Sunday, October 16, 2016

Sola Scriptura & Sola Constitutio...



“What does the bible clearly teach?”

“What does the Constitution clearly say?”

I have a copy of the Constitution and I have several bibles: there is my old King James bible I got when I was a kid, a “new age” NIV, a “sword bible” -which not only has the words of Jesus in red but also God’s words in red in the Old Testament. I even have a Jimmy Swaggart commentary bible which has Jimmy’s words in red, instead of Jesus or God! Now that’s Alpha!

Problem is, none of them speak. I’ve spent countless hours staring at them and listening, waiting for them to say something, and it never happens.

I always end up having to read them. Which means it’s my own voice speaking and my own genetic, cultural, regional, educational and fundamental Western, Aristotelian worldview presuppositions that bias how I read it.

Darn!

Now some Christians acknowledge this little monkey-wrench via the asymmetrical tactic of studying “ancient hebrew culture” to get a more authentic “voice” from the text. Of course these are the people who can’t comprehend how their Hoosier grandparents could biblically justify opposition to mixed race marriages, but they're pretty confident in their ability to transform themselves into avatars of primitive, bronze & iron age, semites living in the deserts of west-Asia thousands of years ago.


You’ll no doubt be shocked to learn that even among these prestigious avatars there are different schools of thought.


Coincidentally, these same people also are a bit perplexed at how “some folk” can’t read the plain writing of ye olde Constitution.

I mean, how in the world could somebody see things differently than how I see them!? It’s impossible!


These stressed out people will, on the one hand, denounce globalism and one world government, then on the other hand embrace the underlying philosophy of one worldism, which is that all people are basically the same; everybody wants democracy, capitalism, freedom and nascar.

That there are billions of people out there who are fundamentally hardwired, by nature, to oppose democracy and “individual liberty” is unfathomable to them. Nevermind that “personal freedom” is an oxymoron since human beings are, by nature, necessarily interdependent on, at a minimum, their immediate social circle (aka, family), which brings with it innumerable burdensome duties and obligations which intrinsically squash “personal freedom”.

I mean, for Odin’s sake, you are born with a body which requires constant food, water, rest, clothing and shelter just to keep functioning. The hurdles you must leap and the hoops you must jump through each-and-every-day, interacting with the other bipeds, just to keep your body up and running doesn’t buttress this asinine notion of “individual liberty”. Laws and social and cultural norms also tend to be a rather blunt reality-check to go-it-aloners. Try going all Mad Max and be a hunter-gatherer. First time you fall and snap your ankle you'll get eaten by wolves.

Or just wait for old age or a serious illness to see how much you want to "go it alone".



No man is an island. Take away the water and the island isn’t even an island anymore -it’s just a hill.


Written texts are the products of specific people, in specific times and places. They are written under the burden of incalculable genetic, cultural, environmental and political forces.

So those who wish to think that the bible or the constitution “speak” with a universal voice to a universal audience are always going to be left flabbergasted at those unreasonable troublemakers who refuse to see “what is plainly written”.

The constitution was written by 18th century Anglo-Saxons.

21st century hispanics, jews, arabs, africans, indians, chinese, etc, are going to read it through their own genetic/cultural prism.


The expectation that everybody can and should see the same thing is the desire to rebuild the Tower of Babel.


Ironically, that’s not ironic. Christianity creates and crowns its anti-Christ. But that’s another subject.



Nations are ethnic groups, not places or forms of government. The conflict over how to read written texts is representative of genetic differences: tribes, clans, races, etc.


Understandings and perceptions of the world and society must (by nature's order) always be local and particular, not universal. This is how worldviews are perpetuated from one generation to the next and it is how stable and harmonious societies work. Diversity = conflict and chaos.

A nation is never comprised of immigrants and it is not defined by legal jurisdiction (that would be an empire). A nation is an ethnic group; a biological unit -a literal, genetically related family writ large.

If a written document is foundational for social order and definition, then something is fundamentally wrong.

Or, how many families have written texts to define themselves as a family or about the legal and sub-cultural obligations of chores and curfews, holidays and spring cleanings, gender identities and status rights around the house?





...