|
Post by fixit on Sept 13, 2014 21:00:50 GMT -5
Yes, Jesus spoke of the kingdom of heaven that is within us, not a kingdom that is of this world.
Authentic Christianity is within the hearts and lives of individuals, rather than the politics of man.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 22:46:22 GMT -5
If everyone decided wars were needless, there would be no more wars. So you have to start somewhere. Passive resistance won't always work. Neither will kindness, love, mercy and forgiveness. I can think of one man in particular who was crucified for his stupidity in putting his faith in these qualities. At the same time, I understand your question, and that my preceding answers, while clever, are inadequate. I think in a war situation I would try to help my country without carrying a weapon. I appreciate your answer WH. I wish there were no more wars. Unfortunately I think the war situation is about to get a lot worse before it gets better. All I talked about was how to start somewhere. Perhaps over thousands of years it might make a difference. I said "passive resistance" not "stupid resistance". There's such a thing as fighting your own battles. I was just reading about Tiananmen Square and its present day influence in China. It's been mostly forgotten, and no one is concerned about freedom in China; at least that was the gist of the article.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 13, 2014 22:49:13 GMT -5
FWIW an awful lot of Christians try to turn so many things into spiritual activities -- some of them think every movement is a spiritual act. A worker once told us in a gospel meeting that God will "tell us how to wash the dishes, and how to mow the lawn". Then I found it quite interesting that at come conventions people wiped their arses with toilet paper and at other conventions they did it with dried corn cobs/husks/whatever. If that's not a religious fanatic, I don't know what is. Then another worker told us at Special meeting that someone was "in the spirit on the Lord's day", and asked the question "Why would the writer make such a statement if the guy was supposed to be in the spirit all the time. I was deeply in the spirit one time when I was filling in my time sheet, and my boss ripped it up and told me to go back and do it correctly. Yes, Jesus spoke of the kingdom of heaven that is within us, not a kingdom that is of this world. Authentic Christianity is within the hearts and lives of individuals, rather than the politics of man.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 22:55:20 GMT -5
Perhaps I could be clearer, and so I'll take another try at this; the other post was just before bedtime last night. Society collectively does need rules and regulations and discipline and punishment to keep people in line. As an individual, I don't need rules and regulations and discipline, because I'm committed to the underlying values of living an honest and ethical life. I could use situational coaching and wisdom at times, that is true. And I think that's true for many, maybe even most, individuals. Further, within its structure, society over-reaches in terms of controlling people, and that is something I do need to be concerned with. A simple example - sending young people to needless wars in order to further the interests of the ruling class. That is something that needs to be resisted in some way. That's what I mean by resistance. I believe the principle of "passive resistance" is how we put Jesus example into practice within society. I'm also not happy with what our respective countries are becoming, which is, more like Communist East Germany with every passing day. Finally, within a church structure, the normalizing and objectifying tendencies operating on the individual are extremely strong; and IMO should not even exist. That's very abstract, but to put in plain English, a worker should NEVER censure a person about issues that are not ethical in nature, that is, that do not amount to tangible harm for anyone in the church. That's supposed to be between that person and God. I think you're saying the same thing I am saying. But the kinds of resistance you're talking about are not Christian resistances, but issues that are more in line with human rights and freedoms than religions. The New Testament doesn't advocate resistance against governments, but against evil. The reason we have come to believe in resisting governments is because we have been taught democratic principles and given the right to petition government -- we have been made the government. That's not because we are either righteous or religious .. it's because we're human beings living in a democracy. A Christian's right to resist the government is a democratic right, not a scriptural obligation. As long as religions, especially monotheistic religions, organize, they will never be entirely comfortable with any form of government. Well, I think evil should be resisted wherever it is found, and it is often found in governments, or in those who have the rule over us. Any Christian should be against the Tea Party and probably the entire Republican party because they do nothing for the poor. And Jesus said, Matthew 25.41-43 “Then he will turn to the ‘goats,’ the ones on his left, and say, ‘Get out, worthless goats! You’re good for nothing but the fires of hell. And why? Because—
I was hungry and you gave me no meal, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was homeless and you gave me no bed, I was shivering and you gave me no clothes, Sick and in prison, and you never visited.’
And to be perfectly clear about who Jesus meant by "I was", Whenever you failed to do one of these things to someone who was being overlooked or ignored, that was me—you failed to do it to me.’
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 23:02:58 GMT -5
I appreciate your answer WH. I wish there were no more wars. Unfortunately I think the war situation is about to get a lot worse before it gets better. It seems that Jesus advocated submission to the Roman occupation, yet they crucified him anyway. Peaceful protest changed oppressive regimes in eastern Europe, but it didn't work in Syria. The fired on the protesters until they took up arms. I saw this recently: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_BackIt mentions non-violent idealists from western countries who went to Russia to support the revolution, only to end up dead or in concentration camps. Yes. These things happen. And in reality, religions are more the cause than the antidote. I believe we just have to accept that New Testament teachings are all for our own "personal" edification and values. I don't think they have anything at all to do with running a government or controlling our neighbors or even defending ourselves against people who slap our face. There is no bill of rights in the scriptures -- that's a concept that came uniquely with democracy, which BTW has long considered democracy its enemy. The resurrection itself if the highest example of Christian righteousness, not self preservation or societal influence. While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. You've maybe never read Jesus' words with the optics of social justice in mind. “The point is not that Jesus was a good guy who accepted everybody, and thus we should do the same (though that would be good). Rather, his teachings and behavior reflect an alternative social vision. Jesus was not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.” ― Marcus J. Borg, The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion To A More Authentic Contemporary Faith
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 23:12:51 GMT -5
Yes, Jesus spoke of the kingdom of heaven that is within us, not a kingdom that is of this world. Authentic Christianity is within the hearts and lives of individuals, rather than the politics of man. I really don't think that way myself. Christianity begins with the hearts and lives of individuals, but it also has to be real in this world. Note the Matthew 25 quote above, also the parable of the Good Samaritan, and here, ten verses on social justice - blog.vyrso.com/2013/10/02/what-the-bible-says-about-social-justice/
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 23:27:29 GMT -5
FWIW an awful lot of Christians try to turn so many things into spiritual activities -- some of them think every movement is a spiritual act. A worker once told us in a gospel meeting that God will "tell us how to wash the dishes, and how to mow the lawn". Then I found it quite interesting that at come conventions people wiped their arses with toilet paper and at other conventions they did it with dried corn cobs/husks/whatever. If that's not a religious fanatic, I don't know what is. Then another worker told us at Special meeting that someone was "in the spirit on the Lord's day", and asked the question "Why would the writer make such a statement if the guy was supposed to be in the spirit all the time. I was deeply in the spirit one time when I was filling in my time sheet, and my boss ripped it up and told me to go back and do it correctly. Yes, Jesus spoke of the kingdom of heaven that is within us, not a kingdom that is of this world. Authentic Christianity is within the hearts and lives of individuals, rather than the politics of man. Are you referring to the idea some people have of God as a personal valet service? Thank you Lord for finding me that empty parking spot close to the supermarket door, and just when it was about to begin to rain too. In some ways I admire people who have that kind of close existential connection with God, but I know I don't. But over the years I have thought of the lessons of Jesus more as transformational in this life, both in ourselves and in others. I see Christ in certain figures like Gandhi or Martin Luther King, Jr. I recently began to watch a very long Japanese movie, The Human Condition, which is now packed away somewhere as the result of our last move, but anyway, I see the protagonist as a prototype of a Christ-like figure, and quite an unintentional one. Maintaining one's ethical integrity in the face of a militaristic regime is a common feature of Japanese and some German post-war movies. I also recommend 'Mephisto'. And a recent movie 'Das Leben der Anderen', also titled, 'The Lives of Others'. Also, 'Life is Beautiful'. All compatible with Christian teaching.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 13, 2014 23:41:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 13, 2014 23:49:14 GMT -5
I think you're saying the same thing I am saying. But the kinds of resistance you're talking about are not Christian resistances, but issues that are more in line with human rights and freedoms than religions. The New Testament doesn't advocate resistance against governments, but against evil. The reason we have come to believe in resisting governments is because we have been taught democratic principles and given the right to petition government -- we have been made the government. That's not because we are either righteous or religious .. it's because we're human beings living in a democracy. A Christian's right to resist the government is a democratic right, not a scriptural obligation. As long as religions, especially monotheistic religions, organize, they will never be entirely comfortable with any form of government. Well, I think evil should be resisted wherever it is found, and it is often found in governments, or in those who have the rule over us. Any Christian should be against the Tea Party and probably the entire Republican party because they do nothing for the poor. And Jesus said, Matthew 25.41-43 “Then he will turn to the ‘goats,’ the ones on his left, and say, ‘Get out, worthless goats! You’re good for nothing but the fires of hell. And why? Because—
I was hungry and you gave me no meal, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was homeless and you gave me no bed, I was shivering and you gave me no clothes, Sick and in prison, and you never visited.’
And to be perfectly clear about who Jesus meant by "I was", Whenever you failed to do one of these things to someone who was being overlooked or ignored, that was me—you failed to do it to me.’
I tend to agree. Because we live in a democracy, we have the right to throw out our government by legal means ... and we have a responsibility to do so for the benefit of ourselves and society. But I don't think the passage you quoted has anything to do with throwing out the Republican party, however. I think what you quoted was about our apparent obligation to care for Jesus in that manner. And it doesn't matter what kind of government we have, we can individually all do such things for anyone. Remember, the question was can a "church" be democratic? Doing for the poor and needy is not really a democratic idea, it's a liberal concept.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2014 0:01:23 GMT -5
Yes. These things happen. And in reality, religions are more the cause than the antidote. I believe we just have to accept that New Testament teachings are all for our own "personal" edification and values. I don't think they have anything at all to do with running a government or controlling our neighbors or even defending ourselves against people who slap our face. There is no bill of rights in the scriptures -- that's a concept that came uniquely with democracy, which BTW has long considered democracy its enemy. The resurrection itself if the highest example of Christian righteousness, not self preservation or societal influence. While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. You've maybe never read Jesus' words with the optics of social justice in mind. “The point is not that Jesus was a good guy who accepted everybody, and thus we should do the same (though that would be good). Rather, his teachings and behavior reflect an alternative social vision. Jesus was not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.” ― Marcus J. Borg, The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion To A More Authentic Contemporary Faith I have no argument with you whatsoever about what the government should do for people and what people should do for each other. I have no argument with you either concerning what should be done with the fascist ideologies of politicians. I am just saying that we don't resolve our issues with government as a Christian activity, or we would be nothing better than the Tea Party. We deal with government evil because we have the democratic right (and responsibility) to do that. But that right and responsibility doesn't come to us because of either Christianity ... it's only because we live in a democracy. Churches can survive in all kinds of government systems, and they can be persecuted in all kinds of government systems either by the government regime or the citizenry. Churches don't need democracy to survive.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 14, 2014 0:28:34 GMT -5
Thanks for that, its inspirational.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 14, 2014 0:45:51 GMT -5
Yes. These things happen. And in reality, religions are more the cause than the antidote. I believe we just have to accept that New Testament teachings are all for our own "personal" edification and values. I don't think they have anything at all to do with running a government or controlling our neighbors or even defending ourselves against people who slap our face. There is no bill of rights in the scriptures -- that's a concept that came uniquely with democracy, which BTW has long considered democracy its enemy. The resurrection itself if the highest example of Christian righteousness, not self preservation or societal influence. While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. You've maybe never read Jesus' words with the optics of social justice in mind. “The point is not that Jesus was a good guy who accepted everybody, and thus we should do the same (though that would be good). Rather, his teachings and behavior reflect an alternative social vision. Jesus was not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.” ― Marcus J. Borg, The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion To A More Authentic Contemporary Faith I might be wrong about Marcus Borg, but I'm concerned that he might have left-wing views that are counter-productive to social justice. Governments can and should take care of the disadvantaged in society, but to do that requires money. Money can be extracted from an economy for social justice but all too often left-wing governments kill the goose that lays the golden egg. There's a balance to be had and governments often get it wrong. They need to provide the conditions for business to prosper, and skim some of the wealth (but not too much) and spend it wisely.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2014 0:55:53 GMT -5
FWIW an awful lot of Christians try to turn so many things into spiritual activities -- some of them think every movement is a spiritual act. A worker once told us in a gospel meeting that God will "tell us how to wash the dishes, and how to mow the lawn". Then I found it quite interesting that at come conventions people wiped their arses with toilet paper and at other conventions they did it with dried corn cobs/husks/whatever. If that's not a religious fanatic, I don't know what is. Then another worker told us at Special meeting that someone was "in the spirit on the Lord's day", and asked the question "Why would the writer make such a statement if the guy was supposed to be in the spirit all the time. I was deeply in the spirit one time when I was filling in my time sheet, and my boss ripped it up and told me to go back and do it correctly. Are you referring to the idea some people have of God as a personal valet service? Thank you Lord for finding me that empty parking spot close to the supermarket door, and just when it was about to begin to rain too. In some ways I admire people who have that kind of close existential connection with God, but I know I don't. Well that too, but I was thinking about people who are holding God's hand, so to speak, at all times, which renders every act they do to be in accordance with God's will. We were told in a gospel meeting one time that God's time for us to get out of bed is when the sun comes up. Makes me wonder what is left of time and chance. I appreciate these kinds of films. I'm just a bit less inclined to credit Christ that I am a basic appreciation of the human condition.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 14, 2014 17:07:32 GMT -5
I appreciate your answer WH. I wish there were no more wars. Unfortunately I think the war situation is about to get a lot worse before it gets better. All I talked about was how to start somewhere. Perhaps over thousands of years it might make a difference. I said "passive resistance" not "stupid resistance". There's such a thing as fighting your own battles. I was just reading about Tiananmen Square and its present day influence in China. It's been mostly forgotten, and no one is concerned about freedom in China; at least that was the gist of the article. Most people in the West don't want war, but when fanatics are determined to destroy our hard-won freedoms the threat needs to be confronted. Western governments are now realising that.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 14, 2014 22:34:46 GMT -5
Well, I think evil should be resisted wherever it is found, and it is often found in governments, or in those who have the rule over us. Any Christian should be against the Tea Party and probably the entire Republican party because they do nothing for the poor. And Jesus said, Matthew 25.41-43 “Then he will turn to the ‘goats,’ the ones on his left, and say, ‘Get out, worthless goats! You’re good for nothing but the fires of hell. And why? Because—
I was hungry and you gave me no meal, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was homeless and you gave me no bed, I was shivering and you gave me no clothes, Sick and in prison, and you never visited.’
And to be perfectly clear about who Jesus meant by "I was", Whenever you failed to do one of these things to someone who was being overlooked or ignored, that was me—you failed to do it to me.’
I tend to agree. Because we live in a democracy, we have the right to throw out our government by legal means ... and we have a responsibility to do so for the benefit of ourselves and society. But I don't think the passage you quoted has anything to do with throwing out the Republican party, however. I think what you quoted was about our apparent obligation to care for Jesus in that manner. And it doesn't matter what kind of government we have, we can individually all do such things for anyone. Remember, the question was can a "church" be democratic? Doing for the poor and needy is not really a democratic idea, it's a liberal concept. Jesus made it clear that looking after the poor and needy is looking after the heart of Jesus. That's what the passage is about ... look after the needy, and that's how you look after me. So how could you vote for a party that is just trying to serve the rich in a country where there is such great income disparity? (Okay, you may not agree with my premise on Republicanism and I'll give you a bye if you don't think it's the party for the preservation of wealth and the wealthy. But otherwise, no Christian should vote for them).
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 14, 2014 22:43:50 GMT -5
While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. You've maybe never read Jesus' words with the optics of social justice in mind. “The point is not that Jesus was a good guy who accepted everybody, and thus we should do the same (though that would be good). Rather, his teachings and behavior reflect an alternative social vision. Jesus was not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.” ― Marcus J. Borg, The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion To A More Authentic Contemporary Faith I have no argument with you whatsoever about what the government should do for people and what people should do for each other. I have no argument with you either concerning what should be done with the fascist ideologies of politicians. I am just saying that we don't resolve our issues with government as a Christian activity, or we would be nothing better than the Tea Party. We deal with government evil because we have the democratic right (and responsibility) to do that. But that right and responsibility doesn't come to us because of either Christianity ... it's only because we live in a democracy. Churches can survive in all kinds of government systems, and they can be persecuted in all kinds of government systems either by the government regime or the citizenry. Churches don't need democracy to survive. Oh, you're saying that democracy is not rooted in Christianity. I completely agree. Is that what we're talking about ... that the best things in government come out of Christian ideals? Certainly not. History indicates otherwise. And I don't think that we should vote for this or that party because it is Christian either. Keep religion out of the affairs of state. But I do think our Christian roots (I don't know if you declare as a Christian, maybe not), our Christian roots compel us toward political activity and action. And our determination and viewpoint on specific issues is rooted or motivated out of our Christian beliefs. I was raised in a neo-Calvinist home, so while they are politically and socially active to an extreme, some of those ideals have rubbed off on me.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 14, 2014 22:54:49 GMT -5
While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. You've maybe never read Jesus' words with the optics of social justice in mind. “The point is not that Jesus was a good guy who accepted everybody, and thus we should do the same (though that would be good). Rather, his teachings and behavior reflect an alternative social vision. Jesus was not talking about how to be good and how to behave within the framework of a domination system. He was a critic of the domination system itself.” ― Marcus J. Borg, The God We Never Knew: Beyond Dogmatic Religion To A More Authentic Contemporary Faith I might be wrong about Marcus Borg, but I'm concerned that he might have left-wing views that are counter-productive to social justice. Governments can and should take care of the disadvantaged in society, but to do that requires money. Money can be extracted from an economy for social justice but all too often left-wing governments kill the goose that lays the golden egg. There's a balance to be had and governments often get it wrong. They need to provide the conditions for business to prosper, and skim some of the wealth (but not too much) and spend it wisely. Never mind welfare payments, the USA is slipping on infrastructure spending, on education and on public health. The middle class is disappearing! And the rich are getting richer. I don't think Borg gets down to the level of indicating what the social policies should be. I think the argument is at the level of - should Christians get involved on social justice issues. Yes, they should. That's really about all. Borg is a theologian and I think, he is helping thinking, intelligent people reclaim God's Word. Cut out the chaff, and focus on what Jesus actually said. His commentary on the New Testament called 'Evolution of the Word' is monumental ... However, "Meeting Jesus again for the First Time" is a very readable short book, that first got me excited about his writing.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 14, 2014 23:00:17 GMT -5
Are you referring to the idea some people have of God as a personal valet service? Thank you Lord for finding me that empty parking spot close to the supermarket door, and just when it was about to begin to rain too. In some ways I admire people who have that kind of close existential connection with God, but I know I don't. Well that too, but I was thinking about people who are holding God's hand, so to speak, at all times, which renders every act they do to be in accordance with God's will. We were told in a gospel meeting one time that God's time for us to get out of bed is when the sun comes up. Makes me wonder what is left of time and chance. I appreciate these kinds of films. I'm just a bit less inclined to credit Christ that I am a basic appreciation of the human condition. If you appreciate the human condition, and have empathy and a concern for humanity, then you appreciate Christ, because that's all it is about. That's all the gospel story is about. It's not a recipe for salvation, IMO, it's a process toward redemption. But whether you're working toward redemption on Earth, or ultimate redemption in heaven, it's exactly the same process. That's why Jesus said, when you look after the needy, you are looking after me; it's all part of the same process.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 14, 2014 23:10:43 GMT -5
All I talked about was how to start somewhere. Perhaps over thousands of years it might make a difference. I said "passive resistance" not "stupid resistance". There's such a thing as fighting your own battles. I was just reading about Tiananmen Square and its present day influence in China. It's been mostly forgotten, and no one is concerned about freedom in China; at least that was the gist of the article. Most people in the West don't want war, but when fanatics are determined to destroy our hard-won freedoms the threat needs to be confronted. Western governments are now realising that. The idiots should never have bombed Iraq. Now they have added who knows how many millions of fanatics that hate them. All this hatred has a history. There is a point where a country has to take a military stand, no question. But where does that leave me? I believe that if the world is going to be changed, it has to begin with me. Even though we might be looking at a successful result, a peaceful world, hundreds or thousands of years away. I think the only way to do it, is volunteer for duty with CO status, which means you're willing to shoulder the burden for your country, but not willing to kill another human being. I don't think that stance is problem free, ethically speaking, but I can't think of a better way.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 14, 2014 23:23:50 GMT -5
The idiots should never have bombed Iraq. Now they have added who knows how many millions of fanatics that hate them. All this hatred has a history. Germans treated Dutch despicably last century, but it hasn't resulted in thousands of fanatics wanting to cut off innocent journalist's heads. Sorry, I don't buy into your theory that those who hate our Western civilization are justified.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2014 23:27:31 GMT -5
I tend to agree. Because we live in a democracy, we have the right to throw out our government by legal means ... and we have a responsibility to do so for the benefit of ourselves and society. But I don't think the passage you quoted has anything to do with throwing out the Republican party, however. I think what you quoted was about our apparent obligation to care for Jesus in that manner. And it doesn't matter what kind of government we have, we can individually all do such things for anyone. Remember, the question was can a "church" be democratic? Doing for the poor and needy is not really a democratic idea, it's a liberal concept. Jesus made it clear that looking after the poor and needy is looking after the heart of Jesus. That's what the passage is about ... look after the needy, and that's how you look after me. So how could you vote for a party that is just trying to serve the rich in a country where there is such great income disparity? (Okay, you may not agree with my premise on Republicanism and I'll give you a bye if you don't think it's the party for the preservation of wealth and the wealthy. But otherwise, no Christian should vote for them). Actually I agree absolutely with everything you said -- I could have said that myself. I'm getting technical with this. I will grant you that a person of true Christian values should place the welfare, personal rights, and personal freedoms of their fellow citizens ahead of all other ideologies. Anyone who does not agree with that does not really believe in democratic principles -- the democratic system of government was developed for that specific purpose. But you can take out the word "Christian" and replace it with "human" and you have the very same results. But here's my problem with voting on "Christian" values -- they encompass far more than the welfare, rights, and freedoms of their fellow citizens. It is "Christian values" applied to politics that breed Tea Parties and fascists, unfortunately, and plays serious havoc with democracies. When I was professing I always disagreed with the friends voting (and workers telling them to) for candidates who advocated against liberties that the 2x2s did not approve of for themselves. That's what theocracies are for, not democracies. When one is involved with democratic politics (and we all are, legally) we have to accept that our own values are not necessarily what is best for the welfare, rights, and freedoms of others. I have no problem voting for freedoms that I would NEVER practice myself .. I just accept as a humanitarian that if I don't want my own liberties to be curtailed, then I owe it to everyone else to respect theirs. Of course, it's easier for me now to explain my political orientation when I don't have to involve myself with the word "Christian". "Humanitarian values" to me covers anything good Christians or any other good human beings can bring to the voting booth. But between you and I, I think we have the same motivations when it comes to voting.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2014 23:49:52 GMT -5
But I do think our Christian roots (I don't know if you declare as a Christian, maybe not), our Christian roots compel us toward political activity and action. And our determination and viewpoint on specific issues is rooted or motivated out of our Christian beliefs. I was raised in a neo-Calvinist home, so while they are politically and socially active to an extreme, some of those ideals have rubbed off on me. I was raised as a 2x2, with no exposure to other denominations until I was out of high school. But in the 2x2s there is a really ambiguous situation. They are usually advised, and for the most part behave, and don't participate in politics and sometimes don't even vote. On the other hand, they can sit around and have lengthy discussions that are nothing short of racial, ethnic, class, religious, and any other kind of discrimination to be found. I was shocked into a consciousness of that in the first grade when I heard a professing man remark that a certain ethnic group of people "used to know that they were dogs, but now they want everything that everyone else has." I played with kids of that ethnic group. It was thanks to my parents that I had such intimate exposure to that ethnic group, and thankful that my Dad served on the city council. But in our house there was never once any mention of voting on "Christian" values. Our religion was strictly limited to our own lifestyle and politics was an entirely separate matter. I should tell you that for quite a number of years before I stopped going to meetings I stopped referring to myself as a Christian because I didn't want people to assume I was any kind of typical Christian.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2014 0:14:54 GMT -5
If you appreciate the human condition, and have empathy and a concern for humanity, then you appreciate Christ, because that's all it is about. That's all the gospel story is about. It's not a recipe for salvation, IMO, it's a process toward redemption. But whether you're working toward redemption on Earth, or ultimate redemption in heaven, it's exactly the same process. That's why Jesus said, when you look after the needy, you are looking after me; it's all part of the same process. Well, yes, that's what Jesus' gospel story was about, but it wasn't an original story. I have no problem with the story, but the whole concept of working toward one's redemption and/or salvation doesn't originate in the New Testament, and certainly not in the Old Testament. The philosophy and wisdom of humanitarianism was recognized long before Jesus time, and undoubtedly long before Old Testament times. Christianity just adds a religious sentiment to the practice. Christianity basically created the need for redemption and salvation and prescribed humanitarianism (in theory anyway) as the means of achieving it. Humanitarianism is more wisdom than theology.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 15, 2014 10:11:36 GMT -5
The idiots should never have bombed Iraq. Now they have added who knows how many millions of fanatics that hate them. All this hatred has a history. Germans treated Dutch despicably last century, but it hasn't resulted in thousands of fanatics wanting to cut off innocent journalist's heads. Sorry, I don't buy into your theory that those who hate our Western civilization are justified. I don't think their reaction is justified. I think it is what you can expect. Have you ever been bombed? Had relatives killed or maimed in war? Still, I'm not saying the reaction is justified. I'm just saying it's what you can expect. So, you're probably alluding to my parents, and extended family, living through occupied Holland under the Nazis. And no, my parents did not hate Germans, but they really hated the Nazis. They also were Christians, and believed in the quality of forgiveness. They also believed that the sins of one generation should not be visited on the next, and any Germans they did know in Canada were generally born after the war. I've also heard tales of German soldiers that were kind and tried to help where they could. It was dangerous for them to do so, but they tried to prevent people from starving, for example. These were rare exceptions though.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 15, 2014 10:25:28 GMT -5
Jesus made it clear that looking after the poor and needy is looking after the heart of Jesus. That's what the passage is about ... look after the needy, and that's how you look after me. So how could you vote for a party that is just trying to serve the rich in a country where there is such great income disparity? (Okay, you may not agree with my premise on Republicanism and I'll give you a bye if you don't think it's the party for the preservation of wealth and the wealthy. But otherwise, no Christian should vote for them). Actually I agree absolutely with everything you said -- I could have said that myself. I'm getting technical with this. I will grant you that a person of true Christian values should place the welfare, personal rights, and personal freedoms of their fellow citizens ahead of all other ideologies. Anyone who does not agree with that does not really believe in democratic principles -- the democratic system of government was developed for that specific purpose. But you can take out the word "Christian" and replace it with "human" and you have the very same results. But here's my problem with voting on "Christian" values -- they encompass far more than the welfare, rights, and freedoms of their fellow citizens. It is "Christian values" applied to politics that breed Tea Parties and fascists, unfortunately, and plays serious havoc with democracies. When I was professing I always disagreed with the friends voting (and workers telling them to) for candidates who advocated against liberties that the 2x2s did not approve of for themselves. That's what theocracies are for, not democracies. When one is involved with democratic politics (and we all are, legally) we have to accept that our own values are not necessarily what is best for the welfare, rights, and freedoms of others. I have no problem voting for freedoms that I would NEVER practice myself .. I just accept as a humanitarian that if I don't want my own liberties to be curtailed, then I owe it to everyone else to respect theirs. Of course, it's easier for me now to explain my political orientation when I don't have to involve myself with the word "Christian". "Humanitarian values" to me covers anything good Christians or any other good human beings can bring to the voting booth. But between you and I, I think we have the same motivations when it comes to voting. In the process of explaining ourselves I think we're finding we quite agree on most things. I'm very much against packaging together a platform, and saying that's the platform based on Christian values. Partly because I'm against many of the positions one finds in those platforms. I'm pro-choice, support euthenasia, support gay marriage, and so on. So I think our Christian values motivate our choices, mine quite differently than some other Christians, but generally, as political actors, we should not vote or organize along religious or cultural lines. That's the problem in many emerging democratic nations: the predominating culture votes itself onto the reigns of power and suppresses other cultures. Shia's in Iraq presently versus Sunnis and Kurds are a notable example of this. (Some countries, like Malaysia, have developed novel voting mechanisms to ensure all cultures are represented in their government. Fortunately, in most developed Western countries we don't vote along cultural or religious lines, although I fear in the USA politic parties are becoming the culture, preventing logical and independent thinking.) The problem for me, which you point to, is that if I identify as a Christian, in many minds I have aligned myself with a particular viewpoint, so that is a concern to me. And some Christians become concerned with my liberal outlook because they want Christians to all think alike. So I always seem to have a lot of 'splaining to do.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 15, 2014 10:29:48 GMT -5
But I do think our Christian roots (I don't know if you declare as a Christian, maybe not), our Christian roots compel us toward political activity and action. And our determination and viewpoint on specific issues is rooted or motivated out of our Christian beliefs. I was raised in a neo-Calvinist home, so while they are politically and socially active to an extreme, some of those ideals have rubbed off on me. I was raised as a 2x2, with no exposure to other denominations until I was out of high school. But in the 2x2s there is a really ambiguous situation. They are usually advised, and for the most part behave, and don't participate in politics and sometimes don't even vote. On the other hand, they can sit around and have lengthy discussions that are nothing short of racial, ethnic, class, religious, and any other kind of discrimination to be found. I was shocked into a consciousness of that in the first grade when I heard a professing man remark that a certain ethnic group of people "used to know that they were dogs, but now they want everything that everyone else has." I played with kids of that ethnic group. It was thanks to my parents that I had such intimate exposure to that ethnic group, and thankful that my Dad served on the city council. But in our house there was never once any mention of voting on "Christian" values. Our religion was strictly limited to our own lifestyle and politics was an entirely separate matter. I should tell you that for quite a number of years before I stopped going to meetings I stopped referring to myself as a Christian because I didn't want people to assume I was any kind of typical Christian. A literal quote from a senior worker, which I heard first hand from the convention platform. "Friends, I hope we're referring to ourselves to others as Christians". (oops - later edit - that should say "not referring" ) So, I'm curious. Do you refer to yourself as a Christian now? Or are you a Christian now? I kinda thought "humanist" might be your label of choice. (I should Google Christian humanist and see what comes up.)
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 15, 2014 13:31:15 GMT -5
While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours.[/quote]Athenian democracy developed around the fifth century BC.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 15, 2014 13:53:06 GMT -5
While there were no democracies when the Bible's books were written, I believe Jesus words definitely applied to running a government or interactions with our neighbours. Athenian democracy developed around the fifth century BC. [/quote] And was gone by the time of Christ. Okay, I meant the New Testament.
|
|