3 readers online now  |  69 million page views

Philosophy, Religion, Homosexuality and Conservatism

Reader comment on item: Conservatism's Hidden History
in response to reader comment: Conservative Liberals vs. Liberal Conservatives

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Oct 1, 2018 at 16:20

Hi, Robert. You said,

"This is not a place to discuss personal views."

Havers. We're all expressing our personal views, however we dress them up.

"It's about the distinction - which rely (sic) isn't accurate in describing American History , because, inter alia, yesterdays Liberal, or Revolutionary, is Tomorrow's Conservative."

Forgive my small reperetoire of philosophers, but what you're saying seems to describe the "dialectic" alluded to Marx; and indeed, Marx's doctrine -- that today's revolutionary, once in power, becomes tomorrow's reactionary.

Marx may be correct, as far as that goes; but this is not the case with "true" liberals and "true" conservatives. Yes, the "Conservative" Parties of the UK and Australia are probably just as "liberal" as, if not more than, the American Democratic Party (presumably "liberal"); and in the US, those wildly liberal Democrats have their core support among descendants of the Puritans, who used to be quite conservative; and the Republican base in the Deep South used to be the baileywyck of Democrats with some very old-fashioned ideas. The party labels have indeed flip-flopped; but Southern Whites still tend to be genuinely conservative while Northern Whites still tend to be more genuinely liberal: the core ideologies haven't really changed: Yesterday's conservatives are still pretty much today's conservatives, and yesterday's liberals are still pretty much today's liberals. You went on to say,

"You've made a strange observation regarding Christian Dogma! You seem to believe that God is One and Two Persons. But I am more interested in Roman Catholicism - where this Dogma is subsumed under the notion of the TRINITY: that God is both One Person and Three Persons AT THE SAME TIME. Actually, it's something I've research, and it's not that difficult to get a hold of if you study Pythagorean and Euclidean ARITHMETIC."

Robert, I think you and I would probably have opposite scores on any "Liberal vs. Conservative" quiz; but this definitely does not mean we cannot have fun -- certainly more fun than I have had, trying vailny to discuss these things with fellow Jews and Christians to date. Let me read on...

"In brief, One is not a Number; rather, it's a primitive in virtue of one has a Unit (like One Apple, as opposed to Two Apples). Similarly, Two is not a Number; rather, what is commonly recognized as Two, is actually, strictly speaking Evenness, as opposed to Oddness: Everything that exists as a Plurality, is either Even or Odd..."

Let me interrupt your thought here. I happen to be doing a word study this week, into the word "one", as translated into the KJV of the Bible. "One" can have many meanings. In French, I believe, "une" is used as an indefinite article ( = the English "a" or "an"). In my current Bible study, which has so far only covered Genesis, the KJV "one", and the Hebrew counterparts ("echad, achad, achat, ish, tappam", etc.) never are used as indefinite articles. The instance of "one" that you are no doubt interested in, is in Deuteronomy 6:

"[4] Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:"

The Hebrew original is "echad"; and it is indeed a number:


as in,

Genesis 1:
[9] And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place (i. e. Pangaea), and let the dry land appear: and it was so.


Genesis 10:
[25] And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

The standard Trinitarian defense I am familiar with, states that "echad" always refers to a "collective" unity (such as a "trinity"); but the two examples I've shown here show that this is not the case. "Echad" refers here to a NUMBER, a "count", distinguishing itself from "two", "three", etc.

According to this, the boilerplate Jewish understanding of the "count" or "number" of God is correct. This doesn't necessarily make the Trinitarians wrong, so long as they realize that they are comparing dissimilar UNITS; for they believe that an essence or substance which they call "God" encompasses both Jesus and the Biblical entity called "God" (which they do philosophical gymnastics to re-label as "God the Father").

The apparent confusion of the Trinitarians can therefore be scripturally resolved, with some transposition of language; but the dilemna I passed on to you goes even deeper into confusion: I have been associated with Christians, most of whom I count as my friends, who, through misplaced loyalty, confusion or ignorance, confess that "Jesus IS God". All bets are off with this doctrine, for it has Jesus praying to himself, loving himself, being his own father and indeed, literally being beside himself! I tossed the problem to you and your philosophers, mainly out of exasperation at having had to deal with this sort of thing for some 45 years.

Enough of my interruption. Let me read on...

"...Everything that exists as a Plurality, is either Even or Odd, So the First instance of Plurality occurs in the Case of the Number THREE - the First Number. And if you want to know more about the Roman Catholic dogma on this aspect of God, I suggest you begin with "ON THE TRINITY" by St. Augustine."

I think you can see that I am not interested in knowing more about the RC dogma. I will only say this about the Catholics, that whatever their dogma (and hardly any Catholics really understand much of it), adherence to that dogma as their form of "political correctness" has kept this church of hundreds of millions of people together for some 1700 years. That is not bad: Most churches I'm familiar with don't outlast a generation). You went on,

"3) Regarding Homosexuality, I maintain that they should be treated as having the same rights and human dignity in civil society as the rest of us."

I agree completely.

"I assume that you read the Bible as imposing a duty on me to discriminate against homosexuals."

You assume wrongly. The Bible says that practicing homosexuality is abominable, and I agree (It involves uncleanness to a dangerous, unhealthy degree). The Bible also commands JEWS to put those openly practicing homosexuality to be put out from among them WHEN THEY ARE LIVING IN AND IN CONTROL OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL. That is because the land and people of Israel are meant to be sepatated from the rest of the wold in holiness, being dedicated unto the King of the Universe. None of this legal enforcement is expected nor demanded of Jews outside Israel, nor among the people of the nations, nor even of the Israelites of today, who are religiously confused.

"And you probably want laws passed against homosexuals."

I want Americans to be free to express their wishes in enacting laws and regulations, in such areas as are delegated to them; and this is certainly an area that is delegated to them. It's the utmost of folly, and disaster for the country, to allow boys to shower with girls in gym class without their parent's knowledge and permission. That is perversion, not freedom.

"Our American Constitution does not allow us to pass any laws that violate their Due Process or Equal Rights provisions.."

After the Kvanaugh Character Assasination Kangaroo Court, you have the gall to talk to me about "due process" and "equal rights"? That is so sick, I won't even discuss it with you. Let's move on...

"4) Since you accept (as I read your writing) that God is both One and Two Persons simultaneously, you shouldn't have that much trouble tolerating my position that I am BOTH a CONSERVATIVE and a LIBERAL !"

You're certainly wrong on the first count; and as for the second, you have your opinion and I have mine: I am a conservative, and your political persuasion -- call it what you will -- is very opposed to my own.

Thank you again for the discussion. As I said, I have been able to talk more freely with you about some of these things, than with many others who ought to be more open to me.

Shalom shalom :-)


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Submit a comment on this item

Reader comments (87) on this item

Title Commenter Date Thread
Yes, there *are* universities devoted to examining the conservative tradition! [103 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Dan SchwartzDec 31, 2018 19:50246915
1"The Conservatives" (2009) by Patrick Allitt (Yale University Press) [357 words]RobertSep 26, 2018 15:25245072
11669 The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina & Antidisestablishmentarianism [806 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
RobertSep 14, 2018 11:14244863
1"The Virtue of Nationalism" by Yoram Hazony [224 words]RobertSep 10, 2018 11:23244798
2From "The Common Law" by Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (1881) [442 words]RobertSep 4, 2018 13:20244635
Empiricism is not the same as "Human Experience" [325 words]Michael SSep 4, 2018 20:07244635
(Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) [511 words]RobertSep 5, 2018 14:39244635
Who are the "great" philosophers? [158 words]Michael SSep 5, 2018 17:05244635
2The Six Philosophers: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume [287 words]RobertSep 5, 2018 21:10244635
1Πλάτων, Σωκρατης, Αριστοτέλης? No? [103 words]dhimmi no moreSep 6, 2018 07:56244635
Greek Philosophy? It's all Greek to me; but Job, Jesus and Shakespeare have given words to live by through the ages [583 words]Michael SSep 6, 2018 18:46244635
Are you a liberal, Robert? I assume you are. [109 words]Michael SSep 7, 2018 02:04244635
Footnote: The etymology of the word Europe [161 words]dhimmi no moreSep 7, 2018 08:28244635
1"The Chemistryb of the Bible" by Michael S. [313 words]RobertSep 7, 2018 15:42244635
1Yes, Greek Philosophy and the West! [96 words]dhimmi no moreSep 7, 2018 16:21244635
Plato, Athanasius and Western Society [457 words]Michael SSep 7, 2018 18:16244635
Plato, Athanasius, Nag Hammadi, Apocrypha, Arianism AND Islam [405 words]dhimmi no moreSep 10, 2018 16:52244635
Athanasius, Schisms and Primitivism [195 words]Michael SSep 11, 2018 01:51244635
1Today's Arianism! [204 words]dhimmi no moreSep 11, 2018 14:01244635
2In Memory of the victims of the 9/11 and we will "Never Forget" [204 words]dhimmi no moreSep 11, 2018 16:45244635
Is Jesus God? or are they two different characters? What does Vital tell us? [884 words]Michael SSep 29, 2018 19:02244635
2Conservative Liberals vs. Liberal Conservatives [354 words]RobertOct 1, 2018 14:18244635
Philosophy, Religion, Homosexuality and Conservatism [1365 words]Michael SOct 1, 2018 16:20244635
1Patriot (American Revolution) [Whigs & Tories] [282 words]RobertOct 1, 2018 21:56244635
Micheal: Maraya Khad Hu! The Peshitta, the Coptic Sahidic Bible, The Christian Arabic Bible and even the Qur'an [231 words]dhimmi no moreOct 2, 2018 07:22244635
Trinitarian excuse [181 words]Michael SOct 3, 2018 01:32244635
Conservatives and Liberals haven't really changed much through time. [819 words]Michael SOct 3, 2018 03:24244635
Michael: Nothing is ever simple and the Syriac word ܨܶܡܕܳܐ [300 words]dhimmi no moreOct 3, 2018 17:56244635
1Michael: Nothing is ever simple and the Syriac word ܨܶܡܕܳܐ Part two [267 words]dhimmi no moreOct 4, 2018 06:44244635
I want your opinion of the Sh'ma [93 words]Michael SOct 5, 2018 01:41244635
2The Yazidi woman Nadia Murad Basi awarded the Nobel Prize [339 words]dhimmi no moreOct 5, 2018 06:27244635
4Michael: ܫܡܥ (Syro-Aramaic) שמע (Hebrew) اسمع (Arabic) Or To Hear [595 words]dhimmi no moreOct 5, 2018 18:10244635
1Non-Simple, but Informative :-) [10 words]Michael SOct 5, 2018 19:57244635
Footnote: The Quranic word al-Samad [301 words]dhimmi no moreOct 6, 2018 07:58244635
Michael: Extant fragments of the NT and OT from the Syriac Peshitta ܦܫܝܛܬܐ or بسيطة in Arabic [26 words]dhimmi no moreOct 7, 2018 13:56244635
Confusion [220 words]Michael SOct 9, 2018 00:20244635
Michael: Nothing is simple! Echad, Khad, Wahid means one as in number one! Samad(a) means Bundle [326 words]dhimmi no moreOct 9, 2018 16:09244635
Muslim, Jewish and Christian views of God, all vs. the Bible. [649 words]Michael SOct 10, 2018 00:30244635
Michael: Ethnocentrism and the religions from the East (Levant, Mesopotamia and Israel/Palestine) [683 words]dhimmi no moreOct 10, 2018 14:25244635
1Who is really جمال خاشقجي or Jamal Khashoqji? Libya, Islamism, the Muslim Brotherhood and US politicians! [245 words]dhimmi no moreOct 12, 2018 06:40244635
1Who is really جمال خاشقجي or Jamal Khashoqji? Was he an Islamist? It seems that he was indeed an Islamist and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood [215 words]dhimmi no moreOct 13, 2018 11:19244635
Who was really جمال خاشقجي or Jamal Khashoqji? And what next? [162 words]dhimmi no moreOct 16, 2018 07:25244635
1Who is really جمال خاشقجي or Jamal Khashoqji? The Washington Post, Qatar, a Washington lobyist and the sordid Muslim Brotherhood [80 words]dhimmi no moreDec 28, 2018 09:57244635
2Yoram Hazony: Israeli Philosopher, Bible Scholar, Political Theorist, Modern Orthodox Jew [176 words]RobertAug 30, 2018 21:30244497
21567 "A learned commendation of the politique lawes of Englande / newly translated into Englishe by Robert Mulcaster." [332 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
RobertAug 29, 2018 23:07244479
2"On the Nature of Natural Law" by Sir John Fortescue [495 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
RobertAug 28, 2018 08:53244454
1Revolution [642 words]RobertAug 23, 2018 08:34244362
We should not overlook consevatives' anti-semitism [356 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
BorisAug 11, 2018 14:19244185
The Relationship between Conservatism and Liberalism: It's Complicated! [170 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Martin J. MallietAug 11, 2018 09:03244178
Liberalism is doomed to failure [148 words]Michael SAug 21, 2018 21:38244178
Aren't we all 'frogpondians' doomed to failure? [241 words]Martin J. MallietAug 23, 2018 06:33244178
The Word of God, vs. Human Reason, as the sustainer of reality [826 words]Michael SAug 25, 2018 07:56244178
Frogpondians and the Tower of Babel [104 words]Martin J. MallietAug 31, 2018 18:52244178
GO: Collect $200 salary as you pass [404 words]Michael SSep 1, 2018 03:00244178
Frogpondian deformations of faith and the egophanic frogpondian revolt [357 words]Martin J. MallietSep 4, 2018 15:02244178
Where do good ideas come from? [454 words]Michael SSep 4, 2018 17:48244178
Can the wisdom of ages be gained outside the cloud of philosophy? [122 words]Martin J. MallietSep 5, 2018 08:43244178
Petersonian Philosophy, and other vexations [692 words]Michael SSep 5, 2018 16:39244178
Jordan B. Peterson, philosophy, and the Cloud of Unknowing [213 words]Martin J. MallietSep 6, 2018 05:00244178
"Unseen", but very tangible [895 words]Michael SSep 6, 2018 19:38244178
The long goodbye [471 words]Martin J. MallietSep 7, 2018 17:46244178
More on "Where Good Ideas Come From" [452 words]Michael SSep 11, 2018 02:25244178
Liberalism flatters the ego [116 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Michael SAug 7, 2018 01:14244122
The historical fiction of Irrational Conservatism [242 words]Tom RossmanAug 3, 2018 11:30244064
common law vs Roman law [210 words]John TaylorAug 3, 2018 02:56244056
Sharia Courts. [55 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Reynald de ChatillonAug 3, 2018 01:39244055
Can Western style liberal democracy survive? [348 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Phil MondAug 1, 2018 20:26244025
3Man is not governed by reason [89 words]LBFAug 1, 2018 10:16244020
The Natural Law that Governs [113 words]K. JerniAug 1, 2018 02:21244013
Personal Experience [354 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
Dennis MiddlebrooksJul 31, 2018 12:49244000
1What happened to liberalism? [595 words]JeffAug 2, 2018 17:11244000
It's About Who Will Obey The Law - Liberals or Conservatives - What Were They Taught! [639 words]M ToveyAug 6, 2018 13:55244000
1Dennis: Your understanding is skewed. [434 words]Michael S.Aug 8, 2018 18:35244000
No, your Comments Are Skewed [296 words]Dennis MiddlebrooksAug 9, 2018 15:33244000
Ancient wisdom vs. Modern rationalism [35 words]Michael SAug 10, 2018 08:22244000
Ancient Wisdom Vs. Modern Rationalism [64 words]Dennis MiddlebrooksAug 10, 2018 20:11244000
James Madison [91 words]JeffAug 12, 2018 10:05244000
2What about the article cited? [317 words]LudvikusAug 24, 2018 23:25244000
Liberty, Truly Observed, Knows How to Survive in a Properly Governed Environment [386 words]M. ToveyAug 31, 2018 13:56244000
Conservatism's Structural Defect [286 words]
w/response from Daniel Pipes
John W HowardJul 31, 2018 12:03243999
1SOME conservatives definitely have "an idea what to do" -- and a good idea, at that [417 words]Michael SAug 8, 2018 13:58243999
the study of history [123 words]rwJul 31, 2018 06:17243992
Philosophies of political thought is important [151 words]Ilbert PhillipsJul 31, 2018 04:52243989
Atta boy ! [45 words]Christopher GameJul 31, 2018 02:56243985
Conservatism v. Liberalism: A Case Humanity Will Never Fully Adjudicate [373 words]M ToveyJul 30, 2018 19:20243978
Liberal democracy leads to inefficient governance. Societies with inefficient governance do not survive. [3 words]Phil MondAug 1, 2018 08:32243978
The most survivable society: Central Africa [226 words]Michael SAug 11, 2018 08:25243978

Comment on this item

Mark my comment as a response to Philosophy, Religion, Homosexuality and Conservatism by Michael S

Email me if someone replies to my comment

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

See recent outstanding comments.

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List
eXTReMe Tracker

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2020 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)