Former [Australian] prime minister Scott Morrison is set to reveal in detail how his Christian faith influenced him, in a memoir to be published in May 2024.
The 288-page book, Plans for Your Good - A Prime Minister's Testimony of God's Faithfulness, will be published by Thomas Nelson, a division of HarperCollins Christian Publishing.
The publisher's website blurb for the book says it: "offers a unique insider's account of a Christian who was open about his faith and operated at the top level of politics for more than a decade".
"During one of the toughest periods since the Second World War, covering drought, wildfires, a global pandemic and recession, he chronicles God's faithfulness throughout, win or lose, public criticism or public success.
"Less political memoir and more pastoral encouragement, Morrison is passionate about encouraging others to discover how they can access and see the many blessings of God in their own lives, no matter their circumstances, drawing on Jeremiah 29:11, that God's plans are for our good and not our harm, to give us a future and a hope."
billd89 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 01, 2023 7:43 am
The US Christian Right has embraced (Commie) Putinism.
It's a numbers racket. The global Christian Right will embrace anything which provides it with power.
"The science of politics is the one science that is deposited by the streams of history, like the grains of gold in the sand of a river; and the knowledge of the past, the record of truths revealed by experience, is eminently practical, as an instrument of action and a power that goes to making the future
...............and remember .....
where you have a concentration
of power in a few hands,
all too frequently
men with the mentality of gangsters get control.
History has proven that. Power corrupts,
and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 6:57 am
On a matter of less (imo) importance, LC wrote, above, in part:
"It's obvious to all historians of antiquity, both biblical and classical, that the rise of the Christian Right commenced with the rise of Constantine."
No, it is not.
I do not understand your disagreement. Please explain. Ante Nicene Christianity had little or no influence over politics in the Roman empire.
The Christian right, or the religious right, are Christian political factions characterized by their strong support of socially conservative and traditionalist policies.[1] Christian conservatives seek to influence politics and public policy with their interpretation of the teachings of Christianity.
Your rigid artificial categories, LC, distort, and obscure trajectories; for example, "Ante Nicene Christianity" did not suddenly utterly disappear with Constantine, and indeed had had some political ramifications before him.
Further, your Constantine-commencement claim above is certainly NOT "obvious to all historians of antiquity."
And here is another example of your distorting quote-mining selection. The wikipedia article that you partly quote addresses the origin of the "Christian Right": "....The movement has its roots in American politics going back as far as the 1940s;...."
SG would you please try and respond to various issues in the same threads in which they are raised and are being discussed. Thanks.
StephenGoranson wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 8:14 am
Your rigid artificial categories, LC, distort, and obscure trajectories; for example, "Ante Nicene Christianity" did not suddenly utterly disappear with Constantine, and indeed had had some political ramifications before him.
Further, your Constantine-commencement claim above is certainly NOT "obvious to all historians of antiquity."
And here is another example of your distorting quote-mining selection. The wikipedia article that you partly quote addresses the origin of the "Christian Right": "....The movement has its roots in American politics going back as far as the 1940s;...."
The term "Christan Right" is generally associated with political power and indicates the influence of Christian ideology in political power. Although the term may be modern there are many examples of Christian influence in political power that go back way before the 20th century. The Christian revolution of the 4th century is an example from antiquity and this revolution witnessed the rise of Christian ideology and religion across the Roman empire.
The Christians prior to the rise of Constantine had little or no perceptible influence on political history. The same cannot be said about the Christians after the rise of Constantine.
On 28 October 312 the Christians suddenly and unexpectedly found themselves victorious (2). The victory was a miracle — though opinions differed as to the nature of the sign vouchsafed to Constantine. The winners became conscious of their victory in a mood of resentment and vengeance. A voice shrill with implacable hatred announced to the world the victory of the Milvian Bridge: Lactantius’ De mortibus persecutorum (3). In this horrible pamphlet by the author of de ira dei there is something of the violence of the prophets without the redeeming sense of tragedy that inspires Nahum’s song for the fall of Nineveh. ‘His fury is poured out like fire and the rocks are broken asunder by him. The Lord is good, a strong hold in the day of trouble’: this at least has an elementary simplicity which is very remote from the complacent and sophisticated prose of the fourth-century rhetorician. Lactantius was not alone. More soberly, but no less ruthlessly, Eusebius recounted the divine vengeance against those who had persecuted the Church. To us it naturally appears that there is something in common between the Jews who died in defending the old Jerusalem and the Christians who died in building up the new Jerusalem against the same Roman empire. Modern scholars have found it easy to prove that in form and substance the Jewish martyr is the prototype of the Christian martyr. Such scholarly discoveries have little relevance to the realities of the fourth century. The pupils hated their masters, and were hated in their turn. With a cry of joy Eusebius, possibly a man of Jewish descent, retells from Josephus the story of the siege and capture of Jerusalem: thus may perish the enemies of Christ. Perhaps it is no chance that personally neither Lactantius nor Eusebius had suffered much from Diocletian’s persecution. Like Tacitus in relation to Domitian, they voiced the resentment of the majority who had survived in fear rather than in physical pain. Eusebius had been near his master Pamphilus who had carried on his work on the Bible in prison while awaiting death (4).
If there were men who recommended tolerance and peaceful coexistence of Christians and pagans, they were rapidly crowded out. The Christians were ready to take over the Roman empire, as Eusebius made clear in the introduction of the Praeparatio evangelica where he emphasizes the correlation between pax romana and the Christian message: the thought indeed was not even new. The Christians were also determined to make impossible a return to conditions of inferiority and persecution for the Church. The problems and the conflicts inside the Church which all this implied may be left aside for the moment.
The revolution of the fourth century, carrying with it a new historiography, will not be understood if we underrate the determination, almost the fierceness, with which the Christians appreciated and exploited the miracle that had transformed Constantine into a supporter, a protector and later a legislator of the Christian Church.
