Why does the Christian Right support the message of financial prosperity and free-market capitalism?

[GCSTroop]

Originally Posted by 007.5

Troop has stated his personal opinion on the issue, and your assertion that there is no such thing as atheistic moral relativism is denied even by Atheists themselves ; Just as atheism is the opposite of Theism , and atheistic Secular Humanism is the opposite of Christianity, so is moral relativism the opposite of absolute moral laws and values . No God = Atheism . No God = no absolute moral laws = man made morals (relativism) .

Please refrain from this excuse of me trolling just because your Faith is being challenged so vehemently ; I have every right as you do to cruise City Data daily on topics of interest. Whining is immature besides.

Horse crap! I did not say that I deny moral relativism, 007.5. What I was getting at is that everyone practices moral relativism - even you Bible thumping goons who insist on a doctrine of unchangeable laws and mandates. I cited plenty of examples - the stoning of prostitutes, those who rallied outside of schools with Bibles in their hands to prevent blacks and whites from going to school together, etc... In these scenarios and a whole host of others, people have clinched their Bibles in their hands and screamed at the top of their lungs about how the Bible finds those things to be immoral.

Christians in this day and age can't agree on a plethora of topics involving what they deem to be moral issues. Gay marriage, women in the church, and even abortion have drawn several lines in the dirt so as to say "This is a moral and religious issue." If one has a Christian over here saying one thing and backing it up with Bible verses, and you have another Christian over here saying another thing and backing it up with Bible verses is that not the very definition of relativism itself?

Throughout history, Christians have moved forward to slowly (and I mean very slowly) accept the moral codes of ever-changing societies. One who insists that Biblical laws are "forever" must accept the punishments doled out and commanded by the Bible. Even some of the most devout Christians in today's world might turn their heads in horror at the punishments commanded by the Bible for such small infractions.

So, which is it 007.5, should we practice the ruthless barbarism dictated by the Bible of yore so that we can be harmonious and closer to Christ? Or, is it high time to admit that even the morality people claim to find in the Bible is nothing more than just an individual moral perspective painted onto the fine, thin sheets of the book itself? One only has to look at the shift in moral codes from 1 A.D. until the present day to realize that all of humanity has shifted its codes ever so slightly from year to year.

We all have our own moral fiber and moral network. To post on these threads insisting that atheists have but merely a loose moral fiber filled with relative morality is simply hypocritical in the fullest. You may have your own moral code, you might find Biblical harmony in that, but the reality is you derived that moral code externally and independently only to paint it back onto The Book itself.

Paint exists externally of the surface it is to be applied on. It is a heap of chemicals mixed independently, in a number of ways, to achieve a variety of colors, thickness and adhesion qualities. Your choice color of paint and my choice color of paint might be different altogether. You may like that color a lot and I may not like it at all. The same is true the other way around. But, if you take that paint and coat the sheets of your Bible with it, it doesn't make it any more sacrosanct or permanent than mine. It's still a different color of paint applied to a book with the relative choice of color you prefer. I could probably paint the book with my own color as there's nothing stopping me from doing so. At the end of the day and whether one applies the paint to a wall or a book, we're still using an external source of color to spruce up otherwise dull material.

[EinsteinsGhost]

Originally Posted by NorthGAbound12

Probably because free market capitalism is the only moral economic system and is the only system that can diminish poverty and raise the standard of living for everyone.

And how capitalistic was Jesus? I recall reading in the Bible that he blasted priests making money in the name of God. Does capitalism ensure that morality, that not everything is for sale?

[GCSTroop]

Originally Posted by whoppers

Are you saying that it's wrong to have people of mixed race at the same schools and in the military? Because that's certainly what you have written when you included racial integration with the "evils" of stoning prostitutes and slavery.

I'm confused - are you a racist? Do you support segregation?

Either the way I wrote that was mistaken or you're misunderstanding what I wrote. For the record, I do not support segregation and was merely comparing the moral relativism of people 50 years ago who held their Bibles so firmly while black men and women walked into "white schools" to the people of today who would not even dare do such a thing.

[007.5]

Originally Posted by GCSTroop

Horse crap! I did not say that I deny moral relativism, 007.5. What I was getting at is that everyone practices moral relativism - even you Bible thumping goons who insist on a doctrine of unchangeable laws and mandates. I cited plenty of examples - the stoning of prostitutes, those who rallied outside of schools with Bibles in their hands to prevent blacks and whites from going to school together, etc... In these scenarios and a whole host of others, people have clinched their Bibles in their hands and screamed at the top of their lungs about how the Bible finds those things to be immoral.

Christians in this day and age can't agree on a plethora of topics involving what they deem to be moral issues. Gay marriage, women in the church, and even abortion have drawn several lines in the dirt so as to say "This is a moral and religious issue." If one has a Christian over here saying one thing and backing it up with Bible verses, and you have another Christian over here saying another thing and backing it up with Bible verses is that not the very definition of relativism itself?

Throughout history, Christians have moved forward to slowly (and I mean very slowly) accept the moral codes of ever-changing societies. One who insists that Biblical laws are "forever" must accept the punishments doled out and commanded by the Bible. Even some of the most devout Christians in today's world might turn their heads in horror at the punishments commanded by the Bible for such small infractions.

So, which is it 007.5, should we practice the ruthless barbarism dictated by the Bible of yore so that we can be harmonious and closer to Christ? Or, is it high time to admit that even the morality people claim to find in the Bible is nothing more than just an individual moral perspective painted onto the fine, thin sheets of the book itself? One only has to look at the shift in moral codes from 1 A.D. until the present day to realize that all of humanity has shifted its codes ever so slightly from year to year.

We all have our own moral fiber and moral network. To post on these threads insisting that atheists have but merely a loose moral fiber filled with relative morality is simply hypocritical in the fullest. You may have your own moral code, you might find Biblical harmony in that, but the reality is you derived that moral code externally and independently only to paint it back onto The Book itself.

Paint exists externally of the surface it is to be applied on. It is a heap of chemicals mixed independently, in a number of ways, to achieve a variety of colors, thickness and adhesion qualities. Your choice color of paint and my choice color of paint might be different altogether. You may like that color a lot and I may not like it at all. The same is true the other way around. But, if you take that paint and coat the sheets of your Bible with it, it doesn't make it any more sacrosanct or permanent than mine. It's still a different color of paint applied to a book with the relative choice of color you prefer. I could probably paint the book with my own color as there's nothing stopping me from doing so. At the end of the day and whether one applies the paint to a wall or a book, we're still using an external source of color to spruce up otherwise dull material.

Atheists/Secularists dont want any moral rudder in their lives which is why they are so hostile toward The Bible or any semblence of moral standards, God, Jesus , or Christianity in general ; its an imposition . Trust me, you dont really want a Nation where everyone acts as they like in accordance to atheisms construct of man made 'morals' -- your reaction when morally violated by another who is acting in accordance to HIS moral relativism...is prooof of that.

Christians who get their truth from the Bible, ALL agree on the various social ills of our day (which are atheistic at their core I might submit).

'Within 3 decades, the Bible will be extinct' --- atheist Voltaire . (Today, his very own house in France is one of the worlds largest Bible distribution centers to the world) . The Bible has for the last few centuries always been the number one book seller ; where does the atheistic Humanist Manifesto stand in the ratings ?!!!!

[mensaguy]

Originally Posted by 007.5

Atheists/Secularists dont want any moral rudder in their lives which is why they are so hostile toward The Bible or any semblence of moral standards, God, Jesus , or Christianity in general ; its an imposition . Trust me, you dont really want a Nation where everyone acts as they like in accordance to atheisms construct of man made 'morals' -- your reaction when morally violated by another who is acting in accordance to HIS moral relativism...is prooof of that.

Christians who get their truth from the Bible, ALL agree on the various social ills of our day (which are atheistic at their core I might submit).

'Within 3 decades, the Bible will be extinct' --- atheist Voltaire . (Today, his very own house in France is one of the worlds largest Bible distribution centers to the world) . The Bible has for the last few centuries always been the number one book seller ; where does the atheistic Humanist Manifesto stand in the ratings ?!!!!

What gives you the right to decide what Atheists or Secularists want in their lives? Why do you get to be the one to decide they are hostile? Who appointed you to make the ruling that they have no moral standards? Since atheists and secularists are not organized, who took the vote that allowed you to define an "atheism construct," whatever that is. Christians absolutely do not agree on which social ills merit attention. If they did, they would all support the Westbrook Baptist Church or that church would cease to exist. Instead of supporting godhatesfags.com, the churches are moving toward ordaining gays and lesbians. There are many other areas where Christians disagree as well. What makes you think that all the social ills are atheistic? You seem to be awfully hung up on the idea that atheists are evil. Are you afraid of atheists or something? I seriously doubt they will eat your children.

[jojo-50]

Originally Posted by RUDE DUDE

These ideals seem to contradict what Jesus Christ himself intended for his followers.

Many on the Christian Right have promoted the message that financial prosperity is a "blessing" from God himself and that wealth is a sign of God's graces. Consequently, the modern Republican Party has had no problem reconciling its socially conservative evangelical views with its messages about economic freedom and free-market capitalism.

However, Jesus Christ himself seemed to hold rich people, and wealth in general, in very low regards:

Matthew 19-20

"Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?” “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?” he inquired.

Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother, and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’” “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?” Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth.

Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Matthew 13:22

"The one who received the seed that fell among the thorns is the man who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke it, making it unfruitful."

Mark 10:23

"Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!"

Jesus' statements seem to be very clear. Worldly riches and personal wealth are NOT to be held by his followers who plan on entering the kingdom of heaven. Why then does the Christian Right promote a contradictory message (i.e. that it is OK to pursue worldly riches and be a Christian)?

i'm so glad to see someone who's not a Jws say this, it always seem that we're making up things. i truely agree with what you post, because i
understand what Jesus mean. we should be focusing more on the riches from Heaven. meaning being in Jehovah God's favor, like many men of old.many who's into their riches, moves further away from God. or feels they don't even need him, (1Tim. 6:10 For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. verse 7 For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out). also, riches might buy one almost every earthly thing. but it sure can't save us from Jesus Father's wrath. peace

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by GCSTroop

So, which is it 007.5, should we practice the ruthless barbarism dictated by the Bible of yore so that we can be harmonious and closer to Christ? Or, is it high time to admit that even the morality people claim to find in the Bible is nothing more than just an individual moral perspective painted onto the fine, thin sheets of the book itself? One only has to look at the shift in moral codes from 1 A.D. until the present day to realize that all of humanity has shifted its codes ever so slightly from year to year.

The one problem with this is that Christianity broke away from the laws and 'barbarisms' of the Old Testament - they rejected those things themselves in the 1st Century. Christianity taught a new ethic - much different from Judaism. I'm not sure if this is being concsiously ignored by many people, or if they are unaware of it.

Perhaps you're confusing Christian Puritans (who DID essentially return to many of the harsh ways of Pre-Christianity) with the rest of Christanity? You know - the rest of Chrisitanity who haven't been stoning their children for thousands of years, and have at least tried to accept the ethics of Jesus and Paul? We've seen (in this thread) some of the changes the Church had to make to tone down even the ethics of Jesus, which were essentially those of charity and love in preparation for the Eschaton. I don't recall early Christianity affirming the laws of the Torah (well, the Christians who became orthodox, anyways), and at that time even many Jews were not practicing the Torah blindly: the oral Torah attests to their own softening of their tradition.

Originally Posted by mensaguy

What gives you the right to decide what Atheists or Secularists want in their lives? Why do you get to be the one to decide they are hostile? Who appointed you to make the ruling that they have no moral standards?

I think he's merely doing what atheists are doing to Christians: pigeon-holing them into a certain category, forcing them into this idea of people who follow a monster god who commands them to kill prostitutes, and ignoring what I mentioned above your quote. Not taking into account that Christianity is NOT fully represented by Fundamentalists (who are, practically, a minority) and not realizing that the average Christian doesn't care if Gensis is true, or is unaware of the Old Testament laws - Christianity makes these things unecesarry.

As for deciding what people want in their lives - again, fight the Fundamentalists, not the normal people living their lives, trying to be Christian and practice Christian ethics. There are certain people in both camps (Christians and Atheists) wishing to legislate their ideas, so it's not as one-sided as it may seem. If we were to follow many vocal opponents, religion (all of it) would be eradicated completely, and now it's starting to sound like the same charges being leveled at religious zealots.

That's all.

[whoppers]

Originally Posted by GCSTroop

Either the way I wrote that was mistaken or you're misunderstanding what I wrote. For the record, I do not support segregation and was merely comparing the moral relativism of people 50 years ago who held their Bibles so firmly while black men and women walked into "white schools" to the people of today who would not even dare do such a thing.

I know - I figured it was just a typo, or the way in which you phrased it to group it with the other 2 examples. Just keeping you on your toes.