"The Christian thing to do"

 Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.

"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for individual happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or society.

Consider writing a personal paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my interpretation of its proposal as follows Born a fellow-citizen, I choose to join We the People of the United States and aid 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” establish and maintain responsible-human-independence to “ourselves and our Posterity”. I want to improve my interpretation by listening to other citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems the Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and no one has challenged whether or not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble is legal. Equity in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who collaborate for human justice.

Every citizen has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.

Selected theme from this week

"The Christian thing to do"

Should female&male-human-being independently provide order&peace to all living species and to the earth?

I doubt the USA is the birthplace of the phrase “the Christian thing to do”. The Google ngram, book-usage frequency graph, shows introduction in 1872, ramp-increase from 1932 to 1940, exponential-increase from 1982 to 2013, and somewhat slower decline since then.

I doubt Jesus approved Mike Pence’s January 6, 2021 betrayal of both the Trump/Pence ticket of 2016 and the entity We the People of the United States. The event demands Pence-attention and perhaps reform. The event constrains U.S. civic-citizens, if not every person who aids the human quest for order&peace on earth, to examine what it means to “witness for Jesus” or to self-judge that you have “Jesus in your heart”. Note that this glib claim is nowhere near the claim to be a Christian: no two Christians believe the-God, as everybody knows. Thus, to claim to be a Christian is to claim personal interpretation of a doctrine.

Both the-God and Jesus are mysteries to the human-being; individually in 2021 and to all homo sapiens plus mixed-homo-species of the recent 300,000 years. Perhaps humankind now marches toward the next homo-mutation: homo humelim or homo fidem or homo integritas.

Recently, I discovered an interpretation of Western-Bible passages that empower me to advocate for Jesus yet retain my commitment-to and trust-in physics and it offspring, including mathematics, gravity, quantum fields, cosmic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, psychology, imagination, fiction, falsehoods, crime, and beyond; I call it “physics&progeny”.

We are told by writers of books in the bible that Jesus said “render unto Caesar . . .”,  “Be perfect [like the-God]”, “Before Abraham was born I AM”, and that he turned over the money tables in the temple. Whatever Jesus is, these reports were written some 70 years after the historical Jesus died, and they fit a mysterious political-duality: state and church; physics and metaphysics; life and afterdeath. I think success as a human-being rests on responsible intent to the-good-behavior during life.

It seems the human-being differs from the-God in that the person faces death:  Each person may develop into a god-facing-death. A Mesopotamian political philosopher some 5,000 years ago suggested that female&male-human-being is like the-God. Humankind can&must independently provide order&peace to the living species and to the earth. The human-individual can&must constrain chaos in their way of living.

Two thousand years later, Hebrew scholars interpreted the ancient suggestion in Genesis 1:26-28. Despite the 2-millennia gap, the human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to responsible-human-independence comes through.

Another 1000 years later, Jesus perhaps affirmed if not claimed the ancient suggestion: The human-individual can&must constrain chaos in their way of living. These 2000 years since then, humankind has attempted to coerce the-God into taking their responsibility.

In this mysterious view, “the Christian thing to do” demands performance more than promise, comfort, and hope. Perhaps in Jesus’ view of Genesis-1, conservatives can&must establish responsible-human-independence rather than dependency on mysterious higher power.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Considering-the-sources-presented-what-is-the-best-way-to-establish-a-civic-nation-inclusion-rights-values-beliefs? by Amal Chehade

About

https://www.quora.com/Considering-the-sources-presented-what-is-the-best-way-to-establish-a-civic-nation-inclusion-rights-values-beliefs? by Amal Chehade

About

 

https://www.quora.com/Considering-the-sources-presented-what-is-the-best-way-to-establish-a-civic-nation-inclusion-rights-values-beliefs? by Amal Chehade

About

 

https://www.quora.com/What-is-communism-and-why-do-people-think-it%E2%80%99s-bad/answer/Phil-Beaver-1 Comment by Tony Horne

Mr. Horne, thank you for appreciative-criticism. I improve my statement to: No human wants civil-submission to un-civic ways of living.

The person who accepts that they are a human-being has the cognizance and grammar by which to discover the-laws-of-physics&progeny and responsibly apply them for self-interest. The human-being neither initiates nor accommodates injury to or from any person or association of people. But not every person accepts that they are a human-being.

The library is a public provision for private pursuits with proffered constraints to encourage&facilitate mental-discipline. An office provides limited contact for supplier and customer with proffered constraints to protect their mutual interests. A factory is a strictly private location with proffered constraints for efficient manufacturing for the provider-to-customer connection.

The civic-citizen observes civic-constraints in self-interest.

https://www.quora.com/Is-tradition-a-good-reason-to-do-something? by Daniel Butt

Mr. Butt, I imagine only one tradition for the-good: celebration of responsible-human-independence (RHI) to encourage&facilitate the necessary individual&civic humble-integrity.

I know of no civilization, culture, race, or society that pursues humble-integrity. Integrity does not accommodate dissidence against RHI.

The proposed practice is proffered in the amendable 1787 U.S. Constitution. My 2021 paraphrase of its preamble is: “the good People”* of these united states practice&encourage 5 public disciplines --- integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” develop responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”.

* The 1776 U.S.A. declaration of independence from England.

https://www.quora.com/What-makes-a-human-right-a-human-right? by Graham C Lindsay

Evolution so far yielded homo sapien as the most aware living species and the only species, so far, with the cognizance to use grammar to advance language unto thought. Perhaps we are at the apex of human knowledge as a vehicle for survival and are entering the age of humility. We may be experiencing the struggle between homo integritas and homo superbus intermixing with homo sapiens.

For the most psychologically powerful species, it seems responsible-survival is the basis for right. That is to say, there is no justice in simply killing-off the lesser species, but responsibility requires the psychologically advanced species to encourage&facilitate reform to the lesser species. To the human-being, it seems integrity is greater than knowledge or pride. But how is integrity gaged?

Perhaps necessity&justice for survival is the key. An perhaps conforming to the laws of physics is the key to survival. Consider for example, a warning to evacuate to higher ground because a tsunami is expected.

The homo integritas has transportation arranged, food supplies, medicines, and confirmed destination to accommodate the family. Homo sapien speculates that the risks of escape are greater than the events of the last tsunami and chooses to stay again. Homo superbus values the properties to be left behind too highly to leave. Homo integritas has the right to accept the other two families’ decisions and leave them behind. People who perceive they know or are above risk lie to themselves and invite ruin.

In general, it seems to me the only right to a human being, a god-facing-death, is the right to develop the humble-integrity needed for responsible-human-independence.

https://www.quora.com/How-does-impugning-the-motives-and-intent-of-your-ideological-opposition-advance-the-conversation? by Michael Wayne Box

Merriam-Webster Online (MWO) informs us “impugn” means “to assail by words or arguments: oppose or attack as false or lacking integrity”. Is your question, Mr. Box, intended to impugn my work on which I earn my opinions? Anyway, I appreciate your question.

I assert that in a civic-conversation, both parties are expressing their hard-earned experiences&observations with mutual fidelity to the-ineluctable-truth rather than reason or personal opinion. MWO defines “ineluctable” as “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”.

By swapping roles --- speaking then LISTENING-TO-LEARN and vice versa --- the two parties iteratively reach a conclusion that accommodates each person’s responsible pursuit of happiness rather than forces either party to submit to an imposed future under someone else’s vision for them. For example, a Buddhist, an Orthodox Ethiopian Christian, a French-Catholic, an American Protestant, and a Muslim can leave such a conversation as enriched human-beings rather than religious doubters: each person appreciates the physical as a beneficial constraint on the metaphysical. Thus, in this usage, “civic” means behaving, in order to mutually, comprehensively pursue safety&security so that each may responsibly pursue their personal happiness.

Both parties accept that 1) they are a human being and therefore have the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to either maintain their infantile posture “I don’t know” when that is the case or to pursue their opinion, regardless of the ineluctable-evidence and 2) the laws of physics and its progeny, such as mathematics, force fields, chemistry, biology, psychology, and imagination, control the unfolding of human events. Thus, physics rather than metaphysics is in charge. Consequently, each party argues with humble-integrity more than free-will.

For example, if a person lives in a community that received an evacuation order due to a Category 5 hurricane and thinks “I can stay safe in this wonderful building and did so during the last Cat 5 evacuation” (does not choose the lesser evacuation-risks for self&family) more strongly invites death. The physics overrides the metaphysics.

When two parties present their arguments under such principles, neither party holds the other responsible for the-ineluctable-truth. Each party is sharing their hard-earned opinion then LISTENING for the opportunity to tweak or change personal opinion in order to more closely approach the-ineluctable-truth. Neither party expects more than the other’s openly shared experiences&observations; neither party is held responsible to express the-ineluctable-truth. But together, they hope each will advance their unique journey to comprehension, without compromising their responsible-human-independence to civically pursue the happiness they desire.

Recently, a good friend said my political philosophy arguments were attractive, and it would be nice if I would be more accommodating toward believers in Jesus. The conversation helped me realize I pursue an understanding of Jesus and am prepared to be judged during my afterdeath, even though I doubt there’ll be more to judge than my accomplishments in life: no soul to punish or reward. On hearing this, many Christians, some of whom never attempted to comprehend Jesus, tell me I will burn in Hell and that they will pray for me. I view the statements as honest expression of integrity-privation and sincerely respond “And I’m praying for you”.

In my 78^th year, I discovered a Jesus I support, doubt it is the historical Jesus, and accept that Jesus may not approve my view, just as my deceased son Stephen may not approve of my progress in the 3 decades since Stephen Boyd Beaver died. In my opinion, no man, alive or dead, can witness for the historical Jesus. The real Jesus may be the-good, or ultimate appreciation of humankind, the ultimate attainment of “ourselves and our Posterity”, or the-God.

Genesis 1:26-28 instructs, in my 2021 view, that the entity femal&male-human-being is independently responsible to constrain chaos to living species and the earth. That is, the-God will not usurp humankind’s responsibility. There are lots of details that were available neither to the speculative Sumerian-political-philosopher responsible for the perhaps 5,000 year-old thoughts nor to the Hebrew scholars who, 2,000 years later, recorded the observations in their expressions.

For example, the earth was the center of the universe, dinosaur fossils had not been discovered, H. sapiens had not separated from Neanderthal, and the last homo&homo-sapien mixed species had not died off. The ancient philosopher expressed the-God only as the creator, sometimes using the pronoun “we” and sometimes “him” and expressed “the spirit of God” as a fog over the water. Perhaps Jesus’ political philsophy was present beforehand.

However, 2021 necessity&justice make it self-evident that humankind can&must constrain chaos on earth, just as certainly as Jeff Bezos will travel in the space formerly regarded as heaven or the realm of the gods. How could self-evident political philosophy be not only resisted but denied for 5,000 years? Could it be failure to believe Jesus?

Jesus did not write, and “the rule of law” had not invented plagiarizing. MWO defines it: “to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source”. Some of Jesus’ apostles wrote about him starting 70 years after Jesus died, and canonization continued until about 405 AD, differently in western Europe, eastern Europe, Asia, and Africa. Protestant canon developed after Martin Luther. No one knows what Jesus said. And in 2021, resources on the Internet make “plagiarizing” almost obsolete. For example, 2021 readers don’t trust writer’s references as sufficient: readers do their own searches by which to evaluate critical claims. For example, who first used the phrase “discipline of, by, and for the people”? Often it brings to mind Abraham Lincoln, in 1863, but Lincoln did not make that claim at all, and his quote is a dream rather than reality.

Apostles reported that Jesus said, “be perfect . . .”, “before Abraham was born I AM”, “render unto Cesar . . .“, and about spouses “Whoever divorces his wife . . .”, “. . . the two shall become one flesh”, “Honor your father and your mother”. These principles reflect the Genesis-1 political-philosophy. Abraham was reported 3,800 years ago, so Jesus may have claimed to have authored or influenced Genesis 1:26-28: female&male-humans can&must provide order&peace on earth.

There’s another literature evidence that Jesus’s principles influenced human-beings before Jesus was born. For example, 2,450 years ago, Agathon, as reported by Plato in “Symposium”, expressed that appreciation’s greatest strength is that the civic-individual can neither initiate nor accommodate injury to-or-from any person or association, including self and family.

In summary, in my 78^th year, I view Jesus as humankind’s pursuit of the-good rather than the-God. I hold my view as no more valid than the Catholic view that the Eucharist is the metaphysical embodiment of Christ nor the Protestant view that grape-juice is ceremonially drunk as an act of Remembrance.

The person who takes offense over my pursuit of the historical Jesus is responsible for judging my motives and intentions rather than considering statements based on my work. The may also be rebuking the-God as well as the-good. I don’t know.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-concept-of-civic-responsibility? by Beka Mbarouk

Google Chrome reports “Civic responsibility means active participation in the public life of a community in an informed, committed, and constructive manner, with a focus on the common good.” I think this is typical of modern thought, at least in “the west” --- western Europe and north America.

I consider the USA a civil, Anglo-American tradition, whereas the United States represents the civic entity We the People of the United States. “The common good” is a western notion, developed by elite politicians since the ancient Greeks to control the gullible masses; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_good. For deep consideration see https://plato.stanford.edu/search/searcher.py?query=common+good. The first 2 of 2097 document titles reflect the importance of “community” in the Google definition, above.

In 2021, we may expand community to the world’s population. Then, clearly, civic responsibility requires mutually-satisfying human-connections everywhere rather than locally. This global way of living would seem to require either mastering the languages, religions, and other particulars of every community in the world or convincing everyone to learn a common language and culture. But there is another way.

Perhaps, 5,000 years ago, an unknown political philosopher in Mesopotamia suggested that female&male-human-being can&must, independent of the-God, provide order&peace to living species and to the earth. Two thousand years later, Hebrew scholars expressed this concept in Genesis 1:26-28, depicting female&male-human-being as the god that is independently addressing chaos unto death. The-God is not subject to death, and each person may develop responsible-human-independence (RHI) before dying. In other words, the god-facing-death can perfect their unique person.

To the individual, the suggestion is to constrain chaos in personal-living. No matter what a person’s pursuit of happiness may be, each day’s choices must constrain chaos. Human-mistakes cannot become habits. However, being a god-facing-death, the person has the power to choose temporal satisfaction, risking chaos. Developing the humble-integrity needed for RHI is in the individual’s self-interest.

Individual communities inculcated dependence on higher-authorities: doctrinal-Gods, governments, ideologies, or partnerships of two powers. The powers are competitive through physics&progeny versus metaphysics; the-ineluctable-truth vs reason; what-is vs what-someone-imagined; fidelity vs tyranny; RHI vs dependency. In gullibility, individuals are too bemused with “the common good” to constrain chaos in their way of living.

I think civic responsibility has two practices: 1) to constrain chaos in chosen ways of living and 2) to encourage&facilitate responsible-human-independence to fellow-citizens.

I appreciate your question, Mbarouk, and hope these ideas help establish an achievable better future.

Phil Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it obviously does not work.

Phil is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays from the latest and going back as far as you like.