MK forum

Discuss anything MK here
It is currently Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:56 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:43 pm
Posts: 215
A Discourse, inspired by 85 Letters to the Independent Journal & New York Packet.


In Reiteration:

When last I wrote upon this subject, a little over 222 years ago, the topic revolved around the formation of a national government, a thing unheard of in the annals of history. It was then, and still is now, truly, an experiment. Since that fortuitous time, the baby has matured into an adult while encountering problems inherent with age. Responsibilities adhere, difficulties arise, first principles consulted (some are re-examined and redefined), and the journey continues.

Here then is the next installment, a re-examination of first principles made applicable by analogy to an entity that was birthed with a noble goal, yet corrupted in the maturation process, and now is in the throes of re-examination and redefinition.

In my last submission I stated, it was “the extreme of imprudence to prolong the precarious state of . . . affairs.” Recent actions taken in response to long-borne inaction has demonstrated that perhaps continued imprudence is no longer the favored modus operandi or coin of the realm. This is to be highly commended. However, lest recent events dull the fervor of a few, again, I quote from my earlier submission when I remind my readers, “I never expect to see a perfect work from imperfect [men].” It is, in fact, the recognition of this fact that the illustrious and long-awaited report by FANDA is met with such approbation as to give solace to many who were silenced for so long. It further gives encouragement for those still seeking a venue in which to raise their voices of suffering. But alas, I digress from my main purpose. True change must recognize, indeed, first principles reveal, that in any given endeavor, “all collective bodies must necessarily be a compound, as well as the errors and prejudices, as of the good sense and wisdom, of the individuals of whom they are composed.” Believing this to be generally acknowledged and a trustworthy statement given abundant human history as witness, true systemic change acknowledges that we are what we are, sinful people driven by desires for self-preservation, not desirous to be held accountable, but each seeking our own way. Truly, if men were angels, no governing authorities or oversight need be necessary, but we know that we do not inherently retain angelic inclinations. If anything, we are devilishly inclined. And so, in reforming the whole, we must commence with the general belief of our fallibility. Yet, even in the midst of fallibility, steps towards perfecting of our minds are possible for those truly sons of God. It is, therefore, with this in mind, that sinful men, organized into sinful entities, are capable (not of themselves, truly) but with God’s grace to effect change.

And so, we will begin with a re-examination and redefining of ourselves, our mission, our purpose, and, moving out purposefully from these first considerations, to practicalities and living out our stated beliefs.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 11:27 pm
Posts: 4954
Is this in Portuguese? :lol:


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2010 11:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:43 pm
Posts: 215
@ Raz: It is the beginning of a little project, I was encouraged to do by others. If you want it in Portuguese, no doubt OT could accommodate. :D

Feel free to enjoy, further installments will be forthcoming . . . .


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 2:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:42 pm
Posts: 58
Do what?!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2010 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:07 pm
Posts: 62
I eagerly wait the next installment....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:29 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:43 pm
Posts: 215
In redefining ourselves, I mean, most clearly not in a post-modern sense of choosing a definition that works for me, but may not work for another. Instead, I submit that any redefinition begin where, for us, all did begin, at a place where man knew no sin. In that beginning, our purpose was, as St. Augustine wrote, to “enjoy God and glorify Him forever.” From that creative standpoint, to be image-bearers, the imago Dei, we derive our most fundamental purpose in this life. It is a fixed point, a North Star; the way we are to relate to God and the rest of humanity. From this fixed point, diverse gifts, inclinations, and attributes are given to the whole, for a singular purpose: to foster love for, and an appreciate of, God in a life lived out in joy and holiness. This then is the purpose of man, originally intended, and from which all other endeavors must necessarily flow to be deemed truly worthwhile.

The most basic mission, entrusted to man by Father God was to be that of a steward, a caretaker. To honor the Father with the trust bestowed. The mission began when, after creating all, God charged man with subduing the earth, filling it, and acting as a trustee over that which God created. It is interesting to note that at the time given, this most basic of charges did not include what now would commonly be called missions. In other words, salvation of the lost was not the most basic, foundational drive of man to which all else was subservient. It was, in the beginning, to serve as a trustee. Please, do not misunderstand this pronouncement to denigrate the Grand (Great) Commission, but rather, I seek to say the first commission was that of a caretaker, to which the commandment in Matthew 28: 18-20, is supplemental. In other words, the one did not obtain primacy over the other; rather, both were to be done in conjunction with each other.

This realization gives rise to a very oft-overlooked purpose of man: family. Adam and Eve, the nucleus of the family, predated the call to seek and save the lost. The apostle Paul reiterated this fact when recognizing that the call to serve as an itinerate or overseas missionary would conflict with the cares associated with a wife. (I do not propose here to go into context about the first century Christians believing Christ’s return imminent alongside the severity of Roman/Jewish persecutions and the practical applications of such a belief, but rather, I am simply noting general principles, still applicable today.) However, Paul recognized the primacy of the familial tie over that of ministry. He did not dispute it, he recognized it. He did not label familial ties “expendable” or merely “excess baggage”, but did note that not all one’s attention could be devoted to missionary work, for other, equally important, aspects demanded attention, as well. The Apostle recognized the conflict that would ensue, and sought to have those wishing to embark upon such a lifestyle as missionary work to clearly “count the cost.”

Thus, in this latest submission, I have examined, albeit cursorily, the basic, most fundamental goal of man in relation to God and the world around him. I have shown that the most basic relationship man undertakes in life is not, contrary to some, that of missionary to the lost, but rather of a husband, father, wife, mother, brother, and sister. In a word: family. This, then, is the building block upon which all else is derived. To the extent that is dishonored or violated, little else can be necessarily correct or truly honorable.

To this most basic building block sin corrupted, the Great Commission was given, and life became infinitely more complex. But that is an entry for another submission. I remain, as ever,

PUBLIUS

* Book recommendation: The God Who Smokes: Scandalous Meditations on Faith, by Timothy J. Stoner.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Oct 22, 2010 11:38 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010 9:29 am
Posts: 15
@Publius

Excellent discussion.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 9:04 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2010 7:43 pm
Posts: 215
I have been busy of late, but the next installment will be out shortly (as in this week!). Thank you, my readers, for your patience . . . .

As ever,

PUBLIUS


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Sep 04, 2015 9:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:32 pm
Posts: 2328
publius wrote:
In redefining ourselves, I mean, most clearly not in a post-modern sense of choosing a definition that works for me, but may not work for another. Instead, I submit that any redefinition begin where, for us, all did begin, at a place where man knew no sin. In that beginning, our purpose was, as St. Augustine wrote, to “enjoy God and glorify Him forever.” From that creative standpoint, to be image-bearers, the imago Dei, we derive our most fundamental purpose in this life. It is a fixed point, a North Star; the way we are to relate to God and the rest of humanity. From this fixed point, diverse gifts, inclinations, and attributes are given to the whole, for a singular purpose: to foster love for, and an appreciate of, God in a life lived out in joy and holiness. This then is the purpose of man, originally intended, and from which all other endeavors must necessarily flow to be deemed truly worthwhile.

The most basic mission, entrusted to man by Father God was to be that of a steward, a caretaker. To honor the Father with the trust bestowed. The mission began when, after creating all, God charged man with subduing the earth, filling it, and acting as a trustee over that which God created. It is interesting to note that at the time given, this most basic of charges did not include what now would commonly be called missions. In other words, salvation of the lost was not the most basic, foundational drive of man to which all else was subservient. It was, in the beginning, to serve as a trustee. Please, do not misunderstand this pronouncement to denigrate the Grand (Great) Commission, but rather, I seek to say the first commission was that of a caretaker, to which the commandment in Matthew 28: 18-20, is supplemental. In other words, the one did not obtain primacy over the other; rather, both were to be done in conjunction with each other.

This realization gives rise to a very oft-overlooked purpose of man: family. Adam and Eve, the nucleus of the family, predated the call to seek and save the lost. The apostle Paul reiterated this fact when recognizing that the call to serve as an itinerate or overseas missionary would conflict with the cares associated with a wife. (I do not propose here to go into context about the first century Christians believing Christ’s return imminent alongside the severity of Roman/Jewish persecutions and the practical applications of such a belief, but rather, I am simply noting general principles, still applicable today.) However, Paul recognized the primacy of the familial tie over that of ministry. He did not dispute it, he recognized it. He did not label familial ties “expendable” or merely “excess baggage”, but did note that not all one’s attention could be devoted to missionary work, for other, equally important, aspects demanded attention, as well. The Apostle recognized the conflict that would ensue, and sought to have those wishing to embark upon such a lifestyle as missionary work to clearly “count the cost.”

Thus, in this latest submission, I have examined, albeit cursorily, the basic, most fundamental goal of man in relation to God and the world around him. I have shown that the most basic relationship man undertakes in life is not, contrary to some, that of missionary to the lost, but rather of a husband, father, wife, mother, brother, and sister. In a word: family. This, then, is the building block upon which all else is derived. To the extent that is dishonored or violated, little else can be necessarily correct or truly honorable.

To this most basic building block sin corrupted, the Great Commission was given, and life became infinitely more complex. But that is an entry for another submission. I remain, as ever,

PUBLIUS

* Book recommendation: The God Who Smokes: Scandalous Meditations on Faith, by Timothy J. Stoner.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Sep 05, 2015 9:46 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:04 pm
Posts: 3572
God smokes because He is a consuming fire.
Great post, Publius.
Where are you?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group