The Romans were convinced by the early popes that Christianity was the ideal way to control people. They were right. The Catholic Church wangled 1/3 of European land out of the deal, and eventually Rome and Italy. During the Renaissance the popes and Catholics in Rome bore more resemblance to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. They should have been wiped out by the protestants.

Christianity is also the religion of the underdog. Jesus the humble servant, that suits the ideals of western capitalism/ the modern secular zeitgeist.

(July 16, 2013 at 3:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The Romans were convinced by the early popes that Christianity was the ideal way to control people. They were right. The Catholic Church wangled 1/3 of European land out of the deal, and eventually Rome and Italy. During the Renaissance the popes and Catholics in Rome bore more resemblance to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. They should have been wiped out by the protestants.

Spoken like a True Christian. If you don't like them, wipe them out.

(July 16, 2013 at 3:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Christianity is also the religion of the underdog. Jesus the humble servant, that suits the ideals of western capitalism/ the modern secular zeitgeist.

Funny how the religion of the underdog produces so many overlords. The ideals of capitalism and secularism cannot be more different than those of Christianity. Capitalism requires you not to be a humble servant but a proud master.

I shouldn't condone the massacre even though it seemed justified. Puritan psychopaths on both sides were as bad as each other.

Capitalism works on the willing underdog.

"Christian faith in reason and in progress was the foundation on which Western success was
achieved."

Source : http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1809

(July 16, 2013 at 4:40 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Capitalism works on the willing underdog.

On the contrary, capitalism is not kind to underdogs. As a matter of course, it bets on the winning horse.

Indeed. It's a savage beast. People accept it because supposedly everyone has a fair shot at becoming the winning horse.

(July 16, 2013 at 5:01 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Indeed. It's a savage beast. People accept it because supposedly everyone has a fair shot at becoming the winning horse.

So we agree then? Capitalism does not have Christian ideals.

From the link above:

"Capitalism was developed by the great monastic estates. Throughout the medieval era, the church was by far the largest landowner in Europe, and its liquid assets and annual income probably exceeded that of all of Europe’s nobility added together. Much of that wealth poured into the coffers of the religious orders, not only because they were the largest landowners, but also in payment for liturgical services—Henry VII of England paid a huge sum to have 10,000 masses said for his soul. As rapid innovation in agricultural technology began to yield large surpluses to the religious orders, the church not only began to reinvest profits to increase production, but diversified. Having substantial amounts of cash on hand, the religious orders began to lend money at interest. They soon evolved the mortgage (literally, “dead pledge”) to lend money with land for security, collecting all income from the land during the term of the loan, none of which was deducted from the amount owed. That practice often added to the monastery’s lands because the monks were not hesitant to foreclose. In addition, many monasteries began to rely on a hired labor force and to display an uncanny ability to adopt the latest technological advances. Capitalism had arrived."

---

" Augustine, Aquinas, and other major theologians taught that the state must respect private property and not intrude on the freedom of its citizens to pursue virtue. In addition, there was the central Christian doctrine that, regardless of worldly inequalities, inequality in the most important sense does not exist: in the eyes of God and in the world to come.
As Paul explained: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor fee, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

And church theologians and leaders meant it. Through all prior recorded history, slavery was universal—Christianity began in a world where as much as half the population was in bondage. But by the seventh century, Christianity had become the only major world religion to formulate specific theological opposition to slavery, and, by no later than the 11th century, the church had expelled the dreadful institution from Europe. That it later reappeared in the New World is another matter, although there, too, slavery was vigorously condemned by popes and all of the eventual abolition movements were of religious origins.

Free labor was an essential ingredient for the rise of capitalism, for free workers can maximize their rewards by working harder or more effectively than before. In contrast, coerced workers gain nothing from doing more. Put another way, tyranny makes a few people richer; capitalism can make everyone richer. Therefore, as the northern Italian city states developed capitalist economies, visitors marveled at their standards of living; many were equally confounded by how hard everyone worked.

The common denominator in all these great historical developments was the Christian commitment to reason.

That was why the West won."

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: From the link above:

For the record, simply finding a link to somewhere in the internet that says the same thing as you do does not make you correct.

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: "Capitalism was developed by the great monastic estates. Throughout the medieval era, the church was by far the largest landowner in Europe, and its liquid assets and annual income probably exceeded that of all of Europe’s nobility added together. Much of that wealth poured into the coffers of the religious orders, not only because they were the largest landowners, but also in payment for liturgical services—Henry VII of England paid a huge sum to have 10,000 masses said for his soul. As rapid innovation in agricultural technology began to yield large surpluses to the religious orders, the church not only began to reinvest profits to increase production, but diversified. Having substantial amounts of cash on hand, the religious orders began to lend money at interest. They soon evolved the mortgage (literally, “dead pledge”) to lend money with land for security, collecting all income from the land during the term of the loan, none of which was deducted from the amount owed. That practice often added to the monastery’s lands because the monks were not hesitant to foreclose. In addition, many monasteries began to rely on a hired labor force and to display an uncanny ability to adopt the latest technological advances. Capitalism had arrived."

I don't see any "Christian" principles involved here. All I see is solid profit motive. Actually, given your Jesus' attitude towards money-lenders, I'd say that the Church's behavior was decidedly unchristian. I'm also curious about why you'd cite Church's actions here where only a few posts back you thought that they - and I quote - "bore more resemblance to the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah".

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: " Augustine, Aquinas, and other major theologians taught that the state must respect private property and not intrude on the freedom of its citizens to pursue virtue.

In arguments borrowed from their Greek predecessors.

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: In addition, there was the central Christian doctrine that, regardless of worldly inequalities, inequality in the most important sense does not exist: in the eyes of God and in the world to come.
As Paul explained: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor fee, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.”

That would be socialism. Class distinctions and inequalities are a part and parcel of capitalism.

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: And church theologians and leaders meant it. Through all prior recorded history, slavery was universal—Christianity began in a world where as much as half the population was in bondage. But by the seventh century, Christianity had become the only major world religion to formulate specific theological opposition to slavery, and, by no later than the 11th century, the church had expelled the dreadful institution from Europe. That it later reappeared in the New World is another matter, although there, too, slavery was vigorously condemned by popes and all of the eventual abolition movements were of religious origins.

Oh they were against slavery alright - when it came to enslaving other
Christians. They even had explicit legal justification when it came to enslaving muslims.

(July 16, 2013 at 5:08 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Free labor was an essential ingredient for the rise of capitalism, for free workers can maximize their rewards by working harder or more effectively than before. In contrast, coerced workers gain nothing from doing more. Put another way, tyranny makes a few people richer; capitalism can make everyone richer. Therefore, as the northern Italian city states developed capitalist economies, visitors marveled at their standards of living; many were equally confounded by how hard everyone worked.

The common denominator in all these great historical developments was the Christian commitment to reason.

That was why the West won."

Try doing a little more research next time before posting a right-wing propaganda piece. Mercantilism was the precursor to capitalism. The rise of capitalism as we know it, took place in Great Britain and with the Industrial Revolution. The existence of the feudal system meant that while there was free-labor, there was also tyranny.

The argument you are presenting here - that Christianity came into the world and Christians fought hard to free slaves everywhere and give private property rights to everyone and then all the free people worked together to get richer and thus the magnificent economic system called capitalism was born - that fictional history of capitalism would only be accepted in Tea-Party circles.

The article presented an informed and detailed study of the point I was making. It seemed suitably unbiased to me which is why I presented it.

The core motivator is shown to be Christian/ religious. I would agree on the anti Christian example of most of capitalism. I think the article addresses that, as does the axiom: the love of money is the root of all evil.

I detailed one abomination committed by the church, of which there are countless examples. That does nothing to discredit things done by the church consistent with its doctrine.

Christianity is also compatible with socialism. Christ had been referred to as a socialist. The point being made is that capitalism rests upon the concept of personal freedom.

Re slavery: you're mixing up abominable acts of corrupt Christians with the acts of Christians acting in accordance with doctrine.

Provide more than your say so on historic information and I'll gladly consider it.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The article presented an informed and detailed study of the point I was making. It seemed suitably unbiased to me which is why I presented it.

A little research would've convinced you otherwise.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The core motivator is shown to be Christian/ religious. I would agree on the anti Christian example of most of capitalism. I think the article addresses that, as does the axiom: the love of money is the root of all evil.

Given that the core motivation for capitalism is love for money - I'm surprised you'd consider it to be compatible with Christianity.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I detailed one abomination committed by the church, of which there are countless examples. That does nothing to discredit things done by the church consistent with its doctrine.

I'm saying that the Church was not acting consistently with the doctrine with regards to all its high-interest money lending.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Christianity is also compatible with socialism. Christ had been referred to as a socialist. The point being made is that capitalism rests upon the concept of personal freedom.

And Christianity doesn't.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Re slavery: you're mixing up abominable acts of corrupt Christians with the acts of Christians acting in accordance with doctrine.

And here I thought that slavery was in accordance with your doctrine.

(July 16, 2013 at 7:29 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Provide more than your say so on historic information and I'll gladly consider it.

Do your own research. Study up on the history of capitalism and slavery in medieval ages.