A conversation from Peace Tribe Manual--Explicitly Reconciling Opposites

                                        

Post: Here's a thought: to talk about "tribe" we're revitalizing an almost lost word. Reading Enlightenment thinkers, they talk about the Social Contract. Nobody in my class pointed out that the Social Contract is not really the origin of society. It's a fable. The tribe forms naturally, and pre-dates the idea of contracted civil government, does it not? They say everything begins with the individual as individual, but that's a semi-modern idea I think. So we have a false history. Not sure exactly how it's relevant to your proposed neo-tribalism, but you can tell me if there's something there.

Response:                       

Yes. Somehow in his lectures, ERH 'post-dicted' the tribe as the first social order (with an imperative).  They were first with speech--empires did writing, iirc. Post-diction is 'this is the way it must have been'.  We must remember that ERH was teaching college students, academia is 'liberal'.  He was bold for the creeds, surely.  Harvard said he should not bring Christ into what he was teaching--1933. So, we see that he is tailoring his message, as Pastor Nolder taught today that Paul 'justification by faith' was writing to a different audience, with different problems.  James was too. Pastor Nolder reconciled these opposites.  Now, ERH says that it's tribe, empire, Israel, Greece, then Jesus (He Who Reversed The Trend) and starting back chiastically, so the Church is Israel without exclusiveness, the Nation-State is the Empire without slavery, Greece not being a social order, but a companion. So we come to tribes, neo-tribalism, when and where we want to keep the small, enthusiastic groups of the tribes, but without the perpetual warfare of the tribes.  So, working through HOST/Calendar Of Peace to find an institution that would do that in a neo-tribal area, it FINALLY came to me--'Peace Tribe'! And, peacefully, other types of peace tribes, no fighting, go in peace.  Yes, it's a fable, a post-diction, a true myth and JBJ would say.  He expanded on ERH's work and modified Imperative-Subjective-Narrative-Objective to a more Biblical Law-Lyric-Evaluation-Fact.  Now, chiastically, 'lost' word.  Yes.  That's what's dangerous. Many on Facebook, etc. are anti-Obama, anti-Romney, pro-Paul, almost as if it were perpetual war, as if they were tribal.  So, perhaps we can get epistemological self-consciousness by using the word.  I pray so.  Thanks, _____.  The Lord be with you. PS: Let’s start your manual.  What is your imperative, your calling? Please.