This is funny considering that the divine right of the kings is based on the bible. This guy obviously needs to read the Treaty of Tripoli. The United States is not based on a Christianity. Most of our founders were deists and naturalists.
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth ... Do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink, or about your body, what you will wear. ... For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. ... Look at the birds of the air ... Look at the lilies of the field."
In light of this, is the "Protestant ethic" of hard work and productivty, thrift, savings, and investment a biblical ethic?
A mother works very hard to nurture and bring up her child. She wants her child to be the best in the area of his/her gifts. Is the mother's work driven by a desire for money? No, she serves for love. We are to serve God with all our heart for love. Excellence in work does result in money. But we serve God, not money. Whatever we do, we need to do it for the glory of God.
Perhaps Weber was wrong, but he saw the source of the Protestant ethic in predestination anxiety, not "the glory of God." Material success--which was the result of the above mentioned economic virtues--was a sign to the individual and community of God's favor, therefore of election. So according to Weber, the Calvinists/Puritans WERE driven by a desire for money. What do you think?
Weber was right that culture (beliefs, values, virtues, family-life, politics etc) play significant role in economic success, in contrast to the materialist idea that economics determines culture (beliefs, values etc). He did focus on "Predestination". An anxiety to succeed economically in order to appear to be right with God may infact drive some people to economic prudence. We are complex creatures. Big worldview issues are:is wealth good? Is material creation good?
I am not contesting the idea that America rejected Aristocracy. But to peg it on relatively unknown stories is just a statement in a vaccuum. I frankly don't know why America rejected Aristocracy (May be because it was built from scratch). But I don't think it follows that it is because David was chosen instead of Saul.
You are right that our generation is ignorant of the biblical stories that shaped the West. That is one reason why the West is losing its earlier advantage. David's story became paradigmatic: the other ingredients that shaped meritocracy included Luther's doctrine of "Priesthood of all believers" (that the job of a housewife or a shoe maker was as sacred as any),Puritan ideas of vocation and work.
Three thousand years ago in the Middle East, the idea that a king be selected for his skill, and that a king (Saul) who doesn't obey the law must be replaced by a king who does (David), is revolutionary.
I think the Bible has something to do with the success of the west. However I do not know if the story of anointing of David has anything to do with current political practices, primarily because most of us have not even heard about this story -:)
You may be surprised at how much we are shaped by things in the past that we're unaware of. There's a long history of political thought that draws its principles from the Bible.
In biblical times, as in many cultures today, leadership responsibilities went to the eldest son. David's selection overruled culture in prefernce for merit. Europe was Aristocracy, America became meritocracy . . . because America followed the Bible more diligently. It is true that most people do not know why America became what it is. Ignorance or rejection of the source of your values will lead to a loss of your values - because your values are not natural or universal, they are peculiar.
This is funny considering that the divine right of the kings is based on the bible. This guy obviously needs to read the Treaty of Tripoli. The United States is not based on a Christianity. Most of our founders were deists and naturalists.
xxdiogenescynicxx 2 years ago
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says,
"Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth ... Do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink, or about your body, what you will wear. ... For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. ... Look at the birds of the air ... Look at the lilies of the field."
In light of this, is the "Protestant ethic" of hard work and productivty, thrift, savings, and investment a biblical ethic?
bjorakrat 3 years ago
A mother works very hard to nurture and bring up her child. She wants her child to be the best in the area of his/her gifts. Is the mother's work driven by a desire for money? No, she serves for love. We are to serve God with all our heart for love. Excellence in work does result in money. But we serve God, not money. Whatever we do, we need to do it for the glory of God.
VishalMangalwadi 3 years ago
Perhaps Weber was wrong, but he saw the source of the Protestant ethic in predestination anxiety, not "the glory of God." Material success--which was the result of the above mentioned economic virtues--was a sign to the individual and community of God's favor, therefore of election. So according to Weber, the Calvinists/Puritans WERE driven by a desire for money. What do you think?
bjorakrat 3 years ago
Weber was right that culture (beliefs, values, virtues, family-life, politics etc) play significant role in economic success, in contrast to the materialist idea that economics determines culture (beliefs, values etc). He did focus on "Predestination". An anxiety to succeed economically in order to appear to be right with God may infact drive some people to economic prudence. We are complex creatures. Big worldview issues are:is wealth good? Is material creation good?
VishalMangalwadi 3 years ago
Replying to NitroDunkirk:
I am not contesting the idea that America rejected Aristocracy. But to peg it on relatively unknown stories is just a statement in a vaccuum. I frankly don't know why America rejected Aristocracy (May be because it was built from scratch). But I don't think it follows that it is because David was chosen instead of Saul.
rachelbinto 3 years ago 2
You are right that our generation is ignorant of the biblical stories that shaped the West. That is one reason why the West is losing its earlier advantage. David's story became paradigmatic: the other ingredients that shaped meritocracy included Luther's doctrine of "Priesthood of all believers" (that the job of a housewife or a shoe maker was as sacred as any),Puritan ideas of vocation and work.
NitroDunkirk 3 years ago 4
of course it does not have to do with that story specifically. but it is a mere example of how the bible taught the basic ideas we use today.
electrostatic1111 3 years ago 2
Three thousand years ago in the Middle East, the idea that a king be selected for his skill, and that a king (Saul) who doesn't obey the law must be replaced by a king who does (David), is revolutionary.
bjorakrat 3 years ago 2
I think the Bible has something to do with the success of the west. However I do not know if the story of anointing of David has anything to do with current political practices, primarily because most of us have not even heard about this story -:)
rachelbinto 3 years ago 3
You may be surprised at how much we are shaped by things in the past that we're unaware of. There's a long history of political thought that draws its principles from the Bible.
bjorakrat 3 years ago 2
In biblical times, as in many cultures today, leadership responsibilities went to the eldest son. David's selection overruled culture in prefernce for merit. Europe was Aristocracy, America became meritocracy . . . because America followed the Bible more diligently. It is true that most people do not know why America became what it is. Ignorance or rejection of the source of your values will lead to a loss of your values - because your values are not natural or universal, they are peculiar.
NitroDunkirk 3 years ago 4