Did Christianity Cause the Crash? [Archive]

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 01:03 PM

Interesting read on faith, Christianity, charity and the roll it played in the current economic crisis...

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200912/rosin-prosperity-gospel

"America’s mainstream religious denominations used to teach the faithful that they would be rewarded in the afterlife. But over the past generation, a different strain of Christian faith has proliferated—one that promises to make believers rich in the here and now. Known as the prosperity gospel, and claiming tens of millions of adherents, it fosters risk-taking and intense material optimism. It pumped air into the housing bubble. And one year into the worst downturn since the Depression, it’s still going strong."

IntheNet

Dec 30, 2009, 01:05 PM

Did Christianity Cause the Crash?

Good science fiction is hard to find... thanks...

;)

leekohler

Dec 30, 2009, 01:06 PM

That's been going on for a while. I've never understood it. It's so contrary to the teachings of Christ.

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 01:14 PM

Good science fiction is hard to find... thanks...

;)

Its an Op/Ed piece...
Why would you take it as "science"? :confused:

IntheNet

Dec 30, 2009, 01:37 PM

Why would you take it as "science"? :confused:

The Atlantic article sets up a what I considered a slap at faith - a preposterous thesis of shift in the American conception of divine Providence and its relationship to wealth - then proceeds to fail to document it with anything close to believable. Then, from this lack of foundation, it blames the recession or the factors causing the recession crash on, of all things, a faith. Sorry... Star Wars has a more valid pretext. As I said, science fiction. But, thanks for posting nonetheless...

leomac08

Dec 30, 2009, 01:40 PM

god has plans....:rolleyes: and this is one of them.;)

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 02:17 PM

The Atlantic article sets up a what I considered a slap at faith - a preposterous thesis of shift in the American conception of divine Providence and its relationship to wealth - then proceeds to fail to document it with anything close to believable. Then, from this lack of foundation, it blames the recession or the factors causing the recession crash on, of all things, a faith. Sorry... Star Wars has a more valid pretext. As I said, science fiction. But, thanks for posting nonetheless...

Are you saying this doesn't happen?
are you saying "faith" is perfect?

There were many facets to the run up to the economic crisis...

To say that "Christianity" was the only cause of the "Crash" is certainly outlandish, denying that this type of faith based recklessness happens is delusional.

Im going to assume your answer to the thread title is "no" ;)

Ugg

Dec 30, 2009, 02:23 PM

Excellent article. I think there's a lot of truth in it and as he makes clear, it's not really so much about religion as it is about boundless faith in the mythological American dream.

Charlatans have been around since the beginning of time, but in the US they're often viewed as gods.

skunk

Dec 30, 2009, 02:55 PM

The Atlantic article sets up a what I considered a slap at faith.There's nothing intrinsically good about faith.

MorphingDragon

Dec 30, 2009, 03:20 PM

That's been going on for a while. I've never understood it. It's so contrary to the teachings of Christ.

Yep, totally against christian teachings. Its known as prosperity theology.

Now that destiny church is trying to make townships in New Zealand its only going to get worse here. :(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosperity_theology

IntheNet

Dec 30, 2009, 03:28 PM

There's nothing intrinsically good about faith.

I respect though disagree with your assessment; faith is, in itself, good as are the faithful. Evil exists apart from faith and that is its evidence.

MorphingDragon

Dec 30, 2009, 03:31 PM

I respect though disagree with your assessment; faith is, in itself, good as are the faithful. Evil exists apart from faith and that is its evidence.

Religion itself is harmless, its the people interpreting the ancient text.

---

Ewwm Sarah Palin, that's so typical.

rhsgolfer33

Dec 30, 2009, 03:43 PM

mcrain

Dec 30, 2009, 03:50 PM

The article talked about changes in Christian teachings and a possible connection to people's spending/saving habits.

An article that discusses a cultural issue and proposes a possible connection is not a slap at religion or Christianity.

Touchy, touchy.

If part of the reason why some people made stupid decisions when it came to housing purchases was their belief system (as proposed by this article), then it's fair to discuss.

Maybe people need to think about their financial issues with a more clear-headed focus. I see no reason why someone who attends that church would be offended by that piece of advice.

ucfgrad93

Dec 30, 2009, 03:51 PM

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 03:54 PM

Greed caused the crash, not Christianity or any other religion for that matter. Greed doesn't cease to exist just because you believe in a certain religion. Writing about greed causing the crash, however, doesn't make for a very interesting or attention grabbing article; suggesting that a religion is to blame does.

But it wasnt greed, it was the belief that because you had faith and were Christian, you would "inherit Jesus's wealth" in the form of material objects...

I dont believe these people are working out of greed but the "faith" that they are deserving because they believe in Jesus..

leekohler

Dec 30, 2009, 03:54 PM

obeygiant

Dec 30, 2009, 04:21 PM

But it wasnt greed, it was the belief that because you had faith and were Christian, you would "inherit Jesus's wealth" in the form of material objects...

I dont believe these people are working out of greed but the "faith" that they are deserving because they believe in Jesus..

Are we taking that op-ed article as fact now? Greed caused the crash, but you can keep railing against christians if you want to.

Nugget

Dec 30, 2009, 04:24 PM

faith is, in itself, good as are the faithful.
"Faith" is what brought down the world trade center.

obeygiant

Dec 30, 2009, 04:26 PM

"Faith" is what brought down the world trade center.

Faith and Hope elected Barack Obama.

Nugget

Dec 30, 2009, 04:49 PM

Right, demonstrating quite well that "There's nothing intrinsically good about faith."

bobber205

Dec 30, 2009, 04:58 PM

Faith and Hope elected Barack Obama.

Not the best response or mature response as possible.

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 05:10 PM

Are we taking that op-ed article as fact now? Greed caused the crash, but you can keep railing against christians if you want to.

Please slow down and remove your finger from the hair trigger responses.

Nowhere on this thread have I even remotely "railed against Christians". If anything these people have been manipulated into a false sense of security by people claiming to be in touch with god.

I also havent claimed this op-ed piece as fact anywhere on this thread. But this thread is about this article, so lets stick to its content ok?

rhsgolfer33

Dec 30, 2009, 05:25 PM

But it wasnt greed, it was the belief that because you had faith and were Christian, you would "inherit Jesus's wealth" in the form of material objects...

I dont believe these people are working out of greed but the "faith" that they are deserving because they believe in Jesus..

And you wouldn't classify that as greed? I would say these people still had an intense desire to possess material objects and money, that fits the bill of greed in my book.

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 05:28 PM

And you wouldn't classify that as greed? I would say these people still had an intense desire to possess material objects and money, that fits the bill of greed in my book.

Fair enough, now replace "material objects" with "an eternity in paradise"...
Is it still greed?

They are both rewards for believing/faith in Jesus. Why is it greed to want to be rewarded for ones faith? Isnt that what the Bible promises?

obeygiant

Dec 30, 2009, 05:35 PM

Not the best response or mature response as possible.

I'll see your immaturity and raise you this post (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9016173&postcount=82).

Nowhere on this thread have I even remotely "railed against Christians". If anything these people have been manipulated into a false sense of security by people claiming to be in touch with god.

I also havent claimed this op-ed piece as fact anywhere on this thread. But this thread is about this article, so lets stick to its content ok?

See below..

But it wasnt greed, it was the belief that because you had faith and were Christian, you would "inherit Jesus's wealth" in the form of material objects...

I dont believe these people are working out of greed but the "faith" that they are deserving because they believe in Jesus..

In saying "inherit Jesus's wealth" proves a fundamental misunderstanding of religion/christianity in general.

The belief that something better may be around the corner is not indicative of only christians or people who have faith. Many, believers and non-believers, were tempted by various arm-loans and the ability to flip a house to make a profit. Saying things like people felt as if they deserve wealth just because they're christian and therefore caused the crash is preposterous.

freeny

Dec 30, 2009, 05:47 PM

In saying "inherit Jesus's wealth" proves a fundamental misunderstanding of religion/christianity in general.

The belief that something better may be around the corner is not indicative of only christians or people who have faith. Many, believers and non-believers, were tempted by various arm-loans and the ability to flip a house to make a profit. Saying things like people felt as if they deserve wealth just because they're christian and therefore caused the crash is preposterous.

I agree, but-

Im not saying these are my own beliefs but what the people in the article are believing.
Im just quoting the article...

While I am Atheist, I do understand what "being a good Christian" is supposed to mean.

The people in the article are being guided to believe this, is it their fault? is that greed?

P-Worm

Dec 31, 2009, 12:06 AM

I think obeygiant hit the nail on the head here. This article seems to be nothing more than trying to make some religious based controversy in hopes that it will garner more attention.

P-Worm

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 12:35 AM

Whatever this article is talking about, it's not Christianity. Call it Pentacostalism, Fundamentalism, Evangelicalism, the Christian Right, hyper capitalism, neo-conservatism, the Prosperity Movement, or some other ism or movement.

This article mentions George Bush and his prosperity pastor, and that makes more sense to me. But the author of this article should not blame Christ or Christianity, if that is what they are trying to hint at.

When I see these prosperity types, they never call themselves Christians, but some non-denominational flavor of the month tied to some cult-like leader. They talk about their founder or pastor, and rarely care about the red letters found in the Bible of Christ's teachings.

Nugget

Dec 31, 2009, 12:40 AM

Whatever this article is talking about, it's not Christianity.

No true Scotsman (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/No_True_Scotsman), right?

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 12:55 AM

No true Scotsman (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/No_True_Scotsman), right?

I must have the Bible that doesn't have the Gospel of W.:rolleyes:

I guess Jesus did say that if you give him lots of cash, then you will reap a lot more in return. I think I remember the part in the Bible about sub-prime loans.

Nugget

Dec 31, 2009, 01:41 AM

I must have the Bible that doesn't have the Gospel of W
Those christians use the same bible to arrive at their doctrine that you do. They believe in the same jesus. That makes them "christians."

Desertrat

Dec 31, 2009, 06:25 AM

Given how often we've covered the specific causes of this present economic kerfuffle, I don't see how anybody can regard the article as other than a rather strange silliness having no correlation with reality.

I really doubt that anybody's Christianity caused Greenspan and Bernanke to set absurdly low interest rates at the wrong time, or for hustlers to peddle dot-com stock or real estate. It certainly wasn't Christianity which caused Congress to pass the CRA or caused ACORN to lobby for the changes in the banking laws.

The source for this sort of idea? Reach between the hip pockets...

'Rat

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 10:57 AM

Those christians use the same bible to arrive at their doctrine that you do. They believe in the same jesus. That makes them "christians."

You are a programmer, right? Let's get logical. David Koresh and Adolph Hitler professed a belief in Jesus. Does that make them Christians? I have an atheist friend who believes Jesus existed, did most or all of the things said in the Bible, but chooses not to be a Christian. I think the Dalai Lama is an amazing man and many around the world believe in his causes. Does that make us Buddhists?

Nugget

Dec 31, 2009, 11:24 AM

Let's get logical. David Koresh and Adolph Hitler professed a belief in Jesus. Does that make them Christians?

Yes. Yes, it does. By definition, a Christian is a person who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ. A person can be a Christian and do awful things. A person can be a Christian and do things which are contrary to their or your particular sect/doctrine. That doesn't make them not be Christians.

I think the Dalai Lama is an amazing man and many around the world believe in his causes. Does that make us Buddhists?

No, because that's not what a Buddhist is. If you look up Buddhist in the dictionary it will not say: "A person who thinks the Dalai Lama is an amazing man."

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 11:34 AM

Yes. Yes, it does. By definition, a Christian is a person who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ. A person can be a Christian and do awful things. A person can be a Christian and do things which are contrary to their or your particular sect/doctrine. That doesn't make them not be Christians.

No, because that's not what a Buddhist is. If you look up Buddhist in the dictionary it will not say: "A person who thinks the Dalai Lama is an amazing man."

My friend, who is a brilliant computer guy like you (he invented the flash drive with his name on a short list of people on the patent) believes in the divinity of Jesus, but really sees no need in professing a religion. He sees him as a god, or God, but really thinks we as human beings can do without God. He has done really, really well so he doesn't see a need to have religion. He will be the first to tell you he is not a Christian. It's his choice.

I know I can use a nicer car, and I know they exist at the car lot near me, but I choose not to get one and there are plenty of great new and used ones. But a neighbor of mine really into cars owns of the the Batmobiles from the George Clooney era of Batman and shows the car at the local car show in Pebble Beach always upstaging the best of show cars. He had to have that car, and I respect that is his choice and preference. I do admit it was an experience I won't forget when he let me sit in the car. It put sitting in the cockpit of a fighter plane to shame. He, he, I swear my legs and butt tingled as I sat in one of the few Batmobiles. But now I am getting off topic. ;)

Lyle

Dec 31, 2009, 12:51 PM

By definition, a Christian is a person who believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ.Satan believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ. Does that make him a Christian?

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 12:59 PM

Satan believes in the divinity of Jesus Christ. Does that make him a Christian?

I was going to mention that one, but I am sure he doesn't believe there is a Satan. :)

jav6454

Dec 31, 2009, 01:04 PM

Quoting someone "Religion is flawed because Men Are Flawed, including this one *points at self*."

Nugget

Dec 31, 2009, 01:21 PM

Real or mythological satan still isn't a "person."

And your friend who refuses the title "Christian" is sort of a different scenario. I'd argue that he is a Christian, even if he doesn't accept the label, because he meets the definition of one. It's not an analogous situation, though. Both Hitler and Koresh (to cite your examples) considered themselves Christian. They both met the definition of a Christian. Ergo, they were Christians.

My point is that you can't decide for them after the fact that they really aren't true Christians just because you want to distance your beliefs from their behavior. They both were Christians by claim and by definition. The dodge you used is such a common fallacy it even has a name, as I linked (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/No_True_Scotsman) earlier.

63dot

Dec 31, 2009, 02:24 PM

And your friend who refuses the title "Christian" is sort of a different scenario. I'd argue that he is a Christian, even if he doesn't accept the label, because he meets the definition of one.

Wow, I would love to see you tell him that.

For practice, go down to all the Jehovah Witness churches in your area and try and pin the "Christian" label on them and ask them why they simply don't call themselves "Christians". ;)

mscriv

Jan 3, 2010, 02:16 AM

My point is that you can't decide for them after the fact that they really aren't true Christians just because you want to distance your beliefs from their behavior. They both were Christians by claim and by definition. The dodge you used is such a common fallacy it even has a name, as I linked (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/No_True_Scotsman) earlier.

While I understand your "True Scotsman" argument it's just not that easy when you are talking about the theology and doctrine of any specific faith group or religion. As for the present Christian argument I would say your definition of Christian is not a universally agreed upon definition. The original meaning of the word Christian from the greek is "follower of Christ". Others in this thread have alluded to the fact that there is a big difference in being a "follower" and being a "believer" and I would agree with them. Hindu's and other Eastern religions that believe in multiple gods could easily fit your definition of believing that Christ is divine, however, they do not ascribe to any other aspect of Christian doctrine. It's just a fact that in today's world the term Christian has lost it's original meaning as a result of the various belief systems that have evolved. The word is now more like a starting place as opposed to a final destination in terms of categorization. It's kinda like ordering a Coke in the South. There's always the follow up question to determine what kind of Coke you want, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Sprite, Dr. Pepper, Mountain Dew, etc. etc. When someone says they are a Christian in today's world, you need to follow up with further detailed questions to understand what they actually mean and what they actually believe. I could go further with talking about things like historical Gnosticism and the like, but let's just keep it simple for now.