Attention republican America Jesus is a communist !

carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Attention republican America Jesus is a communist !

Attention republican America Jesus is a communist !
OK if the main republican American geniuses ;P from America didn't get it while reading the bible. Jesus hates privet property and is a communist and before you mocking me for typical Atheist/communist/Stalinist propaganda check this out :

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

Surprise XD ! Let the drama start.

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


qbg
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-11-22
User is offlineOffline
Don't forget about Christian

Don't forget about Christian Socialism and Christian Anarchism.

It in a way goes to show that you can justify almost anything with the Bible...

"What right have you to condemn a murderer if you assume him necessary to "God's plan"? What logic can command the return of stolen property, or the branding of a thief, if the Almighty decreed it?"
-- The Economic Tendency of Freethought


FulltimeDefendent
Scientist
FulltimeDefendent's picture
Posts: 455
Joined: 2007-10-02
User is offlineOffline
qbg wrote:Don't forget about

qbg wrote:
Don't forget about Christian Socialism and Christian Anarchism. It in a way goes to show that you can justify almost anything with the Bible...

Almost anything...

“It is true that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It is equally true that in the land of the blind, the two-eyed man is an enemy of the state, the people, and domestic tranquility… and necessarily so. Someone has to rearrange the furniture.”


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
He yes however I find this

He yes however I find this so funny since hard core republican-Christiane think Communism = atheism  ! capitalism = god ! I think it will confuse their world ;D And Id love to see on tried to rationalize this Laughing out loud.

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


Mazid the Raider
Rational VIP!Science Freak
Mazid the Raider's picture
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-12-28
User is offlineOffline
Yup, a communist.

I've also heard some convincing arguments that he was a Buddhist as well! Where did he go between running for his life and suddenly showing up as an adult? The far east, of course!

"But still I am the Cat who walks by himself, and all places are alike to me!" ~Rudyard Kipling

Mazid the Raider says: I'd rather face the naked truth than to go "augh, dude, put some clothes on or something" and hand him some God robes, cause you and I know that the naked truth is pale, hairy, and has an outie
Entomophila says: Ew. AN outie


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
interesting Jesus conspiracy

interesting Jesus conspiracy theories that we have here XD. However I'm not seeing Christians , are all of them dead or are they boycotting the RRS ?

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
 I have read through this

 I have read through this thread and am not sure what kind of responce you are looking for? True communism is an utopian society where everything is shared, no one has more of anything. The problem with communism is that it can not withstand the human weakness for greed.

If your point is that a "true" Christianity society where everyone lives for the betterment of others is bad; than I disagree with you.

If you believe that the word Comminism is an evil structure that all God fearing Christians should pray against; than I disagree with you.

If you believ that a "true" Christian society is the same as the governmental structure of China, USSR or any other  Communist country labelled evil by politicians; I disagree with you.

Please understand that I also will not agree that Wikipedia is a credible source for anything.

 


qbg
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-11-22
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote:I have read

Mjolnin wrote:
I have read through this thread and am not sure what kind of responce you are looking for? True communism is an utopian society where everything is shared, no one has more of anything. The problem with communism is that it can not withstand the human weakness for greed.

If your point is that a "true" Christianity society where everyone lives for the betterment of others is bad; than I disagree with you.

If you believe that the word Comminism is an evil structure that all God fearing Christians should pray against; than I disagree with you.

If you believ that a "true" Christian society is the same as the governmental structure of China, USSR or any other  Communist country labelled evil by politicians; I disagree with you.


I'm going to ignore some of the implied assumptions for now.

I think that none of those possible points are his point. I think he is pointing out (to some effect) that Christians should be communists.

Quote:
Please understand that I also will not agree that Wikipedia is a credible source for anything.

Too easy: Wikipedia is an archive of past and present introspection of culture it revolves around. In that respect, Wikipedia is a credable source for information from that viewpoint.

"What right have you to condemn a murderer if you assume him necessary to "God's plan"? What logic can command the return of stolen property, or the branding of a thief, if the Almighty decreed it?"
-- The Economic Tendency of Freethought


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
qbg wrote: I'm going to

qbg wrote:
I'm going to ignore some of the implied assumptions for now. I think that none of those possible points are his point. I think he is pointing out (to some effect) that Christians should be communists.

Nothing implied, I really don't know what the direction of this viewpoint is. To a true definition Christianity is striving for a utopian society that fits a communist definition. I don't know if it is being seen as a bad thing.

mjolnin wrote:
Please understand that I also will not agree that Wikipedia is a credible source for anything.

qbg wrote:
Too easy: Wikipedia is an archive of past and present introspection of culture it revolves around. In that respect, Wikipedia is a credable source for information from that viewpoint.

 

We agree Wikipedia is a viewpoint and nothing more.

 I still need to know if communism, in this light, is seen as a bad thing?

 

 


carx
carx's picture
Posts: 247
Joined: 2008-01-02
User is offlineOffline
Well the point is christians

Well the point is christians supposed to be Communists if they follow the NT. Besides Wicapidia is a source however they have quotes from the bible so you can look up the verses pointing to communism in the bible. The point made here is theta most republicans demonize communism (universal social care , taxing the wealthy , giving to the poor) while glorifying greed and telling us its biblical. I just wont to see the republican response to this or a christian  according to the biblical motto :

Turn (to communism) or burn

PS: Isn't creationism complete and full Communist regime of god in the animal kingdom ? ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=8WWU_KHv2m0 LULZ)

Warning I’m not a native English speaker.

http://downloads.khinsider.com/?u=281515 DDR and game sound track download


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
carx wrote:Well the point is

carx wrote:

Well the point is christians supposed to be Communists if they follow the NT. Besides Wicapidia is a source however they have quotes from the bible so you can look up the verses pointing to communism in the bible. The point made here is that most republicans demonize communism (universal social care , taxing the wealthy , giving to the poor) while glorifying greed and telling us its biblical. I just wont to see the republican response to this or a christian  according to the biblical motto :

Turn (to communism) or burn

 

The word and meaning of Communism the practice, not the theory is the ploy of rhetoric in this viewpoint. Communism viewed as a political and economic organization is defined different than Communism as a utopia society. This thread's attempt to haze the edges is a sad effect.

I am Republican and my opinion is that universal social care, taxing the wealthy, giving to the poor or any other program run by the government is not the same as the Christian communist utopia. The government intervention is not what is taught in the Bible. Don’t ask why the government doesn’t make people give; ask why don’t the people give! The political Communist practice you seem to desire is a place where matter, not mind or spirit, speaks the last word. This ethical relativism accepts no stable moral absolutes while Christianity should sets forth a system of absolute moral values placed within a structure that affirms God, not human desires.

William Temple the late Archbishop of Canterbury referred to Communism as a Christian heresy. He meant that Communism had laid hold on certain truths that are essential parts of the Christian view of things, and bound theories and practices to them that no Christian could accept.

And yes I know that the church has often lagged in its concern for social justice and too often has been content to mouthing pious self-righteous pettiness. The people within a church can be so absorbed in a future good that they forget the present evils of their own. Religion just like Communism, there is a difference between the practice of weak people and the true belief of the utopia.

I admit I am not a biblical scholar and I have not seen biblical motto: Turn or burn 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Does this mean that the Democrats are Communist?


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote:I am

Mjolnin wrote:

I am Republican and my opinion is that universal social care, taxing the wealthy, giving to the poor or any other program run by the government is not the same as the Christian communist utopia. The government intervention is not what is taught in the Bible. Don’t ask why the government doesn’t make people give; ask why don’t the people give! The political Communist practice you seem to desire is a place where matter, not mind or spirit, speaks the last word. This ethical relativism accepts no stable moral absolutes while Christianity should sets forth a system of absolute moral values placed within a structure that affirms God, not human desires.

Well, here's the thing, though:

In the period when Jesus was supposed to have existed, certainly during the time when the gospels were actually put down on paper, the idea of a Republic such as we have now was pretty much gone. The Caesars had gotten rid of the Roman Republic, and another Republic wouldn't arise again until Cromwell.

Thus, the idea of 'the government' doing anything to those effects would be the idea of one rich man doing it: The Emperor, or perhaps one of the petty regional Kings he allowed to pay him tribute. To that end, there'd be no point to speaking of the 'obligations' of a government or State, because really, the Emperor was responsible to no man, and so could not be compelled or obligated to do anything. It would be like the Founding Fathers incorporating a section in the Constitution about the responsibilities of the United Nations. The parameters of that discussion would be beyond the scope of their experience.

So really, looking to the Bible for advice on how a government should comport itself... at best, you can look at how they claim the Pharisees, or the sanhedron, should behave. And they seemed to have some pretty harsh words for those who make the houses of worship into houses of commerce. I think they'd have similar harsh words for megachurch organizers who take a fundamentally communal activity and removing the community from it, as well as folks who use their ministry to get rich, and then use that wealth to continue their ministerial revenue streams. I think they'd also have harsh words for 'public servants' who use their public service as a stepping-stone to getting into high-paying commercial jobs that largely rely on their ability to influence other 'public servants' into serving their own ends.

You want to know why people don't give? Because the people who are held up to them as examples of 'success' only ever take. Oh, sure, professional atheletes have their little 'give back' foundations, but how much of that comes from them? Ten, twenty MILLION a year in income, and they give what? Two million to start and then it's all investments and public contributions. Politicians use their connections to land lucrative jobs in the private sector, or take bribes. Why don't people give? Because the message being broadcast loud and clear by every source, from the government, to the media, to the guys selling shoes, and yes, even to the guy standing up in front of 10,000 people he doesn't know shouting into a mic 'Jesus says we need a bigger sound system. Give us the money so we can build an even BIGGER church! It'll only take $20,000,000'... is 'Take'.

The media, the sports leagues and franchises, the merchants... that's all corporate. Corporations exist to maximize profits for Stockholder returns. Religion always says 'give', but pay close attention and it's really 'give... to me'... which means the real message is 'take from those who trust you'. What's left? Corporations aren't responsive to people. We've seen that too often to really believe they are, not unless there's some major shift in public sentiment. Churches? Hell, man, churches don't even care if their ministers violate every principle they stand for, as long as they can sweep it under the rug and use it as a means to raise more money. So what's that leave us as a means to influence people into have a mindset where giving, taking just a few minutes to help others, is a real part of our national character again?

Man, if only we had an organization of the people, for the people, and by the people...

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
      Oh My God. You

 

 

  

 

 Oh My God. You are a closet Catholic. Didn’t the Pope just come out and slam the accumulation of excessive wealth?

If you are not a closet catholic at least you both agree.

 

Well, here's the thing

After the period when Jesus existed, the Jewish Christian social structure was communal and not the same as the Roman’s nor was it republican. It was a communal systems were they worked for the good of all and were not forced to do it by a government. The simple idea that government should be allowed to control your lifestyle is also not a republican society nor something anyone should want, I do believe it is called a dictatorship. The issue as I see it in this thread is that we should expect the U.S. government to step in to decide economic structure of the people and for the people. Kinda like a golf or bowling handicap… if your score is too low (or high in golf) you are given the extra to keep everyone equal. I do not believe that can be found in the Bible or seen as a Republican theology.

Man, if only we had an organization of the people, for the people, and by the people...

I agree with you on this. But the problem is there must be a set of absolute moral values placed within a structure that is not based soley on a pesonal desire.

BMdC- you must understand that in order for your desires to be met, people must first have the desire to give. The problem isn't that the rich take, it is that what you have expressed is that everyone wants just for them selves. If you believe your convictions than the dislikes shown to the takers are an irrelivant point.

 

 

We are not discussing a republican society, I thought we were discussing communism and the republican party.

please excuse me if I am wrong


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
No, I'm a former Catholic.

No, I'm a former Catholic. I'm an atheist. (Strictly, a theo-apathist, but atheist will do.) And I think before the Vatican can condemn 'obscene wealth' they really need to downgrade the appointments in their own houses. Yes, many of the chalices in newer churches are brass, not gold, but in the older and wealthier cathedrals? Log-in-the-eye time.

 

As far as discussing communism, Jesus, and the Republican Party goes... my point was that you were comparing 20th-21st century political mechanisms to what's in a book written at a point when not only were the political structures enacting those mechanisms wildly outside of the experience or imagination of any of the authors of the text, the sheer scale of the subject matter would have been beyond their belief.

The population of the entire Roman Empire at the time wasn't more than 55 million or so.  Added to that, communities were far more self-sufficient then than they are now. Totally leaving aside places like Los Angeles or Detroit, how many small cities or towns in the modern US do you think produce all their own food, including meats? How many produce all of the things they need to survive? Got a lot of clothing mills in those West Virginia mining towns? We're already interdependent on a much larger scale than anything imagined in the Bible.

But no, the issue is not that we should expect the government to keep the playing field level, it's that Christ's message advocated true Communism, not Marxism, Lenninism, Stalinism, or Maoism. He basically told everyone to give away everything, to eschew material concerns, and to care for one another's needs.

And I do understand that in order for my desires to be met, people have to have the desire to give. However, I also understand that in order for people to develop the desire to give, they must be given examples that reinforce that desire, examples where selflessness and serving the needs of the community, not personal aggrandizement, yield favorable results. That's never going to come from financial and professional constructs whose entire purpose is to maximize profit. It has to come from the activities of those who aspire to public office. If they would be our leaders, then they must lead.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


jmm
Theist
jmm's picture
Posts: 837
Joined: 2007-03-03
User is offlineOffline
I wouldn't go as far as

I wouldn't go as far as saying that Jesus was a communist, but the Gospels have certainly demanded a closer reading upon the advent of the labor movement. 

Here's a very insightful article by Eugene Debs:

www.marxists.org/history/usa/parties/spusa/1914/0300-debs-jesussupreme.pdf

 


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
BMcD wrote:But no, the issue

BMcD wrote:

But no, the issue is not that we should expect the government to keep the playing field level, it's that Christ's message advocated true Communism, not Marxism, Lenninism, Stalinism, or Maoism. He basically told everyone to give away everything, to eschew material concerns, and to care for one another's needs.

We agreeon this

BMcD wrote:

And I do understand that in order for my desires to be met, people have to have the desire to give. However, I also understand that in order for people to develop the desire to give, they must be given examples that reinforce that desire, examples where selflessness and serving the needs of the community, not personal aggrandizement, yield favorable results. That's never going to come from financial and professional constructs whose entire purpose is to maximize profit. It has to come from the activities of those who aspire to public office. If they would be our leaders, then they must lead.

 

 

How can you expect people to find the reinforcement when Mother Teresa the most giving person of our generation has stuff like this written about her.

"Mother Teresa and JPII both took the stance that alleviating poverty was the wrong way to go, but rather the Church's mission was to care for the impoverished, ie: make sure they get the medical and other care they needed to continue their spiritually-redemptive suffering".

Like the spin Bill – Seriously, who should be their role model. I would think Mother Teresa was a good one.

The "Church's mission is to care for the impoverished" funny I thought impoverished meant - poor enough to need help from others.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote:How can you

Mjolnin wrote:

How can you expect people to find the reinforcement when Mother Teresa the most giving person of our generation has stuff like this written about her.

"Mother Teresa and JPII both took the stance that alleviating poverty was the wrong way to go, but rather the Church's mission was to care for the impoverished, ie: make sure they get the medical and other care they needed to continue their spiritually-redemptive suffering".

Like the spin Bill – Seriously, who should be their role model. I would think Mother Teresa was a good one.

The "Church's mission is to care for the impoverished" funny I thought impoverished meant - poor enough to need help from others.

Through honesty. There's no spin there, but rather the truth, based on statements made by both John Paul and Mother Theresa. And yes, impoverished means poor enough to help from others. However, there's a difference between rendering enough aid that the impoverished can improve their state, and only enough to prevent their condition from worsening. Treating the symptoms does not cure the disease.

Just because someone is a good role model doesn't mean you're without flaws. It's important that we remember that no matter how good a role model is, they're still a human being, not a messiah. We should recognize their human failings, and further recognize that the good they achieve is in spite of, and through overcoming, those flaws

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
BMcD wrote: Through

BMcD wrote:

 

Through honesty. There's no spin there, but rather the truth, based on statements made by both John Paul and Mother Theresa. And yes, impoverished means poor enough to help from others. However, there's a difference between rendering enough aid that the impoverished can improve their state, and only enough to prevent their condition from worsening. Treating the symptoms does not cure the disease.

Just because someone is a good role model doesn't mean you're without flaws. It's important that we remember that no matter how good a role model is, they're still a human being, not a messiah. We should recognize their human failings, and further recognize that the good they achieve is in spite of, and through overcoming, those flaws

 

 

If you cannot cure the disease why try to give some comfort but since the disease is the lack of desire to give comfort just let the poor bastards suffer

As I see it the cure has 3 parts. I will attempt to walk through it.

Poverty is based on income

1) Give them jobs so they can support themselves.

Yah… No politician would catch any grief for eliminating jobs and moving them out of the country. OR??? We can bring them to the U.S and give them jobs. I’m sure that won’t cause a problem either.

2) Empty the vast store of wasted food

Inequitable access to food - and not insufficient food production - is the main reason for world hunger. If the land can’t feed them, this is easy, we try to feed them. Sorry but the miracle of genetics doesn’t work here. Genetically altered seed is genetic sterile. Which means a farmer has to buy new seeds every year, this is economically not feasible by farmers from third world countries.

How about we just starve the fat people and setup a universal scale for body fat allowance. 20% is an easily attainable level - that level sounds good to me. We should call the legislature right away and get that moving.

3) Create an international welfare system that provides a living income to all who cannot or do not work.

Increase taxes for the benefits of people outside the country. But this doesn’t cure the disease it is treating a symptom.

 

 

Why don’t we just kill all the greedy bastards in the world? Now that would fix it! Since nobody is without flaws than we can just have one big genocide fest. Last man standing gets it all.

 

Or how about we all try to- Feed the hungry, Give drink to the thirsty, Welcome the stranger, Clothe the naked, Visit the sick, Visit the prisoner and Bury the dead. OOPS, that’s what Mother Teresa did. Being Ex-Catholic I am sure you recognize this. Yeah it doesn’t say remove all suffering because that would also remove all pleasure

I am still waiting for your role model

 

 

 

 


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote:If you cannot

Mjolnin wrote:

If you cannot cure the disease why try to give some comfort but since the disease is the lack of desire to give comfort just let the poor bastards suffer

No, the disease is the inability of the 'poor bastards' to maintain a minimum quality of life.

Quote:
As I see it the cure has 3 parts. I will attempt to walk through it.

Poverty is based on income

1) Give them jobs so they can support themselves.

Yah… No politician would catch any grief for eliminating jobs and moving them out of the country. OR??? We can bring them to the U.S and give them jobs. I’m sure that won’t cause a problem either.

Poverty is based on relative income compared to available resources. Someone making what folks in LA or Manhattan would consider insufficient to survive on might, if they're making that in say, sub-saharan Africa, be very well-off indeed. So it's income relative to cost of living... and income isn't always measured in monetary amounts, either. A farmer making very little money, but able to feed himself and his family without spending that money, wouldn't be said to be impoverished, for example.

Quote:

2) Empty the vast store of wasted food

Inequitable access to food - and not insufficient food production - is the main reason for world hunger. If the land can’t feed them, this is easy, we try to feed them. Sorry but the miracle of genetics doesn’t work here. Genetically altered seed is genetic sterile. Which means a farmer has to buy new seeds every year, this is economically not feasible by farmers from third world countries.

This is only true of some genetically altered crops. Dwarf wheat, for example, was genetically engineered the old fashioned way (through selective breeding) decades ago, and is doing just fine. But I agree, if the land can't feed them, we should try to feed them. Feeding the hungry isn't an issue of food production, that's got room to spare. It's also not a question of logistics. We could do that if we made the effort. It's a question of will, and so far we haven't shown evidence of having the will to put our resources into motion.

Quote:

How about we just starve the fat people and setup a universal scale for body fat allowance. 20% is an easily attainable level - that level sounds good to me. We should call the legislature right away and get that moving.

You get right on that, Mr. Republican, Sir.

Quote:

3) Create an international welfare system that provides a living income to all who cannot or do not work.

Increase taxes for the benefits of people outside the country. But this doesn’t cure the disease it is treating a symptom.

I agree, that doesn't cure the disease. Ideally, we'd need to move toward better resource management, as well as finding alternatives to much of what we use now (for example: many of the fertilizers that would help improve soil quality in some marginal areas are too expensive, in part because of the rising cost of oil, and how that impacts petroleum-based fertilizers). But this, too, takes more effort than we seem to be willing to make now.

Quote:
 

Why don’t we just kill all the greedy bastards in the world? Now that would fix it! Since nobody is without flaws than we can just have one big genocide fest. Last man standing gets it all.

Wow. You're really getting a big excessive with the sarcasm there, ain'cha? Nobody's advocated killing anyone, and I fail to see how acknowledging that our role models have room for improvement points to endorsing genocide.

Quote:

Or how about we all try to- Feed the hungry, Give drink to the thirsty, Welcome the stranger, Clothe the naked, Visit the sick, Visit the prisoner and Bury the dead. OOPS, that’s what Mother Teresa did. Being Ex-Catholic I am sure you recognize this. Yeah it doesn’t say remove all suffering because that would also remove all pleasure

I never said we shouldn't. I simply said we shouldn't stop there. We need to take the next step and address the root causes. Just because someone's taking medication to fight a disease doesn't mean they stop treating the symptoms, too. All I said was we can't just treat the symptoms.

Quote:

I am still waiting for your role model

Why? I acknowledged that the folks you put forward when quoting me were, in fact, reasonable role models. But they were far from perfect, and it's important that we acknowledge their faults, too. If anything, recognizing their faults makes them stronger role models... someone presented as a paragon of all that's good and right... that's an object of worship, but the fact is that no-one can attain that level of perfection, and knowing that makes it harder to really try to emulate a paragon. It's a lot easier to try to live up to the standard set by a role model, like JPII, or Mother Theresa, or whoever you might choose, if you can look at them and say 'this person was just that: a person, just like me. They weren't perfect, but they did their best.' That's a much easier example to relate to, to make that empathic connection that lets you really make your best effort at living up to the example.

Try to live up to perfection, and all you do is guarantee you'll fail... which diminishes the chances that you'll keep trying. I say it's better to set your sights on reality, warts and all, than to give up.

 

 

 

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
  BMcD wrote:[Try to live

 

 

BMcD wrote:

[Try to live up to perfection, and all you do is guarantee you'll fail... which diminishes the chances that you'll keep trying. I say it's better to set your sights on reality, warts and all, than to give up.

 

I am a very sarcastic person. Sorry, but humor doesn't always come across in written form. I do believe we are more in agreement than seen in our conversation. My main point has always been that the imperfect man ensures the collective whole will fail to some degree. We say how it should be and point fingers at imperfection but we as individuals only fail when we don't do anything. 


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Fair enough. I try to be a

Fair enough. I try to be a little less sarcastic in text than I am in speech for just that reason. Eye-wink But yes, I think the most important part of what we do is that we keep trying. Nothing happens when we give up.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


TomUsher
TomUsher's picture
Posts: 1
Joined: 2008-07-09
User is offlineOffline
Jesus is a communist

Hello All,

Yes, Jesus is a communist. I have been writing about this in detail for several years. 

It's too bad that the false-Christians (especially the self-styled conservative Republicans) have given communism (real Christianity, not militant, atheistic Marxism) such a bad name that would-be Christians hardly ever get to hear the truth that even some atheists obviously realize. 

It is important for people to be open, honest, and direct about the real message of Jesus Christ. That's why I've left this comment.

Visit the blog post linked to above. Look around. Read some of the pages down the left column. Check out some of the different posts. Leave comments. Ask questions. If you want to cross-reference (via links) things in this forum, the spam limit is three links. I can override that on a case-by-case basis though. If they are on-topic links, four or five or even more links may be okay. One could over do it. I do have to approve each comment; otherwise, the site gets overrun with spam. Be patient with me while I check comments. It can sometimes take me until the next day to go through them all and especially if they require detailed replies.

If you have a particular thread or comment on the forum you'd like me to address on my blog or on the forum, just let me know. I'll try to get to it. I do have to work for the unrighteous mammon (time-consuming; devouring), because there is so much doubt and darkness in the world. 

I look forward to a fruitful dialogue. 

"Few there be that find it [the strait and narrow]," said Jesus.

God bless every soul in the universe,

Tom Usher
 

 


Balone
Posts: 33
Joined: 2008-07-15
User is offlineOffline
Wikipedia LOL

i love references to Wikipedia the poorest excuse for an encyclopedia in the world...LOL. How dare you sir insult my intellect with delusions from wikipedia. You will have to kill my family before I use wikipedia for any reference source. Is that the atheist's Bible..ROTFLMAO. Any moron can put any stupid thing in that, just as any moron can use it, and will.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
Balone wrote:i love

Balone wrote:

i love references to Wikipedia the poorest excuse for an encyclopedia in the world...LOL. How dare you sir insult my intellect with delusions from wikipedia. You will have to kill my family before I use wikipedia for any reference source. Is that the atheist's Bible..ROTFLMAO. Any moron can put any stupid thing in that, just as any moron can use it, and will.

Which actually refutes the central thrust of the OP how?

I mean, come on, surely you can do better than saying 'LULZ! J00 UZ0rD A PENSUL!!!', right?

 

No referring to wiki:

Jesus Christ, as presented in the Gospels, advocated a position that can be seen as Communist; giving away all of one's possessions and efforts for the betterment of others, while withholding nothing, and trusting to the benevolence of those you have aided in order to meet your own needs.

So. Let's hear your argument against it.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Jesus Christ, as

Quote:
Jesus Christ, as presented in the Gospels, advocated a position that can be seen as Communist; giving away all of one's possessions and efforts for the betterment of others, while withholding nothing, and trusting to the benevolence of those you have aided in order to meet your own needs.

So. Let's hear your argument against it.

I think this argument has been made.. but, here we go, just in case.

Christ may have advocated the giving away of all possesions for <trim> but that would only hold a small connection to communism and, as is suggested through this thread, non-republicanism.  Christ advocated, if anything, the personal choice to give away all that you have; certainly not, IMO, to force that choice onto other people through the establishment of a government meant to enforce that precept.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

Quote:
Jesus Christ, as presented in the Gospels, advocated a position that can be seen as Communist; giving away all of one's possessions and efforts for the betterment of others, while withholding nothing, and trusting to the benevolence of those you have aided in order to meet your own needs.

So. Let's hear your argument against it.

I think this argument has been made.. but, here we go, just in case.

Christ may have advocated the giving away of all possesions for <trim> but that would only hold a small connection to communism and, as is suggested through this thread, non-republicanism.  Christ advocated, if anything, the personal choice to give away all that you have; certainly not, IMO, to force that choice onto other people through the establishment of a government meant to enforce that precept.

Ah, but communism, in fact, advocates no such thing. Pure utopian communism is also anarchy: there is no government, only the community itself. If you choose to exempt yourself from the community, then go for it.

But yes, I do actually agree with your point about the freedom to make the choice. My point wasn't so much directed at you as it was at Balone's 'ZOMG, YOU USED WIKI!!!!' post, which was utterly devoid of any actual contribution to the conversation or other form of attempt to show the OP's position flawed.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Ah, but communism, in

Quote:
Ah, but communism, in fact, advocates no such thing. Pure utopian communism is also anarchy: there is no government, only the community itself. If you choose to exempt yourself from the community, then go for it.

True.  But the title of this thread implies, IMO, that being a republican stands in conflict with this sort of communal communism... so, I suppose I was addressing more that.  This pure communism you speak of doesn't stand in contrast at all, IMO, to being a republican.


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:Quote:Ah,

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

Quote:
Ah, but communism, in fact, advocates no such thing. Pure utopian communism is also anarchy: there is no government, only the community itself. If you choose to exempt yourself from the community, then go for it.

True.  But the title of this thread implies, IMO, that being a republican stands in conflict with this sort of communal communism... so, I suppose I was addressing more that.  This pure communism you speak of doesn't stand in contrast at all, IMO, to being a republican.

Well, in theory, no, but in practice... I find that pretty much anything that doesn't begin with the assumption that Daddy needs to keep us safe from the bad brown men contradicts being a Republican in America these days.

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
...I'm brown...I'm a

...I'm brown...I'm a Republican.  Although.. if one goes by how mainstream politicians present their parties.. I may lean towards the libertarians, federalists (if they still exist), and the green party.

I'm sure those things go together well....... maybe. Sticking out tongue


BMcD
Posts: 777
Joined: 2006-12-20
User is offlineOffline
RhadTheGizmo wrote:...I'm

RhadTheGizmo wrote:

...I'm brown...I'm a Republican.  Although.. if one goes by how mainstream politicians present their parties.. I may be lean towards the libertarians, federalists (if they still exist), and the green party.

I'm sure those things go together well....... maybe. Sticking out tongue

Personally, I think political parties are a great evil, and one that modern telecommunications make superfluous. Two hundred years ago, it took a party to get one man's message all over the nation, but now?

If we have to have political parties, then they have to be judged based on their elected members, because those people are the ones who shape the party's direction by having the podium from which to speak. If a candidate is elected purely because 'he's better than the democrat', that does a disservice, because it creates the illusion that his positions were desirable, not merely less repugnant than the opposition's.

But this ain't a political board. Eye-wink

"You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." - The Waco Kid


RhadTheGizmo
Theist
Posts: 1191
Joined: 2007-01-31
User is offlineOffline
Well said... about political

Well said... about political parties and electing the leaders.. um, also in saying that this isn't a political board.  Heh.