God Bless Racist America

I see there have already been some interesting and inflammatory comments in my previous post. While we're in truth telling mode - might as well address the whole silly "racism" deal. Is America racist?

Let's pose a better and more interesting question - though perhaps impossible to answer: Name one country that isn't? In some it festers quietly below the surface. In others it erupts in mass murder. Mankind has been tribal since his beginning and we will never fully transcend that.

That doesn't mean that we will always, or should ever discriminate based on race, or any other factor. But the notion that factors like race just shouldn't exist is absolutely ridiculous and an impossible reality to achieve. Were America not racist, there would be no "Black candidate" for the Democrat nomination - Obama would be just another individual. One can read any article on Obama today and see that isn't the case.

The idiot liberals betray their incredible inability to reason or be honest through their positions. Think about it. On the one hand they claim their goal is a "color blind" society - yet, at the very same time, they preach preserving every archaic and mostly useless custom, tradition and myth for every culture that comes through America's broad and welcoming door.

Well, which is it, you idiots? Are we all the same? Or is each so uniquely different we need to indulge stupidity like Kwanza, or Cinco de Mayo through national declaration? Because, what you morons haven't figured out, or won't admit, is that you can't have it both ways.

The reality is, before modern liberalism took hold - America actually was less racist than it is today. Of course, that comes with the notable exception of the Black experience in America, shrouded in a unique evil because of the practice of slavery in America.

But even there, what do many liberals support? Reparations? Forget that it's an idiotic idea - what it reveals more is liberals unwillingness to forget any grievance, or move on from the past, as it provides a home for their imbecility. The only thing they seek to "move on" from is the winning of a war, because that would celebrate America's strength - as opposed to nurturing any potential weakness in her national fabric. And that's what today's liberal is really about.

They don't want a strong or good America. They long for one wretched, watered-down world where no one and nothing is any better then the next. Somehow they think that would make for a utopia, instead of the soulless, dead and devoid of choice a world it would be. Today's liberals are hypocrites, liars, idiots, and, yes, traitors. They lack honor as much as they lack any sense. And when you confront their unreasonableness with reason, they spin off like tops, ultimately destined to wobble and fall when they lose momentum.

As for the notion of racism, well what is it, really? It is the ability to distinguish an individual based upon his race - nothing more and nothing less. And it will never go away so long as "races" exist. I rather suspect that will be for a long, long time. And how any one individual might feel about this or that race might lower itself to being repugnant, the fact is, it isn't the government's damned business.

I am not arguing for institutionalized racism - that's wrong. Formal policies and or regulations of government and business should indeed be "color blind." But any one man's heart is what it is - and it is for him to decide that. Not some nanny state government, or kvetching, crying liberal.

If you want to dislike or distrust one race - I'd argue, that's your loss, as you close yourself off to many fine people who might have something to contribute to your world. But it's your cross to bear, not mine, and certainly not the governments. Yet, liberals, who supposedly detest organized religion, would have the government be the authoritative preacher in the most dangerous congregation of them all: the socialist state.

And so, my friends, as we celebrate the realities above, I say, God Bless a racist America, long may she reign - and to Hell with the morons who comprise the Left today. As they aren't worth the salt it took God to make them, let them burn in the fires of the vapid, illogical perdition they've created for themselves through a lack of clear thinking and reason. It's really no great loss to the world and represents absolutely no loss to me.

Amen

Comments

[seekeronos]

"--- If you want to dislike or distrust one race - I'd argue, that's your loss, as you close yourself off to many fine people who might have something to contribute to your world. But it's your cross to bear, not mine, and certainly not the governments. Yet, liberals, who supposedly detest organized religion, would have the government be the authoritative preacher in the most dangerous congregation of them all: the socialist state.If you want to dislike or distrust one race - I'd argue, that's your loss, as you close yourself off to many fine people who might have something to contribute to your world. But it's your cross to bear, not mine, and certainly not the governments. Yet, liberals, who supposedly detest organized religion, would have the government be the authoritative preacher in the most dangerous congregation of them all: the socialist state. ---"

Well said.

Somehow, I doubt that the socialist/liberal trolls that dwell here will be able to read that far without their heads exploding.

Or they'll scan right past it to "God Bless a racist America, long may she reign ..." and bleed a litany of what a nasty guy you were for saying that.

[jharp]

Jesus was a liberal.

[jharp]

And liberals don't detest organized religion.

We just want our government to stay out of it.

Like the first amendment says.

[seekeronos]

Actually, Jesus was quite conservative, if you must insist that the liberal = change.

For God changeth not, yea, the Eternal Word of the Lord saith:

"---- Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever. -----" (Hebrews 13:8, KJV)

"----- Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. -----" (James 1:17, KJV)

"----- The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever. -----" (Isaiah 40:8, KJV)

And at the last did Jesus say unto John the Revelator:

"----- I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. -----" (Revelation 20:13, KJV)

Man wanted to "change" from God's perfect ways, and to do whatever was right in his sight. This is SIN.

He wants men to repent of their sins, accept His redeeming work on the cross, and return to Him.

That is God's GRACE, and our REDEMPTION.

Jesus is not a liberal, nor a socialist.

Just because some of Marx's ideas very loosely mimic those of Christ's does not make him a disciple of the Lord Jesus, especially considering that Marxism has advanced itself upon the corpses of millions of believers-saints.

[nom de guerre]

"jesus was a liberal"??

nowhere in the bible can i find jesus calling for large, intrusive, enforced-at-gunpoint government social-engineering programs. that IS what liberals do, right? hmmmm....blah blah blah preach; blah blah heal the sick; yadda yadda last supper .....

nope. no liberalism.

now HITLER - that proponent of big-government socialist activism; the guy who nationalized industry; the guy who wanted every good german drawing a government paycheck - HITLER was a liberal.

or would y'all prefer that not be mentioned?

[jharp]

Biblical Quotes Supporting the Belief that Jesus Is A Liberal

Peacemaking, not War Making: Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God. [Matthew 5:9] Resist
not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. [Matthew 5:39] I say unto you, Love your
enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despite-fully use you, and persecute
you; [Matthew 5:44]

The Death Penalty: Thou shalt not kill [Matthew 5:21]

Crime and Punishment: If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to cast a stone at her. [John 8:7] Do not judge, lest
you too be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged and with the measure you use, it will be measured to
you. [Matthew 7:1 & 2.]

Justice: Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. [Matthew 5:6] Blessed are the
merciful: for they shall obtain mercy [Matthew 5:7] But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses. [Matthew 6:15]

Corporate Greed and the Religion of Wealth: In the temple courts [Jesus] found men selling cattle, sheep and doves and other
sitting at tables exchanging money. So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle;
he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. [John 2:14 & 15.] Watch out! Be on your guard against
all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions. [Luke 12.15.] Truly, I say unto you, it will
be hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. [Matthew 19:23] You cannot serve both God and Money. [Matthew 6:24.]

Paying Taxes & Separation of Church & State: Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the
things that are God's. [Matthew 22:21]

Community: Love your neighbor as yourself. .[Matthew 22:39] So in everything, do to others as you would have them do to you.
[Matthew 7:12.] If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.
[Matthew 19:21]

Equality & Social Programs: But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed,
because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just. [Luke 14:13 &14.]

Public Prayer & Displays of Faith: And when thou pray, thou shall not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in
the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
But thou, when thou pray, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret…
[Matthew 6:6 & 7]

Strict Enforcement of Religious Laws: If any of you has a son or a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take
hold of it and lift it out? [Matthew 12:11] The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. [Mark 2:27.]

Individuality & Personal Spiritual Experience: Ye are the light of the world. [Matthew 5:14]

Follow the Truth.....wherever it leads you!

[jharp]

Gotta run.

Try to not let your hate and the fact that the liberals are taking over get you down.

What really tickles me is even the GOP nominee, Senator McCain, is a liberal.

Conservatism is toast and good riddance.

[Fred Beloit]

You got the runs alright, Harpo, the verbal runs. I've yet to meet a liberal who would: turn the other cheek when slapped, not cast the first stone, love their enemies, sell their possessions and give to the poor (they want to give the assets of others to the poor in order to get the votes of the poor), pray only in secret, be on guard against greed, invite the poor to a feast (are you babbling about food stamps?), not believe a man's life consists in the abundance of his possessions.

[TheSpartan]

"they preach preserving every archaic and mostly useless custom, tradition and myth for every culture that comes through America's broad and welcoming door."

Like Christmas and Easter?

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Actually, Jesus was quite conservative, if you must insist that the liberal = change. --"

Jesus is the defining factor between Judaism and Catholicism. A fair number of Jewish strictures - no eating shellfish, proper treatment of menopausal women, working on the Sabbath - were overturned by Jesus during his time on earth.

Jesus revolutionized how his religion dealt with disease - in his handling of the lepers - crime - meeting openly with prostitutes and counciling his disciples to visit the imprisoned - and taxes - "Give unto Caeser..." He broke the conventional wisdom of his age that Jews were God's only Chosen People and opened the entire faith up to Gentiles. Like Moses before him and Mohammad after, he would rock the very foundations of his belief system.

How you can claim that this makes him "conservative" is entirely beyond me.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- I've yet to meet a liberal who would: turn the other cheek when slapped, not cast the first stone, love their enemies, sell their possessions and give to the poor (they want to give the assets of others to the poor in order to get the votes of the poor), pray only in secret, be on guard against greed, invite the poor to a feast (are you babbling about food stamps?), not believe a man's life consists in the abundance of his possessions. --"

Then you live under a rock, Fred. I know numerous people who have performed any number of these feats. Some were conservatives, some were liberals. Of course, none of them were out-and-out jackholes, so they probably didn't run in your circle.

[Fred Beloit]

What's a jackhole, Moe? I don't know but it sounds very offensive, insensitive, provocative, and hateful. Am I close? And what kind of people have you been hanging around with who use words like this?

[templar knight]

"Try not to let your hate and the fact that liberals are taking over get you down."

Trust me on this one, nothing you and your fellow Leftists do can get me down. Motivate me...yeah, you can certainly do that, but I see everything as just another challenge, just another mountain to climb, just another river to cross.

[tally]

until this election, i thought we had already "been there, done that" with the racist stuff. i guess not. all i know is that i'm not going to waste my life thinking in black & white, nor am i going to hang with peeps who do. makes me sick actually.

[Worst President Ever]

That is one of the most confused pieces I've read in awhile. It's not often you get to read a defense of racism conflated with a condemnation of all liberals as traitors to be sent to the gallows.

Sieg Hiel, Der Fuerher Dan.

[jharp]

Hey seeker,

You seem a thoughtful,compassionate, and religious man.

Take a listen on Reverend MLK on Vietnam.

Hope you do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b80Bsw0UG-U&eurl=http://www.sadlyno.com/

[seekeronos]

Before I touch that video, I'll start by saying that I'd view the VN war's cases belli thru the same framework I do this one - was it a constitutionally declared war?

AFAIK, it wasn't.

I'll be back after BSG, season 4 starts in about 10 min. :)

[moldy]

"On the one hand they claim their goal is a "color blind" society - yet, at the very same time, they preach preserving every archaic and mostly useless custom, tradition and myth for every culture that comes through America's broad and welcoming door."

Hi Dan,

I think the concept of being "color blind" means that you can look past a persons skin color, culture, customs, etc and still see them as an equal. You can still recognize and respect their differences.

I agree - it's a great theory, but a "color-blind" society is probably something that can never truly happen.

Personally though, that doesn't mean that I will wake up each morning, give in to my own ignorance, and label all customs I don't understand as "useless and archaic". Although I will admit, sometimes I do find it easier.

Moldy

[Lala]

Diversity is wonderful -

But yesterday one motorist offered what must be a unique reason why he should keep his licence.

Mohammed Anwar said a ban would make it difficult to commute between his two wives and fulfil his matrimonial duties.

His lawyer told a Scottish court the Muslim restaurant owner has one wife in Motherwell and another in Glasgow - he is allowed up to four under his religion - and sleeps with them on alternate nights.

He also needed his driving licence to run his restaurant in Falkirk, Stirlingshire.

Airdrie Sheriff Court had heard that Anwar was caught driving at 64mph in a 30mph zone in Glasgow, fast enough to qualify for instant disqualification.

Anwar admitted the offence, but Sheriff John C. Morris accepted his plea not to be banned and allowed him to keep his licence.

Instead, he was fined £200 and given six penalty points.

Lorna Jackson, from the road safety charity Brake, called the decision "astonishing".

[Ralph]

I think what is at work here is the notion that racist is the a worst thing a person could be. It is bad of course but there are many things just as bad or worse.

[BobInStamford]

Speaking of racists, that broken old man had to apologize again yesterday for vetoing an MLK holiday. A real winner, that guy.

[Fred Beloit]

moldy, whom I have the honor of having named, writes: "Personally though, that doesn't mean that I will wake up each morning, give in to my own ignorance, and label all customs I don't understand as "useless and archaic".

How about those time-honored customs of clitorectomy, stoning of adulteresses, and letting adulterers off with a verbal reprimand, moldy? Would these come under the heading of useless or archaic?

[moldy]

Hi Fred,

I think the tradition of forcing women to have a clitorectomy falls into the category of "violence against women". This category is not archaic - it exists in modern society in different forms.

Moldy

[templar knight]

Moldy, those doing the clitorectomies are women. Does this fall into the category of "women doing violence against other women", or perhaps you ought to agree with Fred, and admit these to be archaic customs practiced by ignorant barbarians.

[LOL]

"The reality is, before modern liberalism took hold - America actually was less racist than it is today. Of course, that comes with the notable exception of the Black experience in America, shrouded in a unique evil because of the practice of slavery in America."

Bullshit.

[Fred Beloit]

LOL, thanks for the input. You have certainly won me to your side with this penetrating insight.

[seekeronos]

For jharp:

Concerning the passages (particularly Sermon on the Mount) you quoted, you must understand that these things Jesus preaches about are for everyone who would follow God; they are to be the outworkings of a Christ-lead, Holy-Spirit-filled life.

The paradigm of "left" and "right" and liberalism and conservatism are not really addressed by God: what He desires is repentance and an individual commitment to doing what is right.

He never preached that *governments* should do this, for it difficult, if not impossible, for kings, prelates, prophets or other rulers to legislate morality and expect to compel people to fully obey it. Even if they do, they won't be doing it from their hearts.

Consider the fact that the people to whom Jesus was speaking - the Jewish descendants of Israel and Judah - were children of the original Covenant. They *had* the Law and the Prophets, the very oracles of God that instructed them how to live. In fact, some rather throrough and demanding laws regarding personal and public morality.

Yet, the children of Israel failed in the hearts to observe these laws, and at best, certain folks followed it to the letter while never really believing it in their hearts; such became the hypocrisy of the Pharisees and the doubting disbelief and compromise of the Saducees with the world (specifically Hellenism), and the asceticism of the Essenes and the extremist rebellions (cf. Islamic jihadism) of the Zealots.

All of these were false and misleading teachings to what Jesus was all about - compassion, love, mercy, forgiveness.

While the outward effects of Biblical, faithful Christianity overlap those intended by socialism and Marxism, they key difference is that the former is based upon God's unfailing Word, and is centered in the worship of a perfect and unfailing God; the latter is based upon the corrupt and fallen man, and a worship of Mankind and all of his vainglorious "accomplishments".

Yet, it (socialism) leaves behind a legacy of failure.

Conservatism (true, constitution-loving, classic American conservatism) on the other hand, *realizes* the failed and fallen state of man, his basic greed, and his core selfish nature, and seeks to limit governmental power. For our government is made up of those same fallen and failed men.

Therefore, the three documents that underpin America - the Holy Bible (King James version), the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights help to merge the attributes that Jesus seeks for Christians to have, and the limits the federal government's power of individuals, and over the states.

The federal government has an enumerated right to regulate interstate commerce; to the degree that corporations (created legal entities, and not individual persons) exist and overstep reasonable bounds to either control people or resources and commodities, perhaps it has constitutional purview to intervene.

I stand by my opinion that Jesus would be conservative - in the vein that he represents conservatism - purity - to *His* eternal Word, and to the principles of His Heavenly Kingdom.

A Kingdom not of this earth, and a Kingdom which is promised to come - with all of its qualities of mercy, love, compassion, and forgiveness - to place all other kingship and sovereignty at the feet of Christ.

To the degree that Americans choose to observe God's principles and implement them, is reflected in our standing with God. This is our free will in action; to the degree we turn our backs on God, and reject His proven, unfailing Word, and pursue empire and practice injustice and wickedness, the murder of infants and the love of perversion and sexual immorality (homo- or hetero- ) we shall also be judged as an empire.

Concerning the MLK video, I'll take into consideration the time in which it was made, and set aside Dr. King's particular political views (considerably left of mine) I feel that the government should only allow as much of a standing army as needed to secure the borders, a Navy able to maintain a naval nuclear deterrent as well as keeping a global response to foreign threats, and secure our merchant marine trade. An Aerospace Force that can neutralize threats to our airspace; beyond the support of foreign ports of call, we have no business fielding army groups in Europe, Asia, Mesopotamia, or even Latin America.

Those monies can be returned to the pockets of hard-working Americans, and to charities and church organizations that can help out the disadvantaged in our communities.

I'm not even opposed to a "single payer" system, so long as it means that the existing health care networks can be brought into it, and providers can compete to provide services... and that the government doesn't try to manage the actual practice of medicine, or try to become the dispenser of health care.

The trouble I find with the neo-conservative approach that has not been very successful in leading our nation (they have been VERY successful in trying to build an empire -- and yes, there is deeper meaning behind my saying so) is that they have neglected to follow the same Christian principles that they said they supported (which Pat Robertson and Jimmy Falwell are _not_ representative of).

[moldy]

Fair enough TK, its a good point. And upon reflection and further reading, I will agree that is more of a custom/tradition than an act of violence. And just to make sure there is no misunderstanding - I don't agree with the practice.

My inital post was not an attempt to condone all religious practices. My point is that religious customs should not be automatically dismissed as "archaic and useless" just because we don't understand them.

Regarding circumsision - if clitorectomies (ie Female circumsision) is archaic, does this mean that the male circumsion is also archaic? And does this make Rabbi's barbarians?

Moldy

[moldy]

spelling alert ... circumCision. sheesh.

[templar knight]

"And does this make Rabbi's barbarians?"

Good point, it might just be as you say. I think I heard somewhere that circumcision lessens the occurance of some cancers and other diseases, but nevertheless it is not done in an attempt to destroy the sexuality of men, so I put it more into the custom category.

Oh, and don't misunderstand me, Moldy, I put female circumcision in the violence category, performed by people who wish to control the lives of other people through archaic customs. Performed by the ignorant.

[Fred Beloit]

Woah. Circumcision, is not the same as clitorectomy. The circumcised male retains all major centers of excitement.

[LOL]

"LOL, thanks for the input. You have certainly won me to your side with this penetrating insight."

Dan just made simple declarations as well; I've seen no criticism of his persuasiveness from you.

But fair enough: there was a time when being Irish was looked on as a race, Being Jewish was more raciaized, and let's not even get into Asians or Latinos. To say today is more racist than the conservative dream world of the 1950s is absurd.

[seekeronos]

"--- But fair enough: there was a time when being Irish was looked on as a race...

...To say today is more racist than the conservative dream world of the 1950s is absurd. ---"

Short version:

You missed the point. Entirely.

Dan did not say that we are more racist. He simply acknowledges the sinful, wicked nature of man, and admits that most people do have - at some level - some form of racist thinking.

His point is that people are very tribal, and this will never be worked completely out of us in this lifetime. By forcing "multicultural correctness" on people, and especially to the exclusion of the majority (and yes, that means white, male-centric, European Christian) traditions, it does little other than to call to attention those differences, and creates bitterness and strife.

[seekeronos]

Longer explanation:

Yes, Virginia... some cultures *ARE* better than others, and the fact that Western European Christendom rose to supremacy over most of the world - a 10%~12% segment of the global population at its peak - speaks volumes for it.

And America, at is height, perhaps only 5% of the global population, though weakened by its reckless abandonment of its foundations in Christianity, still has in it the light of the world.

And we do better to have ONE standard, and to acknowledge ONE culture above all others, the Christian, Western European birthed and American refined culture of our great-grandfathers and their fathers before them.

And why is American (Eurocentric, Christ-centered) culture superior?

The Middle Kingdom (China) and her tributaries had their 4,000 year run, and was undone by its many-layered and multi-tiered corruption and decadence; of them, only Japan has surged forward, in large part to its willingness to adopt many parts of Western European thinking, and in some part thanks to the "American Shōgun", GEN. MacArthur. Other Asian tigers do lag, as S. Korea and Taiwan try to imitate Japan's success (although a copy of a copy is seldom as successful as the original)

In like manner, India under the Moguls and Maharajahs had its run, as did the Middle East under the Sumerians, the Egyptians, the Assyrians, Babylon, and later, the various Caliphates under Islam; today the once great domains of the Ummayads and the Ottomans are nothing more than a bunch of disparate and bickering tribes that look for the closest excuse to butcher one another.

The Mongols under Genghis Khan and the Songhai and the Mali (sub-Saharan African empires in their own right). And while the Inca and the Maya and the ancient Mexicans (Aztec/Olmec/Toltec/etc) were busy clubbing each other upside the head with obsidian-edged blunt weapons and sacrificing their young to demonic gods, and the North America First Nations pursued their notion of the "Great Spirit" once known better by their forefather Joktan through his forefather Shem.

And even then, the (very tribal) European cultures were not worthy of any respect until the the time renaissance, where the glory of what was once the Roman Empire and her legacy combined with that legacy of a tiny little fly-speck of an oft-downtrodden nation in the Levant - that offspring of Judaism which lifted the heads of the Gothic, Celtic, Saxon, Scandinavian, Frankish, Burgundian, Jute and Anglic tribesfolk, one by one, out of the depths of paganism and idolatry.

The Bible tells us that the House of Japeth (mostly Europeans and some scattered populations in North Africa and somewhat into East Russia and mixed into Persia and some of the Turkic populations - essentially but not only what would be considered "white folks") will be enlarged by Shem (most Hebrew populations [which incl. Arabs and Jews] and Asiatic and even to the Amerinds as far as the Inca; and so it has.

Through the Lord Jesus Christ, whose heritage is in the House of David, of the Tribe of Judah, son of Israel, a child of Father Abraham, of the House of Eber (Hebrew) a great-great grandson of Shem, son of Noah, descended from Adam... is our culture made great.

And thus shall it ever be, until and unless we forget our heritage in the Lord Jesus Christ, and turn our backs upon Him.

Woe upon us, when (not "if", for it is happening today) that day arrives.

[Fred Beloit]

"...there was a time when being Irish was looked on as a race..." This is true, LOL, but it has only been in very recent years (I saw first evidence in the 90s) that any Irishman could be insulted by referring to his Irishness. Being called a mick or a paddy, for example, was always taken as a compliment, and still is among many. Would that the rest could come to feel the same way.

[seekeronos]

"that offspring of Judaism which lifted the heads of the..."

Forgot to add in the Vandals and the Huns, and of course, the remains of Greco-Roman peoples in Southern Europe. They too, have contributed immeasurably to the rise of Christendom.

[David M]

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 04/07/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

http://thunderrun.blogspot.com/2008/04/web-reconnaissance-for-04072008.html

[Gary Gulrud]

"Jesus was a liberal."

"Like Moses before him and Mohammad after, he would rock the very foundations of his belief system."

No doubt there is a modicum of truth to these statements, however, it's obvious that the systems of belief giving rise to each are antipathetic to Jesus' comments about Himself. Believe what you will, babe.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- No doubt there is a modicum of truth to these statements, however, it's obvious that the systems of belief giving rise to each are antipathetic to Jesus' comments about Himself. --"

Well, we could argue all day as to whether he was a 1960s hippie liberal or a 1990s bible-thumping conservative, but from a progressive/retrogressive perspective given his time, Jesus certainly was not siding with the establishment Levities and Pharisees. To claim that Jesus was embracing the status quo when he consorted with hookers and lepers is just ridiculous. He was, by the broad definition of one who breaks from social norms in advancement of social justice, a progressive.

[seekeronos]

"--- Well, we could argue all day as to whether he was a 1960s hippie liberal or a 1990s bible-thumping conservative, but from a progressive/retrogressive perspective given his time, Jesus certainly was not siding with the establishment Levities and Pharisees. To claim that Jesus was embracing the status quo when he consorted with hookers and lepers is just ridiculous. He was, by the broad definition of one who breaks from social norms in advancement of social justice, a progressive. ---"

And in that vein, Jesus can be said to be upholding the "status quo" and the "establishment" of His Word, in that H was calling the sinner to repentance and to faith in Him.

Consorting with what is often perceived by the (self)righteous as "wrong" (the hookers, tax collectors, and lepers) is more indicative of God's long-standing plan to redeem the wicked and heal this world of the scourge of sin.

[seekeronos]

Bear in mind also that Jesus's last words to that adulteress whose life He saved:

"-----

John 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

John 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

-----"
(John 8:10-11, KJV)

Jesus wants us to return to Him, and to sin no more.

[IslamoLlama]

"-- And in that vein, Jesus can be said to be upholding the "status quo" and the "establishment" of His Word, in that H was calling the sinner to repentance and to faith in Him. --"

That would make sense if His Word was established status quo. Of course, Jesus's doctrine wouldn't even begin to spread until Paul began his evangelical ministry - long after Jesus's death.

There's also a reason why we've got a dividing line between New and Old Testimonts. There was a radical doctrine change between the two books. The very practice of evangelism wasn't in practice until after Jesus's death. The entire system of repentance and spiritual rebirth was non-existent prior to Jesus's ministry. If anything, your quotes prove just how wildly far afield Jesus had strayed from traditional doctrine that would have seen the woman stoned to death. Ask any priest, pastor, or rabbi whether Jesus radically altered the standing Jewish belief system. He revolutionized the faith.

[seekeronos]

"--- The very practice of evangelism wasn't in practice until after Jesus's death. ---"

I think you are wrong. Lessee:

Jesus's death, burial, and resurrection: approx. AD 28 - AD 29

Evangelism by the 12 Disciples and by the 35 Teams of Two (the Seventy) - done during Jesus's earthly ministry ca. AD 25 - AD 28

John the Evangelist, active ministry ca. AD 20 - AD 26

And it goes far back into the Old Testament as well, with Isaiah (6th century BC) and even King David (10th century BC) bearing much witness of Christ, and most if not all of the Prophets commanding the people of Israel to repentance.

The Old and New Testaments bear witness of the same God; He has not changed, nor has His doctrine for us changed beyond drawing the distinction to the earlier dispensation of the Law to the children of Israel, and the dispensation of Grace to the followers of Jesus.

"--- The entire system of repentance and spiritual rebirth was non-existent prior to Jesus's ministry. ---"

This too, is at best, inaccurate.

Repentance is and was rather easily defined: to turn aside from sin and (re)turn to the obedience of the Lord.

Spiritual Rebirth was hinted at, especially in King David's writings in the psalms, and in Isaiah's prophesies of Christ.

"--- Ask any priest, pastor, or rabbi whether Jesus radically altered the standing Jewish belief system. He revolutionized the faith. ---"

The first part of your statement is correct. Jesus was born into a Jewish society that had, over the course of about five hundred years, picked up many strange and mysterious (false) teachings and doctrines that had thoroughly woven themselves into Jewish thinking. These are the "traditions of the elders", partially attributed to a set of oral teachings received by the tribal elders of Israel, either from or apart from Moses, and not in connection with the Law (the Torah). The majority of these "oral teachings" were also added during the first Diaspora (Captivity) in Babylon, and continued to be added to even after Jesus's time on earth.

The sum of these teachings became codified by the tenth century AD, and were compiled by notable Jewish teachers such as Moses Maimonides as the Talmud.

It bears mentioning then, that the Talmud ≠ the Torah. It is for the most part, a hateful collection of "traditions" that run quite to the contrary of the purpose of God's Word.

The Judaism of Jesus's time and especially the "establishment" of the Sanhedrin and the high Priests were much more a sinecure from the occupying Roman government than a vocation to which men saw as their godly calling; as such, these powerful men wielded their "spiritual" authority quite heavily in order to protect their establishment. So to say that Jesus was a "anti-establishment", then in this case it is so.

My argument is that Jesus was calling people to His kingdom, "which is not of this earth", and relevant to that Kingdom, He was seeking to restore the status quo of a faithful people seeking after that Kingdom of God.

As for "revolutionizing the faith", I'd say that this is only partially so, in that the object of the faith of the ancient Jews was originally in the things and objects of the Temple sacrificial system than it was in the person of God.

Jesus sought to teach people that HE was the One whom all men must believe in to be saved, and that the Temple and its system were but a foreshadowing of His coming and His laying down His life as the perfect sacrifice for all sin for all time.

Therefore, Jesus's calling people to repentance and faith in Him seems to me to be less of a "revolution" than it is a revelation, and a restoration to a prior state of communion with our Creator and our God.

[chris]

Wow, hundreds and hundreds of words of jesusbabble. No wonder Red State banned you.

[seekeronos]

Now, now, chrissy-poos.

If you've read my blog entries on the matter, you'd know exactly why RS banned me.

Not that I blame them... it is their site, and they can do as they please with it - even if it means auto-banning people who disagree with their particular sacred cows.

Of course, Kos is even more infamous for its flogging of dissenters - in fact, whole dairies have been disappeared by the Kossack faithful for those poor schlubs who've fallen off Kos's ideological wagon.

[Gary Gulrud]

"Ask any priest, pastor, or rabbi whether Jesus radically altered the standing Jewish belief system. He revolutionized the faith."

And what 'faith' are you talking about?

On second thought, don't bother, I'm past searching out the height and width and depth of this labrynthine idiocy.

[John]

"they claim their goal is a "color blind" society"

WTF? Who in the world said that? If by "color blind," you mean a non-racist society where we celebrate our differences, then yes, that is the liberal position. But there's a big difference between that and "color blind."

[Fred Beloit]

"...you mean a non-racist society where we celebrate our differences..." That's one celebration I'd like to go to. No, wait a minute. First I would like to hear what "differences" you are talking about. If you are celebrating the brilliant theory that the US govt. gave AIDS to African America count me out.

[seekeronos]

WHat is called "liberal" in this country is a far cry from "liberty", and a far cry from the liberalism of those classic thinkers and great men who helped found our Republic.

It is nothing more than a watered-down form of Marxism that seeks to force together a global "empire" faithful to its god: the state.