https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/03/christians-are-more-than-twice-as-likely-to-blame-a-persons-poverty-on-lack-of-effort/?utm_term=.821321bea515 "Christians, especially white evangelical Christians, are much more likely than non-Christians to view poverty as the result of individual failings."
My experience says that's generally true; I detect smugness and an odor of sanctity in far too many professed Christians of my acquaintance. However, here's one Christian whose devotion to the poor is exemplary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavo_Guti%C3%A9rrez My favourite quote from him: "So you say you love the poor? Name them." (Outside a local church near me.) J.
Fr. Gutiérrez is a Peruvian. From the Wiki: "Gutiérrez's thought has marked, consciously or unconsciously, all of Latin American theology." Are you suggesting his theological concepts have something to do with with the dictatorial regime of Nicolás Maduro? J.
This from a Chavez apologist: “I bring food to the hungry,” the Brazilian cleric Dom Helder Camara famously said, “and they call me a saint. I ask why there are so many hungry, and they call me a communist.” Known as the “archbishop of the poor,” Camara was a prophet of liberation theology, the left-leaning Catholic movement from which Hugo Chavez took inspiration. https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/03/10/hugo-chavez-demagoguery-aside-venezuelan-president-was-right-about-poverty/KZpHIt8YApTl0bGjpZA8fM/story.html
I couldn't "get in" to read the Globe piece, so I did some digging. Yes, this is something Hugo Chavez used to his advantage - I guess he used it to cement his lasting appeal to many poor Venezuelans until his death. And yes, I can see how Maduro would like to perpetuate an appeal to the poor - there are so many of them in his country. Best info I could find -written about Chavez's death: "Known as the "archbishop of the poor," Camara was a prophet of liberation theology, the left-leaning Catholic movement from which Hugo Chavez took inspiration. The Venezuelan leader began by asking Camara's question. That is why millions of poor people recognize Chavez as theirs, and why there was so much open grief in the streets of Caracas last week. Over time, Chavez moved from being an idealistic firebrand advocating for the poor, to being a force for their empowerment, to becoming perceived as the latest reduction to the absurd of socialist self-importance. Across roughly the same period, liberation theology itself went from being the inspiration of millions to a broadly discredited disappointment. Denounced as Marxist, a source of class conflict, unfair to the affluent, too obsessed with material matters, and condescending to the pieties and values of poor people themselves, liberation theology was rejected by establishment Catholicism and marginalized. Chavez and his Christian ideology were alike in falling short and being denigrated." From here: Opinion Articles Sad end to what began as well-intended. J.
Oh sure. The Bolsheviks had good intentions and the Maoists, the Castroites, the Viet Minh, Pathet Lao, Khmer Rouge, Sandinistas, Weathermen...
Honestly, "original sin" is an extra-biblical concept created by the Catholic Church. It's not a Christian philosophy so much as a religious one.
Oddly, I've been hearing and reading people say this a lot lately and it doesn't make any sense. Original sin IS in the Bible in the most clear-cut, direct way possible and is explained and referred to at length throughout the entire book (see, for example, Romans 5:12) Are you referring to original sin as being nasty? I don't see that as having anything to do with this thread topic at all, but if I understand your post correctly, then you are WAY off on this one. Even if you're not a Christian and probably especially if you don't believe in God, I would hope you can appreciate the Biblical teaching that it is not God, but a combination of uncontrollable circumstances, the actions of our ancestors and our very own actions that causes us to suffer and be unhappy. That through the understanding that we are born imperfect and undeserving, we should seek to better ourselves while refraining from letting our successes falsely convince us that we are anything greater than a collection of particles. Original sin helps me to appreciate that we don't exist as God intended us to be and to have trust in his promise that, when the time is right, we will be restored to that condition.
Thank you. I'm tired of people claiming that socialist regimes are founded with good intentions. They're no better than any other dictatorships, and usually worse.
Maybe you're the expert and I'm certainly not but I looked at a bible once and I'm pretty sure it's in there.
Imposed collective. Slave state. Same same. And that's imposed collective. Voluntary association is quite different as the individual can associate or disassociate at will. Obamacare is an imposed collective. I'm pretty sure you will agree.
I'm pretty sure it's not, Kizmet. This source (not sure of its authority/validity) says the phrase "original sin" is not in the Bible. I'll believe it, that far, anyway. Looks like yet another man-made religious concept, to me, as Darkwaters maintains. I'd probably still think of it as one if it WAS written in the Bible -- but that's me... What Does the Bible Really Say About Original Sin? | What Is Original Sin? | Disobedience to God - Beliefnet J.
From the article you cited: "Although the words “original sin” aren’t found together in Scripture, the doctrine is taught in many passages: “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned” (Romans 5:12); “one trespass led to condemnation for all men” (Romans 5:18); and “In Adam all die” (1 Corinthians 15:22). Knowing this, it is no wonder that David wrote in Psalm 51:5, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Ephesians is another book of the Bible that people connect with original sin. Ephesians 2:2 says that all people who are not in Christ are “sons of disobedience.” Ephesians 2:3 also establishes this, saying that we are all “by nature children of wrath.” If this is the case, it can only be because we are all by nature sinners. While God did not create the human race sinful, but upright, we fell into sin and became sinful due to the disobedience of Adam." The Bible says it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over..... It's literally the whole purpose and the point for the Bible even existing to begin with. Lisa, from the comment section posted: "I notice you use tons of scripture to support the idea of original sin, but when you start arguing your point you use ZERO scripture." BINGO! My point, exactly.
OK, so like I said, you're the experts. But if it's not actually in the Bible but was instead invented by a bunch of early Christians, maybe that supports my original theses even more solidly.