Jump to content

delaMancha

Members
  • Content count

    354
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About delaMancha

  • Rank
    Accomplished Poster

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. delaMancha

    Eternal Security, Re-re-revisited

    Thanks, that's very interesting. I grew up Catholic, and at least up to confirmation, I wasn't exposed to any concepts similar to eternal or conditional security. (Though they may exist at a more academic level.) The emphasis was on the separation that sin, especially mortal sin, creates between a person and God. The separation can be total, resulting in damnation in the case where someone dies with an unforgiven mortal sin. However, forgiveness is readily available for a repentant sinner, and being saved is less of a binary state of being and more of a continuum of nearness and separation.
  2. delaMancha

    Eternal Security, Re-re-revisited

    I have a question about Reformed conditional security. Is there a technical definition for "lost forever"? Assume that the below statements are true descriptions of a person's salvation from the speaker's perspective. Suppose that a Wesleyan conditional security adherent said, "Person A believed, then fell away and lost salvation. They have returned and are saved again." Would a Reformed conditional security adherent say they were always secure because the were able to come back? Suppose that a Wesleyan adherent said, "Person B believed, then fell away and lost salvation. They have died, unsaved." How would a Reformed adherent react? Is the Wesleyan criteria for losing salvation necessarily easier to fall into than the Reformed criteria, given that in the Wesleyan model, people can return to salvation?
  3. delaMancha

    Is the rebel flag racist?

    Thanks, that's very interesting. I hadn't considered the effect of academia. I was thinking more of the elementary school level.
  4. delaMancha

    Is the rebel flag racist?

    Thanks, that's very interesting. I hadn't considered the effect of academia. I was thinking more of the elementary school level.
  5. delaMancha

    Is the rebel flag racist?

    Thanks, it looks like I was 40 some years early in my reference to northern aggression. I should have used the term Lost Cause. I'm a bit confused by your attribution of the Northern Aggression concept primarily to leftists. I can see that it was used by Zinn, but it seems to belong much more strongly to actual neo-Confederates. I don't think Zinn could have used it to the desired effect if he were not co-opting an already established concept.
  6. delaMancha

    Is the rebel flag racist?

    Case in point: A great deal of the Confederate monuments and historical markers were erected in the 1890s to 1930s, decades after the actual war. They were set up by neo-Confederates as political tools to glorify the old South and legitimize the South's framing of the war as a "Northern aggression". This worked very well, and history books changed in the 1940s to 1960s to be much more sympathetic to the slave owners before the war and to terrorists like the KKK during Reconstruction. PlasmaHam, what you are calling an unacceptable intrusion of politics into history is simply a correction to previous, neo-Confederate political intrusion.
  7. delaMancha

    Debate of Gay Marriage

    Ephesians gives the "Wives, submit yourselves to your husbands" and "Husbands, love your wives" bit, yes. How does the "fleshly reality of biological sex" (in terms of both gender and procreation) relate to these commands? The passage structures the commands as husband is to wife as Christ is to church. In what way do the biological relationship and differences between husband and wife mirror the relationship and differences between Christ and church?
  8. delaMancha

    Debate of Gay Marriage

    It seems like we should be able to structure at least part of this definition as: God's ____ is to man's ____ as a husband's ____ is to a wife's ____. When I think about the relationship and disparity between God and man, I'm struggling to see reasonable equivalents for governing a relationship between humans.
  9. delaMancha

    On minimum wage

    I want to try to create an extreme scenario to explore this question. I don't say this is really possible; it's a thought experiment. Suppose in an increasingly free-market dominated future, income disparity increases to the point that the following is true: There is a small set of wealthy people who own literally all capital on earth. (Land, water, factories, money, raw materials, etc. I said it was extreme) The is a large set of poor people who own literally no capital. Any durable possessions they have are rented from the wealthy people. The poor people are wholly employed by the wealthy people at subsistence wages. The wealthy people collude with their vast resources to make sure that no poor person accrues any capital. All interactions are strictly voluntary, but the wealthy people will refuse to hire anyone who does not conform, and there is not enough food among the poor people to support any sizable number of non-conformists. This state persists for at least one poor person's entire natural lifetime. Was the poor person who was born, lived and died under this regime afforded the natural rights of life liberty and property you described? This person had the liberty to choose to claim property and forego life, or to live and forego property. If an external power had the ability change one or more of these rules, would they have the moral authority to do so against the will of the wealthy people? If the answer is yes, where does that moral authority end? We don't live in the above world, but we do live in a world where fewer and fewer people own more and more capital.
  10. delaMancha

    Debate of Gay Marriage

    The same can be said for a lot of straight marriages, and straight marriage has had the benefit of official recognition far longer than gay marriage. Because these colors don't run.
  11. delaMancha

    Debate of Gay Marriage

    That's whole point of that questionnaire. If you are uncomfortable with those questions, it shows that they come from a unworthy place. If it's not fair to ask them regarding heterosexuality, then it's not fair to ask them regarding homosexuality. Too late!!!!!!!
  12. delaMancha

    Should same sex marriage be legal?

    My immediate interests in a marriage debate are in the legalization and normalization of same sex marriage and in an egalitarian division of marital and child rearing responsibilities. I see those as trending in a positive and progressive direction, at least in the US, and to the extent that marriage is and continues to be an institution, I would like to see those interests represented in it. I agree with Alister Roberts that some of the traditional opposite sex marriage goals and structures are weakened by these changes. However, I don't see that as a bad thing. I think the changes provide an opportunity to replace and improve outdated models of behavior and rules that are no longer useful, though they might once have been. In general, I think that the prescriptive focus on the exclusive roles of men and women is unnecessary, and feeds into damaging trends in larger society. If we can remove this dross of gender essentialist thinking, we will be left with a more pure representation of the same important precepts that underlie the institution of opposite sex marriage. I would certainly not say that monogamy, pair-bonding, or child rearing are outdated concepts that should be removed from the concept of marriage.
  13. delaMancha

    Should same sex marriage be legal?

    I don't really have an alternative in mind or think that the institution needs to be replaced by something completely different. When I said that the opposite sex marriage doesn't have a monopoly, I think I muddied the nuance I was trying to convey. I should have said: I don't think the underlying good ideas and practices that Alastair Roberts refers can only be found in the context of traditional opposite sex marriage. We can change the context to something that includes same sex marriage and preserve the most important common goods. Depending on the path we take, we might lose some positive aspects, but we ought to gain novel positive aspects as well. Importantly, this context change is already well under way. If Roberts sees a mortal societal danger in the de-institutionalization of traditional marriage, then I only see three possible responses: 1. Do nothing and let it happen 2. Fight to reverse the momentum of the change and rebuild traditional opposite sex marriage 3. Work with the change and construct a new institution that reflects the new context and preserves the larger goods from the previous institution. He does not seem satisfied with 1, and I think most of the effort expended in 2 is wasted to reverse an existing trend without necessarily addressing the root cause of the change. Working on 3 puts all of the effort into guiding an existing change, and I think is much more likely to produce a stable institution that preserves important common goods.
  14. delaMancha

    Should same sex marriage be legal?

    I think this is the important thing. I'm my reading, Alastair Roberts makes three major points: 1. Opposite sex marriage is an institution that has been and is very invested in child rearing as a common good. 2. Opposite sex marriage is being de-instutionalized in that people think less about it as promoting common good and more about it serving individual needs. 3. Same sex marriage exacerbates this de-institutionalization because it focuses on those individual needs. I agree with 1 (in the limited way I have phrased it here), but feel that if 2 is true, then fighting 3 is the wrong response, especially from a self-proclaimed secular viewpoint. We should be using this momentum and interest in any kind of marriage to steer society toward a different institution. Trying to reverse a decades old social trend sounds like folly to me. Opposite sex marriage as instituted (over the past few hundred years, (in the west,)) does not have a monopoly on good child rearing precepts, and I believe that it is fatally outdated in many ways, especially in gender roles, masculinity/femininity, etc. Alastair Roberts makes claims about the benefits of opposite sex marriage that are true, but are rooted in the assumption that it is the best and only solution. I don't think that he justifies that assumption.
  15. Thank you for posting this. I was raised Catholic, and and only recently considered this question. I was shocked to find such a big blind spot after so long. It seems to me that the Immaculate Conception significantly and unnecessarily complicates the concept of original sin.
×