Does Love Your Neighbor As Yourself Mean You Can't Have Wealth?

[A Christian Sceptic]

Does "Love Your Neighbor As Yourself" mean you can't have Wealth?

Please explain. Thanks.

ADDED:
By the way - I'm not asking to argue my point of view. Two different posters MarekM and Darat alluded that it does, but haven't expanded on why they think that. I thought it deserved it's own thread. I'm interested in your thoughts.

 

[Darat]

Does "Love Your Neighbor As Yourself" mean you can't have Wealth?

Please explain. Thanks.

ADDED:
By the way - I'm not asking to argue my point of view. Two different posters MarekM and Darat alluded that it does, but haven't expanded on why they think that. I thought it deserved it's own thread. I'm interested in your thoughts.

No I didn't - I was correcting a misunderstanding you had over what a particular Christian teaching actually was.

And just to check I presume you are only asking this question of Members of the Forum who are Christian since you think such a discussion is a waste of time for non-Christian and indeed you seem to have no time for non-Christians who are interested in discussing Christian doctrines and theology: I.e.

...snip...

I always find it fascinating when atheists tell Christians how to be True Christians. And how to interpret something (I find it even more fascinating when atheists insist their interpretation is the correct one!)

If you were a Christian posting your concern I'd say "You first. Good luck. When you succeed - come teach and help me. And when I succeed I'll come teach and help you. But for now I'm still not even where the Young Rich Man is at with being perfect." Since I assume you Steve_S and MarkM are not Christians ... well, this is going to be a rather silly discussion since you've decided how a True Christian should be and apparently there are only 5% True Christians in your view. Or at least 5% True Christians in regards to that verse. Maybe of those 5% they aren't doing something else you think they should.

Apart from my currently repeating line of "Who cares about something like a Vow of Poverty when you don't follow the belief and it has no relevance to you" - what the theme or idea generally being put forth here seems to be "Christians aren't believing what I a non-Christian think they should believe. Those Hypocrites!"

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

No I didn't - I was correcting a misunderstanding you had over what a particular Christian teaching actually was.

So you don't have an opinion on that. OK. That's fine.

And just to check I presume you are only asking this question of Members of the Forum who are Christian since you think such a discussion is a waste of time for non-Christian and indeed you seem to have no time for non-Christians who are interested in discussing Christian doctrines and theology: I.e.

I'm pretty sure that many religions and philosophies have a version of "Love They Neighbor As Thyself".

Yep. Wikipedia calls it The Ethic of Reciprocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

 

[Darat]

...snip...

I'm pretty sure that many religions and philosophies have a version of "Love They Neighbor As Thyself".

Yep. Wikipedia calls it The Ethic of Reciprocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

The topic you've brought from the other thread was about a Christian teaching, again I'm surprised that you do not seem to recognise what I corrected you about in the other thread was a Christian teaching. (Especially since I even provided quotes from the Christian Bible to show how the teaching is given in the Bible.)

So leaving aside that and your opening post tying this thread to that discussion of a Christian teaching you actually want to discuss something called "The Ethic of Reciprocity" and not the Christian teaching you were ignorant about?

And again just to make sure I don't make the wrong assumption, if I don't follow any religion that has "The Ethic of Reciprocity" do your comments about non-Christians discussing Christian doctrines and theology apply to other religions or only to discussions involving Christianity?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

Why not ask God/Jesus?

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

So leaving aside that and your opening post tying this thread to that discussion of a Christian teaching you actually want to discuss something called "The Ethic of Reciprocity" and not the Christian teaching you were ignorant about?

I'd like your thoughts on either.

And again just to make sure I don't make the wrong assumption, if I don't follow any religion that has "The Ethic of Reciprocity" do your comments about non-Christians discussing Christian doctrines and theology apply to other religions or only to discussions involving Christianity?

I'm pretty sure The Golden Rule or The Ethic Of Reciprocity by it's very nature means it affects others. And as stated in that other thread I 100% think it's not silly for you to discuss something that affects you even if you don't believe the doctrine/rule/teaching.

I would like to understand your thoughts on how the Golden Rule or Ethic of Reciprocity applies to wealth.

Thanks.

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

Why not ask God/Jesus?

I'm wondering what you think or even what you think He thinks.

Thanks.

 

[supercorgi]

So you started a new thread because you polluted the old one with your opinion that people who didn't ascribe to a certain faith had no business commenting on that faith? It's your right to start as many threads as you wish but how honest is that? Wouldn't it be better to stay where you started and answer the objections there?

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I'm wondering what you think or even what you think He thinks.

I think the Bible can be made to say a lot and that there is not that one, single stance it takes on several important issues. I also don't think "He" exists independently of people's heads.

So, "Yes/No/Cancel."

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

So you started a new thread because you polluted the old one with your opinion that people who didn't ascribe to a certain faith had no business commenting on that faith? It's your right to start as many threads as you wish but how honest is that? Wouldn't it be better to stay where you started and answer the objections there?

Do you have anything to add in regards to the OP? Thanks.

 

[Cavemonster]

I'll bite,
If you take the phrase literally and strictly, you couldn't live comfortably having an economic surplus while people around you were homeless or in financial trouble. The love we have for ourselves and our family makes it paramount that we provide for their needs. I don't think it's consistent to say you love two people equally while buying one a fancy car and expensive food and letting the other starve and freeze on the street.

Since there are now people in just about every community whose needs are not being met, it would be a violation of "Love thy neighbor as yourself" to attain a high economic standard of living while people around you starve. That would be evidence of loving yourself more than your neighbor.

However, a strict literal reading isn't the only way to interpret this.

 

[supercorgi]

Do you have anything to add in regards to the OP? Thanks.

As if you truly do. Why didn't you stick with the original thread, coward?

 

[slingblade]

I'm pretty sure that many religions and philosophies have a version of "Love They Neighbor As Thyself".

Yep. Wikipedia calls it The Ethic of Reciprocity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethic_of_reciprocity

The concept of reciprocity has...levels, for lack of a more exact word.

The deepest form of reciprocity is not just that one wants for one's neighbor that which he wants for himself. It is that one's neighbor is indistinguishable from oneself. If you have enough food, if you are eating, so is your neighbor. If there is not enough food, and you are not eating, no one is. Food doesn't go to the person with the most status, or wealth, or any other factor. If there is food, everyone eats some. If there isn't, everyone goes without. If food is needed, everyone goes to hunt or gather some.

This is because your neighbor is you. Everyone in your group is actually only one person. As you wouldn't kick yourself out into the snow, naked, to starve, it's impossible that you'd do that to anyone else.

Not many people can live at that level of reciprocity, however.

From there, it goes "up," as it were, getting less and less intimate. We seem now to be living in groups that practice a largely superficial level of reciprocity: I want for my neighbor what I want for myself, as long as that doesn't conflict with what I can get, or think my neighbor should have, or deserves, or unless he can't pay for it and I can, or unless god likes me better and rewards me or...hell, I mostly want my neighbor to do what I say and not have too much.

In a reciprocal society at the base level, there's no such thing as individual wealth. What one has, all has, because all are one. If one lacks something, all lack it, because all are one.

I don't practice that form of reciprocity, and am not sure I'd want to. But I have always liked the idea of not-large, self-sustaining communities of people who want to take care of one another, and do so moderately well. And who cooperate with other communities, and generally share, more than just acquire. Yeah, I'm just a dirty old hippie.

So what level of reciprocity do you practice?

What level should Christians practice in order to please their god?

What would Jesus do? Or more, what would he be telling people to do?

 

[Niggle]

I'd say no, but I think it does mean you have to consider your neighbors (read: fellow man) in collecting and using that wealth. Earning money (even lots of money) is fine if it's done honestly and fairly (providing well-made goods or expert services for a fair price and dealing with your customers in an open and equal manner). It's better yet to use that money to help your neighbors out (not necessarily all of it; that would force you to close your business and end your ability to donate/help others).

In short, getting lots of money by lying, stealing, or killing = bad. Hoarding all the money you make and not helping people who need help = bad (see the bit about "when you fed/clothed the least of my brethren, you did so for me" in the Bible). Good Samaritan providing clothing, dressing wounds, and finding safe lodgings for the beaten traveller = good.

I think that's what Jesus meant by loving your neighbor as yourself. Part metaphor, part literal. YMMV

 

[A Christian Sceptic]

I'd say no, but I think it does mean you have to consider your neighbors (read: fellow man) in collecting and using that wealth. Earning money (even lots of money) is fine if it's done honestly and fairly (providing well-made goods or expert services for a fair price and dealing with your customers in an open and equal manner). It's better yet to use that money to help your neighbors out (not necessarily all of it; that would force you to close your business and end your ability to donate/help others).

In short, getting lots of money by lying, stealing, or killing = bad. Hoarding all the money you make and not helping people who need help = bad (see the bit about "when you fed/clothed the least of my brethren, you did so for me" in the Bible). Good Samaritan providing clothing, dressing wounds, and finding safe lodgings for the beaten traveller = good.

I think that's what Jesus meant by loving your neighbor as yourself. Part metaphor, part literal. YMMV

Thanks.

 

[Holler Hoojer]

Loving your neighbor as yourself would almost certainly have been understood by the Jewish Jesus to mean, "Don't do anything to your neighbor that you wouldn't want done to you." AND "If your neighbor asks for assistance, you must give it."

 

[Fnord]

Does "Love Your Neighbor As Yourself" mean you can't have Wealth?

No, it means that you should treat to other people as you would want them to treat you. There is no application of wealth, expressed or implied in the "Golden Rule." Personally, I try to ignore my neighbors as much as possible so that they will ignore me.

It works.

 

[Cavemonster]

No, it means that you should treat to other people as you would want them to treat you. There is no application of wealth, expressed or implied in the "Golden Rule." Personally, I try to ignore my neighbors as much as possible so that they will ignore me.

It works.

If you're going by scripture, ignoring your neighbor is pretty discourged. One of the many instances of "Love thy neighbor as thyself" comes toward the beginning of a passage that goes on to say

If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food,

16and one of you says to them, "(AB)Go in peace, be warmed and be filled," and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that?

So the phrase does pretty explicitly frown on ignoring poverty around you.
The story of the good samaritan is also a fleshing out of the same idea. It's pretty clear that the phrase refers to more than just refraining from harming your neighbor, but actively helping those in need.

 

[Fnord]

A little personal winge ... Where were those same neighbors when I needed their help? Where was their "Christian Love" after I was laid off, or after my heart attack, or when I was paralyzed for three days after a back injury and spent the next six months recovering? I'll tell you; they were in their homes, enjoying their wealth and comfort, ignoring my wife's requests for help ("Just come over and talk to him, please!"), and likely feeling relief that it wasn't they who had to deal with it.

You could say that they treated me then the way that they want me to treat them now, and that my indifference towards them is only in line with the Golden Rule.

I know I do.

 

[Ducky]

Does "Love Your Neighbor As Yourself" mean you can't have Wealth?

Please explain. Thanks.

ADDED:
By the way - I'm not asking to argue my point of view. Two different posters MarekM and Darat alluded that it does, but haven't expanded on why they think that. I thought it deserved it's own thread. I'm interested in your thoughts.

Yes. Now give me some money. I accept paypal.