Social Structure Is the Key

Human history is a record of how moral progress can occur. In 0 AD, a man known as Jesus of Nazareth commenced a revolution in thinking about justice and moral behaviour, which changed the next 2000 years. But another revolution was to follow.

In the 1800's, anthropology and sociology were perfected. Suddenly it was possible to understand social and economic structural forces that shape human conditions, such as poverty and class systems. A significant revolution, which eclipsed the individualist Christian moral code. Because now we know how to improve millions of lives, through understanding economic monopolies and mass media.

I thus salute SayBlade and other church groups that understand one must address social justice issues and "systems" in order to actually improve the plight of our fellow citizens. Without acknowledging and addressing systemic causes of poverty, they shall surely remain unsolvable.

All very nice, but how is it

All very nice, but how is it that most, if not all fundamentalist religions, are supporting the control and takeover of our economies by brutal power elites, the main cause of hunger and poverty?

The fundamentalists Harper, Manning, Bush et al, are the best examples of the support and legalization of theft and destruction by the worst criminals in history, the multinational corporate mafia, claiming God's will ?

How is it that many religions forbid their faithful the membership, or if there's no way out, the active participation, in unions and any effort to curb the power of ruling elites, as against the will of God?

How is it that the worst crimes, enslavement and the killing of millions in history have all been committed in the name of God, regardless which religion we talk about?

How is it that fundamentalist religions are preaching and fighting any form of publicly controlled social services and welfare, because they, again, interfere with the will of God, who must be going out of his way to create aristocracies and ruling classes, and because it interferes with the right of the rich to provide "charity" to the poor?

It is a simple physical law, which, as all phyisical laws, is created by God, that wealth can not be created, only taken from others, the environment, or the future.

When will religions come to grips with the fact that the destruction of the environment and the enslavement of humanity by power elites may not be what God planned ?

But then we have fundamentalists like Reagan's first Secretary of the Interior James Watt, who declared: "When the last tree is cut, the Lord will return".

So, which is the true religion ? The one that follows the protection of the environment and the rights of humanity, or the ones that preach the support of enslavers and destroyers, some of them also fundamentalist "self made" billionaires?

How can somebody "make" billions, while thumping Bibles ?

Ed Deak.

When Miles describes what

When Miles describes what she calls "the reality of Jesus" and the apparent inclusiveness of his teachings, she conveniently leaves out those parts of his message that contradict that rosy, benign picture. For example, his teaching that he was the only "son" of God and therefore the only way to God, or that the way to God is straight and narrow and few there be that find it. She claims that no one is excluded from the kingdom of heaven, yet the scriptures say that some are indeed excluded, particularly those who reject Jesus as the savior of humanity.

There are other moral short-comings in his teachings as well, so it never fails to irk me when cafeteria Christians leave out of their happy-ending fairy tale the more grimm (pun intended) aspects of Jesus' ministry.

Sure it is noble to feed the hungry, but it need not require reliance on Jesus to do it. Even Miles admits she was often fed by strangers, as have I, with no hint of religious motivation.

Then, a miracle occurred.

Miles's experience is common -- but not common enough!

The frustrating thing (to this atheist) is that only religious institutions provide the most ready-made socially sanctioned mechanism and entry point for people like Miles (and all the rest of us) to contribute to feeding the poor (and other altruistic activities).

Other voluntary organisations (some food banks are secular) help, but somehow have lacked the spirit/inclination/ability to support such "christian" activity on a sustained basis (once the initial founder has passed on).

More power to their elbow, therefore.

Which is not to say that all Christian charity is "christian" in Miles's sense. Examples abound of "christican" charity being distributed with heavy conditions as regards behaviour and belief (just like official systems) of recipients -- hardly Christian in the sense Miles means.

And which is not to say that we could wish for some more "secular spiritual" mechanisms to arise which could perform the same function without having to pay lipservice (or ignore) fundamentally misguided beliefs and doctines. (It is sad that even Bishops who don't believe their own church's doctrine spend so much time defending religion, rather than having other venues -- think Bishop Spong, and several UK bishops, or many Friends, etc. etc.)

good without God

Yes, why do I need to rely on some "Jesus figure" to impel me to feed the hungry? Reminds me of the book by Robert Buckman, "Can We Be Good Without God?"
I have met many wonderful people of all ages who do good for others just because they are fellow human beings. They don't need to be commanded by god or find a calling or be swept up in some spiritual experience. They just do good because that's the decent thing to do.
Can we be good without God? Yes, and no need to be ashamed of this basic human trait to share and help out. No need for some supernatural involvement.

Government

While the actions of many religious charities are, at least in part, quite laudable, there was a very good reason that government stepped in to care for the poor, the sick, and the disadvantaged in the late 19th century and the first half of the 20th. Religious charities could not handle the burden, and they also inevitably made their charity "conditional", at least in many cases, on the delivery of their religious dogma. Those individuals who were unwilling to receive The Word were not welcome. The Salvation Army became known as "The Starvation Army", and were immortalized in Joe Hill's song, "The Preacher and the Slave".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Preacher_and_the_Slave

All this is just to say that we have a secular means of helping the poor and the hungry, one that does not preach and is (or was) legally required to help everyone in need. It's called government. Unfortunately, we as a society, have decided to go back to the "good old days" of Joe Hill, and hand over the responsiblity to sectarian organizations.

I'm not denigrating the good work of people like Sara Miles, I'm just saying it's not sufficient.

Thanks everyone, enlightening

Just wanted to say thanks for the excellent observations on this thread. Indeed, I find the conversations on The Tyee these days are, for the most part, informative exhanges with an emphasis on civility and intelligence, without sacrificing the passion. Appreciate it everyone!

More places at the table

The negative reaction to apparent religious (Christian in particular) requirement for the extension of charity is interesting. Based solely on this review I would expand my earlier comment further with the statement that the theology that Sara Miles espouses is based on a reinterpretation of Christian apologetics and a new understanding of Biblical writings. A significant number of the folk at my church have certainly approached it in this manner.

This new paradigm makes it possible for Atheists and those of other faiths to embrace the work of Christians and work alongside them without the tension of someone trying to "convert" them. Included in our church's group are people from other religious backgrounds and we would welcome Atheists, Humanists and others to participate in this work.

An Agnostic Jew, who is very much in support of our work and contributes to it, once said "perhaps I should convert so I can attend your Sunday services." I said, "Why don't you come as you are. I think you'll find it more comfortable."

Yes, you can be good without "God." But, perhaps it would be interesting to explore what is meant by who or what God is before entertaining the notion that we should rid the world of "religion."

Doing for others

We seek out religions because as humans we are hard-wired to follow customs, and traditionally religions, - or philosophies as formerly in China and Japan - have codified those customs so all can be on the same page.

This places tremendous power in the hands of religious hierarchies, with the inevitable result of them being "bought out" through various means by the power elites. In the process, and over time, rules and dogma are subtly altered to favour the monied half of the partnership.

Thus the rules become more authoritarian than humanitarian, and this is particularly evident today in the Christian and Muslim worlds.

As I understand it, however, the founders of today's great religions, Buddhism, Islam and Christianity, challenged the orthodoxies of their times and offered in their place a more people-friendly choice centered around the "Golden Rule".

Somehow Christianity has weathered the excesses of the apparatchiks in its hierarchies, and "Agape" - the pure love of others - has survived as is evidenced in the actions of many of its followers, though a very large number eschew "organised" religion.

Doing for others has rewards not obtainable in any other way. This is because doing only for yourself - feeding the Ego - is feeding the insatiable child in ourselves who can never be satisfied. It is this addiction upon which today's consumerist society depends, and is why so many of us feel something is missing.

We have been denied the central message of the great mystics who went into the desert and for a time denied themselves of all the creature comforts - good food, sex, liquor, warmth and so on. They did not do this because such things are "bad", for after all we know now that even Christ enjoyed such things, they did it to prove to themselves and to us that they could be done without and so avoid addiction.

Most aboriginal societies recognised the damage the accumulation of individual wealth could wreak upon tribal solidarity, and hence their constant referral to our "greed". They, as is also common with all people who live with hardship, were known for their generosity to strangers.

You can be sure that if the predicted hard times arrive, we'll be finding out the same for ourselves, and hopefully there will then be more like Sara Miles and others like her - which includes Atheists, BTW - to lead the way.

The world has always been

The world has always been governed by the cooperation, or if you like, the conspiracy, of 3 power elites:

The Merchants who invent the demands for "wealth".

The Priesthoods who invent the legalization of theft for "wealth creation", as divine orders, now also joined by the pseudo priesthood of economists.

The Military, who enforce the demands and hopes for the absolution of the crimes by the priests.

The Bible originated with the bishop Athanasius of Alexandria in AD 367, who set his priests to collect the fitting scriptures in the then largest library on Earth, into a book, or "biblios", discarding
the unfitting ones.

Of course, the library was destroyed by the crusaders and later the remainder of it by a Muslim reform army who was ordered by his mullahs that if the "library contained the words of the Prophet, we know them, if not they're blasphemy, so burn it down".

So, now we don't know what else was there, but we do know the repetitious stories of
the Flood and Noah's ark, which was preceded
by the ark of Gilgamesh and many others, and about a dozen virgin births by girls whose names always began with the letter "M" and the son always died and was resurrected after 3 days.

Ed Deak.

Just filling in the gaps.

Ed, If today we destroyed every last religion or "Cult", tomorrow someone would concoct a new one, and the sheeple would flock to join it.

My post above was not intended to make any brief for religion, but merely to say that all begin with variations on the "Golden Rule" as adapted to fit their society and their times, but once firmly established, the religion then morphs into fostering the same individualistic greed it originally attacked.

It is no accident that every isolated tribal group and even small villages which have survived for millennia or even centuries developed various forms of communism in order to cope with the greed that can destroy community harmony and solidarity.

We have developed Democracy, and Socialism within it, to control the excesses of greed in a large modern civilisation while still preserving essential freedoms and the useful aspects of Capitalism, without having to resort to authoritarianism.

Until - or if ever - we can attain that system, we will have to be satisfied with the good works of people like Sara Miles to fill in the gaps today's neocons are bent upon widening.

This may be just one of those stories, but

In my school days, a quote was being attributed to Ghandi.

old time religion

All the great ancient religions of the world repeat a similar theme because they have all been based on the annual cycle of death and rebirth which we see in the grand creation of nature. The
Persian god Mithra,the Hindu Krishna, the Greek Osiris, the Egyptian Horus..these
mythological deities have much in common..born of a virgin, 12 disciples (as in the 12 months), rising from the dead as in the spring equinox which is the date of Easter (and is why the date always changes)..the son (as in the sun) of God, and so
one. Just to use Horus as an example

Like the star in the east of the gospels, Sirius, the morning star, heralded the birth
of Horus, Like Jesus, Horus had no history between the ages of 12 & 30, Like Jesus,
Horus walked on water, cast out demons and healed the sick, having delivered a
sermon on the "mount," his followers faithfully recounted the sayings of "Iusa."(or
Jesus)..He was crucified between 2 thieves, resurrected and referred to as the good
shepard, the son of man, the lamb of God, the fisher..etc Altogether, historians
have discovered nearly 200 instances of immediate correspondence between the
mythical Egyptian material and the allegedly historical Christian writings about Jesus.

Do not mistake me, seeing the Jesus story for what it is , a profoundly spiritual allegory of the soul, in no way detracts from the spiritual and moral teachings associated with his deeds. The truth is still that love is at the centre of all things.
But this also applies to everyone, to all human beings and if we could only live in
understanding of our common link, we might go a long way towards establishing peace on this
troubled planet.

It is the "personalizing " of religion and the consequent fighting over the theological
differences between these religions that continues to this day to cause and justify so
much conflict.