How Christianity gave us the United States and made the World a Better Place

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 31st, 2013

History 101

The Pope kept European Rulers from Oppressing their People lest they get Excommunicated from the Church

In 39 AD the Romans crucified Jesus of Nazareth.  Because they said he called himself the King of the Jews.  Or rather those with political power who felt threatened by Jesus’ popularity said this.  His death was to protect power and privilege of those who had it.  Ultimately, though, His death would do more to destroy power and privilege.  For the Golden Rule allowed people to live together in peace.  To build communities.  And to help one another.

Emperor Diocletian split up the vast Roman Empire into four parts.  The tetrarchy.  The rulership by four.  Each of the four parts had its own emperor.  When Diocletian stepped down from power those emperors began vying for power.  By 312 two emperors were in open war with each other.  Constantine.  And Maxentius.  On October 28, 312, they met in battle near the Milvian Bridge over the Tiber.  On the eve of battle Constantine had a vision.  The Christian God would help him win the upcoming battle if he placed the Christian symbol on his soldiers’ shields (accounts differ it was either the Chi-Rho sign or the Latin cross).  He did.  He won.  And became Constantine the Great.  Sole ruler of the Roman Empire.  And because of his victory in the Battle of the Milvian Bridge he began his conversion to Christianity.  Making the Roman Empire Christian.

Christianity spread throughout and united Europe.  And the Pope kept European rulers from oppressing their people.  Lest they get excommunicated from the Church.  In time, though, some resented rule from Rome.  In particular when Pope Leo X sold indulgences (a way to help purify one from sin) to fund the rebuilding of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.  This was one of many problems that had many calling for a reform of the Church.  One in particular, Martin Luther, published his The Ninety-Five Theses in 1517.  Kicking off the Protestant Reformation.

Plymouth Colony succeeded when Communal Property became Private Property

Henry VIII, King of England, was a good Catholic.  But his wife wasn’t giving him any sons.  And he wanted a male heir.  So he asked the Pope for an annulment from his wife.  Catherine.  So he could marry Anne Boleyn.  The Pope refused.  So Henry left the Catholic Church.  And initiated the English Reformation.  Making England Protestant.  England would swing back and forth between Catholicism and Protestantism without being either but something in between.  Making a group of Protestants very unhappy.  As they felt the English Reformation did not go far enough.  A group referred to derisively as Puritans.  They were so hated that they were being persecuted along with the Catholics.  So they left England.  Landing in the Netherlands first.  Then they sailed across the Atlantic.  They sighted land on November 9, 1620.  They eventually came ashore and established Plymouth Colony.

About half of Plymouth Colony died within the first few years.  From disease.  And hunger.  The economic system they were using was killing them.  Communal property.  Everything the colonists produced belonged to everyone.  People produced according to their ability and took from the common store according to their needs.  A sort of Marxism.  Before there was even a Karl Marx.  To save the colony Governor William Bradford abandoned the idea of communal property in 1623.  Communal property became private property.  And the colony was saved.  As people worked twice as hard to produce more on their land than they did on communal land.  And because they did they replaced famines with bumper crops.  So instead of dying off the American colonies became the prosperous New World.

The Seven Years’ War (1756–1763) came to the New World.  By the time it ended Catholic France lost its North American possessions to Protestant Great Britain.  To pay off the enormous debt of that war Parliament decided to tax their British American colonists.  Who made out very well in the conflict without the costs the British incurred.  But they did this without discussing it with the colonists.  Treating them as second-class citizens in the British Empire.  Who had no representation in Parliament.  Which led to anger over taxation without representation.  Leading to the Boston Tea Party (December 16, 1773).  Which led to the Intolerable Acts and the Quebec Act (1774-1775).  Which led to the shot heard ’round the world.  The Battles of Lexington and Concord (April 19, 1775).  Which ultimately led to July 2, 1776.  When the Continental Congress voted to adopt the Declaration of Independence.  After a few revisions it was formally passed 2 days later.  On July 4, 1776.  Known forever after as Independence Day in the United States.

In the United States your Last Name does not Determine the Quality of your Life

The American Revolutionary War did not start out well.  As the British pushed them back with little effort.  Until Benedict Arnold (future traitor) did some superb soldiering.  Impeding the advance of General Burgoyne.  The Americans met him in battle for the last time on October 7, 1777.  On the second day of fighting in the Battle of Saratoga.  And won.  Forcing an army in the mightiest empire in the world to surrender.  Shocking the world.  And getting the French to take notice.  Who then entered the American War of Independence.  The turning point of the war.  And world history.  For France was anxious to get back what they had lost to the British.  As was Spain.  Who joined the conflict as France’s ally.  Turning the American War of Independence into a world war.  And a war of attrition.  As their new foes forced them to send British forces all around the globe.  Leaving fewer to fight in North America.  With a British public growing weary of the war in North America.

America won.  Eventually.  Taking 8 years until the Treaty of Paris officially ended the conflict (September 3, 1783).  And peace and prosperity followed.  Thanks in large part to Jay’s Treaty (ratified by the Senate in November 1794).  Which improved relations between Great Britain and the new United States of America.  And began a Special Relationship between two nations of a common people, culture, religion and tradition.  When the treaty expired there was a minor hiccup in that Special Relationship that resulted in war.  The War of 1812 (1812-1815).  But peace and prosperity soon resumed.  With the South having a larger say in the national direction thanks to the Three-Fifths Compromise in the United States Constitution (1787).  Giving the South greater representation in the House of Representatives as they counted 3/5 of each slave to determine their number of representatives.  As the North industrialized and immigration filled their factories and swelled her population the South was losing that larger say.  One thing led to another that eventually resulted in the American Civil War (1861-1865).

The agrarian South had more in common with feudal England than they did with the industrial North.  Rich landowners (the planter elite) comprised an aristocracy that controlled politics.  While peasants/slaves worked the land.  The South was holding onto the Old World.  Where there was power and privilege.  While the North was building the New World.  Though the South talked about states’ rights they used the power of the federal government wherever they could.  Such as the Fugitive Slave Act (1850).  When war broke out the South won most battles.  Until General Grant started his great advance down the Mississippi River.  With the Vicksburg Campaign (May 18 – July 4, 1863) culminating in the capture of Vicksburg.  And control of the Mississippi River.  Severing the Confederacy into two.  Pretty much guaranteeing a Union victory.  It was just a matter of time.  In the east the Battle of Gettysburg (July 1–3, 1863) also ended in a Union victory.  President Lincoln went to the Gettysburg battlefield for the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery there.  Where he gave his Gettysburg’s Address (November 19, 1863).  Which ended with “we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”  And so far it hasn’t.  Remaining that shining city upon a hill.  The destination of people everywhere yearning liberty.  And a better life.  Where all men are created equal.  And your last name does not determine the quality of your life.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jesus, Joseph, Mary, Nazareth, Galilee, Bethlehem, Roman Occupation, King Herod and the Massacre of the Innocents

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 24th, 2013

History 101

(Originally published December 25th, 2012)

If Jesus were to pick up His Mortal Life where He left it He would go to the Nearest Synagogue

Some on the Left have tried to advance their agenda by appealing to the religion they hate.  Christianity.  Or, rather, the many religions based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, the New Testament and the Old Testament.  They hate the religions of Christianity because they frown on a more fun and libertine lifestyle.  And judge those who participate in a more fun and libertine lifestyle.  In particular those who use birth control and abortion to engage in sex outside of marriage.

So they are no fans of these Christian religions.  But they do try to use Jesus to advance some of their causes.  Such as their campaign to get rid of the gas-guzzling and air-polluting SUV.  Where they ask, “What car would Jesus drive?”  With the implication that Jesus would choose to drive a car that would not pollute the planet that He created.  Or, if you don’t believe in the Trinity (where Jesus is Father, Son and Holy Spirit), the planet His Father created.  Which is a silly question to ask Christians as they believe that Jesus is everywhere as well as within them and would not need to drive anywhere.  Still, they ask the question to try and make Christians feel that they are doing something that would make Jesus sad.  Driving an SUV.

Here’s a question for the Left.  If Jesus was walking the planet today as the man He was before His crucifixion which Christian church would He attend?  An Orthodox church?  A Catholic church?  Or a Protestant church?  The answer?  None of the above.  For this is a trick question.  If Jesus were to pick up His mortal life where He left it He would go to the nearest synagogue as Jesus Christ was a practicing Jew.  And a rabbi.

The Roman Province of Judea was a Complicated Place between the Roman Occupation and King Herod

It was being Jewish that got Jesus into so much trouble.  From the moment of his birth.  Joseph, Jesus’ father, came from Bethlehem.  While engaged to Mary she became pregnant.  Before their wedding.  And not by him.  Turns out God blessed her to bring Jesus into the world.  Joseph had some trouble believing that but after a visit by an angel Joseph was convinced that she did not cheat on him.  That the Immaculate Conception story was legitimate.  At least according to the Gospels.  Written many years later and may not be a literal historical narrative.  But they do include historical fact.  Where history becomes more a matter of faith is difficult at times to determine for the historical record is rather sparse at times.

Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth.  In Galilee near the border with Samaria.  During the time of the Roman occupation.  Who were pagans.  Herod was an Edomite.  Born in the Kingdom of Edom just south of the Kingdom of Judah.  Though he practiced Judaism he was not considered Jewish by the powers-that-be in Judea, the Jewish lands that became a Roman province.  Herod was governor of Galilee.  With Rome’s approval.  He lost his throne.  Rome helped him get it back.  The Roman Senate then voted him King of the Jews.  Three years later he and the Romans conquered Jerusalem.  And elevated him to king of all of Judea.

So the Roman province of Judea was a complicated place.  The Romans tolerated the Jews as long as they did not cause too much trouble.  The Jews did not like living under Roman occupation.  And they were none too keen with King Herod who wasn’t religiously pure, lived a decadent lifestyle and was a brutal tyrant.  It was this world Mary was about to bring Jesus into.

The Last Thing you want to tell the Current King of the Jews was the Location of the New King of the Jews

According to the Gospels Roman emperor Augustus ordered a census.  The Census of Quirinius.  Requiring all residents of Judea to return to their ancestral lands for counting in a census.  Though this may not have been Roman custom they may have called for this in Judea.  That complicated place where the Jews kept their religion and customs.  So Joseph had to return to Bethlehem.  Worried about leaving Mary behind in a land where others may not be so open minded about her Immaculate Conception he took her along.  Which is why she made that great trek so close to her delivery time.

With everyone else returning to Bethlehem the only shelter they could find was in a stable.  Mary gave birth and they placed Jesus in a manger.  A food trough for the animals.  As the word got out about the son of God being born it attracted a lot of attention.  Some were overjoyed that the prophecy in the Old Testament was being fulfilled.  Some were not quite that happy.  Some in the Jewish hierarchy.  Who didn’t foresee this event.  And King Herod.  Who when he heard that a new king had been born to rule over mankind felt nothing but a challenge to his power.  So when the three wise men from the East, the Magi, came to Herod to ask where this new king was King Herod couldn’t tell them.  But when they found Him they were to send word back so he could come and worship Jesus himself.

Of course the last thing you want to tell the current King of the Jews was the location of this new King of the Jews, this son of God.  Jesus Christ.  Because he would want to kill Him.  Well, the Magi got the message in a dream and went back East without telling Herod after delivering their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.  (The frankincense and myrrh were aromatic gum resins used as incense.)  King Herod took this betrayal as another challenge to his power.  So to protect his power he ordered that all male children in the Greater Bethlehem area 2 years old and younger were to be slaughtered.  The Massacre of the Innocents.  There is no record of this outside the Gospels.  Though it would be something King Herod would have done.  For he killed his own children when they were a threat to his power.  Based on the size of Bethlehem the number of children falling in Herod’s criteria may have been about 20.  The slaughter of which would be a tragedy.  But the number may not have been large enough to enter the historical record.

An angel warned Joseph of Herod’s plan in a dream.  Telling him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt until the dust settled.  Returning to Galilee after Herod’s death.  Where he grew up.  Jesus of Nazareth.   But his problems with the politically connected Jewish hierarchy and the Romans weren’t over.  He would have about 30 years on earth, though, before that trouble would catch up with Him.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Christmas and Keynesian Stimulus

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 23rd, 2013

Economics 101

(Originally published December 24th, 2012)

Christians may not like the Crass Commercialization of Christmas but the Left Loves It

The Left does not have a war on Christmas per se.  For they love the consumer spending part of Christmas.  Which is pure Keynesian.  People go into debt to spend more money at retailers.  They love that part of Christmas.  What they don’t like is the religious stuff.  Especially Jesus.

They don’t like Jesus because He is the God the Christians worship.  Their Lord and Savior.  It’s these Christians that bother the Left.  Because of their opposition to birth control (mostly Catholics), abortion and having fun in general.  The kind of fun adults enjoy.  The kind of things Christians frown on.  Premarital sex.  Gay love.  Drinking and using drugs.  Coarse language and sexual situations on television shows and in the movies.  Things they champion on the Left.  Which makes the Left hate Christianity.  Which they see as nothing but a great killjoy.

It’s the moralizing the Left does not like.  But the one thing Christians don’t like about Christmas, its crass commercialization, they do like.  So the Left will try to band images of Christ from Christmas displays wherever they can.  Despite Christmas being the celebration of Christ’s birth.  But they will gather in Rockefeller Center to party when they light the Christmas tree.  Though they would prefer that we call it the holiday tree.

Retailers often become Profitable for the Year only because of this Temporary Spending Surge at Christmas

So there are two Christmases.  The one where Christians celebrate the birth of Christ.  Wish for peace on earth.  And good will towards man.  And the other Christmas.  The one marked by the orgy of consumer spending.  Much of it funded by one-time Christmas bonuses.  A celebration of demand-side Keynesian economics.  Where people spend their hard earned money instead of saving it.  And when their money runs out they spend even more using their credit cards.

Keynesians have a bunch of charts and graphs showing how great a stimulus this Christmas spending is to the economy.  And mathematical formulas.  They can tell you about the velocity of money. How fast money travels through the economy when it goes from consumer to seller.  The seller then becomes consumer.  And spends the money they just received.  Then the person who receives this money in a sales transaction goes out and spends it as a consumer.  And on and on it goes.  Flying through though the economy at breakneck speed.  Generating a whole lot of economic activity.

Retailers often become profitable for the year only because of this spending surge at Christmas.  In fact, to handle this surge in business they hire a lot of people at Christmas time.  Part-time people.  Proving again that pumping money into the economy creates jobs.  The main tenet of Keynesian monetary policy.  Pump cash into the economy and people will spend it.  Something the Keynesians have been doing since Richard Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold in 1971.  Ending any semblance of responsible monetary policy.  And recessions forever.  At least, that was the plan.

Keynesian Stimulus is nothing more than an Orgy of Temporary Consumer Spending just like at Christmas Time

When the economy slows down and people stop buying stuff businesses have to lay off workers.  So they won’t build stuff that no one will buy.  Laid off workers no longer have money to buy things.  Which causes other business to lay off workers.  So THEY won’t build stuff that no one will buy.  It’s a vicious cycle.  In fact, we call it the business cycle.  The boom-bust cycle.  From expansion to contraction.  From an economy hiring people to an economy laying off people.

Keynesian economics was supposed to remove the contraction side of the business cycle.  By picking up the spending slack.  When consumers stopped spending money the government would step in and replace their spending.  We call it stimulus spending.  Often spending money the government doesn’t have.  So they run a deficit (i.e., borrow money).  Or simply print money.  Which they did a lot of in the Seventies.  Unfortunately, as it turns out, you just can’t do that.  For when you print money you devalue it.  Which raises prices.  As it takes more of these devalued dollars to buy what they once did.

And this is why Keynesian economics doesn’t work.  Because a Keynesian stimulus is nothing more than an orgy of consumer spending.  Just like at Christmas time.  Which happens only for a limited time.  Businesses hire temporary part-time workers at Christmas because this spending does not last.  As it does not last during a Keynesian stimulus.  It doesn’t create any full-time jobs.  Because employers know it is only temporary.  And they know that higher prices will soon follow.  As they do after Christmas when the discounting ends.  Which will reduce future economic activity.  As it does after Christmas.  Once the deals end so too ends the orgy of consumer spending.  Leaving people to deal with the aftermath.  Depleted bank accounts.  A lot of credit card debt.  And a little buyer’s remorse.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Nero, Hitler and Obama and the Lies they Told

Posted by PITHOCRATES - October 29th, 2013

History 101

Nero used the Great Fire of Rome to rebuild Rome to his Liking and to Persecute Christians

Roman emperor Nero does not have the greatest of reputations.  For instance, a popular story about him is that he fiddled while Rome burned.  Of course he didn’t fiddle.  For the fiddle didn’t exist yet.  But the lyre did.  And he could play the lyre.  In fact, he even composed music for the lyre.  But the historical record is a little sparse to say definitely what happened when Rome burned.

That said Nero was not all that dismayed that Rome burnt.  Because he didn’t like the way the city looked.  And he wanted to rebuild Rome into a glorious city befitting him.  And the fire allowed him do just that.  For to build the city Nero envisioned required that he first destroy the city that was there.  And the fire conveniently did that for him.

But it did more.  The year was 64 anno Domini.  In the year of our Lord.  Being that Jesus of Nazareth lived temporally until His thirties that puts the Great Fire of Rome about 30 years after His death.  And during the rise of those pesky Christians that Nero really didn’t like.  Who worshipped Jesus as God.  And not him.  Nero.  Putting crazy thoughts into people’s heads.  That Nero wasn’t God.  So Nero blamed the Great Fire of Rome on the Christians.  Allowing him to torture them.  And execute them.  Earning the moniker of the first persecutor of Christians.  So Nero profited well from the Great Fire of Rome.  He got his new city.  And he suppressed the ascendancy of those pesky Christians.

Adolf Hitler used the Reichstag Fire to make the way Clear for the New Nazi Germany

After World War I Germany was reeling.  Reparations were crippling her.  There was hyperinflation.  Germans were struggling for food and heat.  Creating the perfect political climate for a guy like Adolf Hitler to rise in politics.  After a failed attempt to seize power—the Beer Hall Putsch—he turned to legal channels to secure power.  Winning elections.  In time the Nazi Party rose in prominence.  But it could not win a majority in the German Parliament.  Until, that is, the Reichstag fire.

Following World War I Europe was being pulled between two political ideologies.  Fascism.  And communism.  Both were brutal dictatorships.  While both proclaimed to be for the people.  Well, Adolf Hitler’s Nazis were fascists.  Who were sharing power with the communists.  But they didn’t want to share power with the communists.  Which they didn’t have to do after the Reichstag fire.

Hitler blamed the communists for the fire.  He persuaded President Hindenburg to pass an emergency decree.  Suspending civil liberties.  And then turned the power of the state against the Communist Party.  Clearing the way for the rise of the Nazis to power.  Historians still debate who set that fire today.  But one thing it did was clear the last obstacle in the way of the Nazis.  The communists.  With the Communist Party outlawed the Nazis no longer had to share power with them.  Allowing them to rise to a majority in Parliament.  And from there it was but a short path to Hitler’s absolute power.  Thanks to a fire that got rid of the old.  And made way for the new.

President Obama is On the Record saying that he is a Proponent of Single-Payer Universal Health Care

The American left has longed wanted national health care.  For it is the Holy Grail of socialist/communist states.  As it touches everyone.  And makes everyone dependent on the state.  All brutal dictatorships have/had national health care.  Cuba.  North Korea.  The Soviet Union.  Nazi Germany.  These states also were/are anti-capitalist.  So anti-capitalism and national health care go hand-in-hand.  That is, the only way to have national health care is to give up some capitalism.

Which is a problem for the proponents of national health care.  For people like their capitalism.  And the liberty and high standards of living it gives them.  So proponents of national health care can’t be honest when they’re trying to take away people’s health insurance.  So they lie (see ‘Keep Your Plan’ Vow False; Media Knew It by Investor’s Business Daily posted 10/29/2013 on Yahoo! Finance included here in its entirety).

NBC News on Monday claimed to have uncovered evidence that President Obama knew all along that his promise that “you can keep your health plan” under ObamaCare wasn’t true. The story came out just as millions across the country are getting cancellation notices from their insurance companies.

“Buried in ObamaCare regulations from July 2010,” NBC said, is an estimate that shows “the administration knew that more than 40% to 67% of those in the individual market would not be able to keep their plans, even if they liked them.

Although ObamaCare included a provision meant to grandfather health plans sold before 2010, regulators defined what “grandfathered” meant so narrowly that most plans wouldn’t qualify.

Yet Obama went on repeating this promise, saying, as he did in June 2012, that “if you’re one of the 250 million Americans who already (has) health insurance, you will keep your health insurance.

That the administration knew this wasn’t true is troubling.

But the mainstream press also knew — or should have known — that Obama’s “you can keep your plan” promise was phony. It just didn’t bother to report on it at the time.

As far back as early 2010, health reform experts, Republican lawmakers and conservative policy analysts had been citing the same 40% to 67% figure that NBC News claims to have unearthed: The Commonwealth Fund, a favorite source for health care reporters, pointed out in a June 22, 2010, blog post that the administration “estimated that between 40% and 67% of health plans will relinquish grandfathered status” by 2013, meaning that millions of plans would get canceled.

An October 2010 article in the widely read Health Affairs said that, in addition to those losses, “the Obama administration has projected that between 39% and 69% of employer group plans” and “up to 80%” of small business plans would be canceled.

On Sept. 22, 2010, Sen. Mike Enzi , R-Wyo., said forcing 80% of small firms to change plans “breaks the president’s promise” about keeping your health plan.

In May 2011, a PricewaterhouseCoopers survey found that 51% of employers said they would have to drop plans and buy new ones because of ObamaCare.

An Aug. 29, 2011, memo by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor noted that “by the administration’s own estimates, 40% to 67% of individual insurance plans” will be canceled.

In a December 2011 paper, the Galen Institute’s Grace-Marie Turner noted that “millions of people are losing the coverage they have now, and tens of millions more will surely follow.

(IBD also covered this extensively at the time.) In addition, the Congressional Budget Office had reported in March 2010 that ObamaCare could cause 4 million to lose their employer-provided health insurance. It later raised that to 7 million, and admitted the number could be 20 million.

And years ago, Republicans like Enzi and Cantor pushed ObamaCare changes that would have prevented the massive cancellations going on today.

But with a few rare exceptions, the mainstream press completely ignored evidence that millions would be forced to drop their current insurance.

Now news reports are rife with stories of angry families getting insurance cancellation notices, learning that ObamaCare-approved plans will cost far more, and wondering why they didn’t know this was coming.

On Monday, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., introduced a bill aimed at preventing these cancellations. The one-page bill, “The Keep Your Health Plan Act,” states simply that any health plan sold this year to the individual can also be sold next year.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., has a similar bill in the Senate.

The question is whether Senate Democrats will block this bill — as they have almost every other GOP-sponsored ObamaCare bill — in the face of rising public anger about Obama’s misleading and now broken promise.

President Obama doesn’t like the existing health care system.  And is on the record saying that he is a proponent of single-payer universal health care.

So to get what he wants he first has to destroy the old.  Private health insurance.  And then set up the new.  Obamacare.  His pathway to single-payer universal health care.  Something the American people don’t want.  So he lied to the American people.  And created Obamacare to destroy the one obstacle in his way.  The private health insurance industry.  Then he can act against the will of the people.  And get what HE wants.  Power.  Through legal means.  Just like Hitler.  Who was also a good liar.  And, thankfully, that’s where the similarities end.  Well, that.  And destroying their countries.  For awhile, at least.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT181: “Slavery in America is the best thing that ever happened for today’s black Americans.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - August 2nd, 2013

Fundamental Truth

To become the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit the Man Jesus had to Die

There are some Christians who still have bad feelings towards Jews.  Who they blame for killing their Lord and Savior.  Jesus Christ.  Even though Christ died for man’s sins.  He knew the state was going to execute Him.  But He did not try to save Himself.  He accepted His fate.  Because His death was preordained.  It was all part of God’s plan.  For Jesus’ ascension into heaven.  To become the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit He had to die.  And He had to be crucified.  As horrible as that was.  To give the religion that would follow their most sacred icon.  The crucifix.  Or cross for the non-Catholics.

God’s will was done.  And because of it the Christians got a new religion.  Based on the life and death of a Jew.  The Rabbi Jesus of Nazareth.  Which is why the Christian Bible includes the Old Testament.  To include the Mosaic teachings that Christ Himself taught.  So for Christians to hold a grudge against Judaism is illogical.  Especially when the ultimate instrument of Jesus’ death was politics.  Not religion.

The Jews lived under a Roman occupation.  An uneasy Roman occupation.  The Jews were a thorn in Rome’s side.  As they were quite burdensome.  With their not knuckling under as willingly as others.  So to keep the peace they allowed the Jews to keep their religion.  Or rather, they tolerated it.  Something the high priests and Pharisees were very conscious of.  And they didn’t want any trouble that would cause them to lose their privileges.  Like this young whippersnapper coming around and riling up the masses.  For they knew it wouldn’t take much for the Romans to lose their tolerance of them.  And they especially didn’t like His way of not revering them.  That especially cheesed them off.  So the high priests and Pharisees went to the Romans and said this guy, Jesus, is calling Himself king of the Jews.  Something they were sure would not please Caesar.  Emperor of them all.  Well, one thing led to another and they crucified Christ.  Because of politics.  Not Judaism.

Some of the Countries today enjoying the Greatest Liberties and Highest Standards of Living have a Christian Past

Jesus has done more to bring peace to the world than anyone else.  The golden rule?  It has done more to let people live peacefully together than any government law.  It made people kind to each other.  Instead of the brutes we once were.  Religion civilized us.  And Jesus did more than most to make that happen.  Would that have happened if the Romans hadn’t crucified Him?  Of course this is a moot question.  For it was God’s will.  What happened had to happen.  And we are better off because it happened.  (When people use religion to justify violence it’s a different story.  The horrific wars between Catholics and Protestants had nothing to do with the golden rule.  But people who in their zealotry forget the golden rule.)

Death by crucifixion was a long, painful death.  People hung by their arms until they could hang no longer.  Then they transferred their weight to their legs.  Standing up.  And this went on until death mercifully came.  So Jesus hung by His arms with His weight pulling His tissue and tendons against the nails through His hands.  And when He stood the weight of his body forced His tissues and tendons against the nail through his feet.  And up and down he went.  Forcing those nails through His flesh.  A horrible death.  But a death He did not try to avoid.  People make Him out as some hippy peacenik.  But He had guts.  Though it’s easy for a God to have that kind of guts.  Jesus was just a man when He died.

So something good came from something horrible.  The world became a better place.  Yes, there were a lot of religious wars when some bastardized Jesus’ teachings.  But some of the countries today enjoying the greatest liberties and highest standards of living have a Christian past (and are still predominantly Christian).  Like those that were once part of the Christian British Empire.  Where the rule of law and the respect for the individual—not the ruling powers—rule supreme.  And that would not have happened without Christ.  For even the atheist among the Founding Fathers—Thomas Jefferson—thought that Jesus’ teachings were the greatest in the world.  So good things can come from bad things.  Like another good thing that came from one of the worst things there ever was.  Slavery.

There’s a Prosperous Black Middle Class and Black Millionaires in America thanks to Slavery

Africa is a horrible place.  Sadly.  In any metric you use Africa measures horribly.  More people live in poverty in Africa than they do anywhere else in the world.  Africa has the world’s highest infant mortality rates.  Africa has the lowest life expectancy rates in the world.  Africa has the highest homicide rates in the world.  Africa has the lowest per capita GDP in the world.  And Africa has the lowest Human Development Index in the world.  Which basically says that Africa is the worst place in the world to live.  Whereas Europe and the countries that were once part of the Christian British Empire consistently have the best numbers in all of these metrics.  Making them some of the best places to live.  Unlike Africa.

Of course, the slaves who traveled in the hellish conditions of the slave ships to the New World would have preferred to have remained in Africa.  In the world they knew.  With the family they knew.  Without suffering the horrors of that Atlantic crossing.  The slave markets.  And their brutal overseers.  But something good came from all that suffering.  Unfortunately it was not for them.  But their distant ancestors.  Who today can live in a prosperous black middle class.  Where they don’t have to live in poverty.  Where their children are likely to survive their childhood.  And grow up to live a full life.  Where they have a lesser chance of being murdered.  Where they can have a much higher standard of living.  And a higher Human Development Index.  Unlike in Africa.

Slavery in America is the best thing that ever happened for today’s black Americans.  Ironically, the ancestors of those who were lucky enough to escape the slave traders don’t live as good a life as those who did not.  Today blacks in America are CEOs.  Athletes.  Movie stars.  Hip hop-stars.  Doctors.  Lawyers.  Even president of the United States.  So in addition to a prosperous black middle class there are black millionaires in America.  Blacks who started with nothing.  And earned a champagne and caviar life.  Something that just isn’t happening in Africa.  Sadly.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jesus, Joseph, Mary, Nazareth, Galilee, Bethlehem, Roman Occupation, King Herod and the Massacre of the Innocents

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 25th, 2012

History 101

If Jesus were to pick up His Mortal Life where He left it He would go to the Nearest Synagogue

Some on the Left have tried to advance their agenda by appealing to the religion they hate.  Christianity.  Or, rather, the many religions based on the teachings of Jesus Christ, the New Testament and the Old Testament.  They hate the religions of Christianity because they frown on a more fun and libertine lifestyle.  And judge those who participate in a more fun and libertine lifestyle.  In particular those who use birth control and abortion to engage in sex outside of marriage.

So they are no fans of these Christian religions.  But they do try to use Jesus to advance some of their causes.  Such as their campaign to get rid of the gas-guzzling and air-polluting SUV.  Where they ask, “What car would Jesus drive?”  With the implication that Jesus would choose to drive a car that would not pollute the planet that He created.  Or, if you don’t believe in the Trinity (where Jesus is Father, Son and Holy Spirit), the planet His Father created.  Which is a silly question to ask Christians as they believe that Jesus is everywhere as well as within them and would not need to drive anywhere.  Still, they ask the question to try and make Christians feel that they are doing something that would make Jesus sad.  Driving an SUV.

Here’s a question for the Left.  If Jesus was walking the planet today as the man He was before His crucifixion which Christian church would He attend?  An Orthodox church?  A Catholic church?  Or a Protestant church?  The answer?  None of the above.  For this is a trick question.  If Jesus were to pick up His mortal life where He left it He would go to the nearest synagogue as Jesus Christ was a practicing Jew.  And a rabbi.

The Roman Province of Judea was a Complicated Place between the Roman Occupation and King Herod

It was being Jewish that got Jesus into so much trouble.  From the moment of his birth.  Joseph, Jesus’ father, came from Bethlehem.  While engaged to Mary she became pregnant.  Before their wedding.  And not by him.  Turns out God blessed her to bring Jesus into the world.  Joseph had some trouble believing that but after a visit by an angel Joseph was convinced that she did not cheat on him.  That the Immaculate Conception story was legitimate.  At least according to the Gospels.  Written many years later and may not be a literal historical narrative.  But they do include historical fact.  Where history becomes more a matter of faith is difficult at times to determine for the historical record is rather sparse at times.

Joseph and Mary lived in Nazareth.  In Galilee near the border with Samaria.  During the time of the Roman occupation.  Who were pagans.  Herod was an Edomite.  Born in the Kingdom of Edom just south of the Kingdom of Judah.  Though he practiced Judaism he was not considered Jewish by the powers-that-be in Judea, the Jewish lands that became a Roman province.  Herod was governor of Galilee.  With Rome’s approval.  He lost his throne.  Rome helped him get it back.  The Roman Senate then voted him King of the Jews.  Three years later he and the Romans conquered Jerusalem.  And elevated him to king of all of Judea.

So the Roman province of Judea was a complicated place.  The Romans tolerated the Jews as long as they did not cause too much trouble.  The Jews did not like living under Roman occupation.  And they were none too keen with King Herod who wasn’t religiously pure, lived a decadent lifestyle and was a brutal tyrant.  It was this world Mary was about to bring Jesus into.

The Last Thing you want to tell the Current King of the Jews was the Location of the New King of the Jews

According to the Gospels Roman emperor Augustus ordered a census.  The Census of Quirinius.  Requiring all residents of Judea to return to their ancestral lands for counting in a census.  Though this may not have been Roman custom they may have called for this in Judea.  That complicated place where the Jews kept their religion and customs.  So Joseph had to return to Bethlehem.  Worried about leaving Mary behind in a land where others may not be so open minded about her Immaculate Conception he took her along.  Which is why she made that great trek so close to her delivery time.

With everyone else returning to Bethlehem the only shelter they could find was in a stable.  Mary gave birth and they placed Jesus in a manger.  A food trough for the animals.  As the word got out about the son of God being born it attracted a lot of attention.  Some were overjoyed that the prophecy in the Old Testament was being fulfilled.  Some were not quite that happy.  Some in the Jewish hierarchy.  Who didn’t foresee this event.  And King Herod.  Who when he heard that a new king had been born to rule over mankind felt nothing but a challenge to his power.  So when the three wise men from the East, the Magi, came to Herod to ask where this new king was King Herod couldn’t tell them.  But when they found Him they were to send word back so he could come and worship Jesus himself.

Of course the last thing you want to tell the current King of the Jews was the location of this new King of the Jews, this son of God.  Jesus Christ.  Because he would want to kill Him.  Well, the Magi got the message in a dream and went back East without telling Herod after delivering their gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh.  (The frankincense and myrrh were aromatic gum resins used as incense.)  King Herod took this betrayal as another challenge to his power.  So to protect his power he ordered that all male children in the Greater Bethlehem area 2 years old and younger were to be slaughtered.  The Massacre of the Innocents.  There is no record of this outside the Gospels.  Though it would be something King Herod would have done.  For he killed his own children when they were a threat to his power.  Based on the size of Bethlehem the number of children falling in Herod’s criteria may have been about 20.  The slaughter of which would be a tragedy.  But the number may not have been large enough to enter the historical record.

An angel warned Joseph of Herod’s plan in a dream.  Telling him to take Mary and Jesus to Egypt until the dust settled.  Returning to Galilee after Herod’s death.  Where he grew up.  Jesus of Nazareth.   But his problems with the politically connected Jewish hierarchy and the Romans weren’t over.  He would have about 30 years on earth, though, before that trouble would catch up with Him.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Christmas and Keynesian Stimulus

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 24th, 2012

Economics 101

Christians may not like the Crass Commercialization of Christmas but the Left Loves It

The Left does not have a war on Christmas per se.  For they love the consumer spending part of Christmas.  Which is pure Keynesian.  People go into debt to spend more money at retailers.  They love that part of Christmas.  What they don’t like is the religious stuff.  Especially Jesus.

They don’t like Jesus because He is the God the Christians worship.  Their Lord and Savior.  It’s these Christians that bother the Left.  Because of their opposition to birth control (mostly Catholics), abortion and having fun in general.  The kind of fun adults enjoy.  The kind of things Christians frown on.  Premarital sex.  Gay love.  Drinking and using drugs.  Coarse language and sexual situations on television shows and in the movies.  Things they champion on the Left.  Which makes the Left hate Christianity.  Which they see as nothing but a great killjoy.

It’s the moralizing the Left does not like.  But the one thing Christians don’t like about Christmas, its crass commercialization, they do like.  So the Left will try to band images of Christ from Christmas displays wherever they can.  Despite Christmas being the celebration of Christ’s birth.  But they will gather in Rockefeller Center to party when they light the Christmas tree.  Though they would prefer that we call it the holiday tree.

Retailers often become Profitable for the Year only because of this Temporary Spending Surge at Christmas

So there are two Christmases.  The one where Christians celebrate the birth of Christ.  Wish for peace on earth.  And good will towards man.  And the other Christmas.  The one marked by the orgy of consumer spending.  Much of it funded by one-time Christmas bonuses.  A celebration of demand-side Keynesian economics.  Where people spend their hard earned money instead of saving it.  And when their money runs out they spend even more using their credit cards.

Keynesians have a bunch of charts and graphs showing how great a stimulus this Christmas spending is to the economy.  And mathematical formulas.  They can tell you about the velocity of money. How fast money travels through the economy when it goes from consumer to seller.  The seller then becomes consumer.  And spends the money they just received.  Then the person who receives this money in a sales transaction goes out and spends it as a consumer.  And on and on it goes.  Flying through though the economy at breakneck speed.  Generating a whole lot of economic activity.

Retailers often become profitable for the year only because of this spending surge at Christmas.  In fact, to handle this surge in business they hire a lot of people at Christmas time.  Part-time people.  Proving again that pumping money into the economy creates jobs.  The main tenet of Keynesian monetary policy.  Pump cash into the economy and people will spend it.  Something the Keynesians have been doing since Richard Nixon decoupled the dollar from gold in 1971.  Ending any semblance of responsible monetary policy.  And recessions forever.  At least, that was the plan.

Keynesian Stimulus is nothing more than an Orgy of Temporary Consumer Spending just like at Christmas Time

When the economy slows down and people stop buying stuff businesses have to lay off workers.  So they won’t build stuff that no one will buy.  Laid off workers no longer have money to buy things.  Which causes other business to lay off workers.  So THEY won’t build stuff that no one will buy.  It’s a vicious cycle.  In fact, we call it the business cycle.  The boom-bust cycle.  From expansion to contraction.  From an economy hiring people to an economy laying off people.

Keynesian economics was supposed to remove the contraction side of the business cycle.  By picking up the spending slack.  When consumers stopped spending money the government would step in and replace their spending.  We call it stimulus spending.  Often spending money the government doesn’t have.  So they run a deficit (i.e., borrow money).  Or simply print money.  Which they did a lot of in the Seventies.  Unfortunately, as it turns out, you just can’t do that.  For when you print money you devalue it.  Which raises prices.  As it takes more of these devalued dollars to buy what they once did.

And this is why Keynesian economics doesn’t work.  Because a Keynesian stimulus is nothing more than an orgy of consumer spending.  Just like at Christmas time.  Which happens only for a limited time.  Businesses hire temporary part-time workers at Christmas because this spending does not last.  As it does not last during a Keynesian stimulus.  It doesn’t create any full-time jobs.  Because employers know it is only temporary.  And they know that higher prices will soon follow.  As they do after Christmas when the discounting ends.  Which will reduce future economic activity.  As it does after Christmas.  Once the deals end so too ends the orgy of consumer spending.  Leaving people to deal with the aftermath.  Depleted bank accounts.  A lot of credit card debt.  And a little buyer’s remorse.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What would Jesus think about the Assault on Christianity?

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 24th, 2011

Who would Jesus Vote For?

One thing I learned about demons and vampires from watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer is that they lay low on Halloween.  Except for the few that like to bother the Scooby Gang, that is.  But for the most part, the evil beings don’t like Halloween.  It’s just a bit silly for them.  So the evil and undead stand down on this day.  When the non-evil dress up and pretend to be evil.  A bit of professional demon/vampire courtesy.  They let the people play their scary games.  Then resume their bloodlust the following day.

You’d think those on the Left would extend the same courtesy to Christians on Easter Sunday, the most holy day on the Christian calendar.  Let up on their Christian disdain for this one day.  So Christians can worship this special day in peace.  But no.  Someone has to invoke Jesus Christ in the budget debate (see The Democrats’ secret budget weapon: Jesus by Brad Martin posted 4/24/2011 on Salon).

There are signs that the 2010s could be a fertile ground for using Christian ideals to pursue goals of social justice…

If the moral test of a society is how it treats its most vulnerable, the emergence of What Would Jesus Cut? may be the flashlight leading us out of the dark cave of budgetary wrangling. But it should also provide progressives with a model for marrying religion to politics in a way that reinvigorates their agenda, rather than simply leaving the field wide open to often intolerant evangelicals and social conservatives.

Why, this is a fascinating concept.  And practical.  Especially at Easter.  The day of the Resurrection.  When Christ rose from the grave He was sent to after dying for our sins.  Yes, what a fine day it is to politicize Jesus Christ.  But I’m game.  Hmmm.  Let me think. 

What would Jesus cut?  The defense budget?  Well, if we did that we couldn’t stop the genocide Muammar Gaddafi is perpetrating against the Libyan people.  That’s bad.  So bad that liberals who champion social justice sent our military to Libya to stop that genocide.  Cutting defense spending will leave us little more than an observer of these crimes against humanity.  Much like the rest of the world that isn’t a superpower.  So I don’t know if Jesus would cut defense spending.  Not when we’re using it for humanitarian reasons.  So, could there be something else to cut?

Would He cut programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?  These programs are very kind to those who can’t afford to buy a house.  By putting them into a house that they can’t afford.  Hmm.  That didn’t end too well in 2008, what with the subprime mortgage crisis and all.  No, putting people into houses they can’t afford turned out to be a bad thing.  It gave us the worst recession since the Great Depression.  And this hit art and charitable foundations especially hard.  With record unemployment, no one has any money to donate to the needy.  So, yes, I think Jesus would cut programs like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Anything else?

Oh, here’s a no brainer.  Planned Parenthood.  Because I’m pretty sure Jesus Christ would oppose anything remotely connected to abortion.

How could no one on the Left see this coming?  What would Jesus cut?  Number one on the hit parade would be abortion.  And any public spending that could provide ‘aid and comfort’ to the abortion providers.  This is Jesus we’re talking about.  And I just don’t see Him being pro-choice.  Sure, Planned Parenthood’s abortion unit is only a small part of their business (3%).  But government funding pays the overhead where they provide their real services.  Breast exams.  Pap smears.  Pelvic exams.  AIDS screening.  Birth control.  Etc.  That’s why they don’t have stand alone abortion clinics.  Doing so few abortions makes the unit cost per abortion too high to recover the overhead.  But if the overhead is already being paid by Uncle Sam, why, then that’s a different story.

The Left should stop talking about Jesus.  For they’re going to hurt themselves with the political contortions necessary to make their case.  Besides, if you asked who would Jesus vote for, I’m guessing he or she would have an ‘r’ after their name.  The bitter God-clingers they are.  So why even bother?  They should just take a lesson from the evil/undead and show a little magnanimity on this day.  If they had it in them.  Like the evil/undead do at Halloween.

Syria and Egypt, Similar yet Different

Egypt and Syria are very similar countries.  Both are in the Middle East.  Both are secular nations with Christian minorities.  And both outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood.  The main difference between the two is that one is an ally of the United States.  The other is an enemy.  Another difference is U.S. foreign policy.  They abandoned the ally.  And showed patience with the enemy.

Some are urging caution in Syria.  Worried about what may replace the current regime should it fall.  The Israelis for one.  And possibly the Obama administration.  For now, at least.  Interesting, because they had no such reservations with our ally.  And how are things in Egypt?  Suffice it to say there is cause for concern (see Crowds protest Christian governor in south Egypt by Maggie Michael, Associated Press, posted 4/22/2011 on MSNBC).

Since President Hosni Mubarak’s ouster in February after an 18-day popular uprising, ultraconservative Islamist groups have been flexing their muscles and vowing to take a more active political role as Egypt charts its transition to democracy…

Coptic Christians make up an estimated 10 percent of Egypt’s population of nearly 80 million and complain of discrimination. Relations between the two faiths plunged to new lows after a suicide bomber blew himself up outside a Coptic church in Alexandria on Jan. 1, killing 21 people and injuring 100 others.

Salafis, who seek to emulate the lifestyle of Islam’s early days in the seventh century, have for the past year played a key role in fueling sectarian tensions, spearheading protests against the Orthodox Christian church.

Salafis?  One of their Islamic theologians was Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab.  As in Wahhabi.  As in Saudi Arabia.  As in al Qaeda.  As in Osama bin Laden.  Yes, bin Laden is a Wahhabi.  This is old school Islam.  The way it was mean to be.  In Salafi eyes.  As the Taliban thought, too, the world should be.

The only upside to this is that the Salafis are Sunnis.  Who don’t much care for the Shiites.  Which is what the Iranians are.  So, to recap, the Salafis are not Shiites.  Which may place them out of the Iranian orbit.  Which is good.  The bad news is this.  It was the Wahhabi that attacked us on 9/11.

So maybe we should have encouraged more reform in Egypt and less ‘Mubarak has to go’.  Perhaps we learned our lesson.  Perhaps that’s why we’re not pushing our enemy in Syria (see For Syrian Christians, protests are cause for fear by The Washington Post posted 4/23/2011 on The Washington Post).

For decades, the government of President Bashar al-Assad has protected Christian interests by enforcing its strictly secular program and by curbing the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood. In recent years, Assad has visited the town of Maaloula and other Christian communities to pray and pass on messages of goodwill. At Christmas, he addresses Syria’s Christians, carrying similar tidings. Assad is himself from the minority Alawite sect, a branch of Shia Islam, and many Christians feel they can relate to him…

Many Christians interviewed said their biggest fear was the growth of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is banned in Syria. About half as many worshipers as usual attended Good Friday church services this year because people are afraid to leave their homes.

Maybe these ruthless despots know something we don’t.  Maybe their tyrannical and oppressive rule is the only way to keep things secular in the Middle East.  And peaceful.  At least, under them, the few Christians in their countries could live in relative peace.  Whereas it’s looking a bit harder these days.

Happy Easter

So on this Easter Day, we can reflect on Jesus Christ and His message.  Such as judge not lest ye be judged.  Pity we rushed to pass judgment on Hosni Mubarak.  Perhaps that wasn’t the Christian thing to do.  But we did.  And now Christians in Egypt are getting worried.  And Christians are nervously sitting out the protests in Syria.  Afraid of what their future may hold.  But instead of showing genuine concern for the oppressed (and possibly the soon to be oppressed), some instead think of politicizing Jesus Christ to advance a political agenda.

I wonder what Jesus would think about that.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Happy Birthday, Jesus. And Merry Christmas to Everyone Else.

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 24th, 2010

Jesus, Mary and Joseph away in a Manger a Long Time Ago

‘Tis the season.  People have their holiday trees up.  They’re wishing their friends and neighbors Season’s Greetings.  Yule tidings.  Or Noel.  Racing all over town for last minute gift buying.  Our halls decked in boughs of holly.  And other things.  Santa Claus.  Rudolph and his red nose.  Snowmen.  All kinds of decorations.  But you won’t see many crèches.  Especially in front of public buildings.  Because Mary, Joseph and Jesus depicted in a manger to commemorate the night Mary gave birth to Jesus in a manger with Joseph at her side is not suitable for Christmas.  That time of year when we commemorate the birth of Jesus.  In a manger.  With Joseph at Mary’s side.  Funny.

Some will fight for the right of Muslims to build a Muslim community center near Ground Zero.  With a mosque inside it to boot.  But they tell us not to say ‘Merry Christmas’ or show images of the nativity because it might offend some people.  Unlike the Muslim tradition of building mosques on conquered territory (as those who attacked us see Ground Zero as.  Conquered).  No, these same people don’t find that offensive.  But saying Merry Christmas is.  Funny.

Sure, it’s a double standard.  It always seems to be with Christianity.  And that’s sad.  For this is a Christian nation.  Based on Judeo-Christian values.  The original colonies had established Christian religions.  And some Jews were instrumental in our founding, too (Haym Salomon perhaps being the greatest American no one knows today).  So we should be able to celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ.  For the words of Christ greatly influenced our Founding Fathers.  You might even say Jesus was present at our Founding.  If in spirit only.

Jesus Christ Could Even Charm an Atheist

Jesus was born a mortal.  And some of His greatest works were done as a man.  The words of Christ that influence millions all over the world today were spoken by a young man of thirty something.  But they were remarkable words.  For they impressed theist and atheist alike.  And greatly impressed the Founding Fathers.  Especially Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson was probably an atheist.  He hated anything that infringed upon a man’s liberty.  Be it government.  Royalty.  Or religion.  Especially religion.  For he saw religion as another way to oppress and exploit the masses.  Being of English stock and not that distant from the English Civil War (where Protestant fought Catholic), it is easy to understand why Jefferson thought like he did.  Many did.  That said, Jefferson was a big Jesus Christ fan.

He thought Christ was the greatest philosopher of all time.  That His message was the best message ever to mankind.  The Sermon on the Mount said it all.  For the atheist to reconcile his aversion to all things religious and his love of Christ, he made his own Bible.  It was basically the New Testament with all the God stuff edited out.  Jefferson would die still opposed to organized religion, but felt that the world would be a better place if it was a Christian world.  And that’s something coming from an atheist.

Jesus Christ is American as Apple Pie

Jesus Christ wasn’t an American.  But America wouldn’t be the same without Him.  He instilled in us a moral compass.  Which made America special.  And we rejoice in our faith.  So celebrate Christmas.  Wish friends and families a Merry Christmas.  And ask the good Lord to look over our service people serving in harm’s way away from home.  May God bless them and help them get home safe.

And now, how about a little birthday music?

Hark the herald angels sing
“Glory to the new born King
Peace on earth and mercy mild ,
God and sinners reconciled”
Joyful all ye nations rise.
Join the triumph of the skies
With th’angelic host proclaim
“Christ is born in Bethlehem”

From Hark, The Herald Angels Sing sung by Nat King Cole.

Said the king to the people everywhere
Listen to what I say
Pray for peace people everywhere
Listen to what I say
The child, the child
Sleeping in the night
He will bring us goodness and light
He will bring us goodness and light

From Do You Hear What I Hear sung by Johnny Mathis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6llIRhq74w

Here comes Santa Claus
Here comes Santa Claus
Right down
Santa Claus Lane

He’ll come around
When the chimes rings out
That it’s Christmas morn again
Peace on Earth
Will come to all
If we just follow the light
So let’s give thanks
To the Lord above
‘Cause Santa Claus comes tonight

From Here Comes Santa Claus sung by Gene Autry

So let God and sinners be reconciled.  Let’s pray for peace everywhere.  It shouldn’t be too hard to achieve.  If we all just follow the light.

Merry Christmas.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

LESSONS LEARNED #18: “Man-given rights are only privileges allowed by the privileged elite.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 17th, 2010

GOD WAS HERE before the Marine Corps. So you can give your heart to Jesus, but your ass belongs to The Corps.

(From the movie Full Metal Jacket, 1987.)

In Roman Catholicism, this is the doctrine of the two swords.  The spiritual sword is the Church.  The temporal sword is the state.  Martin Luther had the doctrine of two kingdoms.  The religious and civil.  Going back to the source, Jesus Christ put it this way:

Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s 

The original separation of church and state.  Of course, back then, this was all intended to limit the state’s interference into spiritual matters.  Today it’s reversed.  It’s the state that is trying to hold the spiritual sword at bay.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS were gentlemen of the Enlightenment.  This makes them complex.  The Enlightenment was the Age of Reason.  And guess what we did during the Age of Reason?  We thought.  Rationally.  There was a philosophical revolution going on in Europe.  Simply put, things weren’t what they were because the Church said so.  There were other explanations.  Other laws.  And the Church could be wrong.

So, if the Founding Fathers had lived in the 20th century, they would have probably been fans of the rock group Rush.  And Ayn Rand.  Who influenced Rush.  Thomas Jefferson probably would have an iPod filled with their songs, including Tom Sawyer:

No his mind is not for rent
To any god or government

They questioned ALL authority.  And some may have been Deists.  But they were not atheists.  Even Jefferson.  He may not have believed in the Trinity or Christ’s divinity, but he still believed in God.  And he worshipped Jesus in his own way.  As the world’s greatest philosopher, with his Sermon on the Mount being the best philosophy man could ask for.

THE FOUNDING FATHERS were gentlemen of the Enlightenment.  Now the other part.  The thing that makes them complex.  The gentlemen part.  What did this mean in the 18th century?  Here are some adjectives that describe a gentleman.  Honorable.  Virtuous.  Reputable.  A gentleman strived to achieve moral excellence and righteousness.  He was ethical.  His life was a steadfast adherence to a strict moral code.  And when he served in public office, it was with selfless disinterest.  He would go out of his way to NOT gain personally from his time in public office.  Some did it better than others.  But all tried.  And when they fell short, they at least put on an appearance of disinterest.  It was that important.  And expected.

In a word, restraint.  This is what a gentleman practiced.  George Washington exercised this restraint to such a degree that many found him cold and aloof.  Few saw him smile.  Few saw public displays of emotion.  What they did see was an exemplary life of virtue, honor and moral excellence.  And they would forever look at him with awe and reverence.  We do to this day.

These students of the Enlightenment, then, espoused Judeo-Christian ethics.  They questioned all authority oppressing man, whether it be Church or state.  But they did not throw out the baby with the bath water.  They remained religious.  They just wouldn’t yield to it unconditionally.  Not to the Pope.  To a bishop.  Or any other tyranny of a minority, privileged elite.  Even after their Revolution.

And they would extend this restraint to the new nation they would found.  It would be a government that would govern with the consent of the people.  But it would not be mob-rule.  Not a true democracy.  It would be representative government.  The idea was to restrain the extreme passions of the people.  They would not exchange one tyranny for another.  There would be no tyranny of the majority.

FRANCE HAD PROBLEMS in the late 18th century.  The toll of war was bankrupting the country.  Their financing of the American Revolution didn’t help either.  Food was scarce and expensive.  Famine and malnutrition were commonplace.  Among the Third Estate (the poor).  The First Estate (the Church) was doing well.  The Second Estate (the nobility), too.  Unemployed and hungry, the poor looked at the clergy and the nobility who were not. 

The Church was largely exempt from paying taxes. And the Church was the largest landholder in France.  The Church levied a 10% tax (i.e., a tithe) on the general population.  A lot of that was collected in-kind (food crops).  So the Church had more land, money and food than the starving, suffering masses.  Who became an angry mob.  That demanded democracy.

The people stormed the Bastille.  Confiscated Church property.  Overthrew the monarchy.  And sent the king and queen, and many others, to the guillotine.  Maximilien Robespierre and the Jacobins unleashed the Reign of Terror.  They executed political enemies, including priests, and displayed their severed heads to the angry mob.  They de-Christianized France, destroying churches and religious symbols.  They tried to do away with the Church altogether and replace it with civic and community events and organizations.  It was a revolution against Church and state.  Against law and order.  Against restraint.  They would send Robespierre himself to the guillotine at the end of his terror.  Then another terror followed to avenge the previous terror. 

There’s more to the French Revolution.  But that should suffice for now. 

FRANCE WAS IN the epicenter of the Enlightenment.  Some of the great minds of the Enlightenment were French.  But France was older than America.  And more populated.  With centuries of wrongs to right.  It was anything but a blank canvas.  Egalitarianism soon devolved into angry mob rule.  Democracy.  They went from the tyranny of a minority to the tyranny of the majority without stopping in that fertile middle ground.  As was the case in America.  Why?

It’s that blank canvas thing.  We weren’t overthrowing our history to start anew.  We had little history.  Maybe a century or two of English colonists who literally started with raw earth.  There wasn’t a rich and privileged Church.  So there wasn’t a festering resentment against the Church.  No, the early colonists escaped religious oppression and came here for religious freedom.  Which they found.  And enjoyed.

The American Revolution was more restrained.  There were no bloody reprisals after the War.  There were isolated instances of mob violence during the War, but the ‘mob’ was never in control.  The ‘gentlemen’ were always in control.  Gentlemen steeped in Judeo-Christian ethics.  From the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers built a new nation upon the Rule of Law.  And at its heart were the God-given rights enumerated in those documents.  That no man, or minority, or majority, or mob, could take away.

GOD WAS HERE before the United States.  So we can give our heart to Jesus.  But our ass belongs to the Rule of Law.

Or something like that.  We are a secular nation with a de-emphasis on the religious part.  Yes, legal punishment may dissuade you from doing wrong.  If you think the cops can catch you.  But it’s our morality that will keep us from doing wrong in the first place.  And the people at our founding were moral.  And Christian.  Or deists with Judeo-Christian ethics.

And to those who fear antidisestablishmentarianism, don’t.  I doubt the Catholics and the Protestants could agree on what an established church would be, let alone the myriad other religions peacefully coexisting with each other.  No, more religion would not result in an established church.  It may, though, result in government leaders who fear God and, maybe, they would be better leaders for it.  It sure beats us living in fear of them.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,