Jesus was a Socialist

[Jamiet99uk]

Hospitals should be provided by the state and fully funded through taxation.

As for what I'm doing, I believe it is through society acting collectively that we can best improve things for everyone. I devote quite a bit of my spare time to actively campaign for a better democracy, and for progressive social and environmental policies. I was a member of my local community council for a number of years, and on a more personal basis, I raise money for a number of charities (although in the knowledge that some of the charitable work I support is filling in gaps created by a lack of effective state provision).

Last year most of my own fundraising was targeted at The Samaritans*, a charity that helps people contemplating suicide, because a number of years ago I was in that place myself and a friend, who coincidentally happened to be a Samaritans volunteer, noticed I was in a particularly dark place, and saved my life.

I am also an active member of my trade union and work to support their campaigns for stronger workforce rights and better pay. I am pleased to be able to report that a few years ago, at my suggestion and following considerable efforts to persuade our Executive Committee and our Board, the civil service organisation I work for became a certified Living Wage Employer, working with the UK Living Wage Foundation. For our workforce, that was a very small matter, because all of our staff were already paid above the real Living Wage rate, but for several hundred people working for some of our major suppliers, they directly received a pay rise, and better pay protection on an ongoing basis, as a result of this Real Living Wage pledge.

*and yes I am well aware of the irony of the origins of the name of this organisation, given my views on Christianity.

NOVEL INCOMING

TL;DR - I think our core beliefs regarding the nature of mankind are at odds here, so there can't be a proper conclusion, but in the end, we both want to take care of the people in our communities and improve our world in tangible ways.

I've been out in the world for a bit so now I'm echoing Pengwinja, but I also think that is all excellent.

Regarding the bit about those certain hospitals, my point was that they were pretty clearly a net good for society (at the time) that was created by Christians doing what they thought would help their world. I am not saying those hospitals are good (or moral) institutions now. I am vehemently opposed to privatized healthcare.

Regarding the rest of it, it is wonderful that you practice as you preach. There are many who claim to be Christians who are not the same way. I was like that myself until a recent change in my life that pushed me to become more involved in my community and its well-being.

That said, I obviously still disagree about Christianity being a waste of time. In the spirit of a proper debate, I will set aside the main focus of the faith for a moment, that being that we practice our religion to achieve salvation through Jesus Christ and are tasked with sharing that blessing with others. I think it's likely at least one fellow Christian on here won't like that, but I am also confident that leaning on it for this discussion will lead to you disengaging.

I think what it comes down to is a fundamental belief about the nature of man. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I am assuming that you believe mankind is, on the whole, good (or potentially neutral/amoral in some sense). I say this because you say the best way to improve things for everyone is for society to act collectively. If collective action throughout a society is the best method for improvement, then this society needs to be able to be, at least in a general sense, good and fair and just (or at least have the capability to be moved about on a spectrum of good and evil). By extension, this means that the individual members of this good society need to be good and at least somewhat selfless themselves. Assuming there is no God, the citizens need to be this way of their own volition, motivated solely by their will and the social/political/cultural/etc. environment around them. This is where my issue arises.

Based on my personal experiences, understanding of history, and, yes, from what I have learned from the Bible, I believe mankind is evil at its core. Evil is the natural, easy status that man trends towards, so a good man is one who has rebelled against his nature and put in a massive amount of work to become something different. Yes, I believe Christ is a key part of that, but Christ or not, I firmly believe becoming "good" is a subtle, gradual, never-ending process of change that requires constant effort.

Before anyone else brings it up, yes, saying "good and evil" is vague and subjective if you don't have a biblical foundation, but I am sticking to my resolution and will not go into that this particular minute. I hope you all can get on board with my usage of the generic, modern idea of good and evil.

Because of this belief that man is evil, I think that the best way for mankind to improve is for it to be called upon by something higher and more important than itself, something that demands you to go beyond your base nature and strive for something more. Sadly, I don't believe that society (or the public good, if you prefer) is a high enough or important enough value to sway the group as a whole away from that selfish nature. At the end of the day, I agree that collective action is what needs to be done, but I don't think people can hold it together and execute it properly for its own sake for an extended period of time.

That's (one of the reasons) why Christianity is not a waste of time. It is the motivator and guidance needed to achieve that collective action you and I are talking about.

If I haven't totally misunderstood you (and again, please correct me if I have), that's what it comes down to, and because of that fundamental disagreement, I don't think we are going to find a satisfying middle ground on this subject.

One last note I'd like to emphasize is that I am talking about humanity as a whole. I have intentionally made no implications about you based on your beliefs. We're both out there trying to take care of the people in our world, and that is undeniably a good thing. :)

Your comments on the fundamental nature of man are very interesting.

Yes, ultimately, I believe that there are good people and bad people, but, on average (and bearing in mind we are talking about the average good / evil balance of a sample of 8.1 billion individuals), I believe that the average human is more good than bad; I believe that the average person wants a nice life for themselves, but also wants good lives for their families, for those, around them, and for their community and society.

We are naturally social animals, we gain joy from interactions with others, and we experience joy when we see other people being happy. On a very general level it is clear to me that we are naturally altruistic; while humans do selfish things, humans also frequently perform helpful acts for others, for no personal gain. I believe that humanity can, and must, harness this sociability for the collective good. Society, a mass of unique individuals pulling together, is the basis for progress and happiness.

It is interesting that you, a Christian, believe humans are fundamentally evil. It seems to me, therefore, that your worldview is much more negative than mine. I give man the benefit of the doubt; I assume good and only pronounce evil when I see it. You assume evil rely on an outside force (Jesus) for salvation. This is a negative worldview. Your first act is to damn your fellow man, and everything else you think (I purport), stems from there.

I am not even going to go into the question of why an all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-loving God, putting into practice a perfect design, would design and create man in his own image, and in the process manage to create a version of mankind that is, in your words "fundamentally evil at its core". This does not make logical sense to me, and it never has.

I'd like a proper response to this.

Thanks in advance.

[brainbomb]

The United States is actually very generous in giving foreign aid. I suspect that there is alot of decent people who do give because of feeling bad for tragedy.

[brainbomb]

Dammit now you guys are pulling me out of my troll mindset. Stop. We need to purge the middle class or something

[Napple]

Your comments on the fundamental nature of man are very interesting.

Yes, ultimately, I believe that there are good people and bad people, but, on average (and bearing in mind we are talking about the average good / evil balance of a sample of 8.1 billion individuals), I believe that the average human is more good than bad; I believe that the average person wants a nice life for themselves, but also wants good lives for their families, for those, around them, and for their community and society.

We are naturally social animals, we gain joy from interactions with others, and we experience joy when we see other people being happy. On a very general level it is clear to me that we are naturally altruistic; while humans do selfish things, humans also frequently perform helpful acts for others, for no personal gain. I believe that humanity can, and must, harness this sociability for the collective good. Society, a mass of unique individuals pulling together, is the basis for progress and happiness.

It is interesting that you, a Christian, believe humans are fundamentally evil. It seems to me, therefore, that your worldview is much more negative than mine. I give man the benefit of the doubt; I assume good and only pronounce evil when I see it. You assume evil rely on an outside force (Jesus) for salvation. This is a negative worldview. Your first act is to damn your fellow man, and everything else you think (I purport), stems from there.

I am not even going to go into the question of why an all-powerful, all-knowing, ever-loving God, putting into practice a perfect design, would design and create man in his own image, and in the process manage to create a version of mankind that is, in your words "fundamentally evil at its core". This does not make logical sense to me, and it never has.

I'm responding out of respect to your request, but I'm not quite sure what you want me to say. As I said, I think, because of the differences we've displayed around that core belief, we're likely not going to gain much ground with one another on this particular subject.

The one thing I would like to correct is the phrasing around damning my fellow man. There is a clear distinction in my mind between my concerns about humankind and my interactions with everyday people. I do not go into an interaction and assume everyone is stereotypically evil and out to get me as soon as I meet them. But that means we have to get into what good and evil mean a little bit.

I don't assume a passerby on the street is evil in the sense that I am paranoid that everyone I see is going to shank me and take my wallet. At the same time, I don't assume they're a naturally good person. They've probably got something they get up to that's shady in one way or another. Everyone does, even if that action seems microscopic and insignificant. An important thing to note is that I do not think of this with the myriad of people I meet in day-to-day life. I am not consciously torturing myself by contemplating whatever random, asinine sins the miscellaneous people in my life are committing, but I am aware on a larger-scale sense that these misbehaviors exist within everyone.

Once again, we return to the point where we will not agree because of our core beliefs. Per Christianity, committing any sin categorizes you as evil, so yes, I do believe that whatever minor or generic example of a sin you want to pick qualifies you for the label of 'evil.' That's why we all need Christ. He's a free, instant ticket out of that mess that you don't have to do anything to earn besides genuine acknowledgment.

That said, even if you want to dismiss those small sins, I still believe mankind is evil by nature. Most of the people I interact with on a regular basis seem good to me, but I frequently inhabit spaces that would be considered by society to be positive or at least neutral. I truly believe that if all of those people in my world were in a situation like the German citizens in World War 2, a large majority of them would have fallen prey to the same propaganda and participated in or turned a blind eye to the same atrocities that the German citizens did at the time. I think that I was the kind of person who would have done the same not too long ago, and I believe if anyone thinks they're 100% immune to such manipulations, they are kidding themselves. Not to say any given person couldn't resist it (many people did), but for one to imagine they would immediately notice it and become a freedom fighter or civil rights activist at the slightest hint of injustice is naïve.

It can be easy to entirely blame the Hitlers of the world, and they need to be torn down for the monsters they are, but I don't think they manipulated their people into new, evil creatures that they then used to commit those acts. I think they were actually reducing people to their most carnal, fundamental selves. The people were the ones actually executing those terrible things.

This cruelty was far too widespread, even just talking about Nazism, for me to believe that this vulnerability to shift to evil is the exception instead of the rule. Hitler convinced his citizenry to be selfish and self-serving while at the same time making them believe they were doing something good because they thought it would protect their country, even when it was at the cost of those groups he wanted to target. Intentionally or not, they hid behind the excuse of "I was just following orders" all the way to Nuremberg. Regardless of whether or not that was a real belief or a cheap excuse, what they did was evil. I know throwing out Hitler in any given discussion is kind of a lot, but he's not the only person in history who's led a nightmarish regime that this all applies to.

Go check out the Milgram experiment for a microcosm of what I'm talking about. Even if those people (the ones actually being studied) thought they were doing the right thing, what they did (or rather, unknowingly pretended to do) was evil. I bet a lot of those people would seem good to you or I, yet they could so quickly be manipulated into participating in something evil. That is not to say all evil is merely a result of external manipulation, but rather to emphasize how quickly a rational, "good" person can change.

To conclude, we're not all goblins and ghouls out to get everyone we see, but I believe we are all evil at our core. Schindler initially hired Jews because they were the cheapest labor available. Maybe not evil, but surely self-serving. It took massive amounts of internal and external effort to consciously shift away from the beliefs and values of everyone around him and work to protect those being persecuted. He was a modern-day saint, but he was in the extreme minority when it came to the moral status of his peers.

As to the idea that everything I think comes through the filter of damning my fellow man, I take you to Matthew 22:36-40 (NIV):

36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?” 37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

If I am to follow these commandments, I have to acknowledge that mankind is evil, but I don't go around looking to point my finger at everyone. I am very opposed to those guys who show up to a college campus with a Bible and a giant sign that tells you why you're going to hell, the ones who love to stir up a crowd of angry students and get all debatey with them. That's not what we're called to do. We are called to be honest (and share that mankind is evil and that we all need Jesus), but we are also called to not be judgemental and to love others. That's the deal.

Please respond if you want, but know it'll probably take me longer to get back to you if we continue to go back and forth. I've barely got enough free time for my actual diplomacy games right now, and these take me a while to put together.

P.S. I know I didn't tackle your last paragraph, but if you're not going to go into that question, neither will I for now. Feel free to throw it out there another day. I've got to get offline and go exist in the real world for a while.

[learnedSloth]

I truly believe that if all of those people in my world were in a situation like the German citizens in World War 2, a large majority of them would have fallen prey to the same propaganda and participated in or turned a blind eye to the same atrocities that the German citizens did at the time. I think that I was the kind of person who would have done the same not too long ago, and I believe if anyone thinks they're 100% immune to such manipulations, they are kidding themselves. Not to say any given person couldn't resist it (many people did), but for one to imagine they would immediately notice it and become a freedom fighter or civil rights activist at the slightest hint of injustice is naïve.

After pondering how some didn't succumb to it, I say only that God can keep his own on the right track:

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.
30 I and my Father are one.
(John 10)

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

Why wouldn't God have also kept the Germans who became Nazis on track if he has this power? What a terrible thing it would be for God to save only "his own" from the fate of becoming genocidal murders - what did the ones who became Nazis do to deserve this punishment? Why weren't all Germans "his own" just on the basis of their humanity, or, if that's not a good enough reason to deserve God's love and guidance, then the fact that they were basically all Christian?

[learnedSloth]

Why wouldn't God have also kept the Germans who became Nazis on track if he has this power? What a terrible thing it would be for God to save only "his own" from the fate of becoming genocidal murders - what did the ones who became Nazis do to deserve this punishment? Why weren't all Germans "his own" just on the basis of their humanity, or, if that's not a good enough reason to deserve God's love and guidance, then the fact that they were basically all Christian?

Paul drops the answer in the 2nd chapter of the 2nd Epistle to Thessalonians, even in this context:

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

So turning down the love of the truth prevents salvation.

[Jamiet99uk]

Why wouldn't God have also kept the Germans who became Nazis on track if he has this power? What a terrible thing it would be for God to save only "his own" from the fate of becoming genocidal murders - what did the ones who became Nazis do to deserve this punishment? Why weren't all Germans "his own" just on the basis of their humanity, or, if that's not a good enough reason to deserve God's love and guidance, then the fact that they were basically all Christian?

Paul drops the answer in the 2nd chapter of the 2nd Epistle to Thessalonians, even in this context:

8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

So turning down the love of the truth prevents salvation.

Answer him yourself, you stupid fucking twat.

[dargorygel]

Hmmm.

[Octavious]

Answer him yourself, you stupid fucking twat.

Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman! (1 Samuel 20:30)

[Wusti]

Answer him yourself, you stupid fucking twat.

Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman! (1 Samuel 20:30)

Aren't we all?

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

Can’t we all just join hands in a circle and sing a happy song?

[CaptainFritz28]

Goodness me. I suggest that this thread has seen enough. I don't think much good cam be achieved in further messaging on it, and it clearly doesn't belong here; if it's going to continue to exist let it do so on the politics subforum. Even then, I think it's well worn out its welcome.

I motion to lock the thread.

[dargorygel]

Ok... I have not been reading this thread with enough attention. I enjoyed the topic, and much of the discussion was done reasonably and humorously.

But I just noticed a contributor encouraging another to die. I am sure he was not as serious as it sounds. But that, and the increasing unnecessary rudeness are causing me to lock this thread.

Sorry I let it go on too long.