Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,632
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 594:
Line 594: + + + + + + + + + +
→1 Peter 2:16: response
# The passage about "licentiousness" - is this more a commentary on the 1 Peter passage? or is it trying to claim the point of view that those who advocate personal freedom in all forms are licentious (which is about morals - not freedom)?
# The passage about "licentiousness" - is this more a commentary on the 1 Peter passage? or is it trying to claim the point of view that those who advocate personal freedom in all forms are licentious (which is about morals - not freedom)?
--[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 17:07, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
--[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 17:07, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
:The problem goes back to an older version of the intro,
::''Liberal is a term used in politics to describe someone who favors personal freedom in all its forms[1], as long as it does not conflict with the freedom of others ('liber' means freedom in Latin).''
:This does not descibe liberalism, it describes licentiousnes. Now, there has always been a secular meaning to 'liber' or 'free', and a spiritual meaning. In the ancient world, a person who enjoyed 'liberty' could mean one of two things, (a) a Christian redeemed from the curse, or (b) a non-slave.
:So, who were this secular class of non-free persons, or slaves? They were ususally persons who lost thier liberty because they were either debtors or criminals.
:Now this article rightly picks up the discussion in the 18th century were state-funded prisons often replaced the institution of slavery in Western Europe, so the ancient meaning of a non-free person is largely moot at this time, and there was somewhat of a redefinition of terms. However, what was always regarded as non-free, i.e. in bondage to sin and death, still is regarded as such, and what was always regarded as licentious behavior, or one "who favors personal freedom in all its forms", does change the meaning of licentiousness either.
:So what do we conclude? Advocates of licentiousness (more properly 'licency') have tried to hijack the meaning of the term 'freedom' and 'liberty' for about 200 years now. It's an interesting question, who's meaning will prevail, the Biblical or the advocates of licentiousness. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:32, 5 April 2007 (EDT)