The End of History

[nett]

I really don't think that's true of all post-liberalism. There are some very articulate thinkers who are proposing (and executing) an alternative to liberalism. The crew in Steubenville, guided by Andrew Willard Jones comes to mind.

Isn't Andrew Willard Jones proposing something very like Augustine's Two Cities? Isn't that what Mennonites rejected way back in the beginning of our common history?

How did Mennonites reject two kingdom theology exactly?

[Bootstrap]

I really don't think that's true of all post-liberalism. There are some very articulate thinkers who are proposing (and executing) an alternative to liberalism. The crew in Steubenville, guided by Andrew Willard Jones comes to mind.

Isn't Andrew Willard Jones proposing something very like Augustine's Two Cities? Isn't that what Mennonites rejected way back in the beginning of our common history?

How did Mennonites reject two kingdom theology exactly?

Mennonite Two Kingdom theology is quite different than the Catholic Two Cities. Which is, after all, one of the major reasons Mennonites broke off.

Both terms have the term "two". Both say that there is a Kingdom of God and earthly kingdoms. The relationship between the two is where they differ. To me, at least, a lot of Mennonites on the left or the right no longer remember how to think in two kingdom theology. We could all do worse than to go back and read the things we used to.

[Bootstrap]

The problem who defines white “bad speech” is

The entire left has decided that “A man cannot get pregnant” is “bad speech”. I don’t think it is. And I don’t think it’s wrong for Christians to say “a man cannot get pregnant” in the city square and in the public sphere.

For Kingdom Christians, we should probably let the Bible define that, applying it to our everyday life.

We don't let American political factions define that for us.

Some scriptures have been cited. Perhaps we can discuss them if there's any doubt? There's plenty more teaching on speech in the Bible.

[Josh]

The problem who defines white “bad speech” is

The entire left has decided that “A man cannot get pregnant” is “bad speech”. I don’t think it is. And I don’t think it’s wrong for Christians to say “a man cannot get pregnant” in the city square and in the public sphere.

For Kingdom Christians, we should probably let the Bible define that, applying it to our everyday life.

We don't let American political factions define that for us.

Some scriptures have been cited. Perhaps we can discuss them if there's any doubt? There's plenty more teaching on speech in the Bible.

The problem is the Bible itself has been defined by the left as “bad speech”.

[Bootstrap]

For Kingdom Christians, we should probably let the Bible define that, applying it to our everyday life.

We don't let American political factions define that for us.

Some scriptures have been cited. Perhaps we can discuss them if there's any doubt? There's plenty more teaching on speech in the Bible.

The problem is the Bible itself has been defined by the left as “bad speech”.

I don't think so. I think the problem is that we aren't focusing on the Bible, even when someone cites it, taking it seriously as our own guide. If we do that, I'm sure people on the left and the right will disagree with us, but that doesn't really matter. If we really are members of a different Kingdom, of course we will look strange to the world.

Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Why don't we have the same intensity about how we live out our lives as Christians, why is the intensity so often about political sides, or which celebrity political figures we identify with most?

The culture wars that matter are the Kingdom of God versus the world, not left versus right.

[Josh]

For Kingdom Christians, we should probably let the Bible define that, applying it to our everyday life.

We don't let American political factions define that for us.

Some scriptures have been cited. Perhaps we can discuss them if there's any doubt? There's plenty more teaching on speech in the Bible.

The problem is the Bible itself has been defined by the left as “bad speech”.

I don't think so. I think the problem is that we aren't focusing on the Bible, even when someone cites it, taking it seriously as our own guide. If we do that, I'm sure people on the left and the right will disagree with us, but that doesn't really matter. If we really are members of a different Kingdom, of course we will look strange to the world.

Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Why don't we have the same intensity about how we live out our lives as Christians, why is the intensity so often about political sides, or which celebrity political figures we identify with most?

The culture wars that matter are the Kingdom of God versus the world, not left versus right.

My culture war “hot buttons” are indeed the ones of the kingdom of God. These end up being offensive to many worldly people both left and right. The clearest example is being consistently against warfare. There are many who call me a stooge of Putin, a Russian propagandist, etc. simply because I don’t want my own county to ship arms and munitions to Ukraine.

[temporal1]

The problem is the Bible itself has been defined by the left as “bad speech”.

Those who are interested+patient, are busy bees engaged in rewriting scriptures (and everything, books, laws, et al.) so as to fit through the fine sieve of lib PC education and government. Voila’ - “God didn’t mean what He said!” “God loves sin!”
It’s all about successfully parsing words. Law schools thrive on parsing words. The law school model has been normalized throughout western culture.

These lovely, friendly, well-educated, well-meaning souls/busy bees may be more damaging than honest detractors.


2 Corinthians 3:2-7
https://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/3-3.htm

2You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts, known and read by everyone.

3It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God,
not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

4Such confidence before God is ours through Christ.…

5Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim that anything comes from us, but our competence comes from God.

6And He has qualified us as ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;
for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7Now if the ministry of death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at the face of Moses because of its fleeting glory,…

It’s more than parsing words.

The Holy Spirit determines “more,” “when,” “how,” “how much,” and, “to whom.”
Which drives unbelievers stark raving mad. God knows this. He waits.

[Bootstrap]

I don't think so. I think the problem is that we aren't focusing on the Bible, even when someone cites it, taking it seriously as our own guide. If we do that, I'm sure people on the left and the right will disagree with us, but that doesn't really matter. If we really are members of a different Kingdom, of course we will look strange to the world.

Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Why don't we have the same intensity about how we live out our lives as Christians, why is the intensity so often about political sides, or which celebrity political figures we identify with most?

The culture wars that matter are the Kingdom of God versus the world, not left versus right.

My culture war “hot buttons” are indeed the ones of the kingdom of God. These end up being offensive to many worldly people both left and right. The clearest example is being consistently against warfare. There are many who call me a stooge of Putin, a Russian propagandist, etc. simply because I don’t want my own county to ship arms and munitions to Ukraine.

Suppose, in every discussion of these things, we start by reminding ourselves which Kingdom we belong to, and ask what we, as disciples of Jesus Christ, should be doing?

I was once in a prayer meeting where Mrs. Morrison shared that she was learning, at the age of 60 or so, to ride a bicycle. Whenever she tried to ride down her driveway and into the street, she wound up in a ditch. Every time, she looked at the ditch she was afraid of winding up in, and she wound up precisely where her eyes were leading her. She finally realized that she needed to look straight ahead, where she wanted to ride, and her bike would follow. She then applied that to the Christian walk, keeping our eyes on Jesus, and asked us all to sing "keep your eyes upon Jesus".

Can we put aside giving offense and taking offense and focus on how we can be salt and light? Can we stop building our identities based on which celebrity cultural and political elites we love or hate and build our identity around Jesus? Can we reach the point that bringing up our identity as Kingdom Christians or asking what Scripture teaches starts an enthusiastic discussion rather than ending it?

Those are signs I pay attention to.

[Falco Underhill]

The problem is the Bible itself has been defined by the left as “bad speech”.

Those who are interested+patient, are busy bees engaged in rewriting scriptures (and everything, books, laws, et al.) so as to fit through the fine sieve of lib PC education and government. Voila’ - “God didn’t mean what He said!” “God loves sin!”
It’s all about successfully parsing words. Law schools thrive on parsing words. The law school model has been normalized throughout western culture.

These lovely, friendly, well-educated, well-meaning souls/busy bees may be more damaging than honest detractors.


2 Corinthians 3:2-7
https://biblehub.com/2_corinthians/3-3.htm

2You yourselves are our letter, inscribed on our hearts, known and read by everyone.

3It is clear that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God,
not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.

4Such confidence before God is ours through Christ.…

5Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim that anything comes from us, but our competence comes from God.

6And He has qualified us as ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit;
for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

7Now if the ministry of death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at the face of Moses because of its fleeting glory,…

It’s more than parsing words.

The Holy Spirit determines “more,” “when,” “how,” “how much,” and, “to whom.”
Which drives unbelievers stark raving mad. God knows this. He waits.

"And God said .... and it was so.".

God's word determines reality. Changing the meaning of words is a Gnostic attempt to change the order of being as established by God.

Sorry, but the attempt to do this can only have disastrous consequences for society.

This begins here, but where will it go?

[ken_sylvania]

Is that really what Jesus taught?

Yes.

Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to day in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.

Not that words are not important. But that actions are even more important.

Taken together, I think Jesus is saying:

1. Bad speech really matters, just like other bad behavior.
2. Claiming to be good or claiming to do good doesn't mean anything if you don't back it up with good actions. But those good actions include good speech.

I don't think Jesus ever says anything remotely like "you can tear people apart with your speech, spread false rumors, encourage people to hate on other individuals, as long as you don't follow up with physical action it doesn't really matter". He does say "you can parade around your righteousness all you want, if you don't follow up with real action, it doesn't mean anything". Which is a real danger of the like button and in-groups on social media, fwiw. Let me know if I'm missing places where Jesus says something like that.

If someone keeps saying how Christian they are while spreading false rumors with strong words, just the way someone speaks when they really, really hate someone, well, there's some inconsistency there.

Taking this back to the topic of this thread, as Fukiyama uses the term "liberal democracy", America has been that since its founding, its in our Constitution. For America, the alternative to that seems to be dissolving into factions who loathe each other. Perhaps with a lot of help from Christians who join right in on that kind of political speech.

How is this different from what GaryK was saying? Where did he ever suggest that it is OK to "tear people apart with your speech, etc"?