| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Zechariah 4:6" |
| Date: |
29 Dec 2005 04:28:16 AM |
| Object: |
Dealing with wicked "brothers" |
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is
called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer,
or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what
have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that
are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from
among yourselves that wicked person. - 1 Corinthians 5:11-13
.
|
|
| User: "*Mark T* thehsratbagssh@onthemselves89744659846565856" |
|
| Title: Re: Dealing with wicked "brothers" |
29 Dec 2005 04:37:42 AM |
|
|
"Zechariah 4:6" wrote:
....whatever ...
"The Sins of Scripture: Exposing the Bible's Texts of Hate to Reveal the God
of Love" - Bishop John Shelby Spong
ISBN: 0732282020
Publication Date: 25 May 2005
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In the past the Bible has been used to justify oppression, violence,
discrimination against women and homosexuals, and murder.
..... in this bold new book, bishop and humanitarian John Shelby Spong
explains how the Bible has been misread - and how its overall message
eclipses what he deems these texts of terror. Exposing and challenging the
wrong done in the name
of God, Bishop Spong also seeks to redeem these texts and reveal their
ultimate depth and purpose.
Bishop Spong looks specifically at texts used to justify homophobia,
anti-Semitism, treating women as second-class citizens, corporal punishment,
and environmental degradation, but he also delivers a new picture of how
Christians can use the Bible today. ...
From
http://www.harpercollins.com.au/title.cfm?ISBN=0732282020&Author=0000677
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Book Description
In the history of the Western World, the Bible has been a perpetual source
of inspiration and guidance for countless Christians. However, this Bible
has also left a trail of pain. It is undeniable that the Bible is not always
used for good. Sometimes the Bible can seem overtly evil. Sometimes its
texts are terrible.
Bishop John Shelby Spong boldly approaches those texts that have been used
through history to justify the denigration or persecution of others while
carrying with them the implied and imposed authority of the claim that they
were the "Word of God." As he exposes and challenges what he calls the
"terrible texts of the Bible", laying bare the evil done by these texts in
the name of God, he also seeks to redeem these texts, hoping to recover
their ultimate depth and purpose. Spong looks specifically at texts used to
justify homophobia, anti-Semitism, treating women as second-class humans,
corporal punishment, and environmental degradation, but he also delivers a
new picture of how Christians can use the Bible today. As Spong battles
against the way the Bible has been used throughout history, he provides a
new framework, introducing people to a proper way to engage this holy book
of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
Critical Praise
....
"Spong demonstrates the prophetic vocation that prefers truth to lies,
honesty to hypocrisy, common sense to sick religious ideologies."
--Matthew Fox, president, University of Creation Spirituality, author of
Original Blessing, Creativity: Where the Divine and the Human Meet, and One
River, Many Wells
"Another brilliant chapter in Spong's quest to rescue the Bible from
fundamentalism."
--Robert W. Funk, Jesus Seminar, author of Honest to Jesus
......
"With prophetic vigor, Spong lays bare the evil done.in the name of
God...[and] calls the Christian community to accountability...."
--Spirituality and Health magazine
"This book is long overdue..."
--New York Times
From
http://www.harpercollins.com/global_scripts/product_catalog/book_xml.asp?isbn=0060762055
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Sins of Scripture is structured around 8 sections, each with at least 2
chapters:
1. The Word of God
Chapter 1: Why This Book, This Theme, This Author (pp. 3-14)
Chapter 2: A Claim that Cannot Endure (pp. 15-26)
2. The Bible and the Environment
Chapter 3: The Ethics of Overbreeding (pp. 29-39)
Chapter 4: The Virtue of Birth Control (pp. 41-48)
Chapter 5: The Earth Fights Back (pp. 49-58)
Chapter 6: Bad Theology Creates Bad Ecology (pp. 59-67)
3. The Bible and Women
Chapter 7: Creation - The Woman is Not Made in the Image of God (pp.
71-78)
Chapter 8: Sexism in Christian History (pp. 79-85)
Chapter 9: The Woman as the Source of Evil (pp. 87-93)
Chapter 10: Menstruation and the Male fear of Blood (pp. 95-100)
Chapter 11: Recasting the Negativity (pp. 101-109)
4. The Bible and Homosexuality
Chapter 12: The Ecclesiastical Battle Over Homosexuality (pp. 113-119)
Chapter 13: The Holiness Code from the Book of Leviticus (pp. 121-126)
Chapter 14: The Story of Sodom (pp. 127-133)
Chapter 15: The Homophobia of Paul (pp. 135-142)
5. The Bible and Children
Chapter 16: The Appeal in the Text "Spare the Rod" (pp. 145-149)
Chapter 17: Violence is Always Violent Whether the Victim Be a Child or an
Adult (pp. 151-160)
Chapter 18: God as Judge - Searching for the Source of the Human Need to
Suffer (pp. 161-167)
Chapter 19: God as Divine Child Abuser (pp. 169-174)
Chapter 20: Moving Beyond the Demeaning God into the God of Life (pp.
175-180)
6. The Bible and Anti-Semitism
Chapter 21: Searching for the Origins of Christian Anti-Semitism (pp.
183-192)
Chapter 22: Anti-Semitism is Present in the Gospels (pp. 193-198)
Chapter 23: The Role of Judas Iscariot in the Rise of Anti-Semitism (pp.
199-204)
Chapter 24: The Circumstances that Brought Judas into the Jesus Story (pp.
205-210)
7. The Bible and Certainty
Chapter 25: The Symptoms - Conversion, Missionary Expansion and Religious
Bigotry (pp. 213-218)
Chapter 26: Creedal Development in the Christian Church (pp. 219-229)
Chapter 27: Since I have the truth, "No One Comes to the Father Except
Through Me!" (pp. 231-237)
Chapter 28: My Vision of an Interfaith Future (pp. 239-244)
8. Reading Scripture as Epic History
Chapter 29: The Hebrew Scriptures Come into Being (pp. 247-266)
Chapter 30: Escaping the Limits of the Epic (pp. 267-276)
Chapter 31: Jesus and the Jewish Epic (pp. 277-283)
Chapter 32: Jesus Beyond Religion (pp. 285-298)
.....
Online Book Discussion
An online discussion group, using the web forum pages, is planned for
shortly after the release of the book. The archives will then be available
to others as a resource.
From http://faithfutures.org/sinsofscripture.html
.
|
|
|
| User: ". T James" |
|
| Title: Re: Dealing with wicked "brothers" |
29 Dec 2005 03:21:12 PM |
|
|
In article <43b3bc7c@dnews.tpgi.com.au>, thehsratbagssh@onthemselves89744659846565856 says...
<SNIP>
Bishop Spong looks specifically at texts used to justify homophobia,<SNIP>
"Homophobia" is a word created by political correctness to mischaracterize
opposition to the perversion of homosexuality. No surprise that an American
Episcopal Bishop would try to legitimize that which is an abomination.
###
Denominational Drift
The Bible Doesn’t Need "Rescuing"
By Allan Dobras
May 10, 2005
Bishop V. Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual Episcopal cleric
who left his wife and children to take up with his male lover, addressed
the fifth annual Planned Parenthood ‘prayer breakfast’ April 15 in
Washington, D.C. The bishop used the occasion to equate the struggle
for homosexual rights with abortion rights, citing traditional "religious people"
as their common foe:
"We have allowed the Bible to be taken hostage, and
it is being wielded by folks who would use it to hit us over
the head. We have to take back those Scriptures...what an
unimaginative God it would be if God only put one meaning
in any verse of Scripture."
Claiming that traditionalists have misinterpreted the gospel message
over the last 2000 years is a familiar theme among revisionists, who
seek a Biblical justification for actions that have historically been judged
incompatible with Christian teaching. Retired Episcopal Bishop,
John S. Spong--perhaps the most well-known and esteemed Episcopal
cleric--sounded a similar theme in his 1992 book, "Rescuing the Bible
from the Fundamentalists".
More recently, Bishop Spong issued a challenge to Christians for "A New
Reformation," declaring:
"Theism, as a way of defining God, is dead. So most
theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way
to speak of God must be found...Since God can no longer
be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to
seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic
deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt...The biblical
story of the perfect and finished creation from which human
beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-
Darwinian nonsense."
It is astonishing to compare Bishop Spong’s theology with that of
British philosopher Antony Flew, who was once called "the world’s
most influential atheist," but now shows a greater measure of faith than
the esteemed bishop. In a well-publicized letter in the August/September
issue of the magazine Philosophy Now, Professor Flew declared:
"The publication of ‘The Alleged Fallacies of Evolutionary
Theory’ by Massimo Pigliucci and others in Issue 46 of
Philosophy Now provides a convenient occasion for pointing
out the limits of the negative theological implications of Darwin’s
Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection...
"[T]he evidential situation of natural (as opposed to revealed)
theology has been transformed in the more than fifty years since
Watson and Crick won the Nobel Prize for their discovery of the
double helix structure of DNA. It has become inordinately
difficult even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic
theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism."
At this point, Professor Flew can best be described as a "theist" who
accepts the existence of a "Superior Intelligence" in the process of life,
and rejects the premise that Darwinian theory can provide a mechanism
for the initial development of reproducing organisms--concepts at odds
with that of Bishop Spong.
One might be tempted to dismiss the views of bishops Robinson and
Spong as that of lonely apostates preaching to the wind, but that is far
from the case. Actually, the rejection of basic Christian teachings is endemic
within the pastorate, seminaries, and church agencies, and among the
leadership of such venerable Christian denominations as the
Episcopal Church (USA), the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical
Lutheran Church in America, the United Church of Christ, and the
Presbyterian Church (USA).
For example, in a January 28, 2002 speech titled Affirmations of a
Dissenter, United Methodist Bishop Joseph Sprague revealed that he
did not accept that Jesus was the Son of God and called His virgin birth
a "myth." He denied Jesus’ bodily resurrection, His atonement on the cross,
and described the Christian view that the path to salvation is only through
belief in Christ as "arrogant."
In point of fact, there is a level of arrogance evident among the hierarchy
of the mainline Christian denominations that is as baffling as it is
disturbing--an arrogance that is seemingly impassive to the destructive
schisms that ominously loom on the horizon. All of the old mainline
denominations--with the notable exception of the decidedly orthodox
Southern Baptist Convention--have become so tolerant in their doctrine
and lifeless in their faith that they appear powerless to remove the clear
apostasy in their midst.
Instead of acting to purge the heresies out of the church, the leadership
has actually facilitated its growth and caused the corruption of the gospel
message placed in their charge. By doing so, leaders have invited all manner
of moral deviancy to have sanctuary--if not acceptance--in the doctrines
of the church. As a result, churches are being driven toward schisms by
heretical teachings and acquiescence to homosexuality and abortion on demand.
Predictably, over the last thirty years all of these mainline denominations
have paid a price of steadily declining membership. The United Methodist
Church alone lost about 25 percent of its membership (about 3 million people)
during this period, and other denominations have lost members in similar
proportions. The denominational authorities are not oblivious to these loses,
nor are they unaware that orthodox churches like the Southern Baptists,
Pentecostals, and independent Bible churches are growing in great numbers.
Nonetheless, church leadership has, for the most part, cast their lot with
doctrinal revisionism and moral relativism.
It is tragic that the mainline denominations are becoming culturally
irrelevant irrespective of their rich history and connectivity to such giants
of the faith as Martin Luther, John Wesley, John Calvin, and William Tyndale.
Sadly, even though all of these denominations have presiding bishops,
moderators, or others in leadership who speak for the church, few know
who they are and less pay attention to what they say. That is because
they no longer "defend the faith once entrusted to the saints,"
nor have they protected the moral underpinnings of the denominations
they represent. They have, as Revelation 2:4 tells us, "...forsaken
their first love."
The Roman Catholic Church has now elected a new pope. The culture is
telling him to abandon Catholic doctrine and be less rigid on the subjects
of abortion, homosexuality, and a female priesthood. In other words, the
new pope is being asked to not be Catholic, but rather be a creature of the
culture. He is being asked to take the advice of Rt. Rev. Peter J. Lee,
Episcopal Bishop of Virginia, who said in speaking to the annual diocesan
council on January 30, 2004:
"If you must make a choice between heresy and schism,
always choose heresy. For as a heretic, you are only guilty
of a wrong opinion. As a schismatic, you have torn and
divided the body of Christ. Choose heresy every time."
I suppose if Benedict XVI were to choose heresy, in short order
few would listen seriously to him as well. However, I fully expect
he will do what too many of his counterparts in the mainline
denominations have refused to do--defend the faith as he has
so pledged.
Al Dobrasis a freelance writer on religious and cultural issues
and an electronics engineer. He lives in Springfield, Virginia.
Article Posted at Breakpoint
A Christian perspective on today's news and culture
http://www.breakpoint.org
###
--
..
"Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."
2 Timothy 3:12
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dolf Boek" |
|
| Title: Re: Dealing with wicked "brothers" |
29 Dec 2005 04:17:52 PM |
|
|
Sexual racialism as the repression of gender and sexual identity and denial
of civil rights, within a pseudo-christianised framework, is most pervasive
within our culture--although not limited to it as identity--as form of Roman
Imperialism's hymeneal mysticism and debauchery by a religious/political
state in denial of the 'Judaeo-Christian tradition'.
That such individuals not only show contempt for the basis of civil unions
as State rights and the impetus for formulation into a Commonwealth, but
that they are disloyal to Creation and the laws of nature; the people there
worship shrines, false gods and idols, but not Creation, nor do they follow
its laws.
Thus 'it was for this reason' of SUBSTITUTION rather than SUBSTANTIATION as
the act by which God established substances of the hypostatis, namely the
act of creation, first of all in the ideal realm of the primordial causes
(the ideas in the mind of God) and secondly in the created realm of space
and time, that God gave them up to vile passions. For even there women
exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also men,
leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another,
men with men committing what is shameful {ie. hardness and imperitence
heart, self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey
unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish [v5, 8]},
and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which is due."
[Romans 1:26-27]
[for further see below]
<. (T James)> wrote in message news:43b45348_2@newspeer2.tds.net...
In article <43b3bc7c@dnews.tpgi.com.au>,
thehsratbagssh@onthemselves89744659846565856 says...
<SNIP>
Bishop Spong looks specifically at texts used to justify homophobia,
anti-Semitism, treating women as second-class citizens, corporal
punishment,
and environmental degradation, but he also delivers a new picture of how
Christians can use the Bible today. ...
From
<http://www.harpercollins.com.au/title.cfm?ISBN=0732282020&Author=0000677>
<SNIP>
"Homophobia" is a word created by political correctness to mischaracterize
opposition to the perversion of homosexuality. No surprise that an American
Episcopal Bishop would try to legitimize that which is an abomination.
Bishop V. Gene Robinson, the openly homosexual Episcopal cleric
who left his wife and children to take up with his male lover, addressed
the fifth annual Planned Parenthood 'prayer breakfast' April 15 in
Washington, D.C. The bishop used the occasion to equate the struggle
for homosexual rights with abortion rights, citing traditional "religious
people"
as their common foe:
"We have allowed the Bible to be taken hostage, and
it is being wielded by folks who would use it to hit us over
the head. We have to take back those Scriptures...what an
unimaginative God it would be if God only put one meaning
in any verse of Scripture."
Claiming that traditionalists have misinterpreted the gospel message
over the last 2000 years is a familiar theme among revisionists, who
seek a Biblical justification for actions that have historically been judged
incompatible with Christian teaching. Retired Episcopal Bishop,
John S. Spong--perhaps the most well-known and esteemed Episcopal
cleric--sounded a similar theme in his 1992 book, "Rescuing the Bible
from the Fundamentalists".
[snipped for context]
PAST MOMENTS:
There is a common misconception held amongst religionists that same gender
civil unions as marriage are against nature: "Society's laws and what they
permit are not reflective of nature's natural processes and more often than
not thwart nature." ["Theopatra" <Let_em_eat_Iraqi_democracy@hotmail.com>,
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1135617384 503 127.0.0.1 (26 Dec 2005 17:16:24
GMT) (to expire)]
And that same gender civil unions are against natural order of creation and
its cosmogony {ie. a theory or story of the genesis or origin of the
universe}?
"For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes are clearly
seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power
and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because although they knew
God, they did not glorify him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile
in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be
wise, they become fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into
an image made like corruptible man--THE LIKENESS OF MALE AND FEMALE, the
likeness of any beast that is on the earth, or the likeness of any winged
bird that flies in the air." [Deuteronomy 4:16-17; Romans 1:20-23]
If the "Spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters" [Genesis 1:1] is
the same Spirit that allows us to see Christ with 'unveiled face, beholding
as in a mirror the glory of the Lord', [2 Corinthians 3:7-18] why then the
lack of clarity and substantiation to an otherwise axiomatic basis to
religious belief?
#A = 22/7 as 3W1D with an implied Wednesday 20 March equinox/new moon 21
March/1 Nisan as 'oth 294 year [24 x 7 x 13] cycle {ie. 294 x 364 = 293 x
365.2425 days}
#[X] = + 9(9²+1)/2 as #369 with 7 x #41 centre (#41 = 13 to 17 September
2001) GRAPPLE HOMOIOTIC NOUMENON AS CELESTIAL HIERARCHY
#A = Solar eclipse Monday 25 December 2000 (122J3W1D) = 20 x 6J + 2J + 3W1D
(22 years)
The confusion appears to be related to a pseudo-christianised form of Roman
Imperialism's hymeneal mysticism and debauchery as a religious/political
state in denial of the 'Judaeo-Christian tradition which in its Hermetic and
Planetary system {
1. Mentalism/Saturn,
2. Correspondence/Jupiter,
3. Vibration/Mars,
4. Polarity/Sun,
5. Rhythm/Venus,
6. Case & effect/Mercury,
7. Gender/Moon
}of Governance {A-U-M}which falsely subscribed to ordinal number-HETEROS a
gender and spermatic attribution whereby the male/odd number is formulative
of the substance and the female/even number is projective of the form as
symbollic theological, philosophical attributions assigned to the HOMO
NOUMENON as the PURE REASON WHICH DWELLS WITHIN AS THE INDIVIDUAL AND
AUTONOMOUS HUMAN WILL.
Paul Rorem's 'Eriugena's Commentry on the Dionysian Celestial Hierarchy',
(c) 2005 Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies conveys a pertinent point
in relation to my earlier teleological question:
If the "Spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters" [Genesis 1:1] is
the same Spirit that allows us to see Christ with 'unveiled face, beholding
as in a mirror the glory of the Lord', [2 Corinthians 3:7-18] why then the
lack of clarity and substantiation to an otherwise axiomatic basis to
religious belief?
#A = 22/7 as 3W1D with an implied Wednesday 20 March vernal equinox/new moon
21 March/1 Nisan as 'oth 294 year [24 x 7 x 13] cycle {ie. 294 x 364 = 293 x
365.2425 days}
#[X] = + 9(9²+1)/2 as #369 with 7 x #41 centre (#41 = 13 to 17 September
2001) GRAPPLE HOMOIOTIC NOUMENON AS CELESTIAL HIERARCHY
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/kabbalah/grapple.html>
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/nous.gif>
#A = Solar eclipse Monday 25 December 2000 (122J3W1D) = 20 x 6J + 2J + 3W1D
(22 years)
In his observations of Eriugena's Commentry Paul Rorem states: "[The
following] Dionysian remark triggered an extended comment from John, which
falls into two parts, followed by another significant paragraph on the
Areopagite's next sentence. In the first section, John emplys his
characteristic terminology and also later in his paraphase:
** Then he adds praise befitting the thearchy (that is, the divinity),
saying, FIRST OF ALL (AT ONCE) IT IS TRUE TO SAY THAT OUT OF UNIVERSAL
GOODNESS, THE SUPER-ESSENTIAL THEARCHY, SUBSTANTIATING THE ESSENCES OF
THOSE THINGS THAT ARE, BROUGHT THEM INTO BEING. ***
Here John has translated the aorist participle [Gk omitted] "having
established an hypostasis" or substance) with substituens in the present
tense.
Independently from most Latin usage, John employed the word family of
substitutio to signify the original act of creation, that of establishing
the hypostatis or substance {ie. the GRAPPLE HOMOIOTIC NOUMENON}. This
usage, which I am here awkwardly translating as "SUBSTANTIATING", is found
not only in the exposition that follows but also throughout John's
commentary and indeed his entire corpus.
Although he did not employ the Dionysian sequence of tenses, which reflects
the Platonic sequence of first an original creation of substance and then
bringing into spatio-temporal existence, he shows a firm grasp of the basic
idea. The subsequent paraphrase gives a double example of this
terminology.
First, he says, of all the thinngs that should be both praised and
proclaimed about the divinity, it is most true to say this: that the
super-essential thearchy (that is, the divinity that is more that essence)
out of universal goodness (and justly so, because it itself is universal
goodness), out of its univerality (namely, out of itself) brought all things
into being (that is, in order that they might be), substantiating the
essences of those things that naturally subsist, it brought them (namely,
the essencese) into being, that is, into essence.
John's consistent use of substitutio and cognates to mean not 'SUBSTITUTION'
but rather 'SUBSTANTIATION' in the sense of establishing the substance (and
therefore of the act of creation) is well-known to Eriugena scholars and
routinely incorporated into their translations. For example, when this
passage from The Celestial Hierarchy is cited, at some length in the middle
of the Periphyseon's exposition of the doctrine of creation,
Sheldon-Williams uses "SUBSTANTIATING" for SUBSTITUENS.
Later on, that same version goes directly to the language of "create" and
"creation" for the vernal and nominal forms of SUBSTITUTIO.
Thus, SUBSTITUTIO [rather than SUBSTATIATION] is the act by which God
established substances, namely the act of creation, first of all in the
ideal realm of the primordial causes (the ideas in the mind of God) and
secondly in the created realm of space and time." [Paul Rorem, 'Eriugena's
Commentry on the Dionysian Celestial Hierarchy', © 2005 Pontifical Institute
of Mediaeval Studies , p 100-101]
From Kant's description of the 'Doctrine of Right' within his 'Metaphysics
of Morals' we can deduce the following:
a) Consenting sexual activity between individuals of the same gender is
already legislatively defined: "Lawful sexual activity"
b) Sexual union in accordance with law is marriage (matrimonium), that
is, the union of two persons.
c) It is not requisite for human beings who marry to make begetting
children their end in order for their union to be compatible with rights.
d) A state (civitus) is a union of a multitude of human beings under laws
of right.
e) This idea serves as a norm (norma) for every actual union into a
commonwealth (hence serves as a norm for its internal constitution).
Kant suggests that every state contains three authorities within it, that
is, the general united will consists of three persons (trias politica):
1. the sovereign authority (sovereignty) in the person of the legislator;
2. the executive authority (eg: Head of State) in the person of the ruler
(in conformity to the law); and
3. the judicial authority (to award to each what is his in accordance with
the law) in the person of the judge (potestas legislatoria, rectoria et
inudiciaria).
I make the observation that it is the 'homo noumenon' (as the pure reason
which is in me ) which is the actual idea that serves as a norm (norma) for
every actual union into a commonwealth (hence serves as a norm for its
internal constitution). Which as the individual human will contains its own
principles and laws, according to which Kant fails to recognize as the
autonomous right which is already possessed by human beings--thus the three
authorities (trias politica) might be more universally defined:
a) sovereignty {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven},
b) a head of state and {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth}
c) autonomy {ie. Self identity}.
As indicated, this equates to the structure of the Mysteries as nature's
natural processes {ie. the yearly cycle of the seasons} that are conveyed by
I-Ching by the first century BCE consisted of a set of 64 six-line hexagrams
comprising either a solid (yang ch'i) or a single broken (yin) line, were
substituted by a tetragram as four-line glyph, whose component parts were
read from top to bottom, in the opposite order to the I-Ching. The four
lines each therefore represented 3 possibilities {ie. solid, line broken,
double broken} meaning there were: 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 = #81 possible tetragrams
within the Mystery, as opposed to the 64 glyphs of the I-Ching.
These tetragrams were associated to a hierarchical nest of divisions that is
at once a geographic, sociopolitical and anthropocentric realm implemented
during the Han period (206 BCE - 220 CE):
3 Regions {ie. Realm of its Nature as Heaven: + 0, 27, 54}
9 Provinces {ie. System's Cosmology as Earth: + 0, 9, 18}
27 Departments {ie. Self identity: + 0, 3, 6}
81 Families {ie. Its culturing as that which organises the myriad of
individual phenomena (Wan Wu): + 1, 2, 3} = Tetragrammation hierarchy value.
For example, the numerical value of #30 for the Tetragramation 'Bold
Resolution' is obtained by summing each row of the glyph as follows:
= = + 27
----- + 0
----- + 0
+++ + 3 = #30
Each of the tetragram corresponds to a 4.5 day period of the annual cycle as
equal apportion of a nine day period. Thus whilst Fan Wang (c 265 CE)
subsequently assigned 5 days to odd numbered tetragrams and 4 days to
even-numbered tetragrams, in conception, the system described by Yang Hsiung
is identical to Philolaus' Pythagorean belief (c. 500 BCE) as observation
made by the philosopher Censorinus (c. 285 CE) in 'De die Natali' where he
conveys the "natural year has 364 and a half days."
It is possible to view these as Immauel Kant (1724-1804 CE) suggests, as
though they are three propositions in a practical syllogism: the major
premise (SOVEREIGNTY/YANG -- the great virtue of Heaven: male has mastery
over the great beginning of things [#32, #28, #14, #44 - Moderate Values/
Setting Up Precepts, #15 - Mastering Guiding Discourse/ The Revealers of
Virtue, #30, #44, #43, #36]
Memorial Capstone of Royal Arch Freemasons Australia dated 30 May 1999
Hotel Sofitel 25 Collins Street, Melbourne
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/centrum.html>
), which contains the law of that will; the minor premise (HEAD OF
STATE/YIN -- Earth as female brings things to completion [#2, #47, #10,
#50 - Fantasies of Avoiding Death/ The Estimation of Life, #9 - The
Inconstancy of Achievement/ Practising Placidity, #47, #7, #14, #77]), which
contains the command to behave in accordance with the law, that is, the
principle of subsumption under the law; and the conclusion (AUTONOMY/ZHUN --
vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic Homoiotic Noumenon Entry: (33CE - INR)
#3 - Prescriptions for Politics/ Keeping the People Quiet,
#20 - Left without Language/ Different From the Vulgar,
#52 - So What?/ Returning to the Origin,
#73 - Employing Deeming/ Daring to Act,
#79 - Recognizing Agreements/ Keep Your Obligations,
#1 - To Guide with Names/ Reason's Realisation,
#16 - Being a Guide/ Returning to the Root,
#35 - Great Guiding Signs?/ Virtue of Benevolence,
#7 - Intentional Reversal/ Dimming Radiance
), which contains the verdict (sentence), what is laid down as right in the
case at hand." [Kant 1724-1804, The Doctrine of Right, The Metaphysics of
Morals, para 45]
The Government's present view of marriage as a special institution within
our society perhaps ignores that consenting sexual activity between
individuals of the same gender is already legislatively defined: "Lawful
sexual activity" by instead following the German Philosopher Immanuel Kant's
(1724-1804 CE) view conveyed by his treatise on 'The Doctrine of Right'
conveyed within 'The Metaphysics of Morals', namely:
"Natural sexual union takes place either in accordance with mere animal
nature (vaga libido, venus volgivaga, fornicatio) or in accordance with law.
Sexual union in accordance with law is marriage (matrimonium), that is, the
union of two persons of different sexes for lifelong possession of each
other's sexual attributes. The end of begetting and bringing up children
may be an end of nature, for which it implanted the inclinations of the
sexes for each other; but it is not requisite for human beings who marry to
make this their end in order for their union to be compatible with rights,
for otherwise marriage would be dissolved when procreation ceases.
Even if it is supposed that their end is the pleasure of using each other's
sexual attributes, the marriage contract is not up to their discretion but
is a contract that is necessary by the law of humanity, that is, if a man
and a woman want to enjoy each other's sexual attributes they must
necessarily marry, and this is necessary in accordance with pure reason's
laws of right.
For the natural use that ones sex makes of the other's sexual organs is
enjoyment, for which one gives itself up to the other. In this act a human
being makes himself into a thing, which conflicts with the right of humanity
in his own person. There is only one condition under which this is
possible: that while one person is acquired by the other as if it were a
thing, the one who is acquired acquires the other in turn; for in this way
each reclaims itself and restores its personality. But acquiring a member
of a human being is at the same time acquiring the whole person, since a
person is an absolute unity. Hence it is not only admissible for the sexes
to surrender and to accept each other for enjoyment under the condition of
marriage, but it is possible for them to do so only under this condition.
That this right against a person is also akin to a right to a thing rests on
the fact that if one of the partners in a marriage has left or given itself
into someone else's possession, the other partner is justified in retrieving
a thing." [Kant 1724-1804, The Doctrine of Right, The Metaphysics of Morals,
para 25]
However as conveyed by the attached folio, 'Religious Belief & The Letters
Patent to Australia's Constitution of 1901' which demonstrates the
underlying metaphysical theological and philosophical architecture to the
Letters Patent as homoiotic noumenon. The homo noumenon is the pure reason
which is in me as the individual human will contains its own principles and
laws, according to which Kant fails to recognize as the autonomous right
which is already possessed by human beings-Therefore it requires no judicial
or parliamentary authority to award to each what is his in accordance with
the law. The homoiotic noumenon is after all a transpersonal object, and
this may be viewed as having precedence to the judicial authority, which may
examine whether action (phenomenon) has been undertaken in accordance with
pure principles of right.
Kant also suggests, according to the principles of pure reason in me (homo
noumenon), that "A state (civitus) is a union of a multitude of human beings
under laws of right. Insofar as these are a priori necessary as laws, that
is, insofar as they follow themselves from concepts of external right as
such (are not statutory), its form is the form of the state as such, that
is, of the state in idea, as it ought to be in accordance with pure
principles of right. This idea serves as a norm (norma) for every actual
union into a commonwealth (hence serves as a norm for its internal
constitution).
Every state contains three authorities within it, that is, the general
united will consists of three persons (trias politica):
1. the sovereign authority (sovereignty) in the person of the legislator;
2. the executive authority (eg: Head of State) in the person of the ruler
(in conformity to the law); and
3. the judicial authority (to award to each what is his in accordance with
the law) in the person of the judge (potestas legislatoria, rectoria et
inudiciaria).
These are like the three propositions in a practical syllogism: the major
premise, which contains the law of that will; the minor premise, which
contains the command to behave in accordance with the law, that is, the
principle of subsumption under the law; and the conclusion, which contains
the verdict (sentence), what is laid down as right in the case at hand."
[Kant 1724-1804, The Doctrine of Right, The Metaphysics of Morals, para 45]
The Federal Liberal Party has by its actions with regards to this matter,
reduced our democracy to simply being characterized by the largest
population group exercising its voting power to simply vest a supreme power
within representatives of an institutional agent. One that ignores the
principle that such society is characterized by an equality of rights and
privileges as the franchised opportunity in which an individual may
participate as recognition that such supreme power is established upon
sovereignty, a head of state and autonomy.
Clearly if both the Catholic Cardinal Moran and the Anglican Archbishop,
Saumarez Smith, were in favor of Section 116 of the Constitution, which
prevented Sabbatarian {ie. Saturday} legislation whilst preserving the
religious values of Seventh-day Sabbath keepers as Judaeo-Christians, the
Commonwealth can similarly do so to prevent any opportunity for marriage
discrimination by those who confuse a pseudo-christianised form of Roman
Imperialism's hymeneal mysticism and debauchery as a religious/political
state in denial of the 'Judaeo-Christian tradition' it ought to protect us
from any custom, ordinance or religious practice:
"The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion:
Nature contains Nature {Nature amended in its Nature},
or for imposing any religious observance: Nature rejoices in its Nature {Act
of Nature},
or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion: Nature surmounts
Nature {Form of Nature},
and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or
public trust under the Commonwealth: Nature amended in its Nature
{Engendering Nature}" [Section 116 -- The Australian Constitution of 1901,
Chapter V - States, as in force on 1 July 1999; Ian Breward © 2001, A
History of the Churches in Australia, Oxford University Press, ISBN
0-19-826356-2, p 220]
- dolf
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/kabbalah/noumenon.html>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
