Daily Anarchist Forum
May 23, 2019, 02:19:36 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
  Print  
Author Topic: Is Anarcho-Capitalism Incompatible With Christianity?  (Read 39114 times)
Will
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: April 14, 2012, 10:44:39 PM »

I base the idea that Jesus is a socialist and Christianity compatible with statism and socialism on many more passages than the one I used above. Talking about all the reason would take a long time, as I used to think about religion a lot more years ago. To me the compatiblity of christainity with anarcho capitalism is only academic as I am not a christian and do not need to recouncil these two belief systems.

Ultimately though Christian ethics are about trying to be perfectly selfless. Jesus was supposed to have been the epitome of the selfless man, as his "sacrifice" was to give men the chance to be forgiven.

I think it is also clear that Capitalism is based upon men being selfish in nature. As the actions of people in a capitalist system are done inorder to improve their lot in life. Selfishness and Selflessness are opposites.

That is why I view Christianity and Capitalism to be incompatible.

By this do you mean then that this sort of socialism (giving to the poor, being selfless, and generally not being an asshole...) is incompatible with anarchism? Or just capitalism? If just capitalism than why is this a problem?
Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #31 on: April 15, 2012, 12:58:54 AM »

I base the idea that Jesus is a socialist and Christianity compatible with statism and socialism on many more passages than the one I used above. Talking about all the reason would take a long time, as I used to think about religion a lot more years ago. To me the compatiblity of christainity with anarcho capitalism is only academic as I am not a christian and do not need to recouncil these two belief systems.

Ultimately though Christian ethics are about trying to be perfectly selfless. Jesus was supposed to have been the epitome of the selfless man, as his "sacrifice" was to give men the chance to be forgiven.

I think it is also clear that Capitalism is based upon men being selfish in nature. As the actions of people in a capitalist system are done inorder to improve their lot in life. Selfishness and Selflessness are opposites.

That is why I view Christianity and Capitalism to be incompatible.

By this do you mean then that this sort of socialism (giving to the poor, being selfless, and generally not being an asshole...) is incompatible with anarchism? Or just capitalism? If just capitalism than why is this a problem?

The reasons I give above are only for why Christianity is incompatible with Capitalism, later on in the post I explain why Christianity is incompatible with anarchy.

My problem is not with giving to the poor, I have no issue with that, here is my problem. Under the Christian system of ethics a believer is OBLIGATED to do so, and the only good action is one that is done for others. The Religion FORCES selflessness on its followers, and selflessness is the opposite of selfishness which is the basis for Capitalism.

One cannot be a good Christian and a Capitalist at the same time. Jesus directly states in the gospels that property is bad! The scene with the moneylenders suggests at the very least that money and business is unwholesome to God.
Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #32 on: April 15, 2012, 01:16:22 AM »

I too have had the idea floating in my head that the times in Exodus there wasn't really a state (as we know it.) God ruled very directly at that time, which is a legit rule - unlike man involuntarily enslaving man to his own ideals on life.

If God exists, why is his rule any different than that of a man? If your answer is "Because he is God" that is a statement without logical backing. God in the old testament is a Master of the Jews, they obeyed him or died. (Sodom and Gamorah, The Golden Calf, Naoh's Flood)

So is this legitimate or is God just as evil as men?

The point is the God of the Bible is a Dictator in every sense and thus the question "Is Christainity compatible with Anarcho-Capitalism" is answered in the negative. Because the religion itself Worships a King, how can they do this while at the same time want to abolish government?
Logged
AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: April 15, 2012, 04:44:08 AM »

@MAM while "Because he is God" may not be enough of a statement for you consider this: God is considered to be Omnipotent and Omniscient, and truly perfect, whereas humanity is not all knowing, or all powerful, and most definitely NOT perfect.....so many Christian anarchist such as myself see a difference, we wish to abolish worldly governments because of the fact, that they are run by human beings, people who are imperfect, and must definitely not omniscient or omnipotent.


As for the Bible and Christianity forcing it's followers to give to charity...where does it FORCE them....from my understanding and reading of the Bible, Christians are merely told they SHOULD give to charity. And while you may say that Christians are obligated to give to charity, consider this....let's say God is real, which I as a Christian believe, and you as an Atheist (I'm assuming your an atheist) do not. But let's ignore that and for purely demonstrative purposes say the God described in the Bible IS real....thus God is Omniscient and Omnipotent....but for this example we're going to focus on the Omniscient, id est all knowing, aspect. He is going to know if a Christian is giving to charity because they truly want to, and wish to help those they believe to be in need, then that counts as charity....if however they are only doing it out of a sense of obligation, or for fear of what God might do if they don't...then it doesn't count. That's why I truly believe that only those who "walk the walk" will go  to heaven, regardless of whether or not they "talk the talk" or to put it another way, you could have a die-hard evangelical Christian, like Rick Santorum, or the Pope, et cetera, and if they don't actually behave in a Christian manner, i.e. giving to charity freely, obeying the 10 commandments, and the "New Commandment" ("A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" John 13:34-35), along with a bunch of other things, all that rhetoric isn't going to do anything for them. However if you have say an atheist, a Muslim, or a Buddhist, etc. who acts in a manner befitting of a Christian, minus actually believing in God period, for the atheist and possibly the Buddhist, or believing that Jesus is the Son of God in the case of the Muslims, would still go to Heaven.
Logged

bastiat
Full Member
***
Posts: 100


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: April 15, 2012, 09:41:58 AM »

While most non radical libertarians would find this argument unconvincing,  I would point out God homesteaded the Universe and Heaven and thus is justified in doing pretty much anything provided he does not prevent them from leaving, which he does not.
Secondly, Scripture supports private property and while one may argue it veers mutualistic, it must be at least prop market given that. Additionally, the fact that when Jesus made the Camel statement the next response was who then can be saved followed by With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible suggests this is general comment on salvation not on riches.
Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #35 on: April 15, 2012, 12:43:53 PM »

@MAM while "Because he is God" may not be enough of a statement for you consider this: God is considered to be Omnipotent and Omniscient, and truly perfect, whereas humanity is not all knowing, or all powerful, and most definitely NOT perfect.....so many Christian anarchist such as myself see a difference, we wish to abolish worldly governments because of the fact, that they are run by human beings, people who are imperfect, and must definitely not omniscient or omnipotent.


As for the Bible and Christianity forcing it's followers to give to charity...where does it FORCE them....from my understanding and reading of the Bible, Christians are merely told they SHOULD give to charity. And while you may say that Christians are obligated to give to charity, consider this....let's say God is real, which I as a Christian believe, and you as an Atheist (I'm assuming your an atheist) do not. But let's ignore that and for purely demonstrative purposes say the God described in the Bible IS real....thus God is Omniscient and Omnipotent....but for this example we're going to focus on the Omniscient, id est all knowing, aspect. He is going to know if a Christian is giving to charity because they truly want to, and wish to help those they believe to be in need, then that counts as charity....if however they are only doing it out of a sense of obligation, or for fear of what God might do if they don't...then it doesn't count. That's why I truly believe that only those who "walk the walk" will go  to heaven, regardless of whether or not they "talk the talk" or to put it another way, you could have a die-hard evangelical Christian, like Rick Santorum, or the Pope, et cetera, and if they don't actually behave in a Christian manner, i.e. giving to charity freely, obeying the 10 commandments, and the "New Commandment" ("A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another" John 13:34-35), along with a bunch of other things, all that rhetoric isn't going to do anything for them. However if you have say an atheist, a Muslim, or a Buddhist, etc. who acts in a manner befitting of a Christian, minus actually believing in God period, for the atheist and possibly the Buddhist, or believing that Jesus is the Son of God in the case of the Muslims, would still go to Heaven.

To be honest I am not interested in arguing over whether or not God exists. In order for an argument or a discussion and what not to have a chance of success there needs to be a common ground. Belief in a god is a fundamental metaphysical choice.

The fact that it is fundamental is why Christians use the bible to try and prove the bible and vice versa. All arguments that one makes have their beginings in these fundamental assumptions, and our fundamental metaphysical assumptions are completely different.

And for the record I don't like being called an atheist because it tells someone what I don't believe and has nothing to say about what I actually believe. Karl Marx and Ayn Rand were both atheists putting the nail in the proverbial coffin that atheism is somehow a belief system.

In any case, it seems to me that the arguments that have been stated against mine are of the God is God and his behavior is righteous even if it is the same behavior that would have been considered evil if a man had done it.

In short over the years youtube has been the site of many debates over religion and to my mind both sides have said all there is to be said on the subject.

Anyway I appreciate your thoughts, your argument is pretty cogent, though I do remember Jesus saying "Sell all your possession and give them away and follow me" at one point in the Gospels. So I am not convinced that he isn't forcing Alturism on people.

Another point to consider is this; if a bank robber say to the teller "here is your choice, empty your register into my bag, or get shot." is that really a choice? In the same sense one is offered the choice to accept God, and if they don't they spend eternity in Hell. To my mind there is nothing voluntary in Christianity though a great effort has been made to convince people that there is.

Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #36 on: April 15, 2012, 12:45:57 PM »

While most non radical libertarians would find this argument unconvincing,  I would point out God homesteaded the Universe and Heaven and thus is justified in doing pretty much anything provided he does not prevent them from leaving, which he does not.
Secondly, Scripture supports private property and while one may argue it veers mutualistic, it must be at least prop market given that. Additionally, the fact that when Jesus made the Camel statement the next response was who then can be saved followed by With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible suggests this is general comment on salvation not on riches.


The camel comment seems to indicate that riches make it harder to attain salvation.
Logged
Will
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: April 15, 2012, 01:46:12 PM »

Quote
My problem is not with giving to the poor, I have no issue with that, here is my problem. Under the Christian system of ethics a believer is OBLIGATED to do so, and the only good action is one that is done for others. The Religion FORCES selflessness on its followers, and selflessness is the opposite of selfishness which is the basis for Capitalism.

So are you also against wage labor, or the rules of basketball, or the authority of a third party arbitrator? By choosing to be a part of any one of these activities a person gives up a bit of there personal freedom. I actually disagree that Jesus is forcing his followers to be selfless, but even assuming he does I still don't see how that is a problem.

You argue below that the heaven/hell dichotomy makes it so that one doesn't really have a choice in the matter. But you (I assume) do not really believe that this dichotomy exists. It kind of reminds me of Bakunin's comment that, "...if God exists he would have to be abolished."
Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #38 on: April 15, 2012, 02:21:26 PM »

I'm against any authority that I don't voluntarily recognize. If it an authority that forces itself on me I am against it. For example I'm not against the authority of the moderators on this site because I volunteered to be subject to it while using this site.

And to my mind if God exists then he is EVIL and must be opposed.
Logged
Will
Full Member
***
Posts: 121


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: April 15, 2012, 03:11:05 PM »

I'm against any authority that I don't voluntarily recognize. If it an authority that forces itself on me I am against it. For example I'm not against the authority of the moderators on this site because I volunteered to be subject to it while using this site.

And to my mind if God exists then he is EVIL and must be opposed.

So the crux of your argument is that Christianity isn't voluntary. Which frankly is ridiculous. It is only possible to construe Christianity as involuntary if you accept that it's supernatural suppositions are true, if not then there is nothing involuntary about it.
Logged
MAM
Guest
« Reply #40 on: April 15, 2012, 04:42:29 PM »

I'm against any authority that I don't voluntarily recognize. If it an authority that forces itself on me I am against it. For example I'm not against the authority of the moderators on this site because I volunteered to be subject to it while using this site.

And to my mind if God exists then he is EVIL and must be opposed.

So the crux of your argument is that Christianity isn't voluntary. Which frankly is ridiculous. It is only possible to construe Christianity as involuntary if you accept that it's supernatural suppositions are true, if not then there is nothing involuntary about it.

The question that I am arguing about is "Is Christianity compatible with Anarcho-Capitalism" I'm not arguing about whether or not Christianity is valid. If you are a Christian then obviously you accept the supernatural suppositions of Christianity, and those suppositions are not compatible with anarcho capitalism!

You are forgetting the original question!
Logged
kunkmiester
Full Member
***
Posts: 171



View Profile WWW
« Reply #41 on: April 16, 2012, 07:12:27 AM »

Quote
The scene with the moneylenders suggests at the very least that money and business is unwholesome to God.
The moneylenders weren't the problem, it was the location of their business that was the problem.  IIRC it was also money changing, not lending.  They were doing their business on the temple lot, which was not a place for such business.

Quote
"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to get into heaven." Jesus also told the rich man to sell all of his possession and give them to the poor, and to be selfless etc...
The second part is incomplete--the Bible points out that part of the problem wasn't the possessions, but his attitude towards them: he didn't want to do it because he was selfish and wanted to keep it all and keep the high life.

Mormons believe in a pre-existance, which throws a whole 'nother wrench in the works.  We are literal spiritual children of God.  How does that change God's role?
Logged

Evil is evil, no matter how small.
MAM
Guest
« Reply #42 on: April 16, 2012, 09:44:01 AM »

Quote
The scene with the moneylenders suggests at the very least that money and business is unwholesome to God.
The moneylenders weren't the problem, it was the location of their business that was the problem.  IIRC it was also money changing, not lending.  They were doing their business on the temple lot, which was not a place for such business.

Quote
"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to get into heaven." Jesus also told the rich man to sell all of his possession and give them to the poor, and to be selfless etc...
The second part is incomplete--the Bible points out that part of the problem wasn't the possessions, but his attitude towards them: he didn't want to do it because he was selfish and wanted to keep it all and keep the high life.

Mormons believe in a pre-existance, which throws a whole 'nother wrench in the works.  We are literal spiritual children of God.  How does that change God's role?

I'm not sure your points change anything. And certainly your second point only reinforces mine. As or how does being the children of god change anything. It doesn't a slave is a slave even if his master is his father.
Logged
JustSayNoToStatism
Daily Anarchist Crew
Hero Member
****
*****
Posts: 1747


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: April 16, 2012, 06:27:02 PM »

For the most part I'm going to steer clear of this conversation again, but I have to comment on this:
Quote
Omnipotent and Omniscient
This has been thoroughly debunked. I won't comment on the existence of God, but the properties you have ascribed here cannot go hand in hand with anyone. It's necessarily a logical contradiction. See Human Action for more details.
Logged

"I like to eat. Instead of a monarch I propose we have a Chef be final arbiter in matters. We'll call it anarcho-chefism."
-MAM
Distruzio
Anarcho-Monarchist
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 62


View Profile
« Reply #44 on: April 17, 2012, 03:29:58 AM »

I think that anarcho-capitalism is apathetic to religious concerns except where they encourage compulsory incorporation for the uninitiated. In that capacity, I think AnCap is quite hostile. While I am, myself, an Eastern Orthodox Christian, I feel that religious concerns can only be absolutely reconciled with AnCap by identifying the philosophy as a purely pragmatic and nonreligious philosophy. Incorporating Christian ideals into the philosophy changes it, somewhat, in a manner that excludes the protestant interpretation of the gospels as they tend to be bibliolatrous statists who forget the primacy of christ before the hobbesian State. From my own consideration on the subject, consideration that nearly cost me my faith, I find that only the Orthodox, Catholic, and Anglican faiths, and a very few individual protestants properly elevate Christ and the Church, the family, tradition, and propriety above the state.

Consider this thread in which I mock the text proofing bible thumpers who twist the gospels to there whims. http://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=152426&hilit=jesus
Logged

Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.

- H.L. Mencken
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!