The value of Bible literature for atheism and the value of atheism for Bible literature

[No Robots]

Thinking Christians fully realize that, if Christianity is to continue to exist and function, it must come down to this earth, it must begin to concern itself about man, it must concern itself more about morality than about immortality, it must seek the Kingdom of Heaven right here on this earth, and to be enjoyed by men while they live right here. This means the abolition of exploitation, oppression, degradation and inhumanity. The Jews should welcome this revolution in the Christian world, and the Jews should show an example. It is not an accident that Judaism gave birth to Marxism, and it is not an accident that the Jews readily took up Marxism; all this was in perfect accord with the progress of Judaism and the Jews. The Jews should realize that Jehovah no longer dwells in heaven, but he dwells in us right here on earth; we must no longer look up to Jehovah as above us and outside of us, but we must see him right within us. The voice of Jehovah, which until now was still the small still voice, which was drowned in the noise of the passions, ambitions and vanities, must become the only voice to be heard and to be obeyed. This will require a complete change of attitude towards life and mankind.--A program for the Jews and an answer to all anti-semites: A program for humanity / Harry Waton

 

[Politesse]

No. In a democracy, individuals have a say in what the government does but not control of the government. A democracy is a system of majority rule and if the majority vote to stomp on some minority then that is just the way it is.

Yes, but you are not responsible for your neighbor's vote. You are responsible for yours. Or are you now arguing against your own point that Christianity advocates strong personal responsibility? If you are voting in the interests of a corporation over the wellbeing of your fellow citizens, you are not using the power you have in a loving way. Whether you have complete autocratic power or just a tiny portion of a democratic franchise, it is your actions that you will eventually answer for. King or peasant, if what you're doing is supporting pro-capitalist interests, you're using your power in service of Mammon, not God. Remember parable of the widow's mite? It's not how big and powerful you are that makes you important, but what you choose to do with the agency you possess.

I don't follow that at all. You seem to be confusing an individual with a group. Christianity teaches that it is the actions of the individual toward others personally that should be the concern not what some group does. An individual 'voting' for some group to care for the poor ain't the Christian teaching; the individual personally sacrificing to help others is.

It's illegal to let someone else vote for you. How do you use the power you have? If you use it to foment evil, that's on you. That is your personal responsibility. If you claim to love and help others "as an individual", but you use your vote to hurt and exploit the poor, you are a hypocrite and a liar, not a good Christian. Especially if, like many if not conservatives, you also do jack shit to help other people in other aspects of your daily life. If you want credit for merely talking about being kind to others, but don't use every fibre of your being to in fact help others, the Bible has some grim news for you.

 

[No Robots]

In sum, socialism is effective only when understood as Bible-based, and the Bible is effective only when understood as socialist. Those who wish to separate the Bible and socialism should be regarded as opponents of both.

 

[skepticalbip]

No. In a democracy, individuals have a say in what the government does but not control of the government. A democracy is a system of majority rule and if the majority vote to stomp on some minority then that is just the way it is.

Yes, but you are not responsible for your neighbor's vote. You are responsible for yours. Or are you now arguing against your own point that Christianity advocates strong personal responsibility? If you are voting in the interests of a corporation over the wellbeing of your fellow citizens, you are not using the power you have in a loving way. Whether you have complete autocratic power or just a tiny portion of a democratic franchise, it is your actions that you will eventually answer for. King or peasant, if what you're doing is supporting pro-capitalist interests, you're using your power in service of Mammon, not God. Remember parable of the widow's mite? It's not how big and powerful you are that makes you important, but what you choose to do with the agency you possess.

I don't follow that at all. You seem to be confusing an individual with a group. Christianity teaches that it is the actions of the individual toward others personally that should be the concern not what some group does. An individual 'voting' for some group to care for the poor ain't the Christian teaching; the individual personally sacrificing to help others is.

It's illegal to let someone else vote for you. How do you use the power you have? If you use it to foment evil, that's on you. That is your personal responsibility. If you claim to love and help others "as an individual", but you use your vote to hurt and exploit the poor, you are a hypocrite and a liar, not a good Christian. Especially if, like many if not conservatives, you also do jack shit to help other people in other aspects of your daily life. If you want credit for merely talking about being kind to others, but don't use every fibre of your being to in fact help others, the Bible has some grim news for you.

What the fuck are you talking about? Are you pissed that Christianity teaches about the individual's responsibility (not some group's) to earn their gold ticket to heaven?

 

[rousseau]

The primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism is to root out the anti-Bible elements that have contaminated it. This shouldn't be too hard. Just show these reactionaries that their doctrines actually align with conservatism. Pushing the atheist Right into overt unity with the religious Right will allow Leftists, whether Christian or atheist, to unite.

I'd argue that the primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism would be to turn it into a coherent, fact-based framework that works with reality, rather than trying to radically transform it.

People who promote the collective are the foundation of socialism, and these people will always exist, they just have to figure out how to actually benefit the collective, rather than just guessing.

 

[Politesse]

No. In a democracy, individuals have a say in what the government does but not control of the government. A democracy is a system of majority rule and if the majority vote to stomp on some minority then that is just the way it is.

Yes, but you are not responsible for your neighbor's vote. You are responsible for yours. Or are you now arguing against your own point that Christianity advocates strong personal responsibility? If you are voting in the interests of a corporation over the wellbeing of your fellow citizens, you are not using the power you have in a loving way. Whether you have complete autocratic power or just a tiny portion of a democratic franchise, it is your actions that you will eventually answer for. King or peasant, if what you're doing is supporting pro-capitalist interests, you're using your power in service of Mammon, not God. Remember parable of the widow's mite? It's not how big and powerful you are that makes you important, but what you choose to do with the agency you possess.

I don't follow that at all. You seem to be confusing an individual with a group. Christianity teaches that it is the actions of the individual toward others personally that should be the concern not what some group does. An individual 'voting' for some group to care for the poor ain't the Christian teaching; the individual personally sacrificing to help others is.

It's illegal to let someone else vote for you. How do you use the power you have? If you use it to foment evil, that's on you. That is your personal responsibility. If you claim to love and help others "as an individual", but you use your vote to hurt and exploit the poor, you are a hypocrite and a liar, not a good Christian. Especially if, like many if not conservatives, you also do jack shit to help other people in other aspects of your daily life. If you want credit for merely talking about being kind to others, but don't use every fibre of your being to in fact help others, the Bible has some grim news for you.

What the fuck are you talking about? You have no idea what I believe, what I do, or how I vote. Do you often fly off on such inane personal attacks when someone points out that the U.S. is not a democracy but a constitutional republic?

I don't need to know how you vote or believe for any of my statements to be true...

And your final argument has no bearing either. You are just as responsible for your own political actions whether you are an autocratic dictator or have only an advisory vote in a US Territory. God does not evaluate your behavior based on whether you had the power to force others to agree with you, but whether what you did support was moral. From a Christian perspective. You are called upon to do what is in your power, not to grasp after more power. So how do you use the power that you have?

None of this assumes your answer to any of these questions. If your honest answer is "I take up the cause of the poor and oppressed, the orphan and the widow, and do everything in my power to love my neighbor just as strongly and persistently as I value my own interests", then, great! You are a good Christian. And you are a socialist.

 

[skepticalbip]

The primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism is to root out the anti-Bible elements that have contaminated it. This shouldn't be too hard. Just show these reactionaries that their doctrines actually align with conservatism. Pushing the atheist Right into overt unity with the religious Right will allow Leftists, whether Christian or atheist, to unite.

I'd argue that the primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism would be to turn it into a coherent, fact-based framework that works with reality, rather than trying to radically transform it.

People who promote the collective are the foundation of socialism, and these people will always exist, they just have to figure out how to actually benefit the collective, rather than just guessing.

Socialism seems to work in some small communities (like communal farms) where everyone is there willingly and shares the philosophy. The problem with socialism is that in larger groups, like a nation, there are many people that not willing participants. This means that the controlling government has to use force to compel them to accept their dictates.

 

[Politesse]

From the 5th chapter of the book of Nehemiah, in the Hebrew Scriptures (the Christian "Old Testament"):

Now there arose a great outcry of the people and of their wives against their Jewish brothers. For there were those who said, “With our sons and our daughters, we are many. So let us get grain, that we may eat and keep alive.” There were also those who said, “We are mortgaging our fields, our vineyards, and our houses to get grain because of the famine.” And there were those who said, “We have borrowed money for the king's tax on our fields and our vineyards. Now our flesh is as the flesh of our brothers, our children are as their children. Yet we are forcing our sons and our daughters to be slaves, and some of our daughters have already been enslaved, but it is not in our power to help it, for other men have our fields and our vineyards.”

I was very angry when I heard their outcry and these words. I took counsel with myself, and I brought charges against the nobles and the officials. I said to them, “You are exacting interest, each from his brother.” And I held a great assembly against them and said to them, “We, as far as we are able, have bought back our Jewish brothers who have been sold to the nations, but you even sell your brothers that they may be sold to us!” They were silent and could not find a word to say. So I said, “The thing that you are doing is not good. Ought you not to walk in the fear of our God to prevent the taunts of the nations our enemies? Moreover, I and my brothers and my servants are lending them money and grain. Let us abandon this exacting of interest. Return to them this very day their fields, their vineyards, their olive orchards, and their houses, and the percentage of money, grain, wine, and oil that you have been exacting from them.” Then they said, “We will restore these and require nothing from them. We will do as you say.” And I called the priests and made them swear to do as they had promised. I also shook out the fold of my garment and said, “So may God shake out every man from his house and from his labor who does not keep this promise. So may he be shaken out and emptied.” And all the assembly said “Amen” and praised the Lord. And the people did as they had promised.

Try and extract a pro-capitalist reading from this passage.

I dare ya.

 

[rousseau]

The primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism is to root out the anti-Bible elements that have contaminated it. This shouldn't be too hard. Just show these reactionaries that their doctrines actually align with conservatism. Pushing the atheist Right into overt unity with the religious Right will allow Leftists, whether Christian or atheist, to unite.

I'd argue that the primary task for those who wish to revitalize socialism would be to turn it into a coherent, fact-based framework that works with reality, rather than trying to radically transform it.

People who promote the collective are the foundation of socialism, and these people will always exist, they just have to figure out how to actually benefit the collective, rather than just guessing.

Socialism seems to work in some small communities where everyone is there willingly and shares the philosophy. The problem with socialism is that in larger groups, like a nation, there are many people that not willing participants. This means that the controlling government has to use force to compel them to accept their dictates.

You really have to decouple the intent of socialism from the literal ideology that's been put forth in the past while. Beneath socialist theory is the basic desire to construct a community that works for everyone. There's nothing wrong, or even illogical about that. If the 'goal' for lack of a better term of a social group is to create a stable environment for child-rearing, then creating a more functional social group is a good thing.

The problem is people who pursue this goal with pseudo-scientific theory, and who have negligible grasp of how the world actually works in practice - IOW, most of the socialist theory that exists today.

 

[skepticalbip]

No. In a democracy, individuals have a say in what the government does but not control of the government. A democracy is a system of majority rule and if the majority vote to stomp on some minority then that is just the way it is.

Yes, but you are not responsible for your neighbor's vote. You are responsible for yours. Or are you now arguing against your own point that Christianity advocates strong personal responsibility? If you are voting in the interests of a corporation over the wellbeing of your fellow citizens, you are not using the power you have in a loving way. Whether you have complete autocratic power or just a tiny portion of a democratic franchise, it is your actions that you will eventually answer for. King or peasant, if what you're doing is supporting pro-capitalist interests, you're using your power in service of Mammon, not God. Remember parable of the widow's mite? It's not how big and powerful you are that makes you important, but what you choose to do with the agency you possess.

I don't follow that at all. You seem to be confusing an individual with a group. Christianity teaches that it is the actions of the individual toward others personally that should be the concern not what some group does. An individual 'voting' for some group to care for the poor ain't the Christian teaching; the individual personally sacrificing to help others is.

It's illegal to let someone else vote for you. How do you use the power you have? If you use it to foment evil, that's on you. That is your personal responsibility. If you claim to love and help others "as an individual", but you use your vote to hurt and exploit the poor, you are a hypocrite and a liar, not a good Christian. Especially if, like many if not conservatives, you also do jack shit to help other people in other aspects of your daily life. If you want credit for merely talking about being kind to others, but don't use every fibre of your being to in fact help others, the Bible has some grim news for you.

What the fuck are you talking about? You have no idea what I believe, what I do, or how I vote. Do you often fly off on such inane personal attacks when someone points out that the U.S. is not a democracy but a constitutional republic?

I don't need to know how you vote or believe for any of my statements to be true...

And your final argument has no bearing either. You are just as responsible for your own political actions whether you are an autocratic dictator or have only an advisory vote in a US Territory. God does not evaluate your behavior based on whether you had the power to force others to agree with you, but whether what you did support was moral. From a Christian perspective. You are called upon to do what is in your power, not to grasp after more power. So how do you use the power that you have?

None of this assumes your answer to any of these questions. If your honest answer is "I take up the cause of the poor and oppressed, the orphan and the widow, and do everything in my power to love my neighbor just as strongly and persistently as I value my own interests", then, great! You are a good Christian. And you are a socialist.

That's cute. The way you wrote that seems to be that you see socialism more as a religion (that you deeply believe) than a political philosophy.

 

[No Robots]

Socialists must come to the realization that their greatest enemy is the atheist Right, and that they must therefore make common cause with the Christian Left. Likewise, the Christian Left in its struggle against the Christian Right must seek solidarity with socialists. The alliance of the Christian Left with socialists is unbeatable. No wonder Rightists, whether Christian or atheist, want to keep them separated.

 

[Politesse]

That's cute. The way you wrote that seems to be that you see socialism more as a religion (that you deeply believe) than a political philosophy.

Cute wandering point you have there.

If you make a theological argument, you're going to get a theological rebuttal. If you can't handle the deep end, best to avoid the pool. If you want to have a purely secular argument about the value of the socialism, independent of what the Scriptures say, that is within your power but you should start a new thread in another subforum. Unless you can explain how a purely secular argument about the virtues of the socialism would be in any way relevant to a thread whose topic is the value of biblical literature?

EDIT TO ADD:
And I mean yes, if Christianity endorses socialism, as it clearly seems to do, than this would naturally make upholding socialist values also a religious responsibility on the part of Christians, not "just" a political philosophy. Though I am personally more of a wildly syncretic agnostic than a Christian particularly, I do agree with Jesus and Nehemiah on this point, albeit on the basis of moral argument, not blind faith.

 

[skepticalbip]

That's cute. The way you wrote that seems to be that you see socialism more as a religion (that you deeply believe) than a political philosophy.

Cute wandering point you have there.

If you make a theological argument, you're going to get a theological rebuttal. If you can't handle the deep end, best to avoid the pool.

If you want to have a purely secular argument about the value of the socialism, independent of what the Scriptures say, that is within your power but you should start a new thread in another subforum. Unless you can explain how a purely secular argument about the virtues of the socialism would be in any way relevant to a thread whose topic is the value of biblical literature?

That was my original point that socialism and religion are two very different subjects in response to No Robots trying to make a Biblical linkage.

 

[Politesse]

That's cute. The way you wrote that seems to be that you see socialism more as a religion (that you deeply believe) than a political philosophy.

Cute wandering point you have there.

If you make a theological argument, you're going to get a theological rebuttal. If you can't handle the deep end, best to avoid the pool.

If you want to have a purely secular argument about the value of the socialism, independent of what the Scriptures say, that is within your power but you should start a new thread in another subforum. Unless you can explain how a purely secular argument about the virtues of the socialism would be in any way relevant to a thread whose topic is the value of biblical literature?

That was my original point that socialism and religion are two very different subjects in response to No Robots trying to make a Biblical linkage.

Okay. But you were not correct, and now that you have been shown to be incorrect (with concrete textual evidence rather than vague assertion) you are trying to change the subject by trying to personally attack me instead of rationally defending your incorrect statements. If you want to get back to your original point, that is fully within your power to do.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

The reason belief in Chritianity is slipping in the U.S. is in large part due to the bad behavior of so many self proclaimed Christians. The AMA ferociously attacked any attempt to give all Americans decent health care, such as Medicaid and Medicare as socialism for years and the Republicans and their Christian supporters bought that tripe and still do. 80 years of lies and virulient propaganda.

 

[Jarhyn]

That's cute. The way you wrote that seems to be that you see socialism more as a religion (that you deeply believe) than a political philosophy.

Cute wandering point you have there.

If you make a theological argument, you're going to get a theological rebuttal. If you can't handle the deep end, best to avoid the pool.

If you want to have a purely secular argument about the value of the socialism, independent of what the Scriptures say, that is within your power but you should start a new thread in another subforum. Unless you can explain how a purely secular argument about the virtues of the socialism would be in any way relevant to a thread whose topic is the value of biblical literature?

That was my original point that socialism and religion are two very different subjects in response to No Robots trying to make a Biblical linkage.

I don't think they are.

Fundamentally, religion seeks to answer the question of "what is the most effective set of ideas around which an enduring community may be organized?"

Religion is evolved to provide a form of answer, specifically, to that question.

The gospels feature a character who purports that this is to grow the community through strict adherence to radical love: to love and live for all of society.

To make your "ism", as it were be centered around "society", around living one's neighbors, is the overarching theme of that piece of fiction.

This reveals some uncomfortable truths though, as regards to who is "anti" that message, and it certainly isn't by in large the atheist community at this point in history.

 

[Politesse]

This reveals some uncomfortable truths though, as regards to who is "anti" that message, and it certainly isn't by in large the atheist community at this point in history.

Definitely not. Christian theocracy is a hell of a thing. Jesus died trying to liberate people from bondage, and now his name is used to throw people in chains. The cycle goes on and on.

 

[Jarhyn]

This reveals some uncomfortable truths though, as regards to who is "anti" that message, and it certainly isn't by in large the atheist community at this point in history.

Definitely not. Christian theocracy is a hell of a thing. Jesus died trying to liberate people from bondage, and now his name is used to throw people in chains. The cycle goes on and on.

My point is that the Christians are "anti" Christ's message. Just to be clear.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

But when you look to explain reality with hard material concepts, obviously many would prefer a lighter, more generous framework. This is why religious ideas are so popular, they're a little prettier.

In other words you get to pretend.

 

[No Robots]

The atheist Right is the growing menace. It affects disdain for Christianity, but it really only seeks to destroy the Christian Left. It anchors its doctrines in the theory of evolution, with all the attendant viciousness in the social realm.