Err...
I'm not sure what makes a religion 'legitimate'. I agree about your reservations with Scientology.
Indeed, that's kinda my point.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you think "Religion exploit the working people"
- Thread starter Lars
- Start date
Err...
I'm not sure what makes a religion 'legitimate'. I agree about your reservations with Scientology.
Indeed, that's kinda my point.
Well, not being obviously founded as a money making scam, for one.
Well, not being obviously founded as a money making scam, for one.
This actually feels like a decent thread idea.
I honestly don't get why that would need to be the case.
Some religions are just trash.
Same as some Christians...and some atheists.
The 'No-True Scotsman' thing just never computes in my head. Anyway, I realise I'm being a little obtuse in relation to your post and point, so I'll apologize and stop rambling on. If I create a thread, I'll let you know, in case you want more of my ramble...lol
No need to apologize. As for making the thread, go for it. Sounds like a worthwhile topic.
But to answer your question, I do not expect Scientology to be as charitable as the French government, no. Lol.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Religion is certainly used by politicians to manipulate people. They can convince people to vote against their own interests by paying lip service to it.
Jeremiah Ames
Well-Known Member
Yes, religion exploits people.
Give us money, lots and lots of money.
Go out and pressure people to become converts.
So we can have more people to exploit.
Oh, and be careful what you do, there is an angry, wrathful god waiting to smite you.
Did I miss anything?
Speaking as a religious socialist myself (or proponent of a theology of liberation), in the most general and abstract sense, I would have to say: "no".
Can certain theologies be detrimental to the material situation of the poor? Absolutely. The Calvinist interpretation (in my opinion misinterpretation) of 'original sin' to mean what John Calvin rather indecorously termed "the total depravity of man" - the notion that human nature is so enslaved to sin by the fall that we are "utterly unable to choose to do good" apart from divine grace - if brought to its logical conclusion could lead to extreme pessimism about humanity's capability for social improvement and development (especially in the reform of human institutions), paired with a fundamental inertia and resignation to the injustices of society, as being just the inevitable consequence of original sin (so why bother trying to changing it? We'll just fail anyway! Its divinely ordained!).
However, that's not what many or most religions are like at all.
In his Homily on 1 Timothy 12:3–4,71 the early church father St. John Chrysostom (died 407 CE) made the bold statement that "it is utterly impossible to be rich without committing injustice" (οὐκ ἔστιν οὐκ ἔστι μὴ ἀδικοῦντα πλουτεῖν) and moreover said that wealth is tantamount to theft, for ‘its origin must have come from an injustice against someone’, an ἀδικία (Timothy 1, 3, v.3, v. 8; 6, v.10; John Chrysostom in Schaff, 1886, Vol. 13, p.447). He then posed a rhetorical question: ‘Is this not an evil, that you alone should have the Lord’s property, that you alone should enjoy what is common?’, finally concluding: "Not to share one’s wealth with the poor is to steal from them and to take away their livelihood. It is not our own goods which we hold, but theirs" (Hom. in Lazaro 2,5).
To me, his approach encapsulates the positive contribution that religion - as a moral safeguard in society - can make to the lives of the poorest members of our society.
I do not, therefore, think 'religion' is inherently exploitative of working people - in the sense of being an opiate, a blissful distraction that inhibits them from effecting real earthly change in their material circumstances, with the promise of an illusory 'heavenly felicity'. This is a common Marxian trope and I regard it as lazy stereotyping of a highly complex human cultural phenomenon. In fact, many religious movements throughout history have been motivated by - even originated by - a profound social consciousness.
The Jewish Torah, for example, among many other social justice-driven mitzvah, obliges Israelite landowner to allow the poor free entrance to his fields and access to produce in superabundance and is framed around a story in Exodus about an oppressed slave-class being freed.
When one comes to the New Testament, this theme becomes especially 'radical':
"...a ‘revolutionary’ or ‘subversive’ attitude towards empire, wealth, and inequality is an integral part of the earliest [Jesus] tradition and a product of socio-economic changes in Palestine as Jesus was growing up...
The earliest Palestinian tradition pitted the kingdom of God against Rome, attacked wealth and privilege, supported the poorest members of society, and saw Jesus as an agent of the kingdom in both present and future [in which] rich and poor would be reversed."
The earliest Palestinian tradition pitted the kingdom of God against Rome, attacked wealth and privilege, supported the poorest members of society, and saw Jesus as an agent of the kingdom in both present and future [in which] rich and poor would be reversed."
(Professor James G. Crossley (Jesus and the Chaos of History: Redirecting the Life of the Historical Jesus, p.163))
(continued...)
Moreover, religion has - on many occasions - actually served as the tinder for radical social change. I could cite a multitude of examples of this, but will confine myself to a few archetypal cases:
* The German peasants in the 16th century revolting against their feudal lords, as well as the very institution of serfdom, by appealing to Jesus's social egalitarianism i.e. "Until now it has been practice that we have been treated like serfs, which is deplorable, since Christ redeemed all of us with his precious blood, both the shepherd and the nobleman, with no exceptions. Accordingly we hereby declare that we are free and want to remain free." (Twelve Articles of the German Peasants [1525])
* nineteenth-century Chinese converts responding to their first reception of the Gospel by "offer[ing] equality between men and women as well as reform to the hated system of land ownership where landlords exploited poor tenant farmers" in the Taiping Rebellion:
* The Protestant Social Gospel movement:
* Liberation theology in Catholicism:
* The German peasants in the 16th century revolting against their feudal lords, as well as the very institution of serfdom, by appealing to Jesus's social egalitarianism i.e. "Until now it has been practice that we have been treated like serfs, which is deplorable, since Christ redeemed all of us with his precious blood, both the shepherd and the nobleman, with no exceptions. Accordingly we hereby declare that we are free and want to remain free." (Twelve Articles of the German Peasants [1525])
* nineteenth-century Chinese converts responding to their first reception of the Gospel by "offer[ing] equality between men and women as well as reform to the hated system of land ownership where landlords exploited poor tenant farmers" in the Taiping Rebellion:
The Taiping Rebellion, which is also known as the Taiping Civil War or the Taiping Revolution,[7] was a massive rebellion or civil war that was waged in China from 1850 to 1864 between the established Manchu-led Qing dynasty and the Hakka-led Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.
Led by Hong Xiuquan, the self-proclaimed brother of Jesus Christ, the goals of the Taipings were religious, nationalist, and political in nature; they sought the conversion of the Chinese people to the Taiping's syncretic version of Christianity, the overthrow of the ruling Manchus, and a wholesale transformation and reformation of the state.[8][9] Rather than simply supplanting the ruling class, the Taipings sought to upend the moral and social order of China.[10]
Under the Taipings, the Chinese language was simplified, and equality between men and women was decreed. All property was to be held in common, and equal distribution of the land according to a primitive form of communism was planned. Some Western-educated Taiping leaders even proposed the development of industry and the building of a Taiping democracy
* The Protestant Social Gospel movement:
The Social Gospel was a movement in Protestantism that applied Christian ethics to social problems, especially issues of social justice such as economic inequality, poverty, alcoholism, crime, racial tensions, slums, unclean environment, child labor, lack of unionization, poor schools, and the dangers of war. It was most prominent in the early-20th-century United States and Canada. Theologically, the Social Gospelers sought to put into practice the Lord's Prayer (Matthew 6:10): "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven".[1]
* The Hussite Revolution of the 15th century:
Christ’s communists: the radical religious sect that challenged the Holy Roman Empire
Six centuries ago in Bohemia, a dissenter army led by a one-eyed warrior waged war on the Holy Roman Empire. Tom Holland tells the story of the Taborites, whose creed was to reject money, property… and the AntichristAll through March 1420, they made the trek, drawn from every class of society, from every corner of Bohemia (a kingdom that’s now part of the Czech Republic).
All shared in the common danger – and all shared a common status. Every man was called brother, and every woman sister. There were no hierarchies, no wages, no taxes. New arrivals were obliged to hand over their possessions, which were shared out according to need. Private property was illegal. All debts were forgiven. The poor, it seemed, had inherited the earth.
The town, the first ever to be founded on quasi-communist principles, was called Tabor by its inhabitants. The name broadcast a defiant message to its enemies. In the Bible, it was recorded that Jesus had climbed a mountain to pray...
It had been raised in defiance of earthly monarchs, and fashioned to serve the needs of all the Christian people.
* Liberation theology in Catholicism:
Liberation theology is a synthesis of Christian theology and socio-economic analyses, based in far-left politics, particularly Marxism, that emphasizes "social concern for the poor and political liberation for oppressed peoples."[1]
The best-known form of liberation theology is that which developed within the Catholic Church in Latin America in the 1950s and 1960s, arising principally as a moral reaction to the poverty and social injustice in the region.
And it's sparking of the Sandinista / Nicaraguan Revolution in the 1970s:
Its there anything in your city that would contradict the fact that churches take in much more than they pay out doing charity?
No, religion is now a weak force at least in North America and Europe. This is not Karl Marx's day.
PureX
Veteran Member
I think capitalism exploits everyone but the capital owner/investors. Once upon a time, when organized religion was the dominant form of governance, and was predominantly autocratic, it was very exploitive of the 'common rabble'. But now days it's capitalism and their corrupt plutocracies that are doing the exploiting.
Brian2
Veteran Member
It might depend what is meant by religion. A hierarchical system that joins itself with the upper classes of society or just wants money and power can end up exploiting workers, but religion per se? Probably not.
wellwisher
Well-Known Member
If you compare Church giving, to Big Government giving, at least churches pass the plate and give you the option to give or not give each day. Big Government gives no choice It steals using intimidation and the boot of law. Next tax time, tell the IRS you can only give less that they require amount and see what happens. The atheist seem to think this is a more competent system.
In the bible, one is only required to give 10% of their income as a tithe, while Big Government can go as high as 90%. How is it that religion can manage with less money? People in government are more self serving and often less competent in terms of the end user. They need to force people to overpay to make up for their incompetence and power mongering.
Religion will help with charity but they also encourage work. They will accept a safety net but not a safety hammock for a work vacation. The welfare state of Big Government discourages work, so they can create illusion of being needed. During the Covid crisis in the USA, big government gave more to stay home than people made to work, thereby growing the welfare state. This idle tardiness is a sin in religion but not in big government.
The budget deficits by the US government is mortgaging the future. I do not know of any religion that would take that path since that would be a sin. If we forced government to be more like Religion, we would all be better off in terms of taxes. I would not mind a straight across the board 10% tax rate that is semi-optional. This would require more competent people in leadership roles, who work for the people instead of themselves.
In the bible, one is only required to give 10% of their income as a tithe, while Big Government can go as high as 90%. How is it that religion can manage with less money? People in government are more self serving and often less competent in terms of the end user. They need to force people to overpay to make up for their incompetence and power mongering.
Religion will help with charity but they also encourage work. They will accept a safety net but not a safety hammock for a work vacation. The welfare state of Big Government discourages work, so they can create illusion of being needed. During the Covid crisis in the USA, big government gave more to stay home than people made to work, thereby growing the welfare state. This idle tardiness is a sin in religion but not in big government.
The budget deficits by the US government is mortgaging the future. I do not know of any religion that would take that path since that would be a sin. If we forced government to be more like Religion, we would all be better off in terms of taxes. I would not mind a straight across the board 10% tax rate that is semi-optional. This would require more competent people in leadership roles, who work for the people instead of themselves.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I think that the idea that religion exploits working people is utterly groundless.
idea
Question Everything
,
Does your church pay for your child's school? Did your church construct the roads you drive on? Police? Firefighters?
I found the opposite - it was government who put child molesters from church in jail. Church just wanted to protect itself....
For comparison, YMCA membership cost a lot less then my old church membership, with so many more benefits.
idea
Question Everything
It depends on the church. Mormons exploit their membets as one example. Members pay tithing to a non-charity corporation (holding more than 100 billion now, buying malls, and advertising), then members volunteer for every job (except higher-ups who are paid). It is part of brain-washing to fill someone's time with pointless tasks...
Some groups - like salvation army, actually are charity organizations and do help.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Sorry, but I don't see this as exploiting workers.
If you attend a church, you should contribute to paying its expenses. You have a mortgage, overhead, staff... It doesn't run for free.
I'm not too familiar with the Mormon Church, but I know they have excellent social services for their members -- like you can go to the bishop if you are in need, and their church will supply you with all the food you need. That's not free either.
It seems to me that the original purpose of organized Christianity was to convince exploited people to accept their lot without uprising. Meekness is praised as a virtue. Longsuffering as well. Accept your lot, for your riches await you in the afterlife if you'll just stand down now. Be happy that you are poor and powerless, for you will be kings some day. It's the original prosperity theology, except you pay with docility now. Remember, the rulers are there because God divinely appointed them, and you are to obey the Emperor/king like you do God. If this isn't slave ethics, what is?
Nobody who loves you advises you this way. I would tell my children to be humble and polite, but not meek. Meekness is a poverty of the spirit, a failure of the self to take a stand when it ought to. It's fit for a subject, not a free, autonomous citizen. I'm thinking of Milton from Office Space. His office exploited him and treated him like he didn't exist. That's blessed in this formulation of right-thinking and right-behaving.
Why wouldn't a despot want this as the state religion? Isn't it what Walmart wants from its employees for the same reason - to exploit them and have them accept their lot?
Nobody who loves you advises you this way. I would tell my children to be humble and polite, but not meek. Meekness is a poverty of the spirit, a failure of the self to take a stand when it ought to. It's fit for a subject, not a free, autonomous citizen. I'm thinking of Milton from Office Space. His office exploited him and treated him like he didn't exist. That's blessed in this formulation of right-thinking and right-behaving.
Why wouldn't a despot want this as the state religion? Isn't it what Walmart wants from its employees for the same reason - to exploit them and have them accept their lot?
- "How can you have order in a state without religion? For, when one man is dying of hunger near another who is ill of surfeit, he cannot resign himself to this difference unless there is an authority which declares 'God wills it thus.' Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." - Napoleon Bonaparte
- "If you want to control a population and keep them passive, give them a god to worship" - Noam Chomsky
- "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." - Seneca the Younger
idea
Question Everything
The Mormon church has no paid staff at the local level. Members clean the building, and untrained volunteers do all the childcare etc (which is why there is child abuse, no background checks, no training, just random people asked to be fake counselors etc.)
The church has over 100 billion in investment (I think around $130 billion now?):
The Mormon Church Amassed $100 Billion. It Was the Best-Kept Secret in the Investment World.
It pays pennies to charity, and uses money for things like kicking homeless out of downtown salt lake city, malls etc. The church tells members the money is for charity, but only pennies go to charity.
For comparison - the Mormon church spent $350 MILLION dollars in a week on a luxury hotel in Maui and farmlands while holding a massive public relations event to talk about giving only $3 million in scholarships to the NAACP over three years..
BARE RECORD OF TRUTH: LDS CHURCH'S $357,000,000.00 MILLION REAL ESTATE SHOPPING SPREE
https://www.bizjournals.com/pacific...ence-inn-marriott-maui-sells-100m-mormon.html
I used to volunteer for their "relief society", had an abused homeless girl at our home - thought the church would help, and it 100% refused. The church will throw a few pennies for "socially acceptable" issues but does not help anyone "long term" which means it will not assist with health costs, or mentally disabled (believes those who are disabled sinned in the premortal life, etc.). It considers "charity" to support BYU - indoctrination center (which is not charity). Missionaries pay their own way (missionary spending is not housing the poor, or hospital costs - this is $ spent to further its own agenda)
Some churches, like the Mormon church are NOT charity organizations, they are cash cow corporations.
Last edited: