Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Christianity and Objectivism. Are these compatible in America?

Rate this topic


Reddog

Recommended Posts

Jesus advocated the non-resistance of evil. Of course you will come up with excuses and different interpretations, and reasons why this is taken out of context etc. But here it is anyway in black and white, as clear as the day:

Without context, 2,000 year old words can be perceived to be whatever you want. But when the reasonable context of those words is considered by a logical mind the truth of the words becomes clear.

"I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

Notice that the right cheek is specifically referenced. Most everyone is right handed, so this is not a physical assault at all (because a right hand assault hits a left cheek), but is a backhanded slap... what we would commonly know today as an insult. This advice is all about how to respond to a personal insult by not returning it and escalating into violence.

This wise 2,000 year old advice applies even today, don't you think?

It is common practice to first create a religious characature and then to use that fabrication to make a moral principle appear to be invalid... or even to use one fabrication to jump to the faulty conclusion that all moral principles are invalid.

There is milennia of wise moral advice in religious writings for anyone to freely choose to follow if they wish. And regardless of their own personal choice, the simple truth is that no one is exempt from the consequences of their own actions. So in real world personal face to face personal interactions, when a person behaves as if they deserve decent treatment by not escalating a personal insult, it ends with them. And that sets the moral tone of the personal interaction.

Edited by moralist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Socialists, too, can fight for reason and reality:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

That appears to be reason and reality only to the intellect molded by liberal government subsidized education. Islamists are not the only jihadis with medrasas. The United States is chock full of them. They're called Universities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only Capitalists you could ever live in harmony with are the ones who think exactly like you.

In business I deal with many successful American Capitalists, all of whom got that way by following the same moral code. Upholding the trust of others who are worthy of your trust is a fundamental moral principle upon which Capitalism rests.

Right is right regardless of what one thinks or feels about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reading this page of comments, I'm again remined that non-athiests are as welcome in forums of Objectivism as smokers are to those who've kicked the habit...

The topic, as I understand it is, is Christianity and Objectivism compatible in America, a country that is founded on a principle of freedom of religion (which includes the freedom from religion) and a separation of church and state. Specifically then in matters of state, is Christianity and Objectivism politically compatible?

The politics of Objectivism is capitalism, and the politics of Christianity is largly undefined (unless one defines Jesus as a Capitalist). American Christains are politically divided between conservatives and liberals, but I'm not aware of any Christian majority being against capitalism as a matter of faith. Fiscally conservative Christians are politically compatible with Objectivists as capitalists, which responds to the question asked by this topic, if not the discomfort of Objectivists who dismiss political compatibility with other capitalists even where the context is primarily non-religious.

Edited by Devil's Advocate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without context, 2,000 year old words can be perceived to be whatever you want. But when the reasonable context of those words is considered by a logical mind the truth of the words becomes clear.

"I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also."

Notice that the right cheek is specifically referenced. Most everyone is right handed, so this is not a physical assault at all (because a right hand assault hits a left cheek), but is a backhanded slap... what we would commonly know today as an insult. This advice is all about how to respond to a personal insult by not returning it and escalating into violence.

This wise 2,000 year old advice applies even today, don't you think?

It is common practice to first create a religious characature and then to use that fabrication to make a moral principle appear to be invalid... or even to use one fabrication to jump to the faulty conclusion that all moral principles are invalid.

There is milennia of wise moral advice in religious writings for anyone to freely choose to follow if they wish. And regardless of their own personal choice, the simple truth is that no one is exempt from the consequences of their own actions. So in real world personal face to face personal interactions, when a person behaves as if they deserve decent treatment by not escalating a personal insult, it ends with them. And that sets the moral tone of the personal interaction.

Since this is a topic about faith, you may be tempted to think you are allowed to say any of your opinions and they will be valid. I don't think this will fly here however. If words mean anything, then Jesus IS advocating non resistance of evil. Here is more:

38 ¶ Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.

41 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42 Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

—Matthew 5:38–5:42 KJV

27 ¶ But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,

28 Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.

29 And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke forbid not to take thy coat also.

30 Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.

31 And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.

—Luke 6:27–31 KJV

Love your enemies!? Do good to them which hate you?! These are evil words according to Objectivism. How do you refuse to see this?

PS. I am taking from your silence on the issue of gay marriage and abortion rights, that you would vote to ban both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fiscally conservative Christians are politically compatible with Objectivists as capitalists, which responds to the question asked by this topic.

Yes.

That is the practical real world result, and explains why I'm a behaviorist and not a dogmatist. Heck, if Islam produced Capitalists I'd be just as compatable doing business with them because Capitalism embodies a moral code of behavior within it.

This thread is going in a lot of different directions. So if those raising other tangental issues wish to start a thread on homosexuality, and post their comments in the existing abortion thread, I'll be happy to respond to them on topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since this is a topic about faith...

Whoa! This is a topic about the compatability of two American ideologies presumed to operate within the context of a separation of church and state, i.e. outside issues of faith, or lack thereof. It's amusing to see Objectivists intorducing quotes from the Bible as evidence, along with Christians quoting from the Lexicon, but neither source precludes compatibility on a political view towards capitalism, or ethical politics. Ayn Rand herself was able to complement the political defeat of the McGovern candiacy for president by saying, "God bless America".

Edited by Devil's Advocate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! This is a topic about the compatability of two American ideologies presumed to operate within the context of a separation of church and state, i.e. outside issues of faith, or lack thereof. It's amusing to see Objectivists intorducing quotes from the Bible as evidence, along with Christians quoting from the Lexicon, but neither source precludes compatibility on a political view towards capitalism, or ethical politics. Ayn Rand herself was able to complement the political defeat of the McGovern candiacy for president by saying, "God bless America".

I agree with you that capitalism and Christianity as working ideologies can exist together in a free society. This is a boring and trivial topic as such. For example fascism and Objectivism can also operate as working ideologies, but only if the fascists persuade themselves that key parts of fascism doesn't mean what it says. Similarly, Christianity could only work in a free society if Christian's perform mental acrobatics and convince themselves that Jesus didn't mean what he said. This is because, among other things, Objectivism advocates justice whereas Christianity advocates forgiveness and loving your enemies. On a functional basis, for example on deciding foreign policy, there would be a clash between these ideologies.

So the real question becomes, how can people perform such mental acrobatics!? How can a Christian read Jesus speaking against an "eye for an eye" and then go and vote to keep the death penalty?

PS. For the record I would describe myself as a political centrist, not an Objectivist or capitalist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you that capitalism and Christianity as working ideologies can exist together in a free society. This is a boring and trivial topic as such. For example fascism and Objectivism can also operate as working ideologies, but only if the fascists persuade themselves that key parts of fascism doesn't mean what it says. Similarly, Christianity could only work in a free society if Christian's perform mental acrobatics and convince themselves that Jesus didn't mean what he said. This is because, among other things, Objectivism advocates justice whereas Christianity advocates forgiveness and loving your enemies. On a functional basis, for example on deciding foreign policy, there would be a clash between these ideologies.

So the real question becomes, how can people perform such mental acrobatics!? How can a Christian read Jesus speaking against an "eye for an eye" and then go and vote to keep the death penalty?

PS. For the record I would describe myself as a political centrist, not an Objectivist or capitalist.

There's a lot there to respond to in terms of resolving (if possible) which version of revealed Christian testimony might support the death penalty in terms of smiting ones enemy. The Bible certainly provides examples of sanctioned blood shed.

For that matter, the initiation of force is explicitly addressed by Ayn Rand when she states, "Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate—do you hear me? no man may start—the use of physical force against others." Such a clear expression against the initiation of force apparently doesn't present mental acrobatics for some Objectivists to rationally argue for preemptive force and torture.

In terms of responding to real questions on ideology, I believe compitability is more clearly defined by ones actions rather than by interpreting the supposed tenets of anothers group association. Ayn Rand reached out and found things in common, i.e. compatible, with those of faith on political issues in order to advance capitalism, rather than to dismiss them because of their faith in God.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Except that it doesn't. You support forced taxation (for all kinds of things, even road building), you support a ban on abortion, you are probably against gay marriage, etc.

The only Capitalists you could ever live in harmony with are the ones who think exactly like you.

Capitalism is a socio-political-economic system. Moralist is not a capitalist and no capitalist would think like him.

Edited by thenelli01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa! Did he actually write that he was against gay marriage. If not, how could you possibly know?

ruveyn1

Actually, he equated homosexuality to pedophilia and called it immoral in a different topic.

Someone on the radio raised an interesting point along this line. What happens when pedophilia, like homosexuality, becomes regarded as a congenital physical condition of the brain? Will there be pedophile rights, pedophile marriages, and whoever is opposed will be labled pedophiliphobic?

Edited by thenelli01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hah. Fyi moralist, that viewpoint is slowly being replaced.. many churches (and church leaders) are now opening their doors to the homosexual community:

"Among Disciples, a core manifestation of our unity with diversity has always been the open Table. Knowing that the Table is the Lord’s, we make room for whoever will come at Christ’s gracious invitation. All are welcome. Diverse though we may be, we, too, call ourselves by one name: Disciples. Our challenge (as individual brothers and sisters in Christ and as congregations) is to help each other feel welcome and also safe at the table of our Lord." -Sharon Watkins, General Minister and President of the Christian Church.

Edit: This excerpt is part of a pastoral letter that Sharon published in June 2012. It's been printed, reprinted, and sent to Christian churches all over the world. It's obviously generated a lot of controversy, but if you want to read some (great) responses to her letter, see DHM's fall version of The Advocate, pages 9-10.

Edited by mdegges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...many churches (and church leaders) are now opening their doors to the homosexual community:
The Anglican church even allows homosexual priests and bishops. Even their position on abortion is relatively relaxed. Edited by softwareNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why all this concern with homosexuality? The real problem of Christianity is that it promote sacrifice and altruism. It denigrates self interest as sinful or promoting of sinfulness. In addition extreme forms of Christianity promote Creationism and Intelligent design which if pursued will degrade the instruction of science in the schools. The long term effects of that could be a disaster to our economic future state.

ruveyn1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for posting, I wasn't aware of that.

Took me awhile to find, but a 1978 resolution banning the ordination of openly gay women and men in the Christian Church was overturned in June 2012:

"Therefore, be it resolved, that the Regional Assembly of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Indiana, meeting in Indianapolis Septermber 29, 2012, affirms the criteria for ordination, licensing/commissioning, and standing as specified inTheological Foundations and Policies and Criteria for the Ordering of Ministry in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), which does not include sexual orientation; and...

"Be it further resolved, that the Regional Assembly of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in Indiana instruct the Regional Commission on Ministry to revise its existing criteria to exclude sexual orientation as a criterion for ordination, licensing/commissioning, and standing. This act will supersede the Statement on Homosexuality approved by the Regional Board on June 13, 1978 and amended on August 23, 1988; and..." -Ordination Resolution

I believe there will also be a vote at the 2013 regional assembly to pass this resolution for all DOC christian churches in region. I've been told that churches who don't 'honor' this resolution will be forced to leave the denomination. I suppose that's a good thing... but there will always be churches who support homosexuality and those who don't. They'll just be divided.

Why all this concern with homosexuality? The real problem of Christianity is that it promote sacrifice and altruism. It denigrates self interest as sinful or promoting of sinfulness. In addition extreme forms of Christianity promote Creationism and Intelligent design which if pursued will degrade the instruction of science in the schools. The long term effects of that could be a disaster to our economic future state.

Because homosexuality is the big civil rights battle of our time. It's nice to see that church-goers and church leaders (who are usually stuck in their ways, bound by tradition, and against any form of change) are becoming less discriminatory and more open to change. That can only be a good thing.

Edited by mdegges
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism is a socio-political-economic system.

Considering the source, your comment can be taken as a compliment because to you Capitalism is only a "socio-political-economic system"... while to me it is a moral system. And that's a curious quality Capitalism possess. It never fails. People can only fail Capitalism by failing to live up to its ethical standards of behavior.

Moralist is not a capitalist and no capitalist would think like him.

If it is really as you say, then neither are the Capitalists with whom I do business. But at least we all have the matching moral values which make doing business possible as each helps the other to prosper.

Edited by moralist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, he equated homosexuality to pedophilia and called it immoral in a different topic.

Since you are choosing to make homosexuality a topic here rather than in a more appropriate thread, I have no problem responding directly here. More specifically I said that in my opinion, homosexuality is a consequence of child molestation. All actions have consequences, and every consequence has an action which caused it.

Edited by moralist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since you are choosing to make homosexuality a topic here rather than in a more appropriate thread, I have no problem responding directly here. More specifically I said that in my opinion, homosexuality is a consequence of child molestation. All actions have consequences, and every consequence has an action which caused it.

Have you ever stopped to consider that a leading cause of "child molestation" just might be christianity and the twisted, perverse, un-natural view of human sexuality it has worked to inculcate in our society???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this thread going to be shut down or not? I don't want to invest energy in a thread that is about to be locked.

I have brought up the works of Leo Tolstoy twice as evidence of the connection between socialism and christianity and no one has responded. That in itself is not a reason to shut down a thread, but it has gone way off topic .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this thread going to be shut down or not? I don't want to invest energy in a thread that is about to be locked.

That's actually not a bad idea.

I have brought up the works of Leo Tolstoy twice as evidence of the connection between socialism and christianity and no one has responded. That in itself is not a reason to shut down a thread, but it has gone way off topic .

Sorry... I don't have much to say about Tolstoy other than he wrote a book adored by leftists all over the world. Failure as a farmer. Gambled his money away. Chronically depressed. Family problems. Weird religious beliefs. The guy was a mess, so what he said has no credibility as far as I'm concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...