Era Might Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Warren Carroll is a great historian. I have his Christendom series. Excellent resource. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:38 PM']Are you defending the ancient definition or arguing against the modern one (of "liberal") implied in this thread? [right][snapback]851141[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Well if you're going to say that the official definition of liberal is "slimebag" then no Jesus wasn't a liberal. But that's not the official definition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Right, but today liberal now means "equalizing" and "non-intervening" and actually other things that "liberal" never meant before. Aristotles' definition and the modern conception are total opposites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:45 PM']Right, but today liberal now means "equalizing" and "non-intervening" and actually other things that "liberal" never meant before. Aristotles' definition and the modern conception are total opposites. [right][snapback]851152[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Yes when conservatives are allowed to define things, they lose their meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Aristotle's a conservative? What conservative defined "liberal"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jan 9 2006, 08:50 PM']Yes when conservatives are allowed to define things, they lose their meaning. [right][snapback]851159[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Oh yes. We should let liberals define the meaning of words instead! . . . If they can ever figure out what the meaning of the word "is" is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='qfnol31' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:51 PM']Aristotle's a conservative? What conservative defined "liberal"? [right][snapback]851160[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I was referring to the modern definition and you know that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:53 PM']I was referring to the modern definition and you know that [right][snapback]851164[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I was just going by the so-called "liberals" themselves and what they've given. That's why I was confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 And it really seems that liberals are the ones forever trying to change the meaning of words to mean whatever they want. The libs on here keep insisting on using their modern, trendy, p.c. defs of words such as "marriage." (as opposed to those old, dusty outdated definitions of ten years ago). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 (edited) [quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:56 PM']And it really seems that liberals are the ones forever trying to change the meaning of words to mean whatever they want. The libs on here keep insisting on using their modern, trendy, p.c. defs of words such as "marriage." (as opposed to those old, dusty outdated definitions of ten years ago). [right][snapback]851168[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You wanted some points that would show Christ as a liberal Why are you changing the subject? Edited January 10, 2006 by jaime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='OLAM Dad' date='Jan 8 2006, 06:05 PM']I, for one, am just glad to see that you've found liberals who admit that Jesus existed. To properly enter into this debate you have to first define what 'liberal' means. Don't try to do anything until you first agree on what liberal means and then you can contest their arguments one issue at a time. I must warn you though, arguing with liberals is like arguing with idiots. It is a bad idea. They first drag you down to their level and then they beat you with experience. Good Luck p.s. - You can start with the abortion issue. Most everybody agrees that liberals believe in 'choice'. Scripture is clear on its objection to abortion. [right][snapback]849729[/snapback][/right] [/quote] "the truth has nothing to fear of lies" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lounge Daddy Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='thedude' date='Jan 8 2006, 06:56 PM']Check out this website: [url="http://www.cafepress.com/turn_left"]http://www.cafepress.com/turn_left[/url] [right][snapback]849758[/snapback][/right] [/quote] wow so i think they would have expected Jesus to show up at one of their demonstrations with a table full of Marxist literature to hold a sign and smoke dope with them afterwards super duper for them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggamafu Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 9 2006, 08:56 PM']And it really seems that liberals are the ones forever trying to change the meaning of words to mean whatever they want. The libs on here keep insisting on using their modern, trendy, p.c. defs of words such as "marriage." (as opposed to those old, dusty outdated definitions of ten years ago). [right][snapback]851168[/snapback][/right] [/quote] HAHA BURN!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 9 2006, 09:37 PM'] Christ did not try to change "authoritarian attitudes, " but taught with His own authority. He taught that He alone was the Way, the Truth and the Life. He wasn't some hippy flower child who taught His followers to simply defy authority and do their own thing! Christ liberated mankind from original sin, and to bear the gentle yoke of Christ, not to be "free" to engage in licentiousness. Sure, if you play around with words enough, you can always find some sense in which Christ was "liberal." However, usually when liberals make this assertion, it is meant to imply that Christ would support the modern liberal agenda. The evidence is all against this. Why would Christ support something opposed to Himself? [right][snapback]851140[/snapback][/right] [/quote] How is teaching by his own authority not radical or revolutionary? How is it not a liberal idea to teach that everyone can come to the Father when the Jews believed it was for them alone? Do some misuse the word liberal? Yes just like some misuse the words Christian and conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ruso Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 [quote name='Socrates' date='Jan 10 2006, 03:34 AM']Jesus said nothing about how people aquired wealth. Christ did speak about the spiritual dangers of wealth and attachment to material things. He recommended voluntary giving up of one's wealth to follow Christ. He was speaking of voluntary actions for spiritual reasons here. He said nothing calling for socialistic government-enforced redistribution of wealth. [b]Voluntary[/b] poverty is one of the evangelical counsels. Government-enforced poverty has no merit in itself. And speaking against hypocrisy of influencial people does not automatically qualify one as a liberal. I've read plenty of conservatives doing the same thing. I've still seen zippo evidence given on this thread that Christ supported anything on the liberal agenda. [right][snapback]851085[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Perhasp I have not explained myself well, I have not said that Jesus was communist or socialist, two very different things on the other hand. Socrates, which I see is that for you a liberal one is the one who supports things as the abortion, eutanasia, etc..... and economics measures of the left. Jesus, sight of that way never could be liberal. And of course it is not possible to be catholic supporting first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now