Social justice

From PreparingYou
Jump to: navigation, search
"Social Justice" is a term you hear almost every day. But did you ever hear anybody define what it actually means? Jonah Goldberg of the American Enterprise Institute tries to pin this catchall phrase to the wall. In doing so, he exposes the not-so-hidden agenda of those who use it. What sounds so caring and noble turns out to be something very different.__Time 5:31

Social justice

Social justice is supposed to be a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society. But over the centuries ideas creep into the thinking of society that actually abandons what is fair and just for the individual under the guise of social justice.

Further, social justice is often used for the reallocation of resources based on an arbitrary standard imposed by society often through government.

According to a UN report on Social Justice, the term is defined, “Social justice may be broadly understood as the fair and compassionate distribution of the fruits of economic growth. Social justice is not possible without strong and coherent redistributive policies conceived and implemented by public agencies” with no mention of the "private organizations" or the individuals who establish them. "The UN report goes on to insist that: “Present-day believers in an absolute truth identified with virtue and justice are neither willing nor desirable companions for the defenders of social justice.”

  • "Translation: if you believe truth and justice are concepts independent of the agenda of the forces of progress as defined by the left, you are an enemy of social justice." Jonah Goldberg for Prager University

This thinking that social justice is achieved through government force is contrary to the original use of the term and contrary if not self-defeating and even destructive to the goals claimed by modern social justice warriors.

Some claim that the concept of social justice can be traced through the theology of Augustine of Hippo and the philosophy of Thomas Paine but which concept of social justice are they referring to? The term social justice has been defined and redefined over the years.

While Augustine never used the term social justice his "vita socialis" can be "understood as residing in neighbourly love, grounded in his understanding of the common origin of humanity." [1] He believed that society ran on love and "What does love look like? It has the hands to help others. It has the feet to hasten to the poor and needy. It has eyes to see misery and want. It has the ears to hear the sighs and sorrows of men. That is what love looks like." The idea of using the power of government to force equity by taking from one group to provide for another would be in opposition to John the Baptist, Christ and the whole Bible and injustice. Augustine believed that "In the absence of justice, what is sovereignty but organized robbery?"

In 1840 a priest named Luigi Taparelli using the term social justice advocated that levels of society, having both rights and duties, should be recognized and supported by individuals as members sub-societies[2]. These individuals should cooperate rationally avoiding competition and conflict.

The work of another priest Antonio Rosmini-Serbati who pioneered the concept of social justice in 1830 with the Institute of Charity {Societas a charitate nuncupata). Charity is the antitheses of forced redistribution of wealth.

We see the same distinction made later when Friedrich Hayek criticizes the concept of social justice. He is not talking about individuals working in small groups operating by charity with an equality of choice and opportunity but those societies engaged in the use of authoritarian powers while lacking the accepted moral standard of Ty shalt not covet anything that is thy neighbors".

“While an equality of rights under a limited government is possible and an essential condition of individual freedom, a claim for equality of material position can be met only by a government with totalitarian powers.” Friedrich A. von Hayek, The Mirage of Social Justice

Early Christians' viewed being a believer and having a belief in God much different than the Modern Christian. The early Church was doing things much different than we see in the modern Church today. But there was a difference between public religion and Pure Religion which produced the Christian conflict with Rome.

Comments on "Social costs"
"Social costs"[3] can be examined in economics but also in society itself. Society is often "An association or company of persons united together by mutual consent..." but may merely be "the people in general".
"Social costs" in the kingdom model are easier to calculate. Since the economy is substantive and real-time without usury there is little dependence on debt and therefore less "market failure". Secondly, because the power of governing remains divided within the hands of the individual under basic property rights the ideas of government intervention to regulate is already on the head of every individual people must make "rational" choices for their actions since they will pay the consequences of their action.
There can be unaccounted social cost, externalities, and some market failure but they become more irrelevant because responsibility is both in the hands of the individual and spread among them.
What needs to be accomplished in the case of "externalities" were done through private investment or Administered through the Church in the wilderness and the early Church by freewill offerings to the minister of choice within the network of tens. This competitive choice compelled a servant government to provide the most for the least cost. It also allowed titular representation as a pure Republic without the compromise of personal rights.
This was not done through an invented currency which would be in violation of the warnings about the Golden calf and One purse. The monetary system of the original Common Law and the law of nature and nature's God always depends on present value or some form of Commodity money. To create an unlicensed exchange is a crime in most States.
Then there is the matter of Social Justice which is often defined as:
  • Social justice is a concept of fair and just relations between the individual and society.
The terms "fair and just" are relative terms often determined by cultural morality and private virtue.
  • Social justice is also defined or characterized in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society.
The question may and needs to be asked "distribution" by whom?
In the Kingdom model, the distribution is first by the individual producer in a substantive economy not by benefactors who exercise authority one over the other.
In the Kingdom model the sacrifices or the Corban of the people is the result of freewill offerings] in charity an not the result of taxation or force because such systems would make the word of God to none effect.
The power of distribution is "within you" the individual in the kingdom model.
Early Israel and the early Church were also pure Republics, what Tacitus called Libera Res Publica, where the people were free from things public and the leaders were not rulers because they were titular.
They organized themselves in a network of free assemblies by Tens which was the purpose of feast gatherings like Pentecost.
The Temples and Altars had a purpose.
People covet those benefits provided by the Fathers of earth and are entangled in the yoke of bondage.
* What did Rome have in common with the world today?
* What are the two types of government welfare?
* Were the Levites the church in the wilderness?
* What did the Levites and the early Church have in common?

Socrates (through Plato's dialogue Crito) developed the idea of a social contract, whereby people are expected to follow the rules of a society, and accept its burdens because they have accepted its benefits. This means the more benefits one receives from society the more burdens one will be expected to endure. If the benefits are provided through force by way of taxation then the burdens will be imposed by the same force through the power of the State. If the benefits are provided by way of charity through freewill offerings then the obligations to society will also be performed through freewill choice. In that simple truth, we may see why The Way of Christ sets men free and all other ways bring man back into bondage.

If "Justice is, for Plato, at once a part of human virtue and the bond, which joins man together in society" then "Justice is an order and duty of the parts of the soul, it is to the soul as health is to the body."[4] The soul of society becomes the soul of Cain. You, may at any time, choose to go the way of Cain, Nimrod, Pharaoh or Caesar which will alter your soul and the soul of society to which you cling or you may repent and go The Way of Christ seeking the kingdom of God and his righteousness through which you will be born again.

If you believe that it is okay to force your neighbor to provide for your benefit through the power of the State then by reciprocation through a continuation of that precept it is also okay for the State to impose obligations and duties upon all of society. That too is social justice.

The early Church and the early Christian society shared a common communion through fervent charity and the Eucharist of Christ. They were not only excluded from the benefits of those of those benefactors who exercised authority, those "Fathers of the earth", for conscience sake but eventually they were barred by legal constraints. The Mark of the Beast is a test of the resolve of the soul for those who do not receive it but also for those who have.

"And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done [it] unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done [it] unto me." Matthew 25:40

Capitalism does not need to lead to a "few rich oligarchs" if the people remain generally moral. Among a basically moral people who do not covet their neighbors' good and actively care about their neighbor as much as themselves, there is no threat of an oligarchy taking control.

Socialism requires the same general moral people who care about others, but such people would have no need for socialism because they would already be sharing what they produce through systems of charity without the exercising of authority as a collective. Without a moral people who care about their neighbor's rights to their own production, a socialist system becomes a nation of tyrants where the mob takes away the rights of others and the people become weaker, with laziness and self-indulgence in their lifestyle.

Social justice supposedly assigns rights and duties in the institutions of society, which enables people to receive the basic benefits and burdens of cooperation, but in the kingdom of God the distribution is based on moral criteria in order to produce a fruitful outcome. This is a duty of Religion, and to make it Pure Religion you must distribute the true needs of the individual by the individual for the intrinsic benefit for the individual while attending to the weightier matters including the use of good judgment and mercy with diligent and persistent faith.

But a more selfish and arrogant "social warrior" imagines the relevant institutions created often include taxation, compelled social insurance, public health, public school, and public services financed by that taxation ... and debt. They imagine that these covetous practices used to ensure fair distribution of wealth, and equal opportunity, are their salvation. Polybius makes it clear that such patterns corrupts society. Peter says it will make you merchandise and curse children.

In the review of the book "Human Rights versus Legal Rights: why the church must separate from the state", part two of the four-part series deals with social cost and social justice.

Social costs

  • "Open rebuke is better than secret love." Proverbs 27:5

Play #3 in new window or download

Social Justice

  • "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent." Revelation 3:19

Play #4 in new window or download

see also Part 1 and 2 of the series.

Is Social justice a form of public religion?

Is a belief in Social justice and those who enforce it a belief in strange gods?

Critical theory views their own version of reality through a lens of power, dividing people into groups of oppressed or oppressor through rhetoric focusing on race, class, gender, abilities, and age.

Critical theory

Critical theory is a philosophical[5] approach to culture, and especially to literature, that seeks to confront the social, historical, and ideological forces and structures that produce and constrain it. The term is applied particularly to the work of the Frankfurt School. Critical theory is the reflective assessment and critique of society and culture by applying knowledge from the social sciences and the humanities to reveal and challenge power structures. Critical theory has origins in sociology and also in literary criticism. The sociologist Max Horkheimer described a theory as critical insofar as it seeks "to liberate human beings from the circumstances that enslave them."

Critical theory is not the result of critical thinking which "is the analysis of facts to form a judgment. The subject is complex, and several different definitions exist, which generally include the rational, skeptical, unbiased analysis, or evaluation of factual evidence.

Critical thinking on the other hand is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities as well as a commitment to overcome native egocentrism[6] and sociocentrism.[7] It is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment."

Clarke Scheibe, Director of the L’Abri Fellowship in Victoria, British Columbia stated the idea that “social justice is the end goal of Christianity.”

If the kingdom of God is to be realized in our day we may need to change our thinking in the “pursuit of justice” to a moral “pursuit of justice” void of the covetous practices so common today among Modern Christians

It is the inadequate approach of modern Christians in the practice of pure Religion which has "corroded their beliefs, corroded their confidence in God and in the Bible.”

We are commanded by Christ to pursue justice in attending to the "weightier matters".

Audio Broadcasts
Download Recording #1 or press play
Download Recording #2 or press play

The Critical Commune

Scheibe considered several questions. “How did we get here?” “What is at work?” “How does it relate to Biblical Christianity?” And finally, “is there a way forward?”[8]

Rick went on to say, "Some chose “to live in communes” away from the “tyranny of capitalism.”" But by definition Capitalism cannot be tyranny.

In America, you can start a cooperative or move into a socialist commune away from what people imagine to be a “tyranny of capitalism.” In truth, there is no “tyranny of capitalism” because Capitalism is merely "an economic system based on private ownership, control, and operation of the means of production and their beneficial use. But there is certainly tyranny in "proposed silencing conservatives in the interest of progress" leftist ideologies like those of Herbert Marcus who was a German-American philosopher, sociologist, and political theorist, associated with the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory.

There is no room in a socialist State to start your own capitalist free-market commune.

What we see among those following “cultural Marxism,” is that revenge and oppression of conservatives are not considered a "heinous crime" against those who dare to disagree because their disagreement is considered "hate speech".

If we believe the word of the Bible as it claims in: Isaiah 63:4 "For the day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come." and in Romans 12:19 "Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord." Vengeance is not ours to pursue.

Dividing of the world into the oppressors and the oppressed, or the “powerful, or advantaged,” and the “powerless, or disadvantage” will alter society and the way it thinks

This controls the way people informally relate to one another, resulting in unjust outcomes.

Those who embrace critical theory may not reject “the American dream” of prospering but may reject the self-denying nature of Christianity. he real church does not "play a part” in “patterns of oppression.” "Christianity" may include self-denial but only so that you may prosper in good health.

3 John 1:2 "Beloved, I wish above all things that thou mayest prosper and be in health, even as thy soul prospereth. " 2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Liberation theology

Liberation theology began in the 1960s but the oppression of the poor is not “the number one consequence of idolatry.” It is the oppression of the middle class and even the rich to provide free bread which was “the number one consequence of idolatry.” It was the forced contributions of the foreigner and then of the citizens to provide social security and free bread that gave rise to idolatry.

Critical Theory focuses on the thoughts and assumptions people have about what is just, right, and fair which reinforces oppression. Freeing oneself from the oppressive ideas of dominant groups is what Israel did in Egypt. But their tactics were decidedly different than the modern "woke generation". The Bible is about "liberating marginalized groups" through those groups faithfully practicing of "Pure Religion" in a "daily ministration" of "charity". In fact “intersectionality” is the antitheses of true Christianity.

Romans 10:12 "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him."
Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Repressive tolerance

Rioters were able to do all that under the protection of "peaceful protesters". If the protestors were not helping the police stop the rioters or stopping them on their own then they are guilty of what BLM would call "Repressive tolerance".
America as "the least systemic oppression" in the world is a big deal. The most systemic racism in America is affirmative action which has abused thousands of of Asians and Hispanic and whites and hurt tens of thousands of Blacks.
I do not believe there is a better country in the world for people of Color to pursue life, liberty and success but the protests and subsequent riots are working hard to change that. None if the problems society is seeing today are new in history but almost no one knows history. It is the government system of free bread that brought Rome to its decline an fall because it altered the nature of the people and therefore society. It has been altering Americans and therefore America for the last 90 years. Unless people wake up to the actual cause there will be no way back. The protests and subsequent riots are a distraction doing far more damage than good.

Repressive tolerance is the passive acceptance of social and governmental practices, policies and actions which restrict freedom in an absolute sense.[9]

“Repressive tolerance”, grows in the seed of vanity and pride not humility and sacrifice. We see the idea of repression only in the enemies of Christ, not in his followers. Ambrose professed Christ but called on the the persecution of those not like his form of Christians.

Critical theory will not “eliminate oppressive structures,” nor “create a unified society” without both a critical and moral study of an honest and "reflective assessment and critique of society and culture". It will always result in “a new oppressor class.” You cannot rid your society of oppression by changing who is allowed to oppress.

Polybius said it "The masses continue with an appetite for benefits and the habit of receiving them by way of a rule of force and violence. The people, having grown accustomed to feed at the expense of others and to depend for their livelihood on the property of others... institute the rule of violence; and now uniting their forces massacre, banish, and plunder, until they degenerate again into perfect savages and find once more a master and monarch."

Oppression is not the result of Capitalism but is the choice of those slothful in love.

  • Exodus 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
  • Exodus 23:9 Also thou shalt not oppress a stranger: for ye know the heart of a stranger, seeing ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
  • Leviticus 25:14 And if thou sell ought unto thy neighbour, or buyest ought of thy neighbour’s hand, ye shall not oppress one another:
  • Leviticus 25:17 Ye shall not therefore oppress one another; but thou shalt fear thy God: for I am the LORD your God.
  • Proverbs 3:31 Envy thou not the oppressor, and choose none of his ways.
  • Proverbs 14:31 He that oppresseth the poor reproacheth his Maker: but he that honoureth him hath mercy on the poor.
  • Proverbs 22:16 He that oppresseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want.
  • Proverbs 22:22 Rob not the poor, because he is poor: neither oppress the afflicted in the gate:
  • Proverbs 28:3 A poor man that oppresseth the poor is like a sweeping rain which leaveth no food.
  • Proverbs 28:16 The prince that wanteth understanding is also a great oppressor: but he that hateth covetousness shall prolong his days.
  • James 2:5 Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? 6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? * 7 Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? 8 ¶ If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: 9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

The way forward is the way of Christ which does not include the sloth and covetousness of modern Christians.

  • Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
  • 2 Peter 2:18 For when they speak great swelling words of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, through much wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
  • 19 While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
  • 20 For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.

A questioner asked if the categories of oppression identified by critical theory are compatible with the idea of oppression presented in Scripture. Scheibe responded that he does see instances of structural injustice but modern governments do not have the structure recommended in the Bible. Modern governments have instituted systems that follow in the patterns of Cain and his Altars of force, Nimrod and his top-down system taking and taking warned about in 1 Samuel 8, Pharaoh and His corvee, and the Pharisees and their Corban. None of their modern constitutions include the five restrictions[10] the Bible tells us to write down and read to any ruler or executive power we grant authority.

Critical theory, however, by its very principles, uncritically accepts the claims people in grouped categories deemed oppressed. The possibility that those classed as oppressed might, in fact, be oppressors in some situations is excluded or even licensed.

Another questioner observed from his experience where critical theory is widely accepted that “no matter how kind you are, and gentle you are” people cannot be made to see the bad consequences of implementing critical theory. Scheibe, according to the article, responded that where critical theory is widely accepted, it may be difficult if not impossible to engage the situation from a Christian standpoint. ut what is a "Christian standpoint" if we apply critical thinking to our interpreted view of modern Christianity versus early Christianity?

It was asked at what point it becomes necessary to leave an institution dominated by critical theory, and move, if possible, to new institutions. Scheibe said he encouraged people to remain in their institutions if possible, but also said that there may be times when one has to leave institutions that have become pervasively corrupt with critical theory. He said that he was thankful that homeschooling was still legal in Canada, and even many people who are not Christians homeschool their children to avoid the radicalism of critical theory taught in public schools from kindergarten. Regrettably, he warns that “the current liberal government of Canada is trying to figure out how to get to the homeschool kids.”

We too advocate homeschooling, home health, home industry but do not tell people, because His Holy Church has no exercising authority to do so, to not gather with others. We do emphasize and facilitate gathering in free assemblies in the pattern of Tens as commanded by Christ. We do advocate a daily ministration of Pure Religion and discourage dependence upon the modern systems of Corban and Social Security provided by modern systems like Rome through public religion. We show how those modern systems wreak of the covetous practices of socialism which Peter tells us will entangle us again in the yoke of bondage through the elements of the world, make us "merchandise" and even "curse children" making them surety for debt.

It was also observed that people from Christian backgrounds affected by critical theory tend to regard evangelism as a kind of aggression. Scheibe responded that the gospel can be truncated either by eliminating the effort to win souls to Christ or ignoring injustices in society. He said, however, that it is “really through the conversion of hearts those structural changes come.” Critical Theory’s Advent in the Christian World, and How to Respond by RICK PLASTERER

It is “really through the conversion of hearts" through repentance that those structural changes come.”. And with only true repentance, a changing of the mind, may those "structural changes come”.

We understand that if people examine with true critical thinking the scriptures, the whole word and way, the commands of Christ, and the warnings of Christ and his disciples that they will have to begin to understand what the wages of unrighteousness, the benefits of the world that spot their religion include. With honest humility, there can be true repentance which will bring the biblical structure to society that Moses spoke of and Christ appointed for His Kingdom of God. Through that structure under the perfect law of liberty we may all seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness. That structure must include a daily ministration through the charity of pure Religion, not the covetous practices of public religion through the "benefactors" required to operate a socialist utopia[11] which degenerates the people into "perfect savages" in what always becomes a dystopia.[12] To accomplish and obtain what we should be seeking the people need to gather in the tens as commanded by Christ and the ordained ministers of His Church need to comply with His direct instructions for His disciples.

Belief in God

Description Jordan Peterson vs Susan Blackmore • Do we need God to make sense of life? If that question is to be answered other terms must be defined. Certainly the word "God" but also words like belief and religion and even the word life. Jordan B Peterson who considers himself religious debates the psychology of religious belief with atheist academic Susan Blackmore in the first episode of The Big Conversation. Susan is not grateful to "God" but to the "Universe". She does not see a need for "religion" because she defines religion, like so many others today, as "what you think about supreme being" but she does believe in public religion and the "gods many" required to operate a socialist utopia with health care and social programs that make life good but always at the expense of her neighbor. By subtly changing the definition of religion from a duty to an opinion about God people did not see the establishment of public Social Security as the transference of a religious duty to a government that exercises authority. The atheist still believes in religion and gods but they now call it social justice and government. Instead of depending on charity and hope they choose to take away the choice of the individual and apply force to accomplish their covetous practices. Polybius and the prophets warned us of the result of such choices. Time 47 min

The question "Do you Believe in God?" creates at least two more questions that must be answered first.

What do you mean by "belief"?

What do you mean by "God"?

Without a clear answer to those two questions, there may be no honestly true answer to the first.

One of the first questions that must be answered to come to an honest discussion of God and belief is "What is religion?"

Today we commonly think that religion is what we think about God or a supreme being. But that is not the original definition. Religion was ir centuries and at the time of Christ a "duty to God and our fellowman". That duty included the actions of love both for God and our neighbor and even the stranger and our enemy. For a Christian, the question should be "What is Pure Religion?"

For centuries "divine law" or "divine will" was defined as "right reason". Mankind was supposedly made in the image of God but it appears that many people have chosen to remake God in their own image or at least in their imagination. This has been done in the name of religion but again what is the meaning of Religion. This imagined God or Jesus is the essence of idolatry. It is also at the core of all the evil or wickedness or iniquity done in the name of religion. Without a willingness to critically look at the whole gospel of the kingdom the whole world may be deceived and brought under a strong delusion.

Most Atheists simply rename the gods of their life but they still believe there is a need for something greater than themselves. Socialism is the religion you get when you have no Pure Religion.

Those who are willing to use religious terms see the universe as created by someone identified as God who is even called the "Creator".[13] That "Divine Creator" built into creation a Divine pattern of "cause and effect" with uniformity throughout the observable universe.

It is clear that "God" or a "god" is someone or something greater than ourselves. If religion is how you perform your duty to that "God" or "gods" and your fellowman and pure religion is performing that duty to your fellow man through love and charity rather than the force. ear, and fealty required in the socialist State then there are a lot of modern Christians who say they believe in God but remain workers of iniquity.

Understanding why Christ commanded the His student ministers to organize the people in patterns of tens before there was to be a distribution of the loaves and fishes made available by sharing through charity may call us to a better comprehension of the importance of fervent charity in the practice of Pure Religion. That of course would be true repentance.

Some Questions

More Questions

To find the answers, we must seek and strive to do what Jesus said the way He said to do it... Including attending to the Weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith which include caring for the needs of our neighbors and the widows and orphans of our society through Pure Religion in matters of health, education, and welfare. We are NOT to do so by the Covetous Practices of modern governments.

The Way of Christ was like neither the way of the world nor the governments of the gentiles who depend on benefactors who exercise authority. Christ's ministers and true Christians do not depend upon systems of social welfare that force the contributions of the people like the corban of the Pharisees which made the word of God to none effect. Many people have been deceived to go the way of Balaam and the Nicolaitan and out of The Way of Christ.

The Christian conflict of the first century Church appointed by Christ was because they would not apply to the fathers of the earth for benefits but instead relied upon a voluntary network providing a daily ministration to the needy of society through Faith, Hope, and Charity by way of freewill offerings of the people, for the people, and by the people through the perfect law of liberty in Free Assemblies according to the ancient pattern of Tuns or Tens.

The modern Christians are in need of repentance.

"Follow me!" —Jesus the Christ.


Join The Living Network of The Companies of Ten
The Living Network | Join Local group | About | Purpose | Guidelines | Network Removal
Contact Minister | Fractal Network | Audacity of Hope | Network Links


  1. Chiba, Shin (1995). "Hannah Arendt on Love and the Political: Love, Friendship, and Citizenship". The Review of Politics. 57 (3): 505–535 [507]. doi:10.1017/S0034670500019720. JSTOR 1408599
  2. sub-societies "a body of individuals living as members of a community."
  3. Social cost in economics may be distinguished from "private cost". ... The social cost is also considered to be the private cost plus externalities. Rational choice theory often assumes that individuals consider only the costs they themselves bear when making decisions, not the costs that may be borne by others.
  4. "20th WCP: Plato's Concept Of Justice: An Analysis", D.R. Bhandari.
  5. Philosophical, relating or devoted to the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence.
  6. Egocentrism thinking only of oneself, without regard for the feelings or desires of others; self-centered.
  7. Sociocentrism a tendency to assume the superiority or rightness of one's own social group.
  8. Critical Theory’s Advent in the Christian World, and How to Respond by Rick Plasterer
  9. The Frankfurt School theorist Herbert Marcuse coined the term in an essay of that title for a book co-written with Robert Wolff and Barrington Moore, Critique of Pure Tolerance (1965). Repressive tolerance, Marcuse argues, takes two main forms: (i) the unthinking acceptance of entrenched attitudes and ideas, even when these are obviously damaging to other people, or indeed the environment (the painfully slow response to warnings about climate change and environmental degradation might be seen as an example of this); and (ii) the vocal endorsement of actions that are manifestly aggressive towards other people (the popular support in the US and the UK in the aftermath of 9/11 and 7/7 for the respective government's attempts to override or limit habeas corpus is a clear example of this). Genuine tolerance, Marcuse argues, can only exist in a situation of intolerance for these limits on real freedom. Slavoj *Žižek's books Violence (2008) and In Defence of Lost Causes (2008) continue and update this line of thought.
  10. Deuteronomy 17
  11. A utopia, from the Greek words meaning "not a place", is only "an imagined place or state of things in which everything is perfect."
  12. A dystopia is an imagined state or society in which there is great suffering or injustice, typically one that is totalitarian or post-apocalyptic.
  13. Ecclesiastes 12:1 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;
    Isaiah 40:28 Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the LORD, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.
    Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
    1 Peter 4:19 Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator.
  14. Matthew 20:25-26 But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister;
    Mark 10:42-43 But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you: but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister:
    Luke 22:25-26 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

About the author

To read more go to "His Holy Church" (HHC)