The term “social justice” does not appear in any of the writings of the American founders. They spoke of justice itself and the benefits society would enjoy from the administration of justice for the people. The roots of the term “social justice” as we hear it today are solely in liberal-socialism, which is anti-God in every way and seeks to destroy faith except where that religion is supremely subject to the state.
We need to be supportive of the administration of justice in ways that will benefit society while understanding that virtually nothing today that is promoted as “social justice” has anything to do with justice. We need to be dedicated to actually doing the good works that Jesus told us to be doing so the guidance and empowerment of the Holy Spirit will be seen in us. The result will be people being changed in ways that popular liberal socialism promises but is incapable of delivering and that difference will cause them to praise God.
I recently attended a service at a large black church near me that shall go nameless. The music was loud but definitely not “rocked-up” with particular instruments and musical styles. Out of curiosity, I used the sound meter app on my phone to measure the volume. During the singing it was so loud that, had it been a workplace, OSHA regulations would have required every person in the place to be wearing hearing protection. The sermon was so loud that the five-minute average volume would have required everyone there to wear hearing protection.
I remember reading somewhere that if we give a glass of water, or a blanket, or some food, or any social help I guess, to people in need, we are actually giving it to Christ. Not totally sure though what it actually means…
Ah, also, taking care of the poor and of the widows rings a bell…
It’s targeting people who have an opinion on the issue, and this is a right that everyone has. Nobody is “delusional” for having an opinion that differs from other people’s opinion.
“Delusion” is a state of mind, typically a symptom of mental disorder. Are you a qualified mental health professional able to make a diagnosis like that?
People “who think” usually are not delusional. When someone is delusional, their “thinking” is not actually real thinking.
From Wikipedia: " Social justice is a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. … The relevant institutions often include taxation, social insurance, public health, public school, public services, labor law and regulation of markets, to ensure fair distribution of wealth, and equal opportunity." Who could possibly be against such a concept?
I support social justice being promoted by Churches, and I can assure you that I am not delusional. I am a mental health professional, properly licensed by the State, able to treat people who presents even with distorted thinking like, for example, discrimination of other human beings in several aspects.
“Guilt or innocence based on someone’s characteristics like race, sex, age or how much money they possess has been tried a number of times in the 20th century and got about 100 million people killed.” What in the world are you taking about???
And it will never happen. It may well be that he is just attending those meetings to give the impression that he is listening and collecting people’s input to use it in some way. Nothing but deceit! I doubt he will ever change his position. He may be just trying to appease people here and there but his ultimate plan is execution. (I mean, executing his plan… )
Allegheny East Conference
Allegheny West Conference
Central States Conference
Lake Region Conference
South Atlantic Conference
South Central Conference
Southwest Regional Conference
North Pacific Union Conference
Pacific Union Conference
That all men are created equal - that that is self evident - was an extreme position for social justice / distributive justice in the 1700’s. That you can’t see this is evidence that the founders’ radical ideas worked.
The reason nobody sees the words “all men are created EQUAL” as revolutionary is that we
on this side of the Atlantic Ocean do not understand and have no appreciation of how
society in England and Europe based on Strata and WHO one’s parents and grandparents
In English and European tradition one COULD NOT rise to another “level” in society. Positions
were INHERITED and passed down generationally. It took WW1 and WW11, killing off of most
of the upper class men to change that somewhat. Killing the sons of the aristocracy.
Here in America in 1776 those with Top Hats and those with coon-skin hats were viewed as
equals. Plantation owners and log cabin owners were seen as equals.
THAT was a HUGE Revolution in perception of Human Beings before God.
Yes, that’s the problem with corporate guilt. You’ll start blaming a whole group of people because of evildoers among them. Yes there were millions in Germany who liked and not only liked, but went crazy for Hitler. In 1933 Hitler came to power with about only 33% of votes only because his party gained the most. Afterwards there weren’t even democratic elections. He stayed in power as a dictator till the final end in 1945 (Der Untergang). Therefore blaming a whole nation as racists would be same as saying that all US Americans are dumb because they elected Trump.
I agree. I didn’t mean that members of a group are actually guilty by association or that others should insinuate that they are.
What I meant by corporate guilt is that the members of a group - “German Nationals” in this case - feel their own internal corporate guilt for their group’s behavior. This can be true if they we active participants in the offense (“How could I have done such a thing?”), ‘uninvolved’ bystanders (“Why didn’t I do something to stop this?”), or even members of the opposition (“Why didn’t I try harder to help the Jews?”).
Right. Only the 26% of eligible voters that voted for him are dumb - or at least uninformed. But the 48% of eligible voters that didn’t vote might be in that group asking, “Why didn’t I do something to stop this?”
Interesting story about this. In the 9th century, the newly-crowned Holy Roman Emperor Charlemagne sought a number of ways to further unify the empire, and one was to create consistency in the liturgy, including music, in churches across the realm. The difficulty was that liturgical music had developed locally for the previous eight centuries and there were many local and regional “dialects” of chanted music for liturgy. Church officials in Rome and in the Frankish areas argued about which kind of chant would dominate the new Empire, so a legend was developed that the sixth-century Pope Gregory I (the “Great”) received the Roman dialect of chant directly from the Holy Spirit. You can see this in religious iconography, where Gregory is shown sitting with the dove of the Holy Spirit perched on his shoulder whispering in his ear, as he dictates to a scribe (this is where we get the saying “a little birdie told me”). This settled the debate, and so the Roman chant (now called Gregorian chant) became dominant in Charlemagne’s empire and to the present day. This was, however, nonsense since there was no system of notating music in the sixth century and chant was transmitted orally. The need to unify liturgical practices in the Empire was actually a catalyst for the development of notation in Europe. So arguing that certain music comes from a non-terrestrial source is not actually a new argument! I imagine that Adventists making such an argument might have second thought about repeating a tactic first used by medieval Catholicism!
The church has such expertise in its institutions of higher education and among the lay membership. However, it is a matter of church leadership consulting with those experts. Why this doesn’t happen consistently is open to interpretation, though we educators are happy to help!
The matter of purchasing a pipe organ for the tabernacle at Battle Creek was placed before me by Brother Barnes and others; I told them that as God had presented before me the necessities of the missionary work, the great need of sending men and means to carry the truth into new fields, I could not for a moment give the least encouragement to this piece of extravagance.
This makes some sense as by the second half of the 19th century, harmoniums (reed organs with air supplied by foot pedals) were much cheaper to purchase and maintain than pipe organs, while still providing enough volume to adequately accompany the congregational singing.
In my own research area of the Spanish colonial Philippines, I have seen records of many parish churches who let their beautiful pipe organs go completely to seed because for the cost of a major repair or overhaul, they could buy two or three brand new harmoniums.
By the way, I love pipe organs and support their purchase and maintenance!