Form: Question

Source date (UTC): 2020-08-24 23:57:09 UTC

Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/104747068866243519

Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/104747067266976374

IN REPLY TO:

@curtd

The purpose of the Propertarianism and Christians group is to seek compromise and understanding given that some of us can and need to believe and some of us don’t need, and cannot believe. I wanted this group so that I could talk to christians on their terms about this subject. We argue that: 1) What constitutes ‘christianity’ has spawned hundreds of cults and nearly every individual believes he and his or her sect has some monpoly on what is the correct christianity. 2) That this interpretability is a strength and a weakness – it means there is no law of christianity as there is a law of reciprocity, but conversely it means that groups can form on whatever they imagine the bible conveys. This appeals to cognitive biases and suggestion. And that: 1) christian ethics can be reduced to five statements. 2) christianity provides tolerance for the physical natural and evolutionary laws, and can be encoded in law. 3) christian behavior is the optimum solution to the prisonner’s dilemma of social trust – 4) and is the only substantive via-positiva advancement on the natural law of reciprocity. And that: 1) We can write those five statements into natural law for use in our judicial and political system regardless of whether one has a faith, wisdom, or empirical mind to justify those laws and aderhere to them. We ask: 1) Whether the source of causality as auto-deism (mechanical), deism(originary), or theological (activist) god; And; 2) (scripture) Whether the various wisdom literatures: anglo-empirical, germanic contenental, greco-roman, confucian-taoist, buddhist, hindu, and abrahamic (judaism ,christianity, and islam), are just that: wisdom literatures written in the language available to their local people during the ages of transformation – or whether the abrahamic, and in particular, the christian are (a) superior in experence and outcome, (b) and the work of men or supernatural. And; 3) Whether Jesus was an activist (like Alinsky), a philosopher (like Marx), a prophet that supernatural forces spoke through (like Mohammed), or a supernatural creature as xians(Paulians) claim. And; 4) Whether the globalist catholic church which seeks to rule in competition with or defeat of the state; the nationaist orthodox church which seeks to assist and cooperate with the state; or the institutional protestant which seeks to augment the state; or the evangelical protestant which seeks to avoid modernity entirely, are the superior models, is ‘christianity’ – since they all disagree. Or; 5) Whether, we can write the common rules of the christian ethical system into secular empirical law, and prohibit all COMPETING ethical systems – and yes, religions – from our polity. This would allow Fundamentalists, Traditionalists(Deists), Rationalists(Habituals), and empiricicists (scientists like myself) to cooperate in resisting our many enemies, pursuing our christian behavior regardless of the ‘method’ by which we undersetand it. And; (more…)

Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/104747067266976374