Classifying Yourself

Willtor said:

Here's the biggie: Is this polarization related to politics? We've already had one post that confused the two. Does one stem from the other, or do they have a third, common cause? (common ancestry, anyone?)

Click to expand...

Scientists want you to believe that bifurcations are the direct descendants of lines and that lines originated from simple, single points (the so called theory apointification) but since there is an infinite number of points between any two points it is impossible to draw a straight line. And that's why I subscribe to ID - Intelligent Drawing. Only God can draw straight lines, as they are irreducibly complex.

There is no middle ground on a bifurcation. The ends always polarize the center. Bifurcations are conceptually polarizing and the norm of using these to identify value structures seriously misinforms our understanding of the world around us.

Click to expand...

chaoschristian said:

Scientists want you to believe that bifurcations are the direct descendants of lines and that lines originated from simple, single points (the so called theory apointification) but since there is an infinite number of points between any two points it is impossible to draw a straight line. And that's why I subscribe to ID - Intelligent Drawing. Only God can draw straight lines, as they are irreducibly complex.

Click to expand...

this is meaningless nonsense.
what exactly is "theory apointification"?

all i can figure is that this is unmarked sarcasm or parody.

chaoschristian said:

Scientists want you to believe that bifurcations are the direct descendants of lines and that lines originated from simple, single points (the so called theory apointification) but since there is an infinite number of points between any two points it is impossible to draw a straight line. And that's why I subscribe to ID - Intelligent Drawing. Only God can draw straight lines, as they are irreducibly complex.

Click to expand...

Brilliant.

rmwilliamsll said:

this is meaningless nonsense.
what exactly is "theory apointification"?

all i can figure is that this is unmarked sarcasm or parody.

Click to expand...

The first part was serious. It's my view on spectrums using org dev speak.

The second paragraph was pure sarcasm.

chaoschristian said:

Scientists want you to believe that bifurcations are the direct descendants of lines and that lines originated from simple, single points (the so called theory apointification) but since there is an infinite number of points between any two points it is impossible to draw a straight line. And that's why I subscribe to ID - Intelligent Drawing. Only God can draw straight lines, as they are irreducibly complex.

Click to expand...

Love it! If I had been drinking coffee it would be all over the computer screen.

I chose "other" for much the same reasons as chaos christian.

I relate to TE, but not to conservative/moderate/liberal.

I think the label I would use for myself is "radically orthodox".

I love the word "radical" as it is the antithesis of both conservatism and liberalism. It comes from the Latin word for "root" and implies getting back to the source of things but also implies upsetting the status quo.

Hence it is not conservative (since it rejects the status quo) but neither is it liberal (since it looks to restore what was before the existing status quo not progress to something new).

My understanding of the origin of scripture and how to interpret it is "liberal", yet my theology is very traditional--right in line with the Nicene Creed. In this respect, in fact, I am often more conservative than self-identified conservatives, who tend use modern criteria e.g. abortion, same-sex marriage rather than the questions which originally defined orthodoxy: trinity, incarnation, dual nature of Christ's person, etc.

Similarly in politics, I am definitely neither conservative nor liberal (though I tend to have more respect for conservatives). Political liberals are no where near radical enough for me. I consider them warm fuzzy wusses.

Myself, I am socialist, but not Marxist. Since the triumph and then distortion of Marxism in the old Soviet Union and in China, few people have heard of non-Marxist socialism--which actually preceded Marx.

Over the years, non-Marxist socialism has attracted a number of Christian political thinkers. One of the strongest voices for non-Marxist socialism in Canada was the late Tommy Douglas, a Baptist minister and later provincial premier in Saskatchewan. He is one of my heroes.

Willtor said:

Here's the biggie: Is this polarization related to politics? We've already had one post that confused the two. Does one stem from the other, or do they have a third, common cause? (common ancestry, anyone?)

Click to expand...

From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_fundamentalism), emphases added:

No individual or institution speaks for all of Christian fundamentalism, which is a religious orientation, rather than an organized movement. Drawing on their belief in an inerrant Bible and dispensational-literal hermeneutic, many fundamentalists adhere to young earth creationism and universal flood geology and ardently oppose alternate approaches such as old earth creationism and non-theistic evolution, commonly known as Darwinism. Consequently, some fundamentalists have been active in the debate over teaching multiple viewpoints of the origin of humans in science classrooms of public schools in the United States. Additionally, fundamentalists have aligned themselves with the Christian Right, advocating prayer in public school and Christian messages in other public forums, such as displaying the Ten Commandments in public spaces. Their failure to achieve their goals in the public schools has prompted some to take up homeschooling for religious reasons.

Click to expand...

I have read this paragraph (and containing article) many times and found it not only incredibly insightful but also consistent with observed reality. There is a popular "brand" of American Christianity which combines YECism, Right Wing Politics and dispensationalism. Here in Australia we jokingly call these Christians "Hallelujah, amen brother, praise the Lord! Southen Baptists" (no offence to any Southern Baptists who might read this), and it is regularly associated in the secular media with the politics of George W Bush.

Related to this is the apparent fact that YECism is an almost exclusively American phenomenon. Again, from Wikipedia:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism#Prevalence_of_creationism)

According to a 2001 Gallup poll on the origins of humans, they estimate that 72% of Americans believe in some form of creationism (as defined above). They also estimate that about 45% of Americans concurred with the statement that "God created man pretty much in his present form at one time within the last 10,000 years."

...

Most vocal creationists are from the United States, and creationist views are much less common elsewhere in the Western World.
According to a PBS documentary on evolution, Australian Young Earth Creationists claimed that "five percent of the Australian population now believe that Earth is thousands, rather than billions, of years old." The documentary further states that "Australia is a particular stronghold of the creationist movement." Taking these claims at face value, Young Earth Creationism is very much a minority position in Western countries.

Click to expand...

I find this remarkable, and also very telling. Australia can "boast" of being the nation which gave birth to Creation magazine, Ken Ham and AiG. Yet even among Australian Christians, YECism is a minority position. The 3 largest Australian denominations -- Catholic, Anglican, Uniting -- are officially TE. As far as I know, all the major conservative theological colleges in Australia are TE friendly. And where did Ken Ham and AiG end up? We all know the answer.

Obviously, (without being pejorative in any way to my American brothers and sisters) there is something unique about the American psyche which allows YECism to get a foothold.

I voted TE/Liberal.

I think my profile says it pretty well,

Flaming Liberal,
Believer in Heaven and Hell,
the Resurrection and the Real Presense.

I hold some staunchly conservative views on both the religious and secular fronts, but if I must take a label, "Liberal" is it.

chaoschristian said:

There is no middle ground on a bifurcation. The ends always polarize the center. Bifurcations are conceptually polarizing and the norm of using these to identify value structures seriously misinforms our understanding of the world around us.

Click to expand...

This is ten times as funny for me since right next to me is a book on Bifurcation Analysis that I've been staring at blankly for the past 10 minutes. I guess the chaos in your name comes from math, not mayhem.

LewisWildermuth said:

I choose liberal because of my location. Sadly in this part of the country, if you are not a member of the KKK or a neo-nazi group, or a rabid creationist, or all three, you are some freaky liberal.

Click to expand...

Howdy Neighbor!!! (Almost - just one state away...)

I'm going to have to vote "Other" even though I believe in creation. I believe the physical earth is younger than the OEC people believe but older than the YEC people believe, and as it says in profile that YHWH created all outside of time in a short time brings other dimensional, other planes into the picture and how can we possibly measure a "time" and events that were born in the eternal non time and birthed into what we know as time. And I believe there was physical stuff created in that non time and at some point time as we know it began when the portals to that dimension were opened.

As far as conservative, moderate, liberal.... well, I ain't no KKK member, neo-nazi, or rabid creationist.... I don't put up signs in my yard that say "Be a Christian. Believe in the Flag. Be an American. Speak English." which I actually saw on the way home from church yesterday.
I don't plaster Jesus bumper stickers all over my car like many do around here. Nor do I git a 6 pack of Busch cans and drive a pickup off the dirt road into a ditch, nor do I blast street signs with shotguns from the back of a truck which some of the folk are known to do here.

So in the eyes of others I'm a liberal but in reality I have both liberal and conservative views so I must be a moderate.... I think abortion is evil sin and gay marraige is against nature, but I also fellowship with pagan groups and do the native sweat lodge. But I do go to a relatively conservative (not fundamentalist) non denominational church and teach a weekly Bible study at a neighbors home in the community.

All of this doesn't matter... I can't stand labels so the least label-like choice here is "other"