Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Jesus is the most popular communist ever. Why are so many blind to this?

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Why do you think that? I'm curious to know your reasoning. In my opinion, it's possible to maintain a much larger percentage of the population at comfortable levels while allowing entrepeneurs and hard workers to advance and earn money to buy luxuries.


The idea that you can tax away poorness is self-defeating. When you go tax people, you are really just taking the money from the hands of those who know how to use that money the best. The people who earn money are far more capable to use the money effectively then the government. And when a government uses money wrong, it has no consequences. It simply taxes more and spends again. A person would lose that money. They face real consequences.

The rich get nothing from hoarding away their money. They get nothing from having just a poor lower class. If the lower class is poor, there are no customers. If they aren't spending the money, it loses value. They have to constantly reinvest.

By taxing these people you aren't really helping others, either. These people have the real power. They can cut and raise benefits and pay for their employees, and will if you start taking away from them too much. This just puts more strain on the government's programs. At the same time, the government is taking in less because they have less people working. We can see this problem going on now in Europe. The unemployment goes up. The welfare programs cost more. They spend more and more, and increase taxes to do so. This just leads to the unemployment going up...

It's just a cycle that doesn't work. You can not force people to give.


Why do I have to do that? Believing something doesn't give you the right to mislead people into believing you have control over their immortal soul. It's a simple case of extortion.


If you believe in hell, wouldn't you have some obligation to help other people from not going there? It's charity in the end. You are trying to save people. Just because things are harsh doesn't mean it's not right.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Disturbed Deliverer]




posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer

If Jesus was simply some guy trying to scare people into listening to him, he would have used force, and not just rhetoric. His goal was to teach an ideal.



Dude! Jesus was an ideal! Ubermensch.

And force is not the most effective way to coerce people and resolve conflict. Look to the animal kingdom, those animals that have evolved effective threat displays are more prone to survive because they don't have to expend all the energy to fight all the time, like less evolutionarily 'clever' creatures do.

The evolution of the idea that there is alife after this one, and that another man or another entity has control over that, that's criminal in my opinion. It's contrary to human nature. Jesus was probably running around telling people you are your own god, god is everywhere, be happy, don't worry, everything's cool. But greedy church institutions in the 13th century (and indeed many times before in isolated instances, and many times after) got ahold of that and ran like there was no tommorow.


Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
I'd argue that to Jesus, hell and heaven were not a physical place, but a mental state. There is a story left out of the bible where Jesus is asked how it could be fair to send sinners to hell to burn for eternity for mistakes made in just a lifetime. He states that there really isn't a hell. To Jesus, the idea was to teach people how to make themselves happier. It was teaching people what true happiness was.


Now that's what it's all about. If you've been bad, you will punish yourself in hell. If you've been good, you'll reward yourself in heaven. This is my take as well.

However, I strongly disagree with arbitrary pronouncements of good and evil based on medieval riot control techniques.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:18 PM
link   

And force is not the most effective way to coerce people and resolve conflict. Look to the animal kingdom, those animals that have evolved effective threat displays are more prone to survive because they don't have to expend all the energy to fight all the time, like less evolutionarily 'clever' creatures do


It worked pretty good in Nazi Germany. It's also working pretty good in the Middle East today. It worked pretty good for religious institutions throughout history, as well.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer

And force is not the most effective way to coerce people and resolve conflict. Look to the animal kingdom, those animals that have evolved effective threat displays are more prone to survive because they don't have to expend all the energy to fight all the time, like less evolutionarily 'clever' creatures do


It worked pretty good in Nazi Germany. It's also working pretty good in the Middle East today. It worked pretty good for religious institutions throughout history, as well.


The Nazis lost, there's nothing working in the Middle East, that place has been a gladiatorial arena since man started walking upright, and religious institutions use a higher threat, greater than violence, the threat of eternal damnation, which is it's own sort of violence, but it more directly qualifies as a threat display since there is no physical manifestation of damnation after death to actually prove to people, or in effect, make good on the threat.

Also, the Nazis were adapt at putting up paper tigers for the German people, they blamed the Jews for burning buildings, robberies, the failing prosperity that had left so many without jobs or means to support themselves. Hitler played on the fears and prejudices of the people, the ignorance and the desperate search for meaning that is inherent in man. Jesus did the same, they even had the same goal,
the 'betterment of the human race' and what not.

And you thought bush=hitler was bad, Jesus=hitler is like a thousand times worse.


If Jesus was real, and I have my doubts, he was probably a really groovy guy. But he probably wasn't real, and he probably wasn't the son of God, and if he was, his words have been tragically mistranslated for the benefit of those who presume to place themselves between us and God. What a futile gesture. That's like trying to place themselves between us and the air we breathe.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Communism wasnt evan invented back then.

In communism every1 is supposed to be atheist. The government is supposed to be what you believe in.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 10:50 PM
link   
You are absolutely correct in asserting that the ideals which were taught by Jesus are the same as the ones held by communist idealists. I tried a long time ago to explain this concept to people, but nobody understood that communism in practice is not and will never be the same as the concept it is based on.

The concept of communism requires that everyone living in a society be willing to work for the good of everyone else. It cannot function properly if it's entire population isn't willing to abandon the need for personal power and glory.

Simply put, an ideal communist society is one in which each person puts their neighbor's happiness ahead of their own, creating a society of generosity and kindness, in which everyone has their needs met through the selflessness of their fellow man.

Unfortunately, in this reality, greed and selfishness are so rooted in human nature that they are almost inescapable. Which is why a communistic society will always fall to despotism.

Until this is no longer the case, communism will have to remain a unrealized concept in the minds of us dreamers and idealists, who the world so loves to hate.

Some final thoughts by the original communist himself:

Mat 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mat 19:20 The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
Mat 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go [and] sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come [and] follow me.
Mat 19:22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
Mat 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 11:59 PM
link   
just a little sidebar:
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Most biblical historians believe that this verse was another example of an incorrect translation - the "Eye of the Needle" was the common name of a narrow and treacherous mountain pass. It was incorrectly translated as "the eye of a needle" but, the idea is more-or-less the same.

OK, that's enought trivia. I just happen to like pointing out how the bible has so many translation errors just to twist the tails of the literalist fundies.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 12:00 AM
link   
If I'd had to apply a political idealogy to Jesus teachings I'd say it would be more Socialist than Communist, though I don't really like the idea of applying any, the last thing we need is more confusion of politics and religion. Saying that I've never understood how ultra right wing Christians square that part of Jesus message with their own interpretation, and I've used the argument in the past to try and make them think.

Anyway, If you're looking for a quote that espouses Communism, then I suppose this one does, and it does mention wealth redistrubution. Though you could argue the context and meaning all day like anything in the Bible.



"All the believers were one heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. … There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time, those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need"

Acts 4:32-35



The quote jezebel gave has always been my favorite. Only thing I remember verbatim from childhood in church.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 12:00 AM
link   
just a little sidebar:
Mat 19:24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

Most biblical historians believe that this verse was another example of an incorrect translation - the "Eye of the Needle" was the common name of a narrow and treacherous mountain pass. It was incorrectly translated as "the eye of a needle" but, the idea is more-or-less the same.

OK, that's enought trivia. I just happen to like pointing out how the bible has so many translation errors just to twist the tails of the literalist fundies.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 01:19 AM
link   
I agree, somewhat. Jesus did have very communist ideas. Check this link out right here:

latter-rain.com...

Some of you people here must realize that communism in theory is not the evil empire you were raised to hate. The cold war is over, capitalism is cruel. Oh, wow, I can't believe I'm saying pro-communism stuff again... What's wrong with me?



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 01:44 AM
link   
Michael Gorbachev famously once said that Jesus was the first communist. I agree with him. Communist ideals are one that are grand, however it is the conditioning of human society that will provide an obstacle for ever obtaining it.

My anthropology lecturer brought up an interesting point in class one time. Someone said "Socialism doesnt work because humans are naturally to greedy!" and she replied "are you sure it's natural, perhaps it is a conditiong from society itself?". Some food for thought considering how much of our lives and our perceptions are shaped by our own society and upbringing.

thanks,
drfunk



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 04:22 AM
link   
"Love your neighbour as yourself"
You can't keep gaining wealth, without keeping an eye out for your fellow man.
Disturbed, you keep talking how the rich CAN contribute to charity, the rich CAN start schemes to increase employment, the rich CAN, the rich CAN.
But the point is, do they? Not very often.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 05:24 AM
link   
sorry babloyi the right in america identifies itself closely to religion, somehow to them to admit jesus had communist ideals would be a blow to them and everything they believe in because Jesus can't be wrong.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:25 AM
link   

None of those people had to join him. They were free to do what they want. What you're talking would break a fundamental rule of god called Free Will. Jesus taught people how to live. He never forced people to live any way.


He didn't force it upon them? These people still believe strongly in the gods and he pretty much told them, woprship me or burn in hell for all eternity. Now if that isn't being forceful I don't know what is.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Jesus tells us to "store up for yourselves treasures in heaven" (Matt 6:20) and "do not worry about your life" (Luke 12:22) among other sayings, he has a big de-emphasis on money and a big big emphasis on "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all you mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself." To me this sounds like a form of Christian Socialism as we see it on earth whereas people are constantly taking care of each other with little regard for cash. To a Christian, it may look more like a benevolent monarchy (undivided rule or absolute sovereignty by a single person) with God being absolute and Jesus His son, as king.


[edit on 22-3-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 06:56 AM
link   
First, you HAVE to know the culture to make such responses. Christ told them that it was difficult for a rich man to enter the kngdom of heaven....to which his disciples freaked out....andhe pointed out that through God, anything's possible, lol...menaing a rich man CAN get into heaven with his earhtly money intact. Go and look up Annias and Saphira, people go to this and say that's why you are supposed to give all your money to God, and totally lissd the point. A&S could have given part of the money from their land proceeds, and no one would have cared. Hell, they could keep it all, it was theirs to deal with. Another place, Christ praised a widow who put in less than a penny's worth of money while totally ignoring the scack of money that the rich men gave...because she gave all that she had, while other's gave what they had no need to keep. If Christ was an ouriht communist, this would have never happened.

Christinaity points out that one who will not take care of his own is worse than an athiest (acutal word is infidel). But one who abuses his money (throws it away without thought to how to use it) is jsut about as bad. Communism is a everone will have the same thing system (until it's abused), while the Christian system is one of giving as people have need, and not beyond your means, especially not beyond what you are willing to part with.
Money Changers: Yes, they were making money out of religion....swindling people who just wanted to worship their God. Guess how many TV Evangelists would get the whip from Christ now-a-days?
This is a good reason why communism CANNOT be that closely related to christinity, right here. This is supposed to be a thing of you willingly doing stuff for the poor and helpless, not being forced to.

Matt 17:
24 When they reached Capernaum, the collectors of the temple taxi came to Peter and said, "Does your teacher not pay the temple tax?"j 25He said, "Yes, he does." And when he came home, Jesus spoke of it first, asking, "What do you think, Simon? From whom do kings of the earth take toll or tribute? From their children or from others?" 26When Peterk said, "From others," Jesus said to him, "Then the children are free. 27However, so that we do not give offense to them, go to the sea and cast a hook; take the first fish that comes up; and when you open its mouth, you will find a coin;l take that and give it to them for you and me."



I have always said their was a similarity between the two, but there's a lot of diffrence between them. In christinity, you give as you can handle giving, to those who need help, as they need it....this is not where you force everyone to be on the same level. This is not where you take from one to give to the other out of force. Nor is it something where you prepare a feast for one poor person at the expense of the rich (I'm thinking about welfare, :lol
. Now as to how both degenrated over the years, yeah, both ideals did degenerate into this gimme all your money; it is now mine type mentality. I know of several popes, due to their treatment of people, fit profile of those Christ said were going to hell, in danger of hell, whatever. I personally expect to see some, if not close to all, of the popes burning in a lake of fire. The title does not a true christin make. You could tell what type of monsters they were by what they did to people "in the name of christ".


There are scriptures against not working. There are scriptures that praise those who work hard enough to gain money. There are scriptures against what tax collectors of that time did.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by jlc163
In christinity, you give as you can handle giving, to those who need help, as they need it....this is not where you force everyone to be on the same level.


But jlc, it says "Love your neighbour as yourself". Wouldn't that mean that mean that everyone SHOULD be on the same level? As in, don't try to get extra for yourself while your pal out on the street is going hungry.

Heheh....drfunk, yeah I suppose you are right. Hey people, you can stop pretending communism is evil, the Cold war is over.

I also don't get the whole thing about "Jesus wanted us to be free" and "Jesus would not force us with anything". Being a Christian, you are automatically "forced" into doing alot of things. Admittedly, most of these things are good things to do, but it is still a stopper on freedom. Jesus said "Love your neighbour as yourself". You have to believe that, and act on it, otherwise you are not Christian. To the Christian mindset, being "unchristian" would be the worst. Hence, it is a force, albeit psychological, not physical.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   
I read somewhere that the early Christians lived in Communist communities, yet it was mostly Christians that bashed Communism during the 20th century.



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by invader_chris
I read somewhere that the early Christians lived in Communist communities, yet it was mostly Christians that bashed Communism during the 20th century.


Oh yes, just those Christians were bashing Communisim? A Christian who reads their Book should know that their kingdom is "not of this earth" so to get meddled up with a love affair of the world is asking for disaster.

Thumbs up to both Douglas Adams (Mostly Harmless was my fav.) and Smashing Pumpkins, nice combo



[edit on 22-3-2005 by saint4God]



posted on Mar, 22 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
IMO Jesus used to teach that individualism was an illusion. So that everyone was part of the same thing. He used to say that the kingdom of God was within and around you. (in the gospel of Thomas).

Individualism is an illusion. There are no real individuals. We are all one with the Creator, so in a sense, whatever you do to another you're actually doing to yourself. That's where the golden rule "Do to others as you would like others to do to you" comes from IMHO. In such an understanding compassion is not something that's rare or impossible; it's something that is just logical.

Capitalsim is based on individualism. Sooner or later we're going to find out that individualism doesn't really exist. So what will that make of capitalism?





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join