Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Joohan]

If only mental gymnastics were a sport, you'd be an olympian.

Jesus chased out the money lenders as a private citizen: You're right; he took extrajudicial action in order to violently drive legal merchants from a premises which they had been welcomed at by the owners.

And considering Jesus is the model of how a Christian should lead his life....

In contemporary liberal societies - seeking converts is absolutely frowned upon: bans on religious garb, calls to tear down or remove religious iconography in public areas, scandanavian protective services taking children away when their parents teach them about Christ. This is not an affect so much of the liberal system of governance itself - rather the society it inevitably creates.

Liberalism is wholly dependent upon mob mentality. Trends and fashions have been what have defined liberal states from their inception. Riding the tides of trendy popular social movements is exacetly how one attains position in politics - not enlightened virtue.

#freeBarnabas

In regards to what is the ideal system of government, it's about what most supports and influences society toward Christian living. Liberalism permits Christian living, but doesnt support it - fostering a culture which actually fetishes hedonism and sin, making Christian living much harder.

Liberalism is permissive of Christian living, but not at all supportive: its secularism, materialism, apathetic tolerance, rationalism all in stark contrast to Christianity.

Jesus was against religious institutions being corrupt. But again not for any actions against those outside the premises. Again Jesus did not pursue them after they left.
And actually went quite easy on them. Did not seem to seriously harm or imprison them.
I believe the lesson there is to drive the corrupt from the church.

Liberal states do not require unrestricted mob rule, most have limits on it.

French and Scandinavian laïcité (which I oppose) is very different than the US version of secular religious freedom. And Christianity thrived in the US up until the 80s.

Yes liberalism is permissive but not supportive. But that is all you need.
If you ideas can win in a permissive but not supportive environment that is the fault of you, not the environment.

What does it matter if Jesus's actions were in or outside the temple? He was still, as you say, a private citizen, who picked up a weapon to violently destroy private property and run people away from an establishment which they were welcomed at. I mean, here is the definition of terrorism:

the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Just strike the word political for religious, and what Jesus did in the Temple was straight up terrorism. but yall ain't ready for that conversation... joking...
The mob before Pilate didn't have any actual power either. Pilate, if he chosen to, could have sparred Jesus's life. Instead, he decided to acquiesce to public demand, despite knowing better personally... just like politicians do in a Liberal Republic.

The US isn't the only liberal country. We are much more tolerant of other religions than most of our European counterparts. They are liberal though nonetheless.

Christianity within modern liberal systems is much like the allegory made in the parable about seeds sewn among the rocks. Sure, they can grow, but they will be weak and sickly. Better then to sew them among black soil, so that they might grow healthy and strong.

[Joohan]

We wont stop you - but we are gonna surround you propaganda suggesting you to pursue anything but, and we're gonna try to drown you consumer goods and commercial responsibilities in order to distract you from doing it.

Not stopping you =/= supportive

"We want to preach but not be preached to"

10/10

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

[Joohan]

Actually if a church wants to succeed it should be sending its priests to business and marketing schools, not just a theology school.
I wonder what would happen if the church required all priests to get an MBA with a concentration in marketing.

I am reminded of, I believe it was Socrates, in his story about the doctor and the candyman.

It's far easier to sell candy ( hedonism and pleasure ) than it is bad tasting medicine ( salvation ).

[Novus America]

Jesus was against religious institutions being corrupt. But again not for any actions against those outside the premises. Again Jesus did not pursue them after they left.
And actually went quite easy on them. Did not seem to seriously harm or imprison them.
I believe the lesson there is to drive the corrupt from the church.

Liberal states do not require unrestricted mob rule, most have limits on it.

French and Scandinavian laïcité (which I oppose) is very different than the US version of secular religious freedom. And Christianity thrived in the US up until the 80s.

Yes liberalism is permissive but not supportive. But that is all you need.
If you ideas can win in a permissive but not supportive environment that is the fault of you, not the environment.

What does it matter if Jesus's actions were in or outside the temple? He was still, as you say, a private citizen, who picked up a weapon to violently destroy private property and run people away from an establishment which they were welcomed at. I mean, here is the definition of terrorism:

the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Just strike the word political for religious, and what Jesus did in the Temple was straight up terrorism. but yall ain't ready for that conversation... joking...
The mob before Pilate didn't have any actual power either. Pilate, if he chosen to, could have sparred Jesus's life. Instead, he decided to acquiesce to public demand, despite knowing better personally... just like politicians do in a Liberal Republic.

The US isn't the only liberal country. We are much more tolerant of other religions than most of our European counterparts. They are liberal though nonetheless.

Christianity within modern liberal systems is much like the allegory made in the parable about seeds sewn among the rocks. Sure, they can grow, but they will be weak and sickly. Better then to sew them among black soil, so that they might grow healthy and strong.

Jesus was not trying to purge all non apostates and heretics from society.
Not advocating the be repressed or punished by the state. Again Jesus explicitly rejected a religious state.

Not all politicians in the liberal world are unprincipled populists, even if many are.

And sure a the US version of secularism is better for religion than more hostile and I would say less liberal laicite.

If ricks are not barren because liberal society is inherently so.
Christians can lay soil and sew amongst it without crying to the government for subsidies.

[Novus America]

Actually if a church wants to succeed it should be sending its priests to business and marketing schools, not just a theology school.
I wonder what would happen if the church required all priests to get an MBA with a concentration in marketing.

I am reminded of, I believe it was Socrates, in his story about the doctor and the candyman.

It's far easier to sell candy ( hedonism and pleasure ) than it is bad tasting medicine ( salvation ).

Yet Doctors and drug companies make far more money than candy sellers...
You ever see those vitamin gummies too? If the medicine is bitter, hide it in candy.

The best way to get your cat to take a pill is hide it in a piece of fish.

And if you think you are only selling “salvation” you are doing it wrong.
People are feeling unhappy and depressed with social isolation. Atheists commit suicide more often than the religious.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.huffpost ... 3b812b/amp
Come on. How do churches not create a marketing campaign on that?
That is what you sell. Community. Purpose.
Salvation is not what you primarily sell.

Again why are some churches still succeeding and growing while many others fail?

Though the ones with your attitude will fail. Defeatism and a complete lack of faith in the desirability of your service or product to the population means your organization will fail.
No organization will succeed with that attitude.

This is EXACTLY why the church, to survive MUST send priests to business school.
It would teach them how this attitude is completely the wrong way to run an organization.

That is what disgusts me with Christianity. It has become so defeatist, so lacking in self confidence, so clueless about marketing and organizational management.
If Christianity dies it is because it killed itself.
Not because “liberal society” killed it.

[Joohan]

What does it matter if Jesus's actions were in or outside the temple? He was still, as you say, a private citizen, who picked up a weapon to violently destroy private property and run people away from an establishment which they were welcomed at. I mean, here is the definition of terrorism:

the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Just strike the word political for religious, and what Jesus did in the Temple was straight up terrorism. but yall ain't ready for that conversation... joking...
The mob before Pilate didn't have any actual power either. Pilate, if he chosen to, could have sparred Jesus's life. Instead, he decided to acquiesce to public demand, despite knowing better personally... just like politicians do in a Liberal Republic.

The US isn't the only liberal country. We are much more tolerant of other religions than most of our European counterparts. They are liberal though nonetheless.

Christianity within modern liberal systems is much like the allegory made in the parable about seeds sewn among the rocks. Sure, they can grow, but they will be weak and sickly. Better then to sew them among black soil, so that they might grow healthy and strong.

Jesus was not trying to purge all non religious people from society.
Not advocating the be repressed or punished by the state. Again Jesus explicitly rejected a religious state.

Not all politicians in the liberal world are unprincipled populists, even if many are.

And sure a the US version of secularism is better for religion than more hostile and I would say less liberal laicite.

If ricks are not barren because liberal society is inherently so.
Christians can lay soil and sew amongst it without crying to the government for subsidies.

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

Liberalism, is not accommodating - and today is being influenced by largely unChristian forces.

The unprincipled populists are the ones who eventually win the war though, while those fools holding onto virtue and morality out of principle get squashed come election time and the next big trend. Christianity isn't about riding the wave, we've been modeling ourselves off of the life of a poor middle eastern carpenter for the last 2000 years.

Social engineering has been the norm ever since the French Revolution. Trying to ignore the monolithic impact that government has on culture is a strategy for defeat ( i.e. as mainstream republicans have finally started to learn ). Society can be, and generally, will be fit to fill some norm that the state desires. Liberalism desires apathetic and individualistic consumers - something completely at odds with Christ's teachings. What good is laying soil down, when the farmer keeps heaping salt ontop.

[Novus America]

Jesus was not trying to purge all non religious people from society.
Not advocating the be repressed or punished by the state. Again Jesus explicitly rejected a religious state.

Not all politicians in the liberal world are unprincipled populists, even if many are.

And sure a the US version of secularism is better for religion than more hostile and I would say less liberal laicite.

If ricks are not barren because liberal society is inherently so.
Christians can lay soil and sew amongst it without crying to the government for subsidies.

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

Liberalism, is not accommodating - and today is being influenced by largely unChristian forces.

The unprincipled populists are the ones who eventually win the war though, while those fools holding onto virtue and morality out of principle get squashed come election time and the next big trend. Christianity isn't about riding the wave, we've been modeling ourselves off of the life of a poor middle eastern carpenter for the last 2000 years.

Social engineering has been the norm ever since the French Revolution. Trying to ignore the monolithic impact that government has on culture is a strategy for defeat ( i.e. as mainstream republicans have finally started to learn ). Society can be, and generally, will be fit to fill some norm that the state desires. Liberalism desires apathetic and individualistic consumers - something completely at odds with Christ's teachings. What good is laying soil down, when the farmer keeps heaping salt ontop.

American society is accommodating. But accommodating of everything.
Not just Christianity. You have to compete to survive.

And guess what? You can!
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/ ... g-religion

How many people have you successfully converted? And no, you will not convert people with “I am right because I said so”.
With your attitude you will not. You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.
You have to show how converting will make their lives better.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.

That's not how imaan works.

[Novus America]

You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.

That's not how imaan works.

Given you have only succeeded only in making Islam look worse, you should maybe reconsider what actually works and does not.

[Joohan]

In a way actually, that was exactly what Jesus intended. Purge through converting the non-believers onto his path. Neither he, nor I, ever suggested CHRISTIAN DEATH SQUADS, but the laws of Heaven and the duities implied far outstrip any concept of NAP or bs natural rights purported by liberals and their ilk ( Temple, whip, merchants, etc. ). Christianity has never had an official Jurisprudence - the thought was always to have a Christian populace form a state, which would naturally accommodate our faith.

Liberalism, is not accommodating - and today is being influenced by largely unChristian forces.

The unprincipled populists are the ones who eventually win the war though, while those fools holding onto virtue and morality out of principle get squashed come election time and the next big trend. Christianity isn't about riding the wave, we've been modeling ourselves off of the life of a poor middle eastern carpenter for the last 2000 years.

Social engineering has been the norm ever since the French Revolution. Trying to ignore the monolithic impact that government has on culture is a strategy for defeat ( i.e. as mainstream republicans have finally started to learn ). Society can be, and generally, will be fit to fill some norm that the state desires. Liberalism desires apathetic and individualistic consumers - something completely at odds with Christ's teachings. What good is laying soil down, when the farmer keeps heaping salt ontop.

America society is accommodating. But accommodating of everything.
Not just Christianity. You have to compete to survive.

And guess what? You can!
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/ ... g-religion

How many people have you successfully converted? And no, you will not convert people with “I am right because I said so”.
With your attitude you will not. You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.

Apathetic tolerance is meaningless, and benefits only the most ruthless of forces. The Church will not sell it's soul in order to become popular - we are called to do what is right, not what is trendy. Under liberalism, that is a death sentence - which is why the system is incompatible with Christianity.

I am not suited to help convert others - though I would never shirk the opportunity, I know that it is not a skill of mine. Rather, I intend to raise a family along the Lord's path and just to be an example to my neighbors. In saying that though, I know that mine is but a minuscule influence, in an otherwise ocean of hedonism and immorality. I am not content with such a state - and thus support the actions of my own government to change the situation, and to do what is right.

To hell with apathy and tolerance.

[Novus America]

America society is accommodating. But accommodating of everything.
Not just Christianity. You have to compete to survive.

And guess what? You can!
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/ ... g-religion

How many people have you successfully converted? And no, you will not convert people with “I am right because I said so”.
With your attitude you will not. You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.

Apathetic tolerance is meaningless, and benefits only the most ruthless of forces. The Church will not sell it's soul in order to become popular - we are called to do what is right, not what is trendy. Under liberalism, that is a death sentence - which is why the system is incompatible with Christianity.

I am not suited to help convert others - though I would never shirk the opportunity, I know that it is not a skill of mine. Rather, I intend to raise a family along the Lord's path and just to be an example to my neighbors. In saying that though, I know that mine is but a minuscule influence, in an otherwise ocean of hedonism and immorality. I am not content with such a state - and thus support the actions of my own government to change the situation, and to do what is right.

To hell with apathy and tolerance.

Oh you do not have to sell your soul to be popular. Again how come the Mormons can do it?
They have not radically altered their product over time. They just use better marketing.

Sure, you can do all of the above, that is your right.
Set a good example, raise a family and all.

But if you want to influence the government, guess what? Politics is all marketing.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

That's not how imaan works.

Given you have only succeeded only in making Islam look worse

To who?

you should maybe reconsider what actually works and does not.

Idk what your post has to do with you incorrectly explaining how imaan works.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

America society is accommodating. But accommodating of everything.
Not just Christianity. You have to compete to survive.

And guess what? You can!
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/ ... g-religion

How many people have you successfully converted? And no, you will not convert people with “I am right because I said so”.
With your attitude you will not. You ironically have no faith in the service you are selling.

Apathetic tolerance is meaningless, and benefits only the most ruthless of forces. The Church will not sell it's soul in order to become popular - we are called to do what is right, not what is trendy. Under liberalism, that is a death sentence - which is why the system is incompatible with Christianity.

I am not suited to help convert others - though I would never shirk the opportunity, I know that it is not a skill of mine. Rather, I intend to raise a family along the Lord's path and just to be an example to my neighbors. In saying that though, I know that mine is but a minuscule influence, in an otherwise ocean of hedonism and immorality. I am not content with such a state - and thus support the actions of my own government to change the situation, and to do what is right.

To hell with apathy and tolerance.

If people are fundamentally good, and your message is fundamentally good, than surely more people would accept your message than fundamentally reject it, right?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

"We want to preach but not be preached to"

10/10

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

By what do you mean the stage? And what shall you do if another force finds their way into the stage?

[Bienenhalde]

Where does American Samoa go?

Idk. I'd say Hawaii, if they weren't so far from each other.

American Samoa should be reunified with Samoa.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Idk. I'd say Hawaii, if they weren't so far from each other.

American Samoa should be reunified with Samoa.

^This

[Novus America]

Idk. I'd say Hawaii, if they weren't so far from each other.

American Samoa should be reunified with Samoa.

Yes. A United Samoa as part of the US of course. If that is what the people want.

[Hanafuridake]

"We want to preach but not be preached to"

10/10

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

Wait, so you're criticizing liberalism for being allegedly intolerant of Christianity but saying that Christianity should be intolerant of everyone else.

That makes... not a lot of sense.

[Turbofolkia]

American Samoa should be reunified with Samoa.

Yes. A United Samoa as part of the US of course. If that is what the people want.

They won't. Samoa is much more aligned with New Zealand and Australia.

[Hanafuridake]

Christians in Ancient Rome were fed to lions, Christians in medieval Japan were crucified and burnt, Christians in liberal America.... can't force their religious beliefs on other people.

One of these things is not like the other.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Christians in Ancient Rome were fed to lions, Christians in medieval Japan were crucified and burnt, Christians in liberal America.... can't force their religious beliefs on other people.

One of these things is not like the other.

In reference to the underlined, can you show us where people were saying that should be done?

[Novus America]

Yes. A United Samoa as part of the US of course. If that is what the people want.

They won't. Samoa is much more aligned with New Zealand and Australia.

Well American Samoa does not want to leave the US. So it would be the only way to reunify.
By West Samoa joining with American Samoa with the US.

[Hanafuridake]

Christians in Ancient Rome were fed to lions, Christians in medieval Japan were crucified and burnt, Christians in liberal America.... can't force their religious beliefs on other people.

One of these things is not like the other.

In reference to the underlined, can you show us where people were saying that should be done?

Literally just a few posts above you.

"We want to preach but not be preached to"

10/10

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

[Turbofolkia]

They won't. Samoa is much more aligned with New Zealand and Australia.

Well American Samoa does not want to leave the US. So it would be the only way to reunify.
By West Samoa joining with American Samoa with the US.

Yeah, I don't think reunification is possible or even necessary. The two Samoas have just grown too far apart culturally. A few years back Samoa changed its time zone and switched from driving on the right hand side of the road to the left to get closer to Aus/NZ.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

In reference to the underlined, can you show us where people were saying that should be done?

Literally just a few posts above you.

^this

We've no intention of sharing the stage. Thou shalt have not gods before me.

So where's the forcing religion aspect? Joohan made many posts regarding this topic, namely the fact that he doesn't support forcing Christianity on people.