What are your thoughts re Hegelian dialectic?

[ohio jones]

FWIW, I really do think we would be much better off talking about biblical versus unbiblical instead of using the UNBIBLICAL terms "liberal" and "conservative", which are not mentioned in the Bible even once and tend to get confused with political identities.

King James would beg to differ:

The liberal soul shall be made fat

The vile person shall be no more called liberal

I doubt Solomon and Isaiah intended for political identities to be attached to those statements, but it's possible with only a small amount of imagination.

[Falco Underhill]

I hold an opinion Beth Moore is moving in a liberal-progressive direction, and cite as evidence the fact she is moving in the direction of affirmation.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to decline acceptance of CRT on the basis that the issue requires more time to seriously consider. People hardly understand what it is let alone it's Marxist connections and the potential ill effects it might have on society. Why should the Church be swept up into it into a worldly political fad? My vote would be Nay.

[Falco Underhill]

On the other hand if a commission is set up to study it the CRT representatives would get on that commission themselves!

[MaxPC]

King James would beg to differ:

The liberal soul shall be made fat

The vile person shall be no more called liberal

I doubt Solomon and Isaiah intended for political identities to be attached to those statements, but it's possible with only a small amount of imagination.

The religion equivalent is “orthodox vs heterodox”; but then the mistake is made that the Orthodox Church is being referenced. Like OJ, I feel it is much easier to use a small amount of imagination and go with the familiar. Words can have many meanings so imagination examines context.

[Josh]

Boot,

In other words, Beth Moore decided to get involved with worldly politics and jump on the anti-Trump train.

Has she has the same passion in opposing other immoral candidates for office?

[Bootstrap]

In other words, Beth Moore decided to get involved with worldly politics and jump on the anti-Trump train.

Has she has the same passion in opposing other immoral candidates for office?

In other words, a woman who has done extensive work with women survivors of sexual abuse spoke out when a politician bragged, on tape, of being able to get away with that kind of thing. She received death threats. A congregation in her own Southern Baptist denomination composed a hymn called Make America Great Again and singing it for political events. Which of those two things looks most like getting involved with worldly politics?

Even here on MennoNet you can see people who act like any criticism of Trump is siding with the enemy. Isn't that getting involved with worldly politics?

Trump's sexual immorality is real and easily documented, and so is the eagerness of some Christian leaders to sweep it under the rug and say it doesn't matter. So far, I can't see evidence of Beth Moore embracing the things people are claiming. It looks like a political hit job to me. Beth Moore plainly says she does not believe the things people are trying to put into her mouth. If we want to stand for sexual morality, I don't know why tearing down Beth Moore is a goal.

Trump is not the measure of sexual morality or of Christian ethics or of truth. Seriously, we don't need to join in every controversy the goon squads dream up, but if we do, we need to do very careful fact checking and assume that goon squads exist. Otherwise, we become useful idiots to the goon squads.

[Bootstrap]

I hold an opinion Beth Moore is moving in a liberal-progressive direction, and cite as evidence the fact she is moving in the direction of affirmation.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to decline acceptance of CRT on the basis that the issue requires more time to seriously consider. People hardly understand what it is let alone it's Marxist connections and the potential ill effects it might have on society. Why should the Church be swept up into it into a worldly political fad? My vote would be Nay.

Wait, what? Is someone connecting Beth Moore to CRT now? Did the Southern Baptist Church adopt a proposal to accept CRT? Where is this stuff coming from?

[Falco Underhill]

I hold an opinion Beth Moore is moving in a liberal-progressive direction, and cite as evidence the fact she is moving in the direction of affirmation.

I think it's perfectly legitimate to decline acceptance of CRT on the basis that the issue requires more time to seriously consider. People hardly understand what it is let alone it's Marxist connections and the potential ill effects it might have on society. Why should the Church be swept up into it into a worldly political fad? My vote would be Nay.

Wait, what? Is someone connecting Beth Moore to CRT now? Did the Southern Baptist Church adopt a proposal to accept CRT? Where is this stuff coming from?

I've been trying to figure out how a thread asking our thoughts of Hegelian dialectic turned into a discussion about Beth Moore. The "Beth Moore moment" was referred to in the OP which also referred to a proposal to adopt CRT.

The best I can make out of her place in this - and I could be wrong - is people within the SBC felt the timing of her support of women's issues was intended to lend moral support for the cause of CRT.

Perhaps people are going overboard in their criticism of her but that shouldn't have become the topic here.

The real concern of this thread was supposed to be CRT and Hegelian dialectic, but by focusing on this one issue (hardly even a side thought in the OP) you've managed to turn it to Donald Trump polemics.

You can focus on Beth Moore in a thread devoted to that instead of detailing the topic here.

[Bootstrap]

I've been trying to figure out how a thread asking our thoughts of Hegelian dialectic turned into a discussion about Beth Moore.

That's OK, I'm trying to figure out why a thread that uses the phrase "Hegelian Dialectic" has nothing at all to do with the Hegelian Dialectic. I started a different thread to discuss it there, because when I mention it here people don't seem to want to discuss it:

viewtopic.php?f=25&t=3874

As far as I can tell, the phrase is being used for its mouth-feel in this thread, not for its actual meaning.

The real concern of this thread was supposed to be CRT and Hegelian dialectic, but by focusing on this one issue (hardly even a side thought in the OP) you've managed to turn it to Donald Trump polemics.

One feature of many goon squad threads is that trying to discuss anything at all concretely is like nailing jelly to the wall. You can count the pages flying by, but it sure is hard to know what the topic is, if you focus on the one that is nominated, swoosh, people change the subject. Page 17 now.

But what you said is REALLY amusing. Can you write a definition of CRT and of the Hegelian Dialectic and show a relationship between the two? Please be concrete about what you believe each of these terms mean, and why.

[Bootstrap]

You can focus on Beth Moore in a thread devoted to that instead of detailing the topic here.

Just responding to what other people are saying about Beth Moore in this thread. Most recently, to you.