Hacker News Reader

Comment by unprepare | Hacker News Reader

>here are actually themes in the Bible that talk about a "worker deserving his wage", and "if a man doesn't work he doesn't eat".

wow some fantastic turns of logic you are using.

Christian means Christ-like. did Christ preach social darwinism, or did he spend his time with prostitutes and lepers?

Did Christ preach having the poor fend for themselves, or did he feed the hungry?

Did Christ praise the wealthy, or does he say "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."

You can of course interpret your religion as you see fit, but in my eyes, right wing politics is incompatible with being Christ-like.

View on HN

There is a lot more to Christianity than being "Christ-like". The parent's point is there exists a healthy serving of many unChrist-like, by your definition, ideas in the Bible. And even then, there is much more to a religion than its holy texts or doctrine.

I'd leave it to the practitioners to exhibit what it means to be one of their followers, and it seems the American practitioners haven't noticed this incompatibility you're concerned about.

Those were actual quotes from the bible. I'm not sure how that's a u turn in logic?

Well, the entire first half of the Bible is before the birth of Christ, and when Christ arrived the religion began whats called the New Covenant with God, replacing the old covenant which bound followers to the old laws of the old testament.

something being "in the bible" is meaningless without its context. Theres quite a breadth on the capturing, keeping and treatment of slaves - would you argue that these verses are the same as Christs teachings?

>As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves.

> You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property.

>You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property.

But hey, if you think being a Christian means following any phrase you happen to pick out of the Bible, go for it.

FYI: This reply is exactly one of the "smug styles" that the original article highlights:

> Christianity, as many hastened to point out, is about love. Christ commands us to render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. If the Bible took any position on the issue at all, it was that divorce, beloved by Davis, was a sin, and that she was a hypocrite masquerading among the faithful.

> How many of these critiques were issued by atheists?

> This, more than anything I can recall in recent American life, is an example of the smug style.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com