Comments on: Evangelical Socialism

By: Jeremy Pierce

Jeremy Pierce — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:41:10 +0000

It depends on which part of Marx you’re talking about. You’re focusing on the parts of his work that have to do with his positive program. He spends quite a bit of time simply diagnosing the problems in the work that he thinks his positive program will remedy. I wouldn’t be prepared to endorse everything he says in that body of work, but a lot of it is simply recognizing forces at work in society that perpetuate negative patterns, and a good deal of that was based on genuine argument. And some of it is in fact quite real; he just diagnoses it as based on a reductionistic account of capitalism causing everything bad in the world, when we in fact have a better explanation — original sin.

By: Andy

Andy — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:55:10 +0000

Socialism and Capitalism are like evil step-sisters. Sure, you can argue about which is the lesser of two evils, but at the end of the day, they’re still both evil, because they idolize (in one way or another) mammon.

People love to say that capitalism is legalized greed, and there is some validity to that accusation, but it applies to Socialism, as well. The only difference is that in Socialism, the greed is at the bottom.

“…The nations seek after these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. Rather, seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.”
– Matt 6:32-33

By: Dave Rattigan

Dave Rattigan — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:30:35 +0000

I don’t see this supposed difference between capitalism and socialism. Far from promising only competition, supposedly capitalism is the only way to a flourishing, free society with prosperity and opportunity. If socialism is a rival gospel, capitalism can be and has been turned into a gospel just as easily.

I’d love to see the Republicans running their next campaign on “We can’t promise you anything except competition.”

By: John H

John H — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:21:10 +0000

[Note: hadn't realised comments were moderated. Thought the first version of my comment had got lost. Please can you delete the first version and post the second - and also delete *this* comment! Thanks.]

By: John H

John H — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:20:09 +0000

The debt of socialism and communism to Christian language and worldview – particularly the teleology of fall, redemption and future restoration – is pretty clear, and FC is far from the first to point it out.

But then, pretty much any worldview developed in the west in the past 1,000 years shares that same shape in some form. The “New Atheists” are one example, and it would be just as simple to point to “evangelistic” rhetoric in support of capitalism along the same lines as FC’s post (and it would tell us as much of actual use about the diverse phenomenon of capitalism(s) as FC’s post tells us about the diverse phenomenon of socialism(s)).

So: replace “sin” with “religion”, “Satan” with “God”, “Jesus” with “free-thinking” (as atheists use that term) and “salvation” with “a world free from religion” and you have the New Atheists.

Replace “sin” with “socialism”, “Satan” with “the government”, “Jesus” with “free markets” and “salvation” with the vision of “a nation of
free, prosperous people living without governmental interference”, and voila! – you have the emotional appeal of right-libertarianism.

By: John H

John H — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 07:00:37 +0000

The debt of socialism and communism to Christian language and worldview is pretty clear.

But then, pretty much any worldview developed in the west in the past 1,000 years shares that same shape of fall, redemption and future restoration in some form. The “New Atheists” are one example, and it would be just as simple to point to “evangelistic” rhetoric in support of capitalism in the same way as FC (and tell us as much of actual use about the diverse phenomenon of capitalism(s) as FC’s post tells us about the diverse phenomenon of socialism(s)).

Replace “sin” with “socialism”, “Satan” with “the government”, “Jesus” with “free markets” and “salvation” with the vision of “a nation of free people living without governmental interference”, and voila! – you have the emotional appeal of right-libertarianism.

By: Coyle

Coyle — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:50:12 +0000

Yeah, this is right on. No one becomes a communist because they’re convinced by the arguments in Das Kapital. Rather, as with his spiritual father Rousseau, Marx’s appeal is in his vision and promises…

By: John Mark Reynolds

John Mark Reynolds — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 01:49:11 +0000

Evangelical socialism? Isn’t that Campoloism?

By: Blue Collar Todd

Blue Collar Todd — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:46:25 +0000

Not only Socialism, but today’s Liberalism is essentially the same thing. Machen’s insight into the difference between Liberalism and Christianity still applies today. Christians need to think of Liberalism as a false religion that stands in total antithesis to biblical Christianity. This might also help in arguing whey Christians cannot be Liberal or support those who are, namely most Democrats.

By: Collin Brendemuehl

Collin Brendemuehl — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:34:34 +0000

Nice to see someone else thinking in these terms. John Gray’s book “Black Mass” explains the history behind this post-millennial apocalyptic fervor very well (apart from taking a few liberties, and being an Objectivist).