Christianity vs Earth, the right vs the left (the Nietzsche reading club)

[Florestan]

I'm in no need replying to your post.

Uncalled-for arrogance.

It's obvious that you are not interested in having an honest debate. You have already trialed and sentenced "Christianity" and "capitalism", doing away with  the audiatur-et-altera-pars principle.. Take care of yourself, I'm out of here.

[Henk]

'The Unjust Steward: Wealth, Poverty, and the Church Today

In the ancient heart of Christianity is a deep longing for God's reversal of rich and poor. Its depiction of "the righteous poor and oppressive rich" and God's preferential option for "the least of these" continues to represent something new, countercultural, and strange, both in ancient Rome and today.

Author Miguel Escobar grounds the discussion of wealth and poverty in the teachings of Jesus, weaving in the words of early church leaders and his own personal experience.

The Unjust Steward presents a compelling case for a profound overhaul in the way the church and its people value the poor and transform into servants of God instead of stewards of wealth.

'Here is a book that inspires, yes, but also challenges and unsettles all who would take seriously Jesus's Way of Love. Weaving together words of wisdom from spiritual giants of early Christianity with profound reflections from his own life, Miguel Escobar pulls back the curtain of wealth and poverty to reveal our longstanding complicity with systems of injustice and calls us to make better, more humane choices, reflective of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, that can change the world.
The Most Rev. Michael B. Curry, XXVII Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church and author of Love is the Way

In The Unjust Steward, Miguel Escobar offers a series of moving and insightful reflections on how wealth and poverty, inequality, and economic justice are treated in the biblical and early church theological tradition. By taking us from Jesus to Augustine, faith leaders will find many theological and biblical resources for deepening their congregations' discussions on issues of wealth and poverty. Through its thorough scholarship and insightful reflections this book is a call to action from unexpected voices, the early church fathers. This book is an absolute must read for anyone who has ever wondered what the Bible really says about economic injustice and the wealth gap.
Kelly Brown Douglas, Dean, Episcopal Divinity School at Union Theological Seminary'

[Henk]

'If we lose the Earth, we lose our souls

In this book Bruno Latour calls upon Christians to join the struggle to avert a climate catastrophe.  First and foremost, Christians need to overcome their lack of interest in "earthly things" and pay attention to the Earth at a time when it is being neglected. He also urges Christians to renew their understanding of their faith in the context of the new image of the world that has emerged from earth system science – that of a world in which the myriad of beings that inhabit the world are interdependent and living in close proximity on a slender, fragile membrane on the surface of the planet.

This new image of the world cannot fail to have an impact on the sciences, on politics, and on religion, just as, in earlier centuries, the cosmology of Copernicus and Galileo upset the old order. Latour sees the ecological crisis, and the cosmological mutation that it entails, as an opportunity to convey anew, to the largest possible audience, the tradition of Christianity as it has never been appreciated before, by bringing to bear the lessons of eschatology on the great crisis that looms before us all.'

[Henk]

'The Bible and Ecology: Rediscovering the Community of Creation
Richard Bauckham

With his characteristic rigor and perceptiveness, Richard Bauckham embarks on a biblical investigation into the relationship between human beings and the rest of creation. Bauckham argues that there is much more to the Bible's understanding of this relationship than the mandate of human dominion given in Genesis 1―which, he writes, has too often been used as a justification for domination and exploitation of the earth's resources. Instead, Bauckham considers the ecological perspectives found in the book of Job, the Psalms, and the Gospels, all of which, he determines, require a reevaluation of the biblical tradition of "dominion." Bauckham discovers a tradition of a "community of creation" in which human beings are fellow members with God's other creatures and true reconciliation to God involves the entire creation. Short, reliable, and engaging, The Bible and Ecology is essential reading for anyone looking for a biblically grounded approach to ecology.'

[Henk]

Locke about 'property'. Full of references to God:

https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s3.html

[SimonNZ]

Indigenous peoples are able to care for the future. We aren't.

That's a completely rose-tinted and unread assumption. There are countless examples of pre-contact indigenous peoples hunting countless species to extinction and of constantly moving as all edible plant life is consumed. Not all, but oh so many.

"We" are exactly the same as "them"...but now we do it at an industrial scale.

[Henk]

That's a completely rose-tinted and unread assumption. There are countless examples of pre-contact indigenous peoples hunting countless species to extinction and of constantly moving as all edible plant life is consumed. Not all, but oh so many.

"We" are exactly the same as "them"...but now we do it at an industrial scale.

True.

My thesis however is that we have invented the state. Culture has become secondary to politics and the economy.

For indigenous peoples however culture and nature comes first and the meaning of nature for them is simply 'life'. This allows them to care for Earth and their future.

While for us nature is first of all a resource.

[SimonNZ]

True.

My thesis however is that we have invented the state. Culture has become secondary to politics and the economy.

For indigenous peoples however culture and nature comes first and the meaning of nature for them is simply 'life'. This allows them to care for Earth and their future.

While for us nature is first of all a resource.

Well, you've got a problem there too. The earliest of what we might now call a state - Sumer - was the first to live in balance with nature with an expanding population, and be able to permanently settle in one place...and develop culture.

[Henk]

Well, you've got a problem there too. The earliest of what we might now call a state - Sumer - was the first to live in balance with nature with an expanding population, and be able to permanently settle in one place...and develop culture.

I had Sumer in mind. They invented the idea of 'progress' what you call 'culture', it was a bad idea, it created inequality, and Sumer wasn't ecologically sustainable.

However we are smarter. We can keep our lands productive with methods of regeneration and rewilding.

[SimonNZ]

I had Sumer in mind. They invented the idea of 'progress' what you call 'culture', it was a bad idea, it created inequality, and Sumer wasn't ecologically sustainable.

However we are smarter. We can keep our lands productive with methods of regeneration and rewilding.

Is that true, or did you just go and read a wikipedia page on Sumer so you could say something contrary?

Whatever - if you reject the achievements of Sumer you reject the very notion of civilization...which is a weird thing to do on a classical music internet site.

This conversation is fruitless. Bye.

[Henk]

Is that true, or did you just go and read a wikipedia page on Sumer so you could say something contrary?

Whatever - if you reject the achievements of Sumer you reject the very notion of civilization...which is a weird thing to do on a classical music internet site.

This conversation is fruitless. Bye.

It's true, why do you doubt it? I'm reading the book 'Progress. A History of Humanity's Worst Idea'.

https://www.amazon.nl/dp/0008462488?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

[Henk]

Whatever - if you reject the achievements of Sumer you reject the very notion of civilization...which is a weird thing to do on a classical music internet site.

I define civilization by it's sustainability, it's ability to care for the future in the first place. If we don't care other animals are more civilized than us and we aren't worthy. And we are so evil we destroy other species.

If you define civilization by it's art we are pretty succesful.

[Spotted Horses]

And now you want to conflate Christianity with colonialism. If you are unable to make distinctions, your "argument" will not rise above the level of rant.

I live 10 miles from a Spanish Mission founded by Padre Junipiero Serra. He was the Priest tasked by Spain with establishing the Missions in Alte California. He came with an entourage of Priests and a sizable military garrison. The mission and its compound, including a seven mile long aqueduct, was built by native labor.

For many of the Missions only the Mission Church remains. Many of the outbuildings of Mission Santa Barbara have been preserved, including the prison, shown.

The Catholic Church was both a religion and a system of government. The conflation of religion and colonialism has some historical basis.

[AnotherSpin]

That's a completely rose-tinted and unread assumption. There are countless examples of pre-contact indigenous peoples hunting countless species to extinction and of constantly moving as all edible plant life is consumed. Not all, but oh so many.

"We" are exactly the same as "them"...but now we do it at an industrial scale.

Indigenous peoples killed for food and reproduction. One could argue they also killed for power. Nevertheless, for them power was a tool, not an end in itself.

Today everything is different. People kill on an immeasurable scale, driven by ideas and they do it with no small amount of pleasure. Those who direct this killing are the ones who crave power most of all, preferably unlimited power.

Christianity is powerless to stop it. That's why Moscow's Orthodox priests fully approve of and bless the actions of their Kremlin superiors, sprinkling holy water on missiles that will soon fly off to kill civilians.

[SimonNZ]

When you say "indigenous people" are you talking about, say, the Mayans and the Aztecs?

[steve ridgway]

When you say "indigenous people" are you talking about, say, the Mayans and the Aztecs?

The invention of farming was possibly a key step in moving from living as part of Nature to trying to control it.

As far as Christianity goes, I wonder if Nietzsche might have just used the word for what we might call "European Civilisation" in the way some people still think of "Christian" countries.

[steve ridgway]

In the Torah, humanity's dominion over nature is best understood through the concept of stewardship, not absolute power. The Hebrew words used are key: radah (to rule or have dominion) from Genesis 1:28 is tempered by le'ovdah (to serve/work) and leshomrah (to guard) from Genesis 2:15, creating a mandate to manage and protect the Earth responsibly on behalf of God. This means that while humans are given authority, they are also tasked with caring for creation, using resources wisely, and treating all living things with respect.

Ah yes, from the Vatican English version -

[2:15] The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it.

It all went wrong in Chapter 3, the knowledge of "good" and "evil" or abstract concepts, so it might be best to correct the translation of "stewardship", throw away everything after Chapter 2 and simply focus on doing the above in accordance with God's original plan.

[AnotherSpin]

When you say "indigenous people" are you talking about, say, the Mayans and the Aztecs?

If the question is directed at me, then yes, both the Maya and the Aztecs are considered indigenous peoples. However, it's probably necessary to clarify the terminology.

[Henk]

In the spirit of Foucault we can study this document to get a hold on truth:

'Spanish Requirement of 1513':

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Requirement_of_1513

[Opus131]

If the question is directed at me, then yes, both the Maya and the Aztecs are considered indigenous peoples. However, it's probably necessary to clarify the terminology.

The way the word it is being used today, it just seems to mean non-modern.

In a recent map that has been circulating in social media, the classification of "idigenous" essentially excluded everybody of European descend, including Europeans themselves living in Europe. I guess that means Europeans descended from the sky or something i don't know.

Thus, in Sweden, the Sami are considered "indigenous" while the Swedes are not, even though both the Sami and the Scandinavians colonized that area around the same time and have been living there for the past 10000 years.