This is both insightful and impactful! It emphasizes the need for thoughtful reflection and open dialogue. Your analysis highlights the importance of fostering these conversations to promote unity, mutual respect, and the healing of our nation. Thank you! ~ Angela J
Professor Mitchell, thank you for providing this shortened version of your important message. In some ways you are like a modern day John the Baptist. People of faith must tell the truths of God to our dying culture. In some (most?) respects, I hold myself and the Christian community to blame for the mess we (the country) are now in. Please, continue to spread this message. And if I may…keep finding fewer words with which to convey it. This would help spread your ideas to the average listener, whose attention span isn’t as long as it used to be. Thx and God bless you and your work! (h/t to podcaster Aaron Renn, the person who alerted me to your voice. )
Good analysis. Professor Mitchell's solution reminds me of the late Neil Postman's solution, which can be found in his book "Building a Bridge to the 18th Century: How the Past Can Improve Our Future."
We can't "solve" a guilt problem because history is in the past and there is no way to solve the injustices of the past, which is why all that is left to God.
But why is the sin of the past on us? Why should we feel guilt over the actions of others? And what is the connection between the sin of Adam and slavery and the holocaust?
If God is sinless, pure, and inherently good, then why/how does he create mankind who is inherently the antithesis of him? How can sin come from sinless? How can evil come from good? It is these questions that are a reason why the one true Church, the Orthodox Church, teaches that we are the bearers of the consequences of original sin. We bear the consequence of original sin through the death that was introduced into the world through Adam. But we can't be responsible for a sin that we never committed or even influenced to commit, unless you believe in the mormon philosophy of your spirit existing before conception. Until Western Christianity comes to grips with this apparent paradox of original sin, how can we the Church ever administer to others who are in need of a savior?
Man-kind was created with a will, just like God. We can choose to trust, love, and obey God, or we can choose our own way. Original sin affected all of creation so that man is born into a world that is fallen and a relationship with God that is imperfect. Original sin is like a house built on a faulty foundation; nothing is in proper alignment. The choices of one affect us all. When Adam chose to sin, he set off a chain reaction that affects us to this day. Our sin does the same. Similarly, Jesus's choice to die and redeem all of creation set off a chain reaction as does our repentance and acceptance of Him. It's not a paradox, God is growing those who accept Christ into perfect beings whose will is to do good and right rather than to sin. He didn't create robots.
Adam's sin introduced death, and now mankind chooses death through individual sinful acts, which makes us guilty. However, we have the option of choosing life by accepting Jesus.
I can give a simple answer to the Guilt this video talks about. I single word that I severely doubt will ever happen, because in spite of what Jesus Christ has done in the Passion, it just plain does not exist, never had, and never will, but we solely need it: Forgiveness. We need to forgive. Even when it is not asked, we need to forgive. The ones who are guilty cannot do anything to repay them, especially when they were not born yet when it was committed. They cannot do anything about it. We as a people can do nothing else but forgive. People need to forgive. Unconditionally and Completely. But alas, it will be the one thing that will never happen. And for this I grieve. Did Jesus die on the cross for nothing?
So in the French Revolution the stained one would be the noble and the innocent the peasant. In communism, the stained one would be the capitalist and the innocent the Proletariat. In this new identity politics pseuod-religion, the stained one is the Deplorable and the innocent, as Prof. Mitchell says, is women, trans, blacks (in Europe: immigrants from Africa, Musilms, etc.).
Great analysis but imagery is important. In getting back to truth, even the images we show should try to approximate this truth. Placed alongside profound messages like this, images of white people rather than middle eastern looking people in Biblical art undermine the genuineness of what's being said because it reinforces a subtle type of identity politics by inaccurately making our Savior in the image of a pure, heroic, white martyr. This type of inaccurate imagrey is loaded and brings along baggage that promts a rejection of the message. Beautiful art is wonderful, but we should aim to be consistent in messaging and imagery when having these important conversations.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
This man is very underrated. He is the only political philosopher who knows what is going on.
One of the best political thinkers of our time. I have learned a lot from Prof. Mitchell.
More from Mitchell -PLEASE!
This is both insightful and impactful! It emphasizes the need for thoughtful reflection and open dialogue. Your analysis highlights the importance of fostering these conversations to promote unity, mutual respect, and the healing of our nation. Thank you! ~ Angela J
Professor Mitchell, thank you for providing this shortened version of your important message. In some ways you are like a modern day John the Baptist. People of faith must tell the truths of God to our dying culture. In some (most?) respects, I hold myself and the Christian community to blame for the mess we (the country) are now in. Please, continue to spread this message. And if I may…keep finding fewer words with which to convey it. This would help spread your ideas to the average listener, whose attention span isn’t as long as it used to be. Thx and God bless you and your work! (h/t to podcaster Aaron Renn, the person who alerted me to your voice. )
Good analysis. Professor Mitchell's solution reminds me of the late Neil Postman's solution, which can be found in his book "Building a Bridge to the 18th Century: How the Past Can Improve Our Future."
Thank you for posting, I have to watch it again to understand and process all of your points. Well done.
Thank you, Professor Mitchell for she4dding light on the crisis and what to do about it so our civil society can survive.
We can't "solve" a guilt problem because history is in the past and there is no way to solve the injustices of the past, which is why all that is left to God.
But why is the sin of the past on us? Why should we feel guilt over the actions of others? And what is the connection between the sin of Adam and slavery and the holocaust?
Excellent explanation with antidotes.
Great!
Brilliant ❤
AMEN
Great video and ideas.
! That's my reaction. !
The penal substitutionary ship has sailed.
Look to the East!
Taking the individual seriously is the only way out. That's the classical liberal American solution. Try it. You'll like it.
If God is sinless, pure, and inherently good, then why/how does he create mankind who is inherently the antithesis of him? How can sin come from sinless? How can evil come from good?
It is these questions that are a reason why the one true Church, the Orthodox Church, teaches that we are the bearers of the consequences of original sin. We bear the consequence of original sin through the death that was introduced into the world through Adam. But we can't be responsible for a sin that we never committed or even influenced to commit, unless you believe in the mormon philosophy of your spirit existing before conception. Until Western Christianity comes to grips with this apparent paradox of original sin, how can we the Church ever administer to others who are in need of a savior?
What an amazing insight!
Man-kind was created with a will, just like God. We can choose to trust, love, and obey God, or we can choose our own way. Original sin affected all of creation so that man is born into a world that is fallen and a relationship with God that is imperfect. Original sin is like a house built on a faulty foundation; nothing is in proper alignment. The choices of one affect us all. When Adam chose to sin, he set off a chain reaction that affects us to this day. Our sin does the same. Similarly, Jesus's choice to die and redeem all of creation set off a chain reaction as does our repentance and acceptance of Him. It's not a paradox, God is growing those who accept Christ into perfect beings whose will is to do good and right rather than to sin. He didn't create robots.
Adam's sin introduced death, and now mankind chooses death through individual sinful acts, which makes us guilty. However, we have the option of choosing life by accepting Jesus.
I can give a simple answer to the Guilt this video talks about. I single word that I severely doubt will ever happen, because in spite of what Jesus Christ has done in the Passion, it just plain does not exist, never had, and never will, but we solely need it:
Forgiveness.
We need to forgive. Even when it is not asked, we need to forgive. The ones who are guilty cannot do anything to repay them, especially when they were not born yet when it was committed. They cannot do anything about it. We as a people can do nothing else but forgive.
People need to forgive. Unconditionally and Completely.
But alas, it will be the one thing that will never happen. And for this I grieve.
Did Jesus die on the cross for nothing?
So in the French Revolution the stained one would be the noble and the innocent the peasant. In communism, the stained one would be the capitalist and the innocent the Proletariat. In this new identity politics pseuod-religion, the stained one is the Deplorable and the innocent, as Prof. Mitchell says, is women, trans, blacks (in Europe: immigrants from Africa, Musilms, etc.).
Great analysis but imagery is important. In getting back to truth, even the images we show should try to approximate this truth. Placed alongside profound messages like this, images of white people rather than middle eastern looking people in Biblical art undermine the genuineness of what's being said because it reinforces a subtle type of identity politics by inaccurately making our Savior in the image of a pure, heroic, white martyr. This type of inaccurate imagrey is loaded and brings along baggage that promts a rejection of the message. Beautiful art is wonderful, but we should aim to be consistent in messaging and imagery when having these important conversations.
🤦♀