tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post3390027583115754735..comments2024-03-24T11:03:03.106-07:00Comments on Just Genesis : Genesis on Homosex: Beyond SodomAlice C. Linsleyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-28073526264058297302016-02-10T15:43:34.513-07:002016-02-10T15:43:34.513-07:00Jason, you ascribe serfs, lords, torture etc to Me...Jason, you ascribe serfs, lords, torture etc to Medieval developments. Have you forgotten that the Roman Empire before that was based on slavery and dominated by the Senatorial aristocracy? And the US president most imbued by the Enlightenment, Jefferson, was keen on good relations with Native Americans. It was the unenlightened Jackson who reversed this policy.John Clarehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05691401342426746962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-39340910637514056902013-01-30T11:04:47.061-08:002013-01-30T11:04:47.061-08:00The Sodom story has a parallel at the end of Judge...The Sodom story has a parallel at the end of Judges where we are told that some among the tribe of Benjamin in the city of Giva were practicing homosex and attempted to rape a Horite priest who was passing through there. Instead they sexually assaulted his concubine who died. The priest proclaimed that never had such a thing been heard of among the Horites. He cut his concubine's body in pieces and used this to rally other Horite settlements to attack Benjamin. What's interesting about this is what happens latter. The elders insist that Samuel give them as king. This is said to be a rejection of God as King, but the Lord tells Samuel to go along with their wishes. They want Saul who is from Giva. Saul cuts up an ox and sends the pieces to the tribes with this threat - if you don't support me in my war efforts, this will be done to your cattle.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-55671040361710072062013-01-28T09:40:59.041-08:002013-01-28T09:40:59.041-08:00Sandy,
Nobody is bashing the Enlightenment. The a...Sandy,<br /><br />Nobody is bashing the Enlightenment. The article questions the irrational assumptions of some Enlightenment thinkers. As Charles Sanders Peirce points out there are three rules in epistemology: 1) in order to learn you must desire to learn; 2) do not be satisfied with what you already think/your assumptions; and 3) do not block the way of inquiry.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-32743234748300014482013-01-28T08:55:04.935-08:002013-01-28T08:55:04.935-08:00Dear Jason,
No, the Enlightenment did not prevent...Dear Jason,<br /><br />No, the Enlightenment did not prevent all the horrible acts of Western civilization post-1770. But we have the Enlightenment to thank for the reason we repent our treatment of the slaves and the Native Americans. The Enlightenment allowed people, eventually, to see humanity transcending race and religion, and to treat people who are different with respect and compassion.<br /><br />It was during (and after) the Age of Enlightenment that the British crown colonized India, sometimes with brutal methods. Nevertheless, Enlightenment ideals were what gave the Indian people the means to fight for their freedom and to seek self-government from the British; they also allowed, in turn, the British to see their past wrongs and relinquish control. <br /><br />We are still experiencing the lessons of the Enlightenment every day, and will continue to learn from them in the future. I just found it strange how people were bashing it, for I had never read such criticism before.Sandy Snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-78777902340052778232013-01-28T08:03:03.780-08:002013-01-28T08:03:03.780-08:00Fr. Theodore makes excellent points and unfortunat...Fr. Theodore makes excellent points and unfortunately has words put in his mouth by Sandy S. There is indeed pre-Enlightenment European history in which there were no serfs, lords, torture, etc. These Medieval trappings were largely brought into its culture by invasions of barbaric Franks and Normans, whose lineage spawned such events as the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade (which started with poor white Europeans, by the way), the Inquisition, and the Western World Wars. <br /><br />Sandy S., how did the Native Americans benefit from the Enlightenment? How did they benefit from the American Revolution? Indeed, after the North defeated the South in the War Between the States, the new Union flag travelled West and initiated a merciless massacre against the Aborginal peoples of the continent. What part did Enlightenment thinking play there? See, I could put words into your mouth and say that since you love the Enlightenment, then you hate Native Americans, but that wouldn't be fair, would it? Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18288849522994640993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-86326818163563391732013-01-28T07:40:06.562-08:002013-01-28T07:40:06.562-08:00Sandy S, where did Fr. Theodore write that "t...Sandy S, where did Fr. Theodore write that "the U.S. was wrong to start the American Revolution and might be better off today as a British colony"? And where did he write, "Society was a better place (for women, for blacks, for Catholics, for Jews) three hundred years ago"? I've read and re-read his comment above, and I think you are jumping to conclusions.Ronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-32575425608661492312013-01-28T06:42:35.012-08:002013-01-28T06:42:35.012-08:00Sandy,
The Enlightenment emphasis on reason and N...Sandy,<br /><br />The Enlightenment emphasis on reason and Natural Rights is commendable. However, many Enlightenment writers were not using reason in their dismissal of the Hebrew Scriptures. They were in fact blocking inquiry out of a prejudiced view of Jews, Judaism, Christians, Christianity and the Bible.Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-54422388114940766612013-01-28T06:02:30.760-08:002013-01-28T06:02:30.760-08:00Fr. Theodore, you are certainly the first person I...Fr. Theodore, you are certainly the first person I have ever heard suggest that the U.S. was wrong to start the American Revolution and might be better off today as a British colony. <br /><br />Did the Enlightenment make public thinking more secular? Yes. But it also enabled us to end barbaric practices, including torture, unjust executions, and indeed slavery (though many abolitionists were religious, many were also Enlightenment humanists as well).<br /><br />I would far prefer a press that was influenced by politics and economics than a press censored and shaped by religious doctrine. I do not think it is or should be a government's duty to enforce religious beliefs a la Iran or Afghanistan.<br /><br />The reason countries like Iran continue to practice such barbaric things——public hanging of homosexuals, stoning and murder of women who have premarital sex, the death penalty for any Muslim who converts to Christianity——is because they never had an Enlightenment. Christians practiced those things too, long ago. Reason and tolerance have made great progress.<br /><br />I frankly find it troubling to hear that you feel society was a better place (for women, for blacks, for Catholics, for Jews) three hundred years ago. Gay marriage is far preferable to a world where husbands could beat their wives with impunity, or serfs were tied to the land.Sandy Snoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-45176398941610497872013-01-28T03:33:52.364-08:002013-01-28T03:33:52.364-08:00The Enlightenment gave birth to Scientism which bl...The Enlightenment gave birth to Scientism which blocks the way of inquiry by insisting that Science alone verifies truth.<br /><br />Read this: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-folly-of-scientism<br /><br />Alice C. Linsleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069827354696169270noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-63440684707804215102013-01-27T20:58:05.661-08:002013-01-27T20:58:05.661-08:00Hello Sandy:
Forgive me, but I am of a mind to ch...Hello Sandy:<br /><br />Forgive me, but I am of a mind to challenge what you wrote, even though it is a key element of American civil mythology (I myself thought the same for a long time, based on my public school education).<br /><br />The Enlightenment was not the unqualified good that we are indoctrinated to believe it to have been. It shifted the locus of values and source of "light" from Divine revelation to human reason (which is why it helped foster religious toleration -- religious doctrine didn't matter in comparison with what "I" think). Sadly, it took such a high view of mankind (or at least of the intellectual elite of mankind) that it failed to adequately reckon with the unreasonableness of so many people. Consequently, it resulted not only in various freedoms, but also the Terror of Madame Guillotine in the aftermath of the French Revolution, all in the name of "Liberty, Equality, Brotherhood." <br /><br />The Enlightenment did not give us democracy - it gave us a republic, which is a very different thing. Like in all republics, this means that wealth and public image determine who actually rules us. We do elect them; but there are all too often pragmatic, if inarticulate, aristocratic and elitist criteria in play, even if they are not intrinsically hereditary (though we all know that there are political dynasties in America).<br /><br />True, we are more free to criticize the government openly (most of the time), but it is questionable how effective our criticism really is. Our press is free to be critical. But is it really free enough of political influence, or control by the economic elite, to actually render an honest, disinterested critique? I am no longer so sure as I once was.<br /><br />It is interesting to reflect that the American Revolution, for all its popular rhetoric about King George III being a "tyrant," was actually a revolution against a parliamentary government (headed by a King who had far less direct power than the American President has) that wanted the colonists to pay their fair share towards the cost of the expensive war England had just fought to protect them from the French and their Native American allies. It was just better propaganda to focus hostility on the King -- after all, it would not have sounded nearly so good to say you were rebelling against an elected legislative body (albeit one that didn't include people you had elected - a legitimate criticism, to be sure).<br /><br />The Enlightenment did not end slavery. The big slave holders were deeply imbued with the values of the Enlightenment (which purported to be a hearkening back to Greek antiquity, despite the fact that Aristotle said monarchy was the best form of government). It was deeply Christian persons such as William Wilberforce (an Anglican Evangelical) in Monarchist England who led the campaign against enslavement of human beings (and in his case, without a bloody Civil War). <br /><br />The Autocratic Russian Emperor Alexander II ended serfdom, before slavery was abolished in the US. He eventually paid the same price as Abraham Lincoln. Indentured servitude (i.e. temporary slavery) remained legal in the US long after permanent slavery was abolished (replaced with a very unenlightened failure to deal adequately with the transition of so many persons from slavery to freedom, bringing consequences with which we must still struggle).<br /><br />Worth thinking outside the box, I would say.Abbot Theodorehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09033976541107844341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-688820610845171516.post-36599148714893276112013-01-27T14:57:52.044-08:002013-01-27T14:57:52.044-08:00If it weren't for the Enlightenment, we wouldn...If it weren't for the Enlightenment, we wouldn't have democracy, freedom of speech and the press, religious toleration, or civil rights of any kind. We would be living in absolutist monarchies with no freedoms, probably still working as serfs or as slaves to the wealthy elite. The Enlightenment has done far more good than harm.Sandy Snoreply@blogger.com