toldailytopic: The Royal wedding are you interested in it? How about the idea of a ro

Status
Not open for further replies.

Samstarrett

New member
Yea, that is a pretty bleak view he has.

Bleak?

Do you really think everyone's purpose is to worship something?

1) I would hesitate to describe the honor due a king as 'worship'.

2) Everyone's purpose? Not exactly. It's certainly not the totality of everyone's purpose. I do believe worshiping God is part of everyone's purpose. I also think it's in our nature to honor a king. I doubt if I'd call that our 'purpose', though.
 

Samstarrett

New member
Loyalty doesn't necessarily entail siding with someone in the wrong, but what it does imply is that one is committed to them in some way and that that commitment is an end in itself, which isn't good when it relates to a country. I see no reason why one should be committed to one's country in the first place, and even if one does happen to be favourably disposed toward it it should be because of some quality it - its state, culture or at a push geography - actually possesses. I fail to see why it being the place of one's birth should make any odds.

It sounds as though your taproot in Eden has been cut.
 

ebenz47037

Proverbs 31:10
Silver Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for April 26th, 2011 09:37 AM


toldailytopic: The Royal wedding are you interested in it? How about the idea of a royal family in general?


Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

I was really into Charles and Diana's wedding when I was a teenager. I think that burnt me out on the royal family. I have absolutely no interest in the wedding at all.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I like most members of my family, sure. For similar reasons that I like other people I've grown up alongside. I'd definitely side against one of them if they were in the wrong about something, though, and I'm certainly not proud to be a member. Glad, sure. Proud, no.

Agreed. Whenever anyone asks me if I'm proud to be English I say no. What's there to be prideful about? I didn't achieve anything in being born here but I'm certainly glad I was as oppose to poverty stricken countries and totalitarian regimes...

As to the wedding?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
 

red cardinal

New member
It seems that I am "odd man out". The royal weddings intrigue me. I watched when Charles and Diana got married, I will watch when William and Kate get hitched. It is history - monumental history in the making.

I guess I am a bit surprised that people find it so boring. It's not really much different than all the news coverage on the election or swearing in of the new pres in the USA or any of a number of spectacular events that people are interested in. Look at how people go insane when a celebrity like Michael Jackson died or Elvis? eeeeeee gads !!!!

I think the wedding appeals to the positive in the face of the wars and natural disasters. A kind of "reprieve" from the ugliness of the world right now. It's a real life fairy tale for the moment and I totally understand England's/UK's infatuation with the new princess to be. In the last 30 years they have gone through so much tragedy and now a high point. According to the reports there will be a billion people on the outside tuned in, so I guess I am one of tons who are stupid enough to be "bored" :chuckle:
 

Quincy

New member

Yea, I mean it's a rather sweeping statement to say that someone who doesn't idolize a king is going to idolize the likes of celebrities and prostitutes. I believe all humans are equal and exceptional. Some may be on a less than desired path but that doesn't make them lesser than anyone else. With proper understanding and support they can leave it. No amount of wealth or fame makes any person worth idolizing.


1) I would hesitate to describe the honor due a king as 'worship'.

I don't think most kings want to be honored. Maybe some started out that way but it always ends in wanting to be idolized. I don't think anyone who gains fame or fortune is above falling to egoity.

2) Everyone's purpose? Not exactly. It's certainly not the totality of everyone's purpose. I do believe worshiping God is part of everyone's purpose. I also think it's in our nature to honor a king. I doubt if I'd call that our 'purpose', though.

I can certainly respect and appreciate that you believe part of people's purpose to existence is worshipping God. I just don't believe humans should put another human on that level. Even if that isn't the people's intent upon placing a crown on his head, he'll end up thinking he is one.
 

Ktoyou

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for April 26th, 2011 09:37 AM


toldailytopic: The Royal wedding are you interested in it? How about the idea of a royal family in general?


[/SIZE][/i]

Oh yes, I have an invitation around here someplace? I wrote the Queen a short note wish her well, this time around. Sat to give my regards and deepest affections to the kids, Prince William & Catherine Middleton, and may they do us all proud!

Here is a picture of Queen Elizabeth, as if she is saying Kat, you be good now!
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
"Monarchy can easily be debunked, but watch the faces, mark well the debunkers. These are the men whose taproot in Eden has been cut: whom no rumour of the polyphony, the dance, can reach–men to whom pebbles laid in a row are more beautiful than an arch. Yet even if they desire mere equality, they cannot reach it. Where men are forbidden to honor a king, they honor millionaires, athletes or film stars instead–even famous prostitutes or gangsters. For spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served; deny it food, and it will gobble poison."

--C.S. Lewis

A prime example of the man's fluff at its worst.
 

Samstarrett

New member
Yea, I mean it's a rather sweeping statement to say that someone who doesn't idolize a king is going to idolize the likes of celebrities and prostitutes.

I doubt if Lewis, a Christian theologian, would have advocated idolatry of any kind. What he said was not 'idolize', but 'honor'. And if you don't think that people who don't honor kings are going to honor celebrities and prostitutes, well, just look around. That's pretty much whom American culture does honor.

I believe all humans are equal

With respect, I simply don't think that's the case. Some men are smart, some men are stupid. Some women are pretty, some women are plain. Some people are rich, some people are poor. Some people are honest, some people are crooks. The list goes on. I can think of very few respects in which 'all humans are equal'.

and exceptional.

If they're all equal, how can they also be exceptional? I am reminded of the movie 'The Incredibles', where Helen is taking her son Dash home from school.

Dash: But Dad always said our powers were nothing to be ashamed of! Our powers were what made us special!

Helen: :sigh: Everyone's special, Dash.

Dash: Which is another way of saying no one is.

I think the kid's on to something.

Some may be on a less than desired path but that doesn't make them lesser than anyone else.

I'm not sure what you mean. In what sense might a person be 'lesser than someone else'?

No amount of wealth or fame makes any person worth idolizing.

True. But certain characteristics might make him worth honoring.

I don't think most kings want to be honored. Maybe some started out that way but it always ends in wanting to be idolized.

Let me try to understand your view better.

1) Where do you draw the line between honor and idolization?

2) Why do you think most kings seek the latter?

I don't think anyone who gains fame or fortune is above falling to egoity.

Probably not, but if anyone can be, it's a king. A king did nothing to earn his position and he knows it. This leaves some room for humility which is lacking with a merely rich person who won his own station in life, and completely absent with politicians, who are incredibly egotistical people, as a rule.

I can certainly respect and appreciate that you believe part of people's purpose to existence is worshipping God. I just don't believe humans should put another human on that level.

I certainly wouldn't want to put any man on God's level, except of course the Man Who is God.

Even if that isn't the people's intent upon placing a crown on his head, he'll end up thinking he is one.

I think a king, on account of not having earned his position and being raised all his life to believe in his sacred duty to his country and take it very seriously, is probably the least likely of any leader to think he is a god. Compare with politicians(arrogant, egotistical types who seek power over others, the lot of them).
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
Why the world do these monarchists types always act as if kings never abuse their power and take so much umbrage when you point out this little fact?

Anyone willing to kiss the ring of a king is willing to do whatever he's told and frankly, I don't need that kind of neighbor.
 

Samstarrett

New member
Why the world do these monarchists types always act as if kings never abuse their power and take so much umbrage when you point out this little fact?

I don't act that way. Of course kings abuse their power. So do presidents and dictators. Any class of people who possess power will contain some abusers of that power. Point?
 

Granite

New member
Hall of Fame
I don't act that way. Of course kings abuse their power. So do presidents and dictators. Any class of people who possess power will contain some abusers of that power. Point?

That a monarch can do greater damage, something else you people never admit. Or that the country that gave you the privilege to spout this ridiculous childish rhetoric was founded on the rejection of this divine right of kings nonsense.
 

Samstarrett

New member
That a monarch can do greater damage, something else you people never admit.

Well, I'm looking at the state of the democratic republics of the world compared with the old monarchies and the surviving real monarchies and not seeing that to be the case. Why should it be the case that a monarch is more dangerous than a president? :idunno:

Or that the country that gave you the privilege to spout this ridiculous childish rhetoric was founded on the rejection of this divine right of kings nonsense.

Are you suggesting that in a monarchy I would not be allowed to promote monarchy? :confused:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top