Superficiality Not Merely A Political Issue - But It is Definitely a Social One

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Nov 16, 2012 at 14:03

Clearly, you do not understand where I have come from; nor do I expect that you would even consider that while calling someone chauvinist whose understanding of Biblical principles is beside the point (a chauvinist did not write them); in a modernist's perspective is such an observation of chauvinism made. But you are right, in the current politically correct venue, I am considered a chauvinist.

Jesus Christ spoke to many people; but His first devotees that took Him on faith after His resurrection WERE THE WOMEN. And yet His mother was as obedient to Elohim as any who called Him LORD.

That being said, by the modern context, people of all sorts of venues are trying so hard to either rewrite the Bible according to modernist humanist perspectives; or as is being done in the American military, delete all such references and reliance altogether, even in spite of Biblical prophetical occurrences happening every day now. That's one basis of my world view; and there are many female acquaintances that do agree.

The cause that's lost is not me; but the cause of an America that has begun to resort further to humanist secular values to solve internal and world problems; and if Europe is not already a visible clue of how that does not work, other humanists' values have not worked yet either, now have they? As an aside, the humainsts of Israel are being targeted by a PC worldview as this is being written.

But back to Dr. Pipes' premise, his surmising of superficiality in American politics can trace its roots deep into American history, going back to the emergence of anti-Scriptural sentiments during the industrial revolution. But after all the efforts to wrest America from its former moral standings, the pendulum that in times past allowed for course corrections may no longer return to the basis of America's Constitutional formation. That is what is lost now.

For the record, I have never heard that Chauvin was a Biblical scholar; so an inference that following Biblical principles is Chauvinist is a new one on me.

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".