wlauthor 
Member since Jun 4, 2012


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “Author William G. Lord is a cold warrior for Christ

I am intrigued at the Liberal Reverend’s argument. The argument from what we have in common is interesting. For example, Islam also believes in long-term marriages. They believe in paying their debts and taking care of their children. They believe in helping the poor. Could we point to these common beliefs as membership in the Islamic faith? Are we really Moslem after all? Hinduism and Buddhism both to some degree have common traits with Christianity.

Even unbelievers have common ground with Christianity with respect to giving. For example, the Nicomachean ethic developed by Aristotle encourages helping the unfortunate as a means to happiness, happiness being a life’s work. The Greek Antiquities no doubt played a major role in the development of Western philosophy. Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s social contract reflects the Greek ethic. Democracy is a product of the Greek culture and philosophy. May we call our self, followers of Aristotle and the Greek Antiquities rather than followers of Christ? In fact, Karl Marx wrote his doctoral dissertation on the differences between Epicurus and Democritus philosophy. You see Karl Marx was an atheist who believed in giving. He also believed in marriage.

It should be obvious what we have in common does not make us different. It is what we hold uncommon which make us different. George Lakoff, a cognitive professor at the University of California, Berkley, agrees with me. The liberal family model is different from the Christian Father figure family model. He said so in his books Moral Politics (1996) and Political Minds (2008). George Lakoff is the most influential progressive in America according to Howard Dean who wrote a foreword in one Lakoff book.

Since it is obvious we cannot define liberal Christianity by using what we have in common, how will we define it? Eduard Bernstein and the Apostle Paul have done a fine job of that in the 1899 work Evolutionary Socialism and the book of Romans. For example, on pages 166-168 and in the footnote Bernstein tells us that socialism ‘s root came from Christianity (Acts 4:32-5:11). Socialism sounds like Christianity and may even be substituted for it but as Bernstein explains Christians just could not get it right.

Bernstein was an atheist. Socialism removes the eternal truths of God and replaces them with man’s cultural needs. The Communist Manifesto requires the same. The Bible speaks of this phenomenon in Romans.
24, "Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen."

Between Eduard Bernstein and the Apostle Paul we find the difference. Liberal Christianity is different in its embrace of the creature over the creator. God becomes second in priority used only for a support system to glorify the workings of men. Bernstein said, “The materialist (contemporary metaphor is socialist) is thus a Calvinist without God.” (Evolutionary Socialism page 7)

I am different, I place the creator first and mankind as a support system for the creator.

0 of 2 people like this.
Posted by wlauthor on June 4, 2012 at 10:37 AM
Classified Listings

Powered by Foundation   © Copyright 2017, Charleston City Paper   RSS