:

The will of God prevails—In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be wrong. God cannot be for, and against the same thing at the same time. In the present civil war it is quite possible that God's purpose is somewhat different from the purpose of either party—and yet the human instrumentalities, working just as they do, are of the best adaptation to effect this.

Here in the Bay Area there is the cheap, shrill thrill of virtue-signaling. At Washington National Airport the MAGA Souvenir stands are passed by or frequented without a fuss. In the Bay Area one wears a MAGA hat to one's peril. Both areas are hugely democratic and yet the different level of civility is startling.

"Both May be wrong..." is the humble hermeneutic premise to political discussion and debate.





Pete Garrison
RC Catechist

J. Thomas Shelley

Quote from: pastorg1@aol.com on October 13, 2019, 12:19:46 AM
"Both May be wrong..." is the humble hermeneutic premise to political discussion and debate.

Or perhaps, in the words of the great Bard, "a plague on both your houses."
Greek Orthodox Deacon - Ecumenical Patriarchate
Ordained to the Holy Diaconate Mary of Egypt Sunday A.D. 2022

Baptized, Confirmed, and Ordained United Methodist.
Served as a Lutheran Pastor October 31, 1989 - October 31, 2014.
Charter member of the first chapter of the Society of the Holy Trinity.

Paul O Malley

Quote from: Dave Benke on October 11, 2019, 02:14:46 PM
Donald Trump   Boomer
Bill Clinton       Boomer
Hillary Clinton   Boomer
E. Warren        Boomer
Mitt Romney    Boomer
George Bush    Boomer

Just say you're welcome, Mark.  We'll be running for office and running the country until - well, maybe until you become our age now. 

Your vocal/verbal distaste for the entire generation, including church workers and church leaders from that era, is interesting to me, not in a funny way.  Many of us were raised in homes and churches where the fourth commandment was highly regarded.  But that's not your way of looking at it.

Dave Benke

Glancing down this list, my first reaction to "E. Warren" was to think, "Earl Warren, a boomer? I think not." 
Paul O'Malley - NALC layman
Supporting the observance of Central Time across Indiana since 1967.

Richard Johnson

Quote from: Paul O Malley on October 13, 2019, 09:23:12 AM
Quote from: Dave Benke on October 11, 2019, 02:14:46 PM
Donald Trump   Boomer
Bill Clinton       Boomer
Hillary Clinton   Boomer
E. Warren        Boomer
Mitt Romney    Boomer
George Bush    Boomer

Just say you're welcome, Mark.  We'll be running for office and running the country until - well, maybe until you become our age now. 

Your vocal/verbal distaste for the entire generation, including church workers and church leaders from that era, is interesting to me, not in a funny way.  Many of us were raised in homes and churches where the fourth commandment was highly regarded.  But that's not your way of looking at it.

Dave Benke

Glancing down this list, my first reaction to "E. Warren" was to think, "Earl Warren, a boomer? I think not."

That's what I thought, too! It's because we're old.
The Rev. Richard O. Johnson, STS

James S. Rustad

Quote from: George Rahn on October 12, 2019, 12:21:46 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on October 12, 2019, 12:07:50 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 12, 2019, 11:37:56 AM
It does not require any particular form of government, just this:
1) So long as the government requires you not to do wrong, obey.
2) When the government requires you to do wrong, disobey.

Charles is correct when he says "There are dozens and dozens, probably hundreds of political orders." (although they're mostly variations on just a few themes)

Does every individual get to decide what is wrong? By what criteria does one determine that something is wrong? Issues of right and wrong have divided our country perhaps from the beginning?

was it wrong to revolt from England
was it wrong to own slaves
was it wrong to relocate Native Americans; is it wrong to give them back their traditional lands
is it wrong to drink alcohol that can lead to drunkenness and addiction
is it wrong to make marijuana available
is it wrong to allow women the right to choose to have a safe abortion
is it wrong to allow same-sex marriages;
is it wrong to give same-couples the same civil rights as married couples
is it wrong to increasing the suffering of non-criminal refugees seeking protection in the U.S.
and so on

No.  Not every individual.  Individuals who have banded together under similar beliefs of what is right and wrong do live politically.  Or should I say, individuals as sinners band together on what they believe to be right and wrong.  Notice it is a group of sinners believe what is right or wrong not one individual.  This is basic civics class stuff.

Ultimately it does come down to what the individual believes.  If I were the only person to believe that it is wrong to kill everyone who is thirty or older, does that make the killing right and me wrong?

Your "basic civics class stuff" has been used to justify many evil acts.
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -Thomas Jefferson

readselerttoo

Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 10:36:29 AM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 12, 2019, 12:21:46 PM
Quote from: Brian Stoffregen on October 12, 2019, 12:07:50 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 12, 2019, 11:37:56 AM
It does not require any particular form of government, just this:
1) So long as the government requires you not to do wrong, obey.
2) When the government requires you to do wrong, disobey.

Charles is correct when he says "There are dozens and dozens, probably hundreds of political orders." (although they're mostly variations on just a few themes)

Does every individual get to decide what is wrong? By what criteria does one determine that something is wrong? Issues of right and wrong have divided our country perhaps from the beginning?

was it wrong to revolt from England
was it wrong to own slaves
was it wrong to relocate Native Americans; is it wrong to give them back their traditional lands
is it wrong to drink alcohol that can lead to drunkenness and addiction
is it wrong to make marijuana available
is it wrong to allow women the right to choose to have a safe abortion
is it wrong to allow same-sex marriages;
is it wrong to give same-couples the same civil rights as married couples
is it wrong to increasing the suffering of non-criminal refugees seeking protection in the U.S.
and so on

No.  Not every individual.  Individuals who have banded together under similar beliefs of what is right and wrong do live politically.  Or should I say, individuals as sinners band together on what they believe to be right and wrong.  Notice it is a group of sinners believe what is right or wrong not one individual.  This is basic civics class stuff.

Ultimately it does come down to what the individual believes.  If I were the only person to believe that it is wrong to kill everyone who is thirty or older, does that make the killing right and me wrong?

Your "basic civics class stuff" has been used to justify many evil acts.

Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.


James S. Rustad

Quote from: George Rahn on October 13, 2019, 04:14:03 PM
Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.

You stray awfully close to "I was only following orders."
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -Thomas Jefferson

peter_speckhard

Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 13, 2019, 04:14:03 PM
Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.

You stray awfully close to "I was only following orders."
Not at all. The point was that the people giving the orders are flawed. The obeying of orders in the abstract is good and God pleasing. Sinners ruin it by giving wicked orders, which means we must all weigh the orders we receive against God's Law.

James S. Rustad

Quote from: peter_speckhard on October 13, 2019, 09:09:23 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 13, 2019, 04:14:03 PM
Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.

You stray awfully close to "I was only following orders."
Not at all. The point was that the people giving the orders are flawed. The obeying of orders in the abstract is good and God pleasing. Sinners ruin it by giving wicked orders, which means we must all weigh the orders we receive against God's Law.

Which was exactly my point.  We are each responsible for the actions we take, regardless of whether or not the government has commanded something.  George seems to reject that responsibility.
"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -Thomas Jefferson

readselerttoo

Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 10:08:26 PM
Quote from: peter_speckhard on October 13, 2019, 09:09:23 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 13, 2019, 04:14:03 PM
Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.

You stray awfully close to "I was only following orders."
Not at all. The point was that the people giving the orders are flawed. The obeying of orders in the abstract is good and God pleasing. Sinners ruin it by giving wicked orders, which means we must all weigh the orders we receive against God's Law.

Which was exactly my point.  We are each responsible for the actions we take, regardless of whether or not the government has commanded something.  George seems to reject that responsibility.

Again, the issue is making a distinction between God's order/configuration in existence/estate and the powers wielded by humans within that estate.  Marriage is an order/estate created by God within which one man and one woman "step into and thus live out of."  God doesn't simply create and sustain formlessly.  I am the first born son of my parents.  An order/estate/configuration of existence where and within which I am called by God to live under God's law and as a sinner face God's judgments, ie. You will die.   Hint:  think Adam and Eve

readselerttoo

Quote from: peter_speckhard on October 13, 2019, 09:09:23 PM
Quote from: James S. Rustad on October 13, 2019, 07:13:09 PM
Quote from: George Rahn on October 13, 2019, 04:14:03 PM
Then your argument is not with me but with Aristotle, Plato and Cicero.

You stray awfully close to "I was only following orders."
Not at all. The point was that the people giving the orders are flawed. The obeying of orders in the abstract is good and God pleasing. Sinners ruin it by giving wicked orders, which means we must all weigh the orders we receive against God's Law.

Yes.

readselerttoo

#42
We are not born as individuals so much as we are born with a father and a mother, ie a family.  The issue of the individual pulled from its connections is an Enlightenment concept.  To a certain extent it does harm to political existence in that the impact made by individuals does not go unaffected in the impact made on all the different estates/orders we are placed in by God.  Family, marriage, citizen and nationality.

Again, this is basic civics class stuff.

And I'm not talking about how all this plays out in specific historical events.  History can speak for itself.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk