27 ms·

It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of

by x1oqw 7y ago

It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why do the exploited masses believe them?

weare138 7y ago
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." -Jesus Matthew 19:24
- 2ion 7y ago
  "It is easier for a rich man to enter Heaven seated comfortably on the back of a camel than it is for a poor man to pass through the eye of a needle." - Supply Side Jesus, https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp
  - threatofrain 7y ago
    Also if he who is first shall be last, then isn't it a pretty conservative choice to be middle class in wealthiness?
  - conanbatt 7y ago
    That comic is hilarious!
- camhart 7y ago
  Why do you think it's more difficult for a rich person? Does giving a tithe encourage or discourage the behaviors that make it difficult to make it to "Heaven"? Think on it.
  - weare138 7y ago
    Jesus never advocated giving tithes or even churches for that matter.
    - knicholes 7y ago
      What about The Widow's Mite or Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."?
- zippie 7y ago
  I see this quoted a lot whenever there is discussion of wealth. However, as with all verses, the context is important as well as the follow up verses. This is not in defense of. 17 “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, 19 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. 24 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.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:17-26 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-26&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-...
  - darkerside 7y ago
    This can be read as meaning that your wealth will be left behind when you die, so you are no longer rich.
  - anonsivalley652 7y ago
    Actually, I think a more apropos saying is: Unless the children were looting their elder's estate before the burial, there's no U-Haul behind a hearse.
  - xtracto 7y ago
    As an atheist I love reading these passages.. it is amazing how people in this day and age are trying to find "meanings" from a book full of the stories of one person... who lived 2000+ years ago.. imagine if someone tried to find meaning in Beckhams biography 2000 years from now...
- anonsivalley652 7y ago
  For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. - Matthew 13:12 ^-- which should not be interpreted as rich people are "righteous" and poor people are "bad," but rather people tend to worship the rich and abuse the poor.
- mml 7y ago
  It’s “the eye of the needle”. It was a very narrow gate into Jerusalem, which camels had difficulty traversing.
  - kragen 7y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Gate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Gate > The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate.[7][8]
  - godelski 7y ago
    And it is hard for a rich man to pass through because they have many possessions. These are things you can't take to heaven. These are things you should not covet. This and many other of Jesus's teaching demonstrate that to be holy and good is to focus not on the material, but on helping your fellow man. There's nothing saying you will get barred from heaven if you're rich. But there's plenty that says you should give away your wealth and spend all your time helping others. You know, kinda like what Jesus did...
    - claudeganon 7y ago
      According to the text, Jesus was an itinerant carpenter or stone mason (depending on the vagaries of translation). He wasn’t a billionaire philanthropist. And by the telling of Acts, his followers lived in communal poverty. The problem with much of mainstream American Christianity is that it tries to reconcile the greed and amorality of Capitalist wealth accumulation with its own teachings and they are fundamentally irreconcilable. Or, if you want, by its own scripture: “No one can serve two masters: Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”
  - whokal 7y ago
    This. The imagery is that a rich person carrying too much stuff would have difficulty going through the gate whereas a poor person wouldn’t. More reflection is required for a deeper understanding.
- maxlybbert 7y ago
  “All things (e.g., a camel’s journey through a needle’s eye) are possible, it’s true. But imagine how the camel feels, all squeezed our, in a long bloody thread from tail to snout.” I’ve seen this attributed to C.S. Lewis, but I’ve never tracked it down.
tomrod 7y ago
I can't speak for more faiths, just what I saw in the Mormon faith. Basically, they literally believe they are the only church that has authority to act for God on earth, it was given to them, and they will be the world wide government during the millennium (a time period kicked off when Jesus Christ returns, in their view).
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- mnm1 7y ago
  > they literally believe they are the only church that has authority to act for God on earth Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, and I'm sure many others (especially Christian) believe the same. Seems like the one thing they have in common is their own narcissistic delusion about their importance. It also makes a great argument against the arrogance and stupidity of such teachings. After all, if only a subset of people of earth have access to god, that's the kind of god people with a brain will not want to get to know: a piece of shit asshole like the one from the Bible who favors certain people, gets angry, tortures and kills like some crazy lunatic. No thanks.
  - kevinmchugh 7y ago
    Neither Islam nor Judaism is monolithic and it makes me uncertain of the accuracy of the comment to see them each treated that way.
    - mnm1 7y ago
      They both think, like Christianity, that their religion is the only path to god. Islam kills for it too.
DyslexicAtheist 7y ago
> but why do the exploited masses believe them? my favorite book on the subject of why is "Robert Cialdini's Influence": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence:_Science_and_Practice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence:_Science_and_Practic...
- tomrod 7y ago
  Thanks for sharing. I look forward to reading.
camhart 7y ago
The concept of tithing is absolutely taught in the Bible. If you believe Christ to be the God of the Old Testament then He absolutely taught it. You seem to be under the impression all religious people who give tithing are merely being exploited. I can promise you are wrong there. The mentality of "I've had no such experience with God so everyone who claims they have is a kook" is quite ignorant. Perhaps you could learn something from those who have.
- fiblye 7y ago
  I won't address your other points since that's not what HN is about, but the person you responded to didn't say tithing. He said amassing money. 100 billion is an absolutely massive amount of cash to keep on hand for any purpose, and I imagine a good number of people think the money would mostly be going towards charitable causes or something of the sort. Tithing doesn't necessarily entail stockpiles that can buy out entire countries.
  - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
    I thought it was $100B in assets and investments, not cash on hand. Did I understand wrong?
    - lvh 7y ago
      You're right, but that doesn't seem to be GP's core point.
      - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
        One is a lot more defensible than the other. Having $100B cash on hand would just be stupid. Having invested $100B could be seen as more like an endowment if they produce income.
- throwaway894345 7y ago
  Did the parent significantly revise their comment? Because in its current incarnation, it doesn't argue against tithing nor that those who tithe are being exploited. It seems like you're responding to the wrong comment. For posterity, here's the original comment at the time that I read it: > It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why do the exploited masses believe them? And here is your response: > The concept of tithing is absolutely taught in the Bible. If you believe Christ to be the God of the Old Testament then He absolutely taught it. You seem to be under the impression all religious people who give tithing are merely being exploited. I can promise you are wrong there. The mentality of "I've had no such experience with God so everyone who claims they have is a kook" is quite ignorant. Perhaps you could learn something from those who have.
gherkinnn 7y ago
I find a lot of people invoke Christ, but have little to do with his teachings. Amusingly, his ideas align more with beliefs held by “the young left” than by “the old right”. (Yesyes, bad terms but you know what I mean) And yet the real-world allegiances are inverted.
- camhart 7y ago
  You're missing the role of agency (or choice) in your evaluation. Forcing someone to do something vs someone choosing to do it of their own accord is quite different.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - Fellshard 7y ago
    Figures you're being downvoted to pieces, when this is among the key aspects of Jesus' teachings. Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is centered around the centrality of the /heart/ as the seat of sin, and the thoughts and intentions of the /heart/ as being the fount from which actions stem. Individual sin is what Jesus demanded repentance from; there is no 'collective sin' in Scripture, though groups of people with common sin may be punished collectively, e.g. the time of the Judges, Israel's captivity, etc. Given the 'young left' is a collectivist ideology, which seeks to institute a form of 'ancestral sin' - people being responsible for their parents' and grandparents' wrongs, etc. - and which has made physical wealth and attributes the sole measurements of moral integrity, being a purely secular worldview - it is not in any way compatible with the teachings of Christ. But people don't like to hear that. Self-righteousness is a potent drug, something else Christ taught about quite regularly. :)
    - mola 7y ago
      I really think you have major misconceptions about social democrat ideology. Your 'ancestral sin' interpretation could easily be said on capitalists who don't have a problem with people capital fortune being decided mostly a birth. (You're born poor, you are likely to stay poor, you're born rich you're likely to stay rich no matter what you do). Or, You could also easily say that the Protestant morals equate physical wealth accumulation with how moral you are. Because if you do good by God, of you'll get rewarded with prosperoty. In your lifetime. This is of course nonsense just as your interpretation of social democrat ideology.
dorian-graph 7y ago
> when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money I'm guessing you're talking about the moneychangers being thrown out of the temple? There are examples recorded in the scriptures of tithes and offerings, and also of a people preparing/amassing the relative wealth/supplies (Noah, Joseph, etc). There are multiple levels of preparedness taught in the LDS church. The lowest, the family, being to only have necessary debt (e.g. university or a house) and to have 3 days of storage for in case of emergencies for your own family (or individual self), or to help others. Then in some areas you have Bishop storehouses. It goes up and up. > I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ) Why does the LDS church do it?
- pqla1 7y ago
  > Why does the LDS church do it? To go into detail would probably be outside the scope of HN, but if this is a serious question, Richard Dawkins is a good source on how the LDS church was founded.
  - dorian-graph 7y ago
    Yup, it was a serious question, because it's quite an accusation. Richard Dawkins is a proliferate man, anything in particular to look up? I know he's said things about the church being fake, but what has he said about why the LDS church has amassed money and resources?
- darkerside 7y ago
  The moneymakers in the temple were making money for themselves, profiting off of the nominally faithful. This is very different from saying the church shouldn't acquire wealth.
  - darksaints 7y ago
    The Mormon church tried for years to pretend that their leaders don't make money from the church. That too was confirmed as a lie not too long ago.
gameswithgo 7y ago
same reason they believe trump loves god and america and the common man.
adaisadais 7y ago
A lot of what the Mormon Church teaches is not based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. Mormonism and Christianity are two separate things much like Christianity and Judaism are separate.
- tomrod 7y ago
  This is true of virtually every religion under the Christian umbrella.
  - adaisadais 7y ago
    Yes, I’m asserting that they are mutually exclusive.
- gwilliams 7y ago
  That could hardly be farther from the truth. The church does have extrabiblical volumes of scripture, which also testify of Christ and go into more depth, but every doctrine of the church is in harmony with the Old and New Testaments. Members believe it is only by faith in Christ and by good works that they can be saved.
  - Robin_Message 7y ago
    IANATheologian but I think many if not most Christian denominations teach that people are saved exclusively by faith. Works are interpreted as a sign of faith in some Protestant denominations, which lead to the concept of the Protestant work ethic.
    - curiousgeorgio 7y ago
      IAANATheologian (I am also not a theologian), but I suppose those other Christian denominations conveniently skipped chapter 2 of James, where it says: "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."
walrus01 7y ago
If anybody asks you "what would Jesus do?", remind them that turning over tables and whipping money lenders is within the realm of possibility.
- dehrmann 7y ago
  That was in the context of people cashing in on religion, selling their wares in front of the temple. It'd be like him going to a religious bookstore and trashing the place. It was not an indictment on lending money.
gremlinsinc 7y ago
Christians in general all denounce socialism --even it seems democratic socialism. Christ taught: Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, give all you have to those in need then come follow me, else there's no path to heaven if you're a shallow rich person. I'm no expert on Marxism, but I think there's quite a bit of crossover in ideologies. But the point of my argument is most church's don't practice what Christ preached, they're essentially anti-christian churches.
- whatthesmack 7y ago
  I think the issue that many folks take with this perspective is that you’re prescribing one particular implementation (socialism) of what Jesus taught. We can debate what he taught, but you must acknowledge that you’re advocating for your favored implementation. There are plenty of ways to “Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, give all you have to those in need then come follow me, else there's no path to heaven” that don’t involve or require your particular implementation at all.
- dehrmann 7y ago
  There's a difference between socialism and charity. Christ didn't say much about governments or governmental systems beyond "pay your taxes."
- jki275 7y ago
  Jesus taught that we should do that. He did not teach that the government should force everyone to do that.
tptacek 7y ago
Different Christian denominations have different relationships with wealth --- ranging from a "high church" tradition of inspirational grandeur to pseudo-evangelical "prosperity churches", as well as denominations that reject all that stuff, and the LDS relationship is unique and (in a relative sense) pragmatic. I don't think your blanket statement really applies here.
- xkall 7y ago
  The comment you reply to does not say "all churches". It is evident, however, that several large churches do not believe in Christ. The ruthless bureaucratic and greedy Catholic church may serve as an example: https://www.smh.com.au/national/with-30b-in-wealth-why-is-the-catholic-church-struggling-to-pay-for-justice-20180208-p4yzra.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/with-30b-in-wealth-why-is-th... "John Ellis is no longer a practising Catholic." "I realised there is nothing special or different about the church ... They act like any other ruthless wealthy organisation," says Ellis. "The more money they’ve got, the more ruthless they will be with it."
- 1lLAIW 7y ago
  A critical comment has been deleted and the incoherent comment of 'tptacek has been placed on top of the subthread.
blueprint 7y ago
I'm not part of any religion. But can you provide some citations that show that is Jesus's own opinion rather than people's interpretation of something? IF you're talking about the "leave your money and follow me" thing, I doubt he was talking about the money itself there. He said it was harder for a man to enter heaven with all his riches – but what if someone's virtue rose so high that they were able to enter heaven and then they encountered money – it would not have been true that they were virtuous if the money itself is capable of corrupting them. It's like saying that water corrupts someone. Wrong education (environment) does. Wrong education means that they stopped handing down the truth which was revealed by philosophy, lost the ability to make students able to see reality, and came to spread falsehoods, stories, logical derivations, and people's thoughts instead.
tomcam 7y ago
> (of course they don't believe in Christ) Mind reading. Would you like me to tell you what's going on in your head? I'm not a Christian, BTW. But this isn't the place to make inflammatory statements.
1lLAIW 7y ago
This comment also has been flagged recently. It has never been flagged during the active period.

by x1oqw 7y ago

weare138 7y ago

"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God." -Jesus Matthew 19:24

2ion 7y ago
"It is easier for a rich man to enter Heaven seated comfortably on the back of a camel than it is for a poor man to pass through the eye of a needle." - Supply Side Jesus, https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp https://imgur.com/gallery/bCqRp
- threatofrain 7y ago
  Also if he who is first shall be last, then isn't it a pretty conservative choice to be middle class in wealthiness?
- conanbatt 7y ago
  That comic is hilarious!
camhart 7y ago
Why do you think it's more difficult for a rich person? Does giving a tithe encourage or discourage the behaviors that make it difficult to make it to "Heaven"? Think on it.
- weare138 7y ago
  Jesus never advocated giving tithes or even churches for that matter.
  - knicholes 7y ago
    What about The Widow's Mite or Matthew 22:21 Jesus said "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God the things that are God's."?
zippie 7y ago
I see this quoted a lot whenever there is discussion of wealth. However, as with all verses, the context is important as well as the follow up verses. This is not in defense of. 17 “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, 19 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. 24 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.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:17-26 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-26&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-...
- darkerside 7y ago
  This can be read as meaning that your wealth will be left behind when you die, so you are no longer rich.
- anonsivalley652 7y ago
  Actually, I think a more apropos saying is: Unless the children were looting their elder's estate before the burial, there's no U-Haul behind a hearse.
- xtracto 7y ago
  As an atheist I love reading these passages.. it is amazing how people in this day and age are trying to find "meanings" from a book full of the stories of one person... who lived 2000+ years ago.. imagine if someone tried to find meaning in Beckhams biography 2000 years from now...
anonsivalley652 7y ago
For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. - Matthew 13:12 ^-- which should not be interpreted as rich people are "righteous" and poor people are "bad," but rather people tend to worship the rich and abuse the poor.
mml 7y ago
It’s “the eye of the needle”. It was a very narrow gate into Jerusalem, which camels had difficulty traversing.
- kragen 7y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Gate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle#Gate > The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate.[7][8]
- godelski 7y ago
  And it is hard for a rich man to pass through because they have many possessions. These are things you can't take to heaven. These are things you should not covet. This and many other of Jesus's teaching demonstrate that to be holy and good is to focus not on the material, but on helping your fellow man. There's nothing saying you will get barred from heaven if you're rich. But there's plenty that says you should give away your wealth and spend all your time helping others. You know, kinda like what Jesus did...
  - claudeganon 7y ago
    According to the text, Jesus was an itinerant carpenter or stone mason (depending on the vagaries of translation). He wasn’t a billionaire philanthropist. And by the telling of Acts, his followers lived in communal poverty. The problem with much of mainstream American Christianity is that it tries to reconcile the greed and amorality of Capitalist wealth accumulation with its own teachings and they are fundamentally irreconcilable. Or, if you want, by its own scripture: “No one can serve two masters: Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”
- whokal 7y ago
  This. The imagery is that a rich person carrying too much stuff would have difficulty going through the gate whereas a poor person wouldn’t. More reflection is required for a deeper understanding.
maxlybbert 7y ago
“All things (e.g., a camel’s journey through a needle’s eye) are possible, it’s true. But imagine how the camel feels, all squeezed our, in a long bloody thread from tail to snout.” I’ve seen this attributed to C.S. Lewis, but I’ve never tracked it down.

tomrod 7y ago

I can't speak for more faiths, just what I saw in the Mormon faith. Basically, they literally believe they are the only church that has authority to act for God on earth, it was given to them, and they will be the world wide government during the millennium (a time period kicked off when Jesus Christ returns, in their view).

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
mnm1 7y ago
> they literally believe they are the only church that has authority to act for God on earth Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, and I'm sure many others (especially Christian) believe the same. Seems like the one thing they have in common is their own narcissistic delusion about their importance. It also makes a great argument against the arrogance and stupidity of such teachings. After all, if only a subset of people of earth have access to god, that's the kind of god people with a brain will not want to get to know: a piece of shit asshole like the one from the Bible who favors certain people, gets angry, tortures and kills like some crazy lunatic. No thanks.
- kevinmchugh 7y ago
  Neither Islam nor Judaism is monolithic and it makes me uncertain of the accuracy of the comment to see them each treated that way.
  - mnm1 7y ago
    They both think, like Christianity, that their religion is the only path to god. Islam kills for it too.

DyslexicAtheist 7y ago

> but why do the exploited masses believe them? my favorite book on the subject of why is "Robert Cialdini's Influence": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence:_Science_and_Practice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influence:_Science_and_Practic...

tomrod 7y ago
Thanks for sharing. I look forward to reading.

camhart 7y ago

The concept of tithing is absolutely taught in the Bible. If you believe Christ to be the God of the Old Testament then He absolutely taught it. You seem to be under the impression all religious people who give tithing are merely being exploited. I can promise you are wrong there. The mentality of "I've had no such experience with God so everyone who claims they have is a kook" is quite ignorant. Perhaps you could learn something from those who have.

fiblye 7y ago
I won't address your other points since that's not what HN is about, but the person you responded to didn't say tithing. He said amassing money. 100 billion is an absolutely massive amount of cash to keep on hand for any purpose, and I imagine a good number of people think the money would mostly be going towards charitable causes or something of the sort. Tithing doesn't necessarily entail stockpiles that can buy out entire countries.
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago
  I thought it was $100B in assets and investments, not cash on hand. Did I understand wrong?
  - lvh 7y ago
    You're right, but that doesn't seem to be GP's core point.
    - seanmcdirmid 7y ago
      One is a lot more defensible than the other. Having $100B cash on hand would just be stupid. Having invested $100B could be seen as more like an endowment if they produce income.
throwaway894345 7y ago
Did the parent significantly revise their comment? Because in its current incarnation, it doesn't argue against tithing nor that those who tithe are being exploited. It seems like you're responding to the wrong comment. For posterity, here's the original comment at the time that I read it: > It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously, when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money. I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why do the exploited masses believe them? And here is your response: > The concept of tithing is absolutely taught in the Bible. If you believe Christ to be the God of the Old Testament then He absolutely taught it. You seem to be under the impression all religious people who give tithing are merely being exploited. I can promise you are wrong there. The mentality of "I've had no such experience with God so everyone who claims they have is a kook" is quite ignorant. Perhaps you could learn something from those who have.

gherkinnn 7y ago

I find a lot of people invoke Christ, but have little to do with his teachings. Amusingly, his ideas align more with beliefs held by “the young left” than by “the old right”. (Yesyes, bad terms but you know what I mean) And yet the real-world allegiances are inverted.

camhart 7y ago
You're missing the role of agency (or choice) in your evaluation. Forcing someone to do something vs someone choosing to do it of their own accord is quite different.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- Fellshard 7y ago
  Figures you're being downvoted to pieces, when this is among the key aspects of Jesus' teachings. Indeed, the entire Sermon on the Mount is centered around the centrality of the /heart/ as the seat of sin, and the thoughts and intentions of the /heart/ as being the fount from which actions stem. Individual sin is what Jesus demanded repentance from; there is no 'collective sin' in Scripture, though groups of people with common sin may be punished collectively, e.g. the time of the Judges, Israel's captivity, etc. Given the 'young left' is a collectivist ideology, which seeks to institute a form of 'ancestral sin' - people being responsible for their parents' and grandparents' wrongs, etc. - and which has made physical wealth and attributes the sole measurements of moral integrity, being a purely secular worldview - it is not in any way compatible with the teachings of Christ. But people don't like to hear that. Self-righteousness is a potent drug, something else Christ taught about quite regularly. :)
  - mola 7y ago
    I really think you have major misconceptions about social democrat ideology. Your 'ancestral sin' interpretation could easily be said on capitalists who don't have a problem with people capital fortune being decided mostly a birth. (You're born poor, you are likely to stay poor, you're born rich you're likely to stay rich no matter what you do). Or, You could also easily say that the Protestant morals equate physical wealth accumulation with how moral you are. Because if you do good by God, of you'll get rewarded with prosperoty. In your lifetime. This is of course nonsense just as your interpretation of social democrat ideology.

dorian-graph 7y ago

> when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money I'm guessing you're talking about the moneychangers being thrown out of the temple? There are examples recorded in the scriptures of tithes and offerings, and also of a people preparing/amassing the relative wealth/supplies (Noah, Joseph, etc). There are multiple levels of preparedness taught in the LDS church. The lowest, the family, being to only have necessary debt (e.g. university or a house) and to have 3 days of storage for in case of emergencies for your own family (or individual self), or to help others. Then in some areas you have Bishop storehouses. It goes up and up. > I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ) Why does the LDS church do it?

pqla1 7y ago
> Why does the LDS church do it? To go into detail would probably be outside the scope of HN, but if this is a serious question, Richard Dawkins is a good source on how the LDS church was founded.
- dorian-graph 7y ago
  Yup, it was a serious question, because it's quite an accusation. Richard Dawkins is a proliferate man, anything in particular to look up? I know he's said things about the church being fake, but what has he said about why the LDS church has amassed money and resources?
darkerside 7y ago
The moneymakers in the temple were making money for themselves, profiting off of the nominally faithful. This is very different from saying the church shouldn't acquire wealth.
- darksaints 7y ago
  The Mormon church tried for years to pretend that their leaders don't make money from the church. That too was confirmed as a lie not too long ago.

gameswithgo 7y ago

same reason they believe trump loves god and america and the common man.

adaisadais 7y ago

A lot of what the Mormon Church teaches is not based on the teachings of Jesus Christ. Mormonism and Christianity are two separate things much like Christianity and Judaism are separate.

tomrod 7y ago
This is true of virtually every religion under the Christian umbrella.
- adaisadais 7y ago
  Yes, I’m asserting that they are mutually exclusive.
gwilliams 7y ago
That could hardly be farther from the truth. The church does have extrabiblical volumes of scripture, which also testify of Christ and go into more depth, but every doctrine of the church is in harmony with the Old and New Testaments. Members believe it is only by faith in Christ and by good works that they can be saved.
- Robin_Message 7y ago
  IANATheologian but I think many if not most Christian denominations teach that people are saved exclusively by faith. Works are interpreted as a sign of faith in some Protestant denominations, which lead to the concept of the Protestant work ethic.
  - curiousgeorgio 7y ago
    IAANATheologian (I am also not a theologian), but I suppose those other Christian denominations conveniently skipped chapter 2 of James, where it says: "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."

walrus01 7y ago

If anybody asks you "what would Jesus do?", remind them that turning over tables and whipping money lenders is within the realm of possibility.

dehrmann 7y ago
That was in the context of people cashing in on religion, selling their wares in front of the temple. It'd be like him going to a religious bookstore and trashing the place. It was not an indictment on lending money.

gremlinsinc 7y ago

Christians in general all denounce socialism --even it seems democratic socialism. Christ taught: Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, give all you have to those in need then come follow me, else there's no path to heaven if you're a shallow rich person. I'm no expert on Marxism, but I think there's quite a bit of crossover in ideologies. But the point of my argument is most church's don't practice what Christ preached, they're essentially anti-christian churches.

whatthesmack 7y ago
I think the issue that many folks take with this perspective is that you’re prescribing one particular implementation (socialism) of what Jesus taught. We can debate what he taught, but you must acknowledge that you’re advocating for your favored implementation. There are plenty of ways to “Feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick, give all you have to those in need then come follow me, else there's no path to heaven” that don’t involve or require your particular implementation at all.
dehrmann 7y ago
There's a difference between socialism and charity. Christ didn't say much about governments or governmental systems beyond "pay your taxes."
jki275 7y ago
Jesus taught that we should do that. He did not teach that the government should force everyone to do that.

tptacek 7y ago

Different Christian denominations have different relationships with wealth --- ranging from a "high church" tradition of inspirational grandeur to pseudo-evangelical "prosperity churches", as well as denominations that reject all that stuff, and the LDS relationship is unique and (in a relative sense) pragmatic. I don't think your blanket statement really applies here.

xkall 7y ago
The comment you reply to does not say "all churches". It is evident, however, that several large churches do not believe in Christ. The ruthless bureaucratic and greedy Catholic church may serve as an example: https://www.smh.com.au/national/with-30b-in-wealth-why-is-the-catholic-church-struggling-to-pay-for-justice-20180208-p4yzra.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/with-30b-in-wealth-why-is-th... "John Ellis is no longer a practising Catholic." "I realised there is nothing special or different about the church ... They act like any other ruthless wealthy organisation," says Ellis. "The more money they’ve got, the more ruthless they will be with it."
1lLAIW 7y ago
A critical comment has been deleted and the incoherent comment of 'tptacek has been placed on top of the subthread.

blueprint 7y ago

I'm not part of any religion. But can you provide some citations that show that is Jesus's own opinion rather than people's interpretation of something? IF you're talking about the "leave your money and follow me" thing, I doubt he was talking about the money itself there. He said it was harder for a man to enter heaven with all his riches – but what if someone's virtue rose so high that they were able to enter heaven and then they encountered money – it would not have been true that they were virtuous if the money itself is capable of corrupting them. It's like saying that water corrupts someone. Wrong education (environment) does. Wrong education means that they stopped handing down the truth which was revealed by philosophy, lost the ability to make students able to see reality, and came to spread falsehoods, stories, logical derivations, and people's thoughts instead.

tomcam 7y ago

> (of course they don't believe in Christ) Mind reading. Would you like me to tell you what's going on in your head? I'm not a Christian, BTW. But this isn't the place to make inflammatory statements.

1lLAIW 7y ago

This comment also has been flagged recently. It has never been flagged during the active period.