 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Religious Left
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 02:20 PM "You appear to 'talk down' to people" I'm tall. Very tall. Seriously, I'll take note and watch my tone. I think I understand what you're saying -- from my point of view, I feel that the reason why I'm posting as I am is not because of a sense of superiority -- rather, I think it stems from the inherent obstacle of addressing a large group of people who have developed a VERY strong, somewhat complex, interconnected and overwhelmingly majority "liberal-like" belief system (just like any other closed community might develop)-- one that has grown its own legs and is actually even a bit different from the run-of-the-mill liberal POV observable in today's politics (outside the mudcat). Because I happen to be the newest (though I've lurked for years) to come and actually call into question that dogma, complete with its set of now unquestionable assertions that has been allowed to develop without restraint over the years, and have gained unwarranted credence based upon mere repetition, I appear to be arrogant -- what else but arrogance would dare challenge the orthodoxy here? But, yeah, I'll watch my tone. Maybe it wouldn't then be too much to ask that you re-analyze what you think I'm saying, and ask yourself if it couldn't just be the color of your glasses -- not the color of my skin (metaphorically speaking). Have a nice afternoon! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: GUEST,Voice crying in the wilderness Date: 28 Jan 05 - 02:02 PM "Nazism? I believe the Nazis followed Jesus as their religion." Yet another foray into blind ignorance. The "religion" of the Nazis was a distortion of the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. They particularly fastened on Nietzsche's concept of the "übermensch," or "superman." This, plus anti-intellectualism; follow the aggressive urgings of "the blood and bowels." Their idea of purity of race involved the elimination of everyone they deemed "imperfect." The idea that the Nazis gave any credence to Christianity or anything that Jesus said is ludicrous. Typical of the Christian response to Nazism was that of Pastor Martin Niemöller. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: GUEST,Sleepless Dad Date: 28 Jan 05 - 01:55 PM Martin - Which of Christs teachings mean nothing to you ? The Love your neighbor as yourself kinda stuff perhaps ? And refresh my memory about the Torah. Is posting on the Mudcat on your sabbath day allowed ? I notice you've done that quite a few times. How about eating shellfish and wearing clothes made from two different types of cloth ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Peace Date: 28 Jan 05 - 01:51 PM "he doesn't need to be rescued by you, as well-meaning as you may be." I am aware of that. But, this is an open thread, and what is said in a public forum is fair game for all. You appear to 'talk down' to people, and I don't care for that. Very nice and all, but nevertheless, there you have it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jan 05 - 01:46 PM It would seem obvious ... that some Christian, or Christian organization, has hurt you deeply at some point... Jeez- ya took the time to read all of 'em? May be "obvious" to you, Jim, but unfortunately for the patronizing point you were attempting to make, completely untrue. Assumptions- and adherence to dogma- can both be problematical. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Once Famous Date: 28 Jan 05 - 12:53 PM Little hawk, you comments about the Old Testament are the a good reason why we deny Jesus Christ was certainly not the son of God and why his teachings mean nothing to us. They are about as believable as immaculate conception. The New testament is completely worthless to us. The Old testament/Torah is all we will ever need. You can't improve on the original, no matter what kind of mythology you want to create. No matter how much you portray as much as possible that Jesus did not look like the Jew he was. Nazism? I believe the Nazis followed Jesus as their religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Amos Date: 28 Jan 05 - 12:44 PM You mean that religious belief is based on selfish motives, and is at odds with the teachings of the philosopher, Christ. Ake: Not at all what I said, and certainly not what I meant!! Why was it okay for the Hashishims to take on assignments to commit murder or mayhem?Because they would wake up (if they succeeded in dying int he attempt) in Paradise surrounded by honeyed virgins or grapes or whatever. Why was it okay for the Crusaders to sharpen their steel and go barging off to murder the Arabs from here to the Holy Land? Because they would be elevated in the afterlife for having died gloriously, under the authority and sanction of a very anthropomorphical deity. Why was it okay for Vikings to go berserk and slaughter and pillage? Because if they died like a "warrior" they would go to Valhalla and get to sit around and drink and sing, a good fate in my book, too!!:) The point is that many belief systems use the afterlife as a token for manipulating behavior in this lifetime. The moral of that observation , is be careful what beliefs you choose, so that you don't end up doing things you would otherwise abhor. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Piers Date: 28 Jan 05 - 12:06 PM Thanks for your response Little Hawk. You are right about the context of 'sell that thou hast . . . ', but it does beg the question 'how did they live'? Manna from heaven perhaps! Without what to get into a debate about the meaning of 'Take no thought for the morrow' - you have provided two alternate meanings. I am sure there are hundreds of other interpretations. The second of your interpretations highlights 'opium of the people' effect of religion, believing that 'God will see you through' or in 'being optimistic' may cause less anxiety than resigning yourself to pessimism, but you still have to get through that long shift or pay that bill. And that's what socialists want to change. I absolutely agree with you about 'seeing beyond worldly things' and for me being a socialist is about creating the material security and comfort so I/we can go onto enjoy those without the disfiguring effects of capitalism. Piers |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: GUEST Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:38 AM maybe not jerry, but a study published recently showed that the blue states had a higher state IQ than all but two or three of the red states. make of that what you will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:35 AM And THAT is all I have time for right now! You can tell I'm having fun, eh? I love this kind of subject... :-) Gotta work now, alas! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:33 AM Beautifully stated back two posts, Little Hawk. Jesus would be proud a ya. Jesus basically told us not to be materialistic... not that there is anything inherently evil in material things. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:32 AM Your comments regarding "Yeshua" (Jesus) are right on the mark, Rapaire. Good stuff. I agree, he repudiated the Old Testament (or much of it). The Old Testament is full of extremely negative stuff that I in no way identify with (with the exception of Genesis, the Psalms, and the Proverbs, which are fine with me). I regard the Old Testament mostly as just the opinions of a primitive, brutal, ancient tribal people who were capable of virtually any atrocity in the name of their patriarchal horror of a "god", Jehovah...a god that no one with any sense of mercy would follow nowadays. (I will say, in their defence, however, that the Children of Isreal were probably not much different from most of the other primitive, brutal, ancient tribal people whom they massacred when they entered "the promised land"...brutality was the normal mode at the time, I figure.) I regard the very idea that one race of people are set apart as "God's chosen" to be detestable. It sounds like Naziism to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Amos Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:31 AM Christianity isn't about what happens after you die. It's about how you live. Jerry: I know this is true for some Christians, probably most of them. The Real Deal, as Praise likes to call it, is very much part of life, nothing else. But there have been those who dramatized the other end of things. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:25 AM Jerry, and Jim - Well said. "God is Love" That is the Truth. It is Love that builds a healthy society or life, lack of Love that destroys it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:21 AM Peirs - You said (that Jesus said): "'Sell that thou hast and give to the poor' which sounds a pretty stupid idea to me, not a step toward to socialist society, but social suicide. 'Take no thought for the morrow' Jesus said, which is entirely anti-social advice. In fact, Jesus' teaching was to despise worldly things for the sake of a reward in heaven. Socialism, is the appreciation of the things of this world and the endeavour to make a better world here." I think you are misinterpeting the words, or looking at them out of context, that's all. His statement "sell what thou hast and give to the poor" was not a blanket statement directed toward ALL people in society, it was a statement specifically directed to those who had decided to become spiritual apprentices to him and follow him around and learn what he was teaching at the highest level. He was advising them that they would have to part with their worldly riches and concerns, put them aside, and concentrate entirely on the spiritual discipline. That was a very specific and small number of aspirants he was addressing, and it was entirely appropriate advice in their case, but certainly not appropriate advice for everybody in a whole functioning society. It sounds like exactly the advice any advanced spiritual teacher would give to an aspirant entering a monastic life of spiritual discipline, then or now. Such people comprise way less than a tenth of a per cent of any given population, so it will not result in social suicide! :-) "Take no thought for the morrow" means...do not subject yourself to needless worry and anxiety, because it doesn't get you anywhere. That's good advice for anyone. It certainly does not mean "do not prepare for anything"! Jesus gave thought to the morrow when he instructed his disciples and told them in advance that he would be arrested, tried, condemned, and executed, and he was preparing them in advance for dealing with those terrible events in the best way they could. That is "thinking for the morrow". "Take no thought for the morrow" also means, "have confidence in yourself and in life, because you are essentially good and so is life...therefore be optimistic". Excellent advice. "Despise worldly things"? No. Just see beyond them, that's all. There is more to life than worldly things. There is love, compassion, understanding, forgiveness, generosity, kindness, illumination, and every other great nonmaterial thing a person can experience...those things are the things of spirit, and they are far more crucial in a person's consciousness than worldly possessions, which come and go. You can do a lot of good with worldly things if you become adept in those other things, and a lot of harm if you don't. Therefore, see beyond worldly things. "Heaven" is (or can be) your own inner state of consciousness, not some place out there beyond the troposphere. The same goes for "hell". They are inner states of consciousness, available to whomever gravitates naturally toward them...and THAT is a matter of choice. Entirely up to you. I am essentially a socialist, Piers, although I do not object in any way to combining socialism and capitalism in an even mix...which is probably the best way to go. I do NOT despise worldly things. Neither did Jesus. He honored worldly things, but he saw their limitations clearly. Man does NOT live by bread alone. And that's my opinion... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:15 AM Now wait a minute... you mean that the red states prove that there are more Christians slanted toward the right? Would that life was so simple. Then, as someone who was horrified that Bush was re-elected, it would give me a convenient group of people to be angry with. I think there are a lot of reasons why Democrats lost the election. Maybe as a Democrat, that would be a good thread to start. But, I don't think you can equate red states to the religious right. WAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY too simplistic. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:04 AM I am pretty much in agreement with your comments there, Boab. We have a slightly different interpretation in some respects, but substantially are on the same ground. Yes, Jesus, was MORE than just a great teacher. Agreed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Piers Date: 28 Jan 05 - 11:03 AM Oh Amos, I wish socialism had been tried. Show me social ownership, production for use and democratic control of the means of production please. I have comrade in Denmark, he's still fighting for socialism, perhaps no one told him he owned the means of production and he can take his part in controlling them. My boss, is a very intelligent man, but he won't give me any more money, shops are run by intelligent people, but you can't have what they've got if you can't pay, intelligent landlords evict tenants and prosecute trespassers - they do what they do intelligently. You can put whatever spin on it you want about vectors and matrices, crude metaphors if ever there were, the empirical experience of living says that social processes and corporate are antagonistic, as are the corporate and the democratic. The very fact that you identify corporate processes as distinct from social processes proves the point. Are not the means of food, housing, entertainment, research etc. production on which we all labour in and depend upon corporate processes? It is time to shake off irrationalities of corpse worshipping, patriotism, racism and guff about the inflexibility of human nature. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:55 AM Well Larry, I guess you pretty much flushed all my points with but one well-timed flick of the lever! I guess it's back to the drawing board for me! LOL!! Have a good'n! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: GUEST,Larry K Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:51 AM This thread is predicated on the theory of what has derailed the religiious right. I would contend that the religious right represents that views of the majority of the red states and that the term religious left is an oxymoron. Clearly, for the past 10 years, the vast majority of people who attended church regulaly voted republican and the vast majority of pepole who don't believe in religion voted democrats. People like Jerry may be the exception, but are in the very small minority. How does a practicing catholic support abortion? It is contrary to all their teachings. I state this position as a non religious Jew is is not part of the religious right in any way shape or form. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:49 AM That's not meant as a put-down, brucie. GregF may be a lot of things -- bright, witty, quick-thinking, or an angry man, but one thing is pretty certain from his 1200+ posts ...... he doesn't need to be rescued by you, as well-meaning as you may be. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Peace Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:24 AM "It would seem obvious from a quick perusal of your 1200+ posts here, Greg, that some Christian, or Christian organization, has hurt you deeply at some point." The man has an opinion that differs from yours, Jim. No call for you to say this kinda thing to him. Greg's a darned good guy, IMO. I disagree with some of his posts, but so what? Should I try putting him down instead of his comments? Sheesh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:13 AM Very dogmatically stated, Rapaire. Well mixed, skillfully separated, artfully leading. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:10 AM It would seem obvious from a quick perusal of your 1200+ posts here, Greg, that some Christian, or Christian organization, has hurt you deeply at some point. I won't compound the pain by continuing to discuss what you've already decided upon. Have a nice day! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Rapparee Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:09 AM I think that you are all forgetting a couple of things. (And I'm going to address here those who profess to "Christianity" -- not others. I'm also not going to address the historicity of the Christian church, but the doctrines upon which it claims to have begun.) First, not all of the New Testament was that which was taught by Yeshua of Nazareth. Perhaps more than half of what it is there was inserted later, by the leaders of the Christian church during the first centuries of the Church's existence. As just one example, study the person who was considered to be the "Apostle to the Apostles" -- Mary of Magdala. The early Church was full of dissent and came close to withering to death. Secondly, Yeshua was most definitely not a "Christian" or a follower of "Christianity". He was a Jew -- circumsized and Temple-taught. He never claimed to be the "Messiah"; such statements appear to have been added after his death, as do the ones regarding "the fulfillment of the Scriptures." Thirdly, if we assume that Yeshua did make such statements as "I will destroy the Temple and in three days rebuild it", "I have come to bring you a new covenant," and so on it should be clear that rather than fulfilling the Old Testament he was repudiating its teachings. Thus, to be a "Christian" you would have to drop the teachings of the OT as being no longer relevant to your religious beliefs and follow the teachings of the NT. Fourthly, "Christ" comes from the Greek "Kristos" and means "The Anointed One." The man under discussion never used that word as a surname and most likely didn't know Greek (although that is under discussion). Yeshua's last name would most likely have been something like "bar Yoshef" (or, assuming a divine parentage, "bar El" or "bar Yehovah"). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:03 AM I think you'd find, were you to stack 'em up side by side, Jim, the dead would make a much higher pile. Besides which, the atrocities put the lie to the presumed "benevolence", don't they? Its real easy to be benevolent to "your own kind". Habanero, Brother. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Peace Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:01 AM Nothing is good or bad but thinking makes it so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:59 AM Thanks, Jim: Religion doesn't kill people. People kill people. People who use the excuse of religion for their own gain. I take no responsibility for what others have done in the name of religion, any more than an Atheist is responsible for the crimes of other Atheists. It's a specious argument. My neighbor's cat digs up our flower beds to use as a kitty litter box. The cat down the street who never goes out can not be held accountable. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:50 AM And countless millions have been fed, comforted, cared for, and educated in the name of that proposition. I guess it's all in which part of history you wish to dwell, and the interpretation of which of the two parts of that long history (the atrocities you cite or the beneveolence I site) more closely represents that proposition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Greg F. Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:44 AM "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me". Yup, T.H.E. "One True Religion" Countless millions have been slaughtered in the name of that proposition. There's true "christian love" for ya. Jalapeño, Sister. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:35 AM "You know, you and I should get to know each other. And I believe we would respect each other, rather than see each other at opposite pole. Part of the problem in this country is when you, Amos and others talk about about what Christians are like, they don't sound even faintly like the people I know. I suspect that when I talk about the Religious Right they don't sound anything like the people you know. Life becomes simpler when we can confine people to little boxes with labels. But, that isn't the way that life works. I know loving, moral, highly admirable Atheists who do far more good in life than some so-called "religious" people do. I know gay couples who in many ways live a more moral life than many straight couples. As for Jesus being the "way, the truth and the light," I think that belief is not a "Right" or Left" belief. If you are characterizing those on the "Left" as not beliving that, you are completely misunderstanding your fellow Christians. Perhaps the difference is that while I belief that statement to be true, I accept that as the foundation of my life, not something I can try to impose on others. And definite, not to legislate." I don't disagree with a word of what you said here. Not a single word. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:28 AM Hey, Jim: You know, you and I should get to know each other. And I believe we would respect each other, rather than see each other at opposite pole. Part of the problem in this country is when you, Amos and others talk about about what Christians are like, they don't sound even faintly like the people I know. I suspect that when I talk about the Religious Right they don't sound anything like the people you know. Life becomes simpler when we can confine people to little boxes with labels. But, that isn't the way that life works. I know loving, moral, highly admirable Atheists who do far more good in life than some so-called "religious" people do. I know gay couples who in many ways live a more moral life than many straight couples. As for Jesus being the "way, the truth and the light," I think that belief is not a "Right" or Left" belief. If you are characterizing those on the "Left" as not beliving that, you are completely misunderstanding your fellow Christians. Perhaps the difference is that while I belief that statement to be true, I accept that as the foundation of my life, not something I can try to impose on others. And definite, not to legislate. But, I don't think that Mudcat is a proper forum to get into any lengthy discussion of religious beliefs. I have too much love and respect for friends in here who don't share my beliefs. Whatever anyone believes, or is trying to do to live a moral, productive life, I applaud them for it. In the long run, it is how we "walk the walk," not "talk the talk" that we are measured by. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Amos Date: 28 Jan 05 - 09:00 AM Piers: The left lost interest because of the large-scale failures of socialism, ignoring its successes in quiet places like Copehagen and Oslo. I think there is a triangle of forces at work in a social matrix -- vectors that absolutely require private ownership and individualism; vectors that require intelligent socialization of interest; and vectors that require balancing by majority voice. Democratic process, corporate process, and social process are not antagonists when they are done intelligently. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 08:40 AM Yes, equally right -- "finding their own way", "believing their own mythology" "there are many ways to find God" -- as opposed to a more literal take on the words of Jesus -- "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me". And I also believe God is love. And just. Love without justice is sentimentality. Justice without love is cruel judgementalism. Cheers! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jerry Rasmussen Date: 28 Jan 05 - 08:30 AM Jim: It is your "educated, informed generalization" that all religions are equally acceptable to the religious left? Where in the world did you get your education? And what do you mean by acceptable? Equally true? Now, my take on faith is very simple. It is summed up in three words. God is love. If something isn't love, it ain't from God. That was Martin Luther King's strength, Mother Theresa's and Ghandi's too. If an action is done out of duty and not out of love, there's no sense in being righteous about it. And hey, Amos my friend. You live in the wrong neighborhood, Man. I don't think that I've ever met a Christian who was anxious to get out of this life and into the next unless they were suffering with no hope of ever being cured. And even then, I've seen far more who want to live, even under the most limiting conditions. We visit a woman who has MS and has been an invalid most of her adult life. She is at the point now where she can just lie on her back in bed with her head propped up, watching television. She can no longer use her hands, so she has to watch whatever channel is on until her sister (who just went in for her second operation on cancer in her body) changes it for her. They're in no hurry to go anywhere. When you ask our friend Lena how she is doing, she answers with a radiant smile that would put all of us to shame, "Oh, I'm fine!" Christianity isn't about what happens after you die. It's about how you live. And it's all about how YOU live, and not at ALL about how anyone else lives. I have my hands full trying to live a decent life without worrying about what others are doing. Jerry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 08:19 AM btw, Jerry, so you believe in marching to uphold the Constitution, but the Constitution is not law? That's a very tricky distinction. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Jim Tailor Date: 28 Jan 05 - 06:47 AM "Civil rights are guaranteed by our constitution. I marched in support of civil rights because I support out constitution. As I said above.. "only human rights need to be protected. And they are not the property of any one religion." I was not trying to impose my religious beliefs on anyone. I was trying to uphold our constitution. Jerry" Every Pro-life Christian I know could say the same thing. And if your "religion" does not inform your moral code, then is grace the sole component of your religion? And to others, No, the right does not focus on the Old Testament while the left focuses on the New. But I will grant you that the left seems to dismiss the Old to a far greater extent than does the Right (because few, if any on the left believe that the Old Testament contains objective truth, while those on the right believe that it does even if that truth needs contextual understanding). And the Left and Right have pragmatic differences due to theological ones -- for instance, the Right teaches tolerance to a much greater degree than does the Left for the simple reason that the Left need not teach it -- their theology in "inclusive" -- it need not tolerate anything because it teaches that all religions are equally acceptable (in other words, what's to "tolerate"?). The above are my educated, informed generalizations to which I understand there are finer points and possible exceptions. That you can find intolerant Right wing Christians is not a surprise -- nor a surprise that you can find bigotted left-wing Christians, or obese Catholics, or cross-eyed Jews, or flatulent atheists. There is an individuality that makes each believer a non-representative of their group. There's a word for those who see the world otherwise... "bigot". Ask yourself if you believe what you do about Christians (right and otherwise) because you really know what they believe, or because it fits your presupositional world-view and thereby leaves you comfortable. Have a good morning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Piers Date: 28 Jan 05 - 04:30 AM The whole intellectual advance, which most of the left has since lost interest in, of which Marx and Engels were early protagonists, was that of removing the ethical, moral and vague ideas about justice from the socialist movement. This was not because they dour and uncompassionate but because they recognised that religious and personal ethics are informed by material existence. They observed contradiction in morality between members of different classes and between different societies and historical eras. They recognised the hopelessness of trying make people 'good' whilst the relationships of people to each other are antagonistic (i.e. the labour versus capital). Their point was that we don't need a left and right - the antagonism, we could have social ownership of the means of life and democratic control or production directly to fulfil the needs of people rather than production for profit and allocation on the basis of ability to pay. They also showed that this could only happen where the means of life were capable of producing an abundance, that is prior to the industrial revolution socialism was not a possibility - thus Jesus could not have been a socialist, in fact he famously said 'Sell that thou hast and give to the poor' which sounds a pretty stupid idea to me, not a step toward to socialist society, but social suicide. 'Take no thought for the morrow' Jesus said, which is entirely anti-social advice. In fact, Jesus' teaching was to despise worldly things for the sake of a reward in heaven. Socialism, is the appreciation of the things of this world and the endeavour to make a better world here. In my humble opinion Piers |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Hrothgar Date: 28 Jan 05 - 03:41 AM I am always intrigued by the way "conservative Christians" seem to espouse the teachings of the Old Testament instead of the New - Leviticus instead of the Sermon on the Mount, if you like. Does this mean that they aren't really Christians after all? I don't want to have to tell them so ...... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Boab Date: 28 Jan 05 - 03:40 AM Jesus Christ was more than an"inspired teacher", Little Hawk, though indeed he was AT LEAST that. He seems to have had the not-too-uncommon power to guide and influence the minds of his fellow-humans [oh, yes---he was human!],but to an extraordinary extent. His "miracles [ feeding the five thousand, walking on the water] can only have been just that---being able to convince people that something unreal WAS real. One of the most telling quotes from Him is "Your faith has made you whole!". Something which has actually happened many thousands of times. Something made John the Baptist see Him for what He was---the personification of the true God.He was, and still is,God in one person, named by the baptist as Love. My mind was concentrated on this one episode by a personal experience, in the midst of human tragedy, many years ago. I accepted my God then, and have known Him/Her ever since. It's not a matter of "believing", any more than knowing there's a roof on my house is "believing". My God is undeniable. My God can be seen in the selfless efforts of those who toil in their thousands to help the suffering tsunami victims. My God was evident in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. My God can be recognised after every mine disaster, and in every Hospital. My God is Love, a God whose existence CANNOT be denied. So I have no "religion" as the world seems to understand it; only the acceptance of that simple statement "God is Love". I don't think anything else matters at all. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Joe Offer Date: 28 Jan 05 - 02:24 AM Jerry started this thread out with an inspiring message, but there are a lot of things said here that make me feel very uneasy. I think it's unfair to condemn a group for having dirty laundry in its past - far better to look at what people are doing here and now, rather than pigeonholing them for what their forebears did, or for what some of their coreligionists do in another continent. I'm a Catholic, and I generally believe what Catholics believe. I don't claim an exclusive corner on the truth, but what I believe works for me and for many others. In my area (Sacramento), we have an extraordinary network of social programs, mostly springing from Catholic organizations (and mostly independent of the Catholic Church bureaucracy). I've worked with Catholic groups in the peace and civil rights movements, and in all sorts of other programs that promote peace and justice. I think I have a right to take pride in that, and I have to say it hurts to be condemned over and over by "enlightened" bigots who lump me with the inquisitioners. Some Catholics do good stuff, and some don't. Nobody's perfect, and no group is perfect. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Little Hawk Date: 28 Jan 05 - 12:18 AM I think Jesus' general attitude and teachings were pretty close to socialism. He rendered public service, not for profit but for the public good. He didn't charge a fee. He sought results, not profits. He encouraged equal treatment of all and equal sharing of resources. Sounds a lot like socialism to me. He threw the moneylenders out of the temple, because it was holy and they didn't belong there. Sounds like socialism to me. He advocated forgiveness, not judging others, and practicing non-violence. Now THAT's revolutionary! It goes way beyond either capitialism or socialism, and it is exactly what Gandhi and other great spiritual people in modern times have taught. That takes far greater courage and compassion than the average person is seemingly capable of. The churches and religious orders which rose in Jesus' name after his death mostly betrayed and subverted his teachings...particularly after the 4rth centurh. Mostly. They sought money, political power, and domination, and they were anything but nonviolent, anything but forgiving of those who stood in their way. Their hands were red with the blood of the innocent. Jesus was NOT a Christian! He was an inspired teacher. Such teachers are completely beyond ANY denominational identity, because they teach what transcends all denominations. Those who followed after Jesus invented Christianity, so don't blame him for its excesses and stupidities. He did not recommend or commit those excesses or stupidities. His misguided followers did, in his name...and they did it because they were mostly incapable of rising to the level which he communicated in his teachings. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: akenaton Date: 27 Jan 05 - 10:10 PM Oh I get it now Amos. You mean that religious belief is based on selfish motives, and is at odds with the teachings of the philosopher, Christ. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: mack/misophist Date: 27 Jan 05 - 10:01 PM At the risk of stating the obvious, any group that believes it has the only recipe for salvation will eventually try to impose it's values on every one else. For their own good. For example, it's possible to argue that the Inquisition was the greatest act of Christian charity in history. Make a few bad assumptions, follow them to their conclusion, and that's the sort of thing that can happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: akenaton Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:39 PM OK Frida,but socialist ideas were being espoused long before Jesus was around,and I dont really think that the motivations of the Martyrs have a great effect on how people view our political or religious systems in todays world. In my view organised religion has always been at best a distraction, and often an impediment to social justice Amos I think I understand what your getting at,but man its hard work. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Rapparee Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:29 PM Thomas 14:5 and Mark 7:15. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: freda underhill Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:26 PM and while i am not a christian, i beleive this information demonstrates why unions worked in democratic societies and not in communist societies. because a union can only exist in a democratic society, as it needs the protection of law and separation of powers in which to operate properly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: freda underhill Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:22 PM I note that Karl Marx and Frederick Engels wrote The Manifesto between December 1847 and January 1848. The first Union was formed by George Loveless, founder of the Tolpuddle union in December 1833. this song, written as a poem by one of the original martyrs when sent to exile in Australia and put to music by Mick Ryan and Graham Moore, demonstrates that the Tolpuddle martyrs, the world's first unionists, were Christians. Albion's Shore. Mick Ryan and Graham Moore. The distant shore of England fades from sight. Now all seems dark that once was pure and bright, And now a convict serves me for a time, To suffer hardship in a foreign clime. My faith and union's stronger than these chains, In pastures green he leads me once again, Through death's dark valley, safely and secure, return once more to stand on Albion's shore. How wretched is an exile's state of mind, By grief worn down, in servile chains confined, While not one gleam of hope on Earth remains, And not one friend to soothe his heartfelt pains My faith and union... Too true I know that man was made to mourn, With anguish full my aching heart is torn The heavy portion falls unto my lot, Far from my friends, by all the world forgot. My faith and union... Farewell my mother, aged father dear, for you I shed a sympathetic tear, I pray before our lives have ceased to run, You'll be united with your long lost son. My faith and union.. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: Amos Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:20 PM It's not Christian, or non-Christian, ake. It has to do with how the lesson of responsibility in life is rendered. Some folks imply that your only real responsibility will be to get the hell off this mortal coil, join Papa-In-Sky, be upgraded to a non-material golden Being, and make music ad infinitum. This is a very shortened version, but you can see how it woul be easy to rationalize harmful acts against lesser beings or races or species if all you were going to do was escape to the hereafter. The downtrodden slaves of the South made up lots of songs about escaping to the hereafter, for their reasons, as well. But they can be condoned on the basis that they were in an insufferable amount of oppression. Using the same rationale as an expiation of your own harmful acts against others is not so easily understood. On the other hand some folks teach that you will find yourself riding the wheel of Life until you learn it so well you can transcend or graduate. If you thought that, naturally, you'd be more considerate about sowing pain or environmental mayhem, because you'd know you would be living with the after-effects of your own actions one way or another,. These two models of the life-cycle of the soul engender very different models of what ethical thought should be. Capisce? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Religious Left From: freda underhill Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:14 PM A group of tutors and students meeting at Oxford University in the late 1720s became known as the Oxford Methodists. The group included John Wesley, Charles Wesley and George Whitefield. In 1735 these three men became evangelical missionaries in America. After three years with the English settlers in Georgia, John Wesley and George Whitefield returned to England and in 1739 built their first Methodist Chapel in Bristol. Wesley and Whitefield also gave sermons in the open-air. They travelled the country where they mainly visited poor neighbourhoods. Wesley, who had emerged as the leader of the Methodists, told the people who attended his meetings that if they loved God in return, they would "be saved from sin and made holy". Wesley also had a lot to say about personal morality. In his sermons he encouraged people to work hard and to save for the future. Wesley also warned against the dangers of gambling and drinking. Although there were Methodist ministers, John Wesley encouraged people who had full-time jobs to become lay preachers. This gave working people valuable experience of speaking in public. Later, some of these went on to become leaders of trade unions and reform groups. By the time John Wesley died in 1791, the Methodist movement had over 76,000 members. After Wesley's death the Methodists formally separated from the Anglican Church. Membership continued to grow and by 1801 reached 87,000. The movement was weakened in 1808 when followers of Hugh Bourne were expelled. Bourne's followers became known as Primitive Methodists whereas those who remained were called Wesleyan Methodists. Methodists were active in the campaign for religious emancipation. Victories included the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts in 1828, the voluntarization of the church rate in 1853 and the 1871 the Universities Tests Act opened Oxford and Cambridge to non-Anglicans. In these struggles the Methodists became closely associated with the Liberal Party. Throughout the 19th century, none of the many Wesleyan Methodists elected to Parliament were members of the Conservative Party. |
