What is Jefferson???

I can honestly say that I've never read the Jefferson Bible before today and that my preconceptions of him being a Godly founding father are starting to fade away. Was he afraid of the truth? Is that why he didn't talk about angels, prophecies, or miracles that much if at all? I did a little background research on Jefferson and there's a lot of controversy about him. Of course, there is his famous quote, "I am a sect by myself, as far as I know." He was a deist, meaning he didn't believe in the trinity, and consequently believed Jesus was not God but a moral teacher. Why else would he exclude prophetic passages and miraculous signs from his "Bible"? Honestly, I'm looking forward to our class discussion tomorrow and hopefully some of my questions will be answered. Jefferson may not have done this intentionally, but people who take important sections out of a text just because they don't agree with them are, in my opinion, cowardly. Maybe its like what Plato wanted, the lessons of the epics without the blood and gore.

Feeling a little confused and disappointed...

Governmental Affairs

After being gone with RamKids all week for their college tour and missing class, I can’t believe I remembered to blog!!

Anyway, I found the reading about government pretty awesome. I was one of those people who definitely didn’t realize all of those things about the kings not having all the power. I was under the assumption -- I know, don’t assume… -- that kings could pretty much have their way in doing whatever they want. Just that short reading makes me want to go do some studying on that stuff. It’s kind of cool that even though one man was in charge, the people still had enough power to keep him from doing things they didn’t agree with. This reminds me of the Gettysburg Address section that says “…a government of the people, by the people, for the people…” The government is there to represent the people, and help maintain order amongst those people. Unfortunately, that gets lost in other things sometimes.

Rebellions and Whatnot

If I'm perfectly honest, I really don't know much about Milton other than what we've read for class, so I'm going to try and not interpolate much. One thing that struck me however, was how Milton talked about the people having the right to overthrow the king or magistrate essentially at will. Like I said, I don't really know how this fits with Milton's ideology as a whole, but in this text it was very interesting.  "Since the King or Magistrate holds his authority of the people, both originally and naturally for their good in the first place, and not his own, then may the people as oft as they shall judge it best, either choose him or reject him... merely by liberty and right of freeborn Men." He goes on to talk about several instances in scripture where he thinks this precedent is set. This is the point I don't really agree with Milton on. If I understand this correctly, he understands that because rulers are appointed by God, then when they stray from what is right, the people then assume the right to overthrow that authority. If that is true, then David had every right to kill Saul, yet he didn't. Hopefully this will become clearer as we study more Milton, but I really am not sure about all this rightful rebellion nonsense.

P.S. I commented on Preston Smith's "Milton is my Favorite"

John Milton is my favorite.

John Milton is my favorite, and i'm so happy we are going to be reading excerpts from Paradise Lost! I knew very little of his political dealings (though that consisted of his primary works).  One thing I enjoyed from the work we read in class today was his opinion on the multitude.  We were asked to compare Machiavelli's ideas of how to control the public compared to Milton's.  Milton believed that the multitude was certainly hard to manage, but that the people had the ability to learn and outgrow the historical Monarchy that they followed for so long.  I commend Milton for having so much faith in the people although they were so stuck in their ways.  I can't wait for Paradise Lost and discovering the parallel ideas from his political ideas to his theological. Very cool stuff. Congratulations to the new honors council!

P.S. I commented on Megan Johnston's in defense of Cordelia."

That seems about right...

Honestly, I believe that any sort of government, whether it be a democracy, tyranny, or monarchy, can be the best for any country as long as it is run correctly. Once again, it all falls down to what the people want though. A democracy of the people seems the most reasonable to me, but even then everyone has their own opinion. Some might wish to have one individual rule over them. There will be skepticism about anything and everything, so Milton's view is nothing out of the blue. To overthrow the king and establish a new government would probably appeal to me if I was under that ruling, however not everyone feels that way. Some feel the most secure in that sort of ruling, and that is what matters most. As long as the majority of the people are content with their rulers, then no sort of change needs to occur.

P.S. I commented on Meghan Johnston's "In Defense of Cordelia"

Much Ado About...well, whatever.

Welcome to modern civilization, where government has become the "bad guys" that don't really do what we tell them to do.  Yeah...they give us nice things sometimes, but why exactly do we vote them in each year?  I recall the faint memory of tax breaks, political issues, moral issues, and a little hogwash mixed in there somewhere.  So I kid about the government, but search your feelings!  You may find that there's a lot of truth lingering about.

Where are we at with government these days?  Lincoln said that a government should be "of the people, by the people, for the people," but what does that even mean?  I certainly haven't heard of Brutus around town these days, practicing his tyrannicidal tendencies for the "good of the country."  Do we have a pompous Caesar on the throne, or has our King decided to fly solo and rule by his own authority?  Perhaps neither of these relate to our current predicament, and we have progressed to a superior form of....something.  Or nothing.

In all seriousness, if government is to be "of the people, by the people, for the people," then one would assume that the PEOPLE are a pretty big deal for the system.  It was the people who chose Saul as a physical king instead of God, and this process has continued for millennia.  The people have been picking and choosing rulers for quite some time now, and I think it's time they started making educated decisions based on the good of the system as a whole.  Government is FOR the people, and if there are no people, then there can be no government.

P.S. I commented on Susan Berner's "Long Live the King"

God Save the Queen

As I read the last 3 acts of King Lear, I thought about the differing perspectives of how the king should be treated from King Lear's England to current day England. In King Lear, his daughters treat him terribly, throwing him out in the rain and driving him insane. As opposed to today where the Queen of England is treated with the upmost respect. Can you imagine someone throwing Queen Elizabeth in the rain? But also, the English people seem to almost idolize the Queen. And then things got really interesting when we talked about Julius Caesar and Charles I. Now I know why the English view the queen like they do. First, Shakespeare shows how a monarchy can go awry in King Lear. Then,today we talked about how the English monarchy actually went awry. People weren't ready for Charles I to go. Even Oliver Cromwell and John Milton couldn't brainwash the people to be something they didn't want to be - a republic. Hopefully, we don't get so complacent with the way things are that we refuse change and make people seem completely different than they are as people did with Charles I. From killing Charles I to the rebirth of the English monarchy, England has an interesting history. P.S. Commented on Meghan's