Hacker News Reader

> This is the culture of the moralist left, of the blue cities, of the Coast, of Progressivism as the only moral ideology

> In the US, at least, if you engage with conservative culture, with Christians, with rural people, with the people who are tired of "cancel culture," you will still find plenty of grace.

As is often the case with generalization born of prejudice, this effort to split good and evil along ideological lines fails to match up with reality. Plenty of Progressives give grace to people around them. Plenty of Christians ostracize and abuse even the people closest to them. The vocal hypocrites on either side loom large for their ideological opponents and the quietly good on either side are easily ignored, except by their ideological peers. This pattern holds in rural towns and huge cities.

The problems of selfishness and hate for others are difficult to solve, and unfortunately even a framework as simple as Christ's demonstrates that. Try not to get too comfortable with the belief that people who see the world differently aren't still trying to navigate it kindly.

I mean I have been a christian all my life, and I am also unambiguously very far to the left explicitly because that is the only way I can see to truly act within my religious beliefs in the world right now. So I'm not sure how far this framework can get you, really. I certainly don't find it to have much explanatory power on any of these issues.

I also think it could be rephrased in a way that would make it easy to see how it describes the american political right, but I kind of trusted the readers to do that and didn't bother. But things like refusal to wear masks, wide-spread gun ownership, these are the "self-actualizated rights" that conservatives understand as needing no forgiveness regardless of harm caused.

> that is the only way I can see to truly act within my religious beliefs

I've been unable to find in the Bible the phrase that says "take from bob and give it to bill and you will be righteous".

My interpretation of the Bible is that Jesus encouraged people to freely give of their own to help others.

I'm genuinely curious where your leftist views derive from Christian principles.

You've already mischaracterized my views and further I'm not particularly educated or skilled in debate or theology, nor do I enjoy defending the deep foundations of my self from what is likely to be a hostile audience on the internet. So you will have to remain curious, sorry.

But I am lucky enough to have received a centuries-long tradition of christian radicalism, and came to no conclusions on my own. You can read john chysostom, or mother maria, or tolstoy, or talk to your own priest. The path is well-worn and there are many ways to find it.

You're safe with me, as I eschew use of rhetorical tricks and traps in debate (people try them all the time on me). I do my best to rely on facts and reason. I only take sides that I believe are correct.

I believe that if one espouses honest opinions, and they don't hold up to facts and reason, one should re-evaluate those opinions, or acquire a stronger basis for them.

Actually the Apostles try having "all things in common" for a while in Acts 4 or so, find that their initial ideas don't work out that great (see, e.g. Ananias), but eventually set up institutions of communal living with some monasteries and such.

There's nothing wrong with voluntary communism. It's the forcible kind, though, that is unjust.

> everyone could stand to listen to Christ on this topic

Yup.

The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scratch our heads trying to solve all the problems it gives you the solution for.

I think my intense aversion to Christianity originates from knowing only those people who take the Bible literally and have true faith in the stories that are told. Hell actually exists, gay people go there, divorce is fine though, oh don't worry about that line, etc. It's all very pick and choose.

I think I would have had much more interest in faith/religion if they acknowledged the myth component of their stories, and acknowledged the utility of abiding by the framework nonetheless.

IMHO faith can only exist and have meaning (including to God) when juxtaposed with doubt. If God manifested in Times Square as a 2,000 foot glowing being, would admitting your belief in His existence mean anything?

If any theist says they have no doubt, I’d first say they’re possibly lying, maybe to themselves.

It feels taboo to say, but doubt is probably critical for the formation of an authentic faith. Kierkegaard calls it a leap of faith for a reason, after all. I posit that some are able to believe with minimal doubt, but circumstances will eventually force the issue.

>The new thing is that we’re too smart and cool for all the things religion teaches, while we scratch our heads trying to solve all the problems it gives you the solution for.

First of all, that isn't new. The Renaissance, when philosophy, science and law began to divorce themselves from religion, started about 700 years ago.

Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself. You don't need to believe in salvation through faith, or the Holy Trinity, or Hell and brimstone for the teachings of Jesus to be useful. That isn't religion, that's philosophy.

>Second, nothing useful taught by religion actually requires religion itself.

This hinges very much on your definition of "useful;" if you don't believe in God or the resurrection of the dead, then talk concerning them is of course pointless. But if you do, they are very useful indeed.

My definition of useful in this case is humanistic. The utility of "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" doesn't depend on belief in the supernatural, nor do concepts like grace and forgiveness.

Sometimes the illness is better than the cure

I grew up in the American south, hearing I would go to hell if I had premarital sex, took God's name in vain, or watched the Simpson's. There wasn't really a 'cultural left' where I lived (or I wasn't aware of it), but I was well aware that the Christian right had a stranglehold on the idea of morality.

Now that situation seems to have shifted, and the left has adopted and re-branded ideas of original sin, absolution, performative prayer, etc. But I don't believe for a minute that folks in my hometown have discovered how to embody the idea of grace and cultural liberality. If anything I see more antagonism now that evangelism and Trumpism have created a terrible two-headed beast.

It'd be great if these paragons of grace would have a serious chat with the 'fuck your feelings' crowd about their death threat fetish, since they are nominally all in the same big tent.

> In the US, at least, if you engage with conservative culture, with Christians, with rural people, with the people who are tired of "cancel culture," you will still find plenty of grace.

The sjws and Christians show grace in exactly the same way: you earn it by converting.

Middle America also has it's own issues, nihilism, crab mentality (big one), and drug issues (also a coastal problem) are some that come to mind