Liberalism Masquerading as American Judeo-Christian Values
The period of the Enlightenment initiated a fascination with the individual, culminating in the establishment of the USA. In the Declaration of Independence, our Founders established the right of a people to overthrow unjust rulers under natural law and to abolish tyranny. While the Articles of Confederation failed owing to a weak union, the Framers corrected this in the Constitution. They established a different form of representative democracy from the European parliamentary system. In Europe, the people had accepted joint cooperation between powerful individuals, businesses, and government owing to their history of feudalism. In the European system the executive branch arises from the majority party of the legislature. In the American approach the three branches are distinct, limiting any branch’s power. This has worked well for 220 years. The economic result is a more diffuse capitalism. With a less unified government, it is harder for politicians to regulate our economy.
Our socio-political system incorporates the Judeo-Christian ethos. Embossed on our money are the words “in God we trust” and “liberty.” This results from the Framers’ belief that God grants freedom. In America, many of the earliest settlers were seeking religious freedom from the Church of England. The Pilgrims and Puritans followed a Hebraic form of Christianity with their dependence upon scripture rather than church leadership. American “manifest destiny” was seen by these immigrants as an expression of God’s satisfaction with America as the inheritor of his covenant from the Jews. Charity and community virtues were seen as religious requirements. In “A Model of Christian Charity” delivered by Gov. John Winthrop in 1630 on board the ship Arbella, he borrows the biblical principles from the Old and New Testament which underlie American generosity and collectivism which was necessary for survival in a new and hostile environment. During the period of the Enlightenment in Europe the ideas of individual rights and material wealth were encouraged by Voltaire, Adam Smith, Kant, and Hegel. The Enlightenment in Europe ultimately merged the established aristocracy with a state regulated capitalism. It was this structure that Marx and Engels sought to replace. In our country there was no established aristocracy resulting from feudalism, so a meritocracy ensued, with an individualistic capitalism (sometimes falsely called laissez faire). This divided government has reduced control over our economy. However, gaining control over 16% of our economy through the health care system may allow politicians to establish a more European styled socialist society. This explains the relentless effort despite the Massachusetts’ senatorial results. Politicians have seized upon our concern for equality and decency which is our religious legacy. They have substituted a secular “fairness” to gain greater control over our lives.
Socialism is devoid of religious purpose (through relativism or humanism), while capitalists often invoke religion (as absolute natural law). Religious dogma has been supplemented by modern calls for “social justice and social action.” Ministers, priests, and rabbis have long called for help for the less fortunate. So the American religious community has merged political purposes with religion. Though Americans are overwhelmingly theistic, church and synagogue attendance has declined. This void is being filled by government and secular social action groups. Early schools in America were organized through churches, but eventually elementary and secondary education was adopted by the government to ensure equal access. The result has been an expensive mediocrity. Is the same ahead for the health care industry?
There are differences between Judeo-Christianity and socialism. Socialism postulates a solution to questions of inequity through class struggle, favoring the disadvantaged over the wealthy. The Judeo-Christian ethic looks to the rejection of God’s word as the cause of failure. The different approaches do not stop the atheists from appropriating the terminology of religion. And therein is the Achilles heel of the American values. Secular politicians use our concern for less fortunate people to secure greater power, thus eroding our freedoms. And that is the disguise in this masquerade.
Yes, from out of the primordial soup random electrons came together and poof: Barack Obama: evolution! Or G-d created the world and in making us in G-ds image turned over the creating to us! We live in a finite world: what/where were we before birth and after death? Since you can not answer: there is a G-d that lives in an infinite word that we can not perceive…or random electrons and poof Obama!…
Listen up, Dr. Bones! Wombscholarship has just ascertained that
“American philosophical ethos and religiosity is unique, often described as the Judeo-Christian ethic.”
(( A little grammar-challenged, maybe, but what is language correctness among ideobuddies? ))
Alas, your Honour, and ’tis another sad case of _asinus ad lyram_ for poor Paddy and me! We predestinate _dhimmí_ jackasses cannot appreciate so lofty a strain of neo-auto-harpin’ as this. Old Nick. or somebody, keeps putting it into our minds that anything whatever can be ‘unique’ — provided you resolutely ignore everything else that resembles it the least bit. [*] [**]
Do you remember, Dr. Bones, St. Jack’s [***] little story about, or rather against, the so-called “stream of consciousness” in Eng. Lit.? A traffic cop stops all the traffic himself and then solemnly scribbles in his notebook, “The silence in this street is extremely suspicious.” (IQFM)
Like unto that is the dottiness of Neocomrade Dr. Dent. H. J. Warner.
And I remain, ever wishing your Honour, and all of the former Christojudaeandom.
Healthy days.
___
[*] To avoid possible confusion at Rio Limbaugh and Port Lucid, perhaps the dental neocomrade could be prevailed upon to change the name of his swell new product line to, say, ‘neouniqueness’?
[**] It does not appear whether Old Europe and the rest of the Eastern hemisphere are actually bein’ flushed down the George Orwell Memorial Memory Hole, or whether the decerebrate kiddie speaks figuratively, meanin’ only to excommunicate the bastards from Western Sieve(®) — after which setback, no doubt they might as well not be existential, though technically speaking they would remain so.
And Father Zeus knows best.
[***] Dear Rio Limbaugh, / “St. Jack” is Clive Staples Lewis, died Y. R. 1383/1962/5732. / As ever, JHM
Apparantly libs are aware that socialism historically only takes hold in countries that are economically depressed so they throw us into bankruptcy so we’ll have no choice but to depend on the goverment for everything and sadly churches are fooled into thinking that libs actually support christianity which they don’t. Christians doing good works by proxy, ie government entitlement programs, isn’t what God had in mind. One only has to read the story of the good Samaritan to know this.
Jesus said to be generous to the poor with what you have, he never told anyone to be generous to the poor with what your NEIGHBOR has…liberals support a system that does just that…
Liberalism and Christianity?
or is it Liberalism vs. Christianity?
I suggest that you read or listen to Christianity and Liberalism by J. Gresham Machen (1923) which is available in mp3′s.
- http://reformedaudio.org/machen.html (audio)
- http://www.reformed.org/books/chr_and_lib/ (text)
Where the author proves that modern Liberalism is a completely different religion seperate from Christianity. There is NO such thing as a “liberal Christian”.
In my opinion it goes back to the very 1st liberal (in Eden) who by the way is indentified by Saul Alinsky (Hussien Obama’s mentor) in the dedication to his book ‘Rules for Radicals’. The book was dedicated to Lucifer, the first radical.
also see Lucifer, The First Liberal
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/904024/posts
Secular politicians use our concern for less fortunate people to secure greater power, thus eroding our freedoms. And that is the disguise in this masquerade.
Absolutely. This is the dog that isn’t barking in all this mess.
The alleged concern is simply a vehicle, a charade, a prop, a front. Not to mention that the very judgment of “less fortunate” is implicitly condescending to its target groups.
(Personally, I can’t imagine anyone “less fortunate” than the devastatingly hypocritical Chuck Schumer, Barney Fwank, Nancy Pelosi, Obama…I’ll get typer’s cramp, the list of “unfortunates” is so long)
I would only change “secular politicians” to progressives, leaving out religious allusion in naming them. Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief, cf Teddy Kennedy as the poster child.
In America centralized power has arisen incrementally.
Video link: The agenda has been meticulously unfolded over a very long time
“Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief,”
Even worse, many of them infest our churches (and especially the umbrella outfits like the NCC), slapping a cross on good ol’ socialism and selling it as “Christian” under the rubric “social justice.” The more virulent form, seen mostly in Latin America and the black community, is full-on Marxism with a clerical collar: “liberation theology.”
“Many progressives at least pretend to religious belief,”
and some really are religious! It’s a fact. They are very very very religious. But thier religion is NOT a christian religion.
It might look like real Christianity on the surface but when
closely examined it is not Christian at all.
They have a completely different Jesus, a non-judgemental God (who doesn’t mind child sacrifice), and the Bible is just a bunch
of old disconnected stories. All you have to do to be saved is to
read John 3:16 once or twice in a lifetime and you are saved.
And people wonder WHY this nation is under Divine Judgement (aka Obama)
Revolutionary movements often misappropriate and redefine generally accepted religious and political concepts and buzzwords as a way to make their radical agendas seem mainstream. In the 60′s I wrote a short paper for humanities class exploring the use of religious imagery to serve Stalin’s personality cult.
One master of this form of deception is the Rev. Wright, our Maximum Leader’s spiritual mentor.
The most brutal murderers of our age have clothed themselves in venerable, cherished concepts—with a vicious twist.
See also The Pournelle Political Axes, noting that he reverses left and right from the conventional usage on his graph.
Seems to me that Nancy Pelosi is doing her best to become Prime Minister.
Thank you for making this article. Finally, someone distinguishes the two. JESUS WAS NOT A SOCIALIST.
To the apes, monkeys and baboons, as well as their cousins, one must offer peanuts, bananas and similar fruits and veggies. But just remember to save 3,000% of that stock for their future needs, because of AGW and food will become scarce. And spread all that around all 57 States, for better storage.
Warner: Socialism postulates a solution to questions of inequity through class struggle, favoring the disadvantaged over the wealthy. The Judeo-Christian ethic looks to the rejection of God’s word as the cause of failure.
This is the one part of the article I take issue with. It is entirely possible to not reject God’s word and still end up disadvantaged. C’est la vie. It would be closer to the truth to say the Judeo-Christian ethic acknowledges that there is no solution, not in this life anyway. Under this mindset, the response to social injustice in this life is to hope and pray for justice to come in the next one, and simply carry on as best you can in the meantime. Of course, one must believe in the Judeo-Christian concept of an afterlife in the first place for this approach to have any appeal at all.
#14 Joshua – No, one cannot have God in one’s life and end up being disadvantaged. When has God, one is happy, whatever one’s circumstances. God gives one the strength to endure and triumph, because it gives one, greater, even infinite, perspective.
I am poor and decrepit. I could despair and rage against my misfortune, but I do not. I used to before accepting Christ. Embracing God transforms you, leading always to a better life, because faith is followed by action. Such action, motivated by faith, results in good things always.
Re: Marc, #15: You and I seem to be using different definitions of the word “disadvantaged”. I am going by the purely economic one, in the spirit of Warner’s original article. The one you’re going by goes beyond economics and therefore, beyond the scope of the article and most of the preceding comments.
With that in mind, I stand by my original assertion: It is entirely possible to not reject God’s word and still end up economically disadvantaged. C’est la vie. At least you have obviously accepted that last part, which is more than can be said about progressives, and that goes a long way toward explaining why they stand for what they do.
The US is looking more and more like the movie Planet of the Apes.. Obama reminds me of the son in The Omen.. yep I love my movies but The Omen was too scarey for me.. but here we are living it.. God help us all..
Sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves purses which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven, where no thief comes near, nor moth destroys. [Luke 12:33]
And [John the Baptist] would answer and say to them, “Let the man with two tunics share with him who has none, and let him who has food do likewise. [Luke 3:11]
He who oppresses the poor reproaches his Maker, but he who is gracious to the needy honors Him [Proverbs 14:31]
Open your mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy. [Proverbs 31:8]
Jesus taught sacrificial love. It doesn’t matter what the poor did to make themselves the way they are. The point is that you help them anyway. You should help the poor, sick, and hungry. To deny that is to deny Jesus’ words.
Adrian – those are commandments for CHRISTIANS in their personal lives. All of the Christians I know give money AND time generously to a large number of charitable organizations.
Our government was founded to let us get on with our lives, hopefully with a spiritual motivation.
I am accountable to God for my actions. I am not accountable for YOURS. I am asked to tell you the good news; I cannot make you accept it.
Government cannot change people’s hearts by throwing money at them. Government is there to PROTECT its citizens, not to control everything that they do.
The “communist ideology” was created by conservatives.