Old Time Radio at OTRCat!

Saturday, August 03, 2013

So here's the thing...I see people kvetching about members using Biblical texts in their comments on other sites, particularly conservative or Tea Party-type fora . "Some of us don't want Bible verses thrown in our faces..." or somesuch. (That was a quasi-quote, NOT an attack.) The hilarious thing is that attitude is what has placed us in our current situation (and I speak of the West in general, not just the YouEss of AY). A culture inculcated in the attitude of "Do to others as you want them to do to you." is going to be a more pleasant place to live than one where it is everyone for himself. The West was built on the foundation of the Biblical text; from the Law of Moses to the Golden Rule, our system of laws was based upon that. (Please note: I am not making the absurd assertion that "everyone was Christian".) Law was at least somewhat viewed as an objective authority by which to govern our lives, passions and behaviors. England has quite self-consciously denied that foundation, and is in the painful process of crashing and burning to the music of Islamic ululation. These United States have done similarly, legal precedent (judges' opinions) rules the day, and we have no objective cultural plumbline by which to measure ourselves. By denying our foundation, we are cast adrift on the tide of popular opinion, so please view the inclusion of a Biblical quote as an attempt to provide an anchor point in our national slide toward the abyss.

We are where we are because it became chic to be irreligious, and to deny our cultural roots. The lawlessness of our "leadership" is the endgame to this scenario. Without an objective standard, it all becomes a battle of opinions, and mine is as valid as yours (or as in-valid).

The Bible quotes that you decry are ultimately attempts to rescue our culture, our nation. It will be good for you, too. "Rising tide" and all that.


Doom said...

Yeah, I agree. I also have some problems. If someone is going to quote the bible, I expect them to both understand the passage and to not use it as a sword or shield but leave it to it's own merits.

It irks me greatly when someone suggest the bible, so I assume they believe to that God, supports them. While it does, it supports all. But it certainly doesn't support any single individual sinner the way some let on. Women seem to be the worst at this, though I have seen stupid or confused men as well. Sanctimony? Yeah.

Now, if someone wants to do reasonable bible lessons, or combine such with their idea of the history of our nation and Western Civ? Cool. Just... don't avoid the good or bad or change things. They fit well, and explain the maturity of faith through freedoms, and the reverse I do believe. And some of the "freedoms" today don't match any of that. It was slightly, socially, religiously, culturally, civilly, and through government, tyrannical. Not a problem for me. As I have suggested, Apartheid was better for all involved, domestically and internationally. I mean that.

The Aardvark said...

Doom, what the madding crowd, the hoi polloi, crave today is not Liberty, but License. They wish to be granted permission and approval for their actions by society, and/or by God. It is like the people who whinge about this or that "right" (marriage, voting, unlimited rice pudding...)when they are not rights enumerated, nor even penumbra'd nor emanated.

I THINK that you are saying that you do not want cherry-picked verses used to buttress someone's pet opinion, nu?

The Aardvark said...

And Brawndo has what plants crave.

Doom said...

Precisely, Aardvark! Neither cherry pick nor supplant the intent. For example, while there is the notion of, say, the gifting and readjusting of the talents, suggesting God favors those who have to gain more, that it will be rewarded. There is also the notion that the wealthy will get to heaven as easily as a camel will get through the eye of a needle. How literal and figurative those things are, and some other notions about them, have to be left to their own devices, not used to spurn the rich or decry the poor. Bleh.