peter12's "Human rights is an exclusively Christian concept." thread

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I'm still waiting for a non-religious, or "unaffiliated" candidate to win an election. Then, maybe, we can finally have a serious conversation about separation of church and state.

It's all variations on Judeo-Christian morality and ethics that bleed into the lawmaking. It would be great to have a break from that for a few years.

That is what makes our laws great. Human rights is an exclusively Christian concept.

[Fuzz]

Green text?

[driveway]

Originally Posted by peter12

That is what makes our laws great. Human rights is an exclusively Christian concept.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Green text?

Nope he firmly believes it. Had several debates about it in previous threads.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

Nope he firmly believes it. Had several debates about it in previous threads.

Because it is true, of course.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Iggy City

Nope he firmly believes it. Had several debates about it in previous threads.

And despite his argument being absolutely torn apart he coins to some random author who agrees with him. Never change Peter12

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

And despite his argument being absolutely torn apart he coins to some random author who agrees with him. Never change Peter12

Well, I haven't really engaged in any sort of debate, other than a brief challenge to the modern orthodoxy that Christianity is some super bad thing.

I only refer to a single author because it is a good point of entry for anyone interested in exploring the argument further.

Most people don't really have any knowledge of intellectual history out of what they have learned in high school, so it is kind of a huge task to go all the way back, and argue about things like the Church fathers or briefly go through Kierkegaard and the profundity of Protestant piety.

That said, there would be no abolition movement - both ancient and modern - without the influence of Christianity. Dignity, compassion, egalitarianism are all Christian doctrines. Human rights as an ideology, obviously, derives from these doctrines. Pre-Christian societies - such as the early Romans- would have found it hilarious that we think people who don't live in our particular polity (extended from a family notion) deserve dignified treatment.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, I haven't really engaged in any sort of debate, other than a brief challenge to the modern orthodoxy that Christianity is some super bad thing.

I only refer to a single author because it is a good point of entry for anyone interested in exploring the argument further.

Most people don't really have any knowledge of intellectual history out of what they have learned in high school, so it is kind of a huge task to go all the way back, and argue about things like the Church fathers or briefly go through Kierkegaard and the profundity of Protestant piety.

That said, there would be no abolition movement - both ancient and modern - without the influence of Christianity. Dignity, compassion, egalitarianism are all Christian doctrines. Human rights as an ideology, obviously, derives from these doctrines. Pre-Christian societies - such as the early Romans- would have found it hilarious that we think people who don't live in our particular polity (extended from a family notion) deserve dignified treatment.

You can go through whatever history you want, but you'll still find you're wrong.

Compassion isn't a Christian invention.

Egalitarianism isn't a Christian invention.

/end thread derail

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

You can go through whatever history you want, but you'll still find you're wrong.

Compassion isn't a Christian invention.

Egalitarianism isn't a Christian invention.

/end thread derail

Both wrong, but continue in your arrogant ignorance. As I said, what you learned in high school or from Christopher Hitchens isn't really right at all.

This is actually quite cogent to the discussion at hand, since it has become a very fun thing for liberals to dehumanize American Christian conservatives as if they are some sort of creature hell-bent on destroying America, and liberal values, absolutely.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

Both wrong, but continue in your arrogant ignorance. As I said, what you learned in high school or from Christopher Hitchens isn't really right at all.

This is actually quite cogent to the discussion at hand, since it has become a very fun thing for liberals to dehumanize American Christian conservatives as if they are some sort of creature hell-bent on destroying America, and liberal values, absolutely.

Hinduism has compassion add a core virtue, and in fact has even broken it down further. You need to forget what you were taught in Sunday school. Gays aren't abhorrent and compassion wasn't invented by Jesus

[Coach]

peter, don't you think you're missing the broad point that Christianity is a human invention, and thus and morals that stem from it are human, and not uniquely Christian?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Hinduism has compassion add a core virtue, and in fact has even broken it down further. You need to forget what you were taught in Sunday school. Gays aren't abhorrent and compassion wasn't invented by Jesus

I actually never went to Sunday school.

And I think you mean "non-violence" in Hinduism.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MattyC

peter, don't you think you're missing the broad point that Christianity is a human invention, and thus and morals that stem from it are human, and not uniquely Christian?

This is a complicated question as Christianity was/is intended for all people. Its universal doctrine of compassion and dignified freedom was what caused it to spread so rapidly through the Roman Empire.

I personally believe it to be divine truth filtered through unique human institutions, which of course have their own failings.

This duality in expression is why Christianity is so contradictory, particularly when it pushes for a political influence, something that it has never really been successful at historically.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by peter12

Both wrong, but continue in your arrogant ignorance. As I said, what you learned in high school or from Christopher Hitchens isn't really right at all.

This is actually quite cogent to the discussion at hand, since it has become a very fun thing for liberals to dehumanize American Christian conservatives as if they are some sort of creature hell-bent on destroying America, and liberal values, absolutely.

You can't actually believe compassion is a Christian invention, but it comes across as though you do. You might want to clarify. Or not. But it is confusing.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by peter12

This is a complicated question as Christianity was/is intended for all people. Its universal doctrine of compassion and dignified freedom was what caused it to spread so rapidly through the Roman Empire.

I personally believe it to be divine truth filtered through unique human institutions, which of course have their own failings.

Do you mean divine truth literally? Like god's word? And that god didn't build these constructs into us, and instead decided to wait a few hundred thousand years to gift his son to the world before trying to include decency in our society via word of mouth vs imprinting it in our biology?

And for your edit: are you suggesting that Christianity has never successfully had political influence?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

You can't actually believe compassion is a Christian invention, but it comes across as though you do. You might want to clarify. Or not. But it is confusing.

When you look at how Christianity emerged from the Greco-Roman pagan world, it becomes a lot easier to believe.

The pagan empires were cruel, melancholic, fate-ridden places to exist. Life was a serious of struggles against natural obstacles, and heroism was often expressed as a stoic refusal to be beaten by said obstacles. Life was cheap. For slaves - most of the ancient population - you were viewed as a technological unit, and nothing more.

As the central aspect of Christianity is that Christ came to absolve everyone from their sins, and in essence, to create a new man, you can see why that would be revolutionary within that particular world. The reverberations of that are still with us today, of course. One only has to examine the language of the 19th century English abolitionists to see how seriously they took the Gospel's view on human society, and the proper ordering of living between individuals from different political strata.

[afc wimbledon]

You wouldn't need an abolition movement if good God fearing Christians hadn't bought slaves in the first place, using the bible to excuse their abhorrent behaviour.

These would be the same God fearing folk that stuck children up chimneys or down mines to die in vast numbers, but yes, those Romans were awefull.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Do you mean divine truth literally? Like god's word? And that god didn't build these constructs into us, and instead decided to wait a few hundred thousand years to gift his son to the world before trying to include decency in our society via word of mouth vs imprinting it in our biology?

And for your edit: are you suggesting that Christianity has never successfully had political influence?

I think that the deeper we get into this subject, the more I will have to backtrack into explanations regarding my views on faith - particularly as I draw it from Christian literature.

The whole discussion revolves around a type of anthropology or maybe existential theology - a study of humans. Three books that I have found particularly useful - outside of the Bible - are Dante's Divine Comedy, Kierkegaard's The Concept of Anxiety, and Walker Percy's Lost in the Cosmos. Anyway, you can dress the ideas up in all sorts of fancy language, but in reality, it all speaks to the everyday experience of all human beings searching for a truth. That said, as limited mortal beings, we are not capable of seeing the whole truth, only parts, so I personally, along with many Christians, remain open to the truths of other cultures, but without being relativistic. Hence, Christianity's long history of cosmopolitanism.

I think Christianity faces a dichotomy within politics - particularly now. A lot of American Christians feel that the political system has begun to act directly against their interest. They have become bellicose in turn, mainly defensively. The problem is that Christianity tends to become perverted by politics quite quickly.

You can't be Pope, and use the office to benefit yourself materially. The two don't quite go together. This is why Dante, in his Inferno, relegates such Popes to the lowest level of Hell - the same could go for many American/Canadian politicians who use their Christianity as a means to benefit from a certain office or manipulate the good faith of their Christian constituency.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

You wouldn't need an abolition movement if good God fearing Christians hadn't bought slaves in the first place, using the bible to excuse their abhorrent behaviour.

As a piece of history, John Newton's Amazing Grace disproves this little myth. The song is a prayer for forgiveness for a man who imported thousands of slaves to the New World, repented of his sins, and spent the rest of his life in penance.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

As a piece of history, John Newton's Amazing Grace disproves this little myth. The song is a prayer for forgiveness for a man who imported thousands of slaves to the New World, repented of his sins, and spent the rest of his life in penance.

Lol. One guy uses the Bible one way, the other uses it another way and you claim only one is right