Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yeh, it is defensible. There are exceptions of course, just as there are bound to be with most historical generalizations, but Conservatism, being built upon religious faith and values, has always been the adversary of all movements which minimize religion or outright oppose it.
A great part of our Western values come from Biblical principles. These of course got into the mainstream of our civilization by way of Christianity and, to some extent also, Judaism. Even secular-minded people in our societies adhere to and promote many of the same values because of this fact.I'll bite. What fundamental religion faith and values do you have in mind that were not the product of some innovation?
A great part of our Western values come from Biblical principles. These of course got into the mainstream of our civilization by way of Christianity and, to some extent also, Judaism. Even secular-minded people in our societies adhere to and promote many of the same values because of this fact.
You might want to debate it, but it's such a well-known and indisputable fact of Western history that I'm not going to debate it.We can debate to what extent Western values come from “Biblical principles”
"Innovation," which you've referred to several times now, was something you introduced into the discussion about the nature of Conservatism (and Liberalism). I see no basis for thinking it to be a valid point.I am still curious what religious values or beliefs you think did not come from some innovation of human thought.
Fragmentation in Christianity is a feature not a bug. Christianity doesn't need uniformity or even unity to survive. What it needs is to fill as many branches on the religious tree as possible while plausibly self-reporting "Christian".
Excellent observation. Ironically the Christianities that are closest to each other are most antagonistic to each other. For example, evangelical Protestants and Jehovah's Witnesses agree on much more than, say, Baptists and Catholics. Yet Catholics are brothers and sisters and JW are "heretics".
Innovations in religion have both a objectively functional purpose and a subjectively claimed purpose. These two are often different and there is no reason the innovators need even be consciously aware of their idea's functional purpose. The forgers who wrote the pastoral letters in Paul's name may well have thought they were acting morally (the subjective purpose), but the functional purpose (i.e., the result) of their insistence on a church hierarchy, suppression of women, and conservative family values was to change the church so it would survive for the long haul. The apocalyptic moral program of Jesus and Paul was not sustainable because apparently the world wasn't going anywhere any time soon.
Agreed that these can never be a stable feature of any majority party in Christendom. But they are extremely viable niches that will always have a non-trivial subscriber base.
I think whether this dualism adds much to the equation depends on the details, so maybe you could elaborate there.
You might want to debate it, but it's such a well-known and indisputable fact of Western history that I'm not going to debate it.
"Innovation," which you've referred to several times now, was something you introduced into the discussion about the nature of Conservatism (and Liberalism). I see no basis for thinking it to be a valid point.
I don’t see endless possibilities for adaptation in Christianity
Forgeries of Paul - some of the Pauline epistles or all of them?
Marginalizing colonists, is it really happening and is of a concern?
To do away with sanctity of life sounds scary though… Or you mean life of fetus? A new definition of sanctity or life, yes. For example, considering long-term sustainability, “multiply” and “wealth is a blessing” have to be reviewed
A healthy measure of conservatism is vital
I know, God or soul or afterlife or unicorn or grandma-turned-angle etc are unprovable concepts and therefore as good as non-existant. I do believe we can evolve to a point where this can change and it won’t be a question to most or all of us, as it will be included in our direct experience and even enhanced with technology.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?