It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why I Think God Warned us About Conservatives and Capitalism.

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Jesus would be economically communist
edit on 15-12-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:24 PM
link   
reply to post by iRoyalty
 


Who gave more, in both raw amount and in percentage, Romney the Conservative, or Obama the Democrat?



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


dude! Jesus was obviously a conservative...




posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
The question is not one of giving. It is one of force. Which philosophy forces you to give? Of course, "giving" cannot be forced. When giving is forced, we know it by another name, and that name is theft. Was Jesus for theft then?

And, of course, all this assumes that there is actually a zero sum argument here.

In order to believe this, you have to believe that the only reason that people do not want a socialist/Marxist/Communist/fascist tyranny is because we are so selfish we want to keep everything to ourselves, and that is the only possible reason we could be opposed to it. That is a false choice.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Conservatism in the United States

"Historian Gregory Schneider identifies several constants in American conservatism: respect for tradition, support of republicanism, "the rule of law and the Christian religion," and a defense of "Western civilization from the challenges of modernist culture and totalitarian governments."

"Sons of Liberty"


...boom boom tiss



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   

ketsuko
The question is not one of giving. It is one of force. Which philosophy forces you to give? Of course, "giving" cannot be forced. When giving is forced, we know it by another name, and that name is theft. Was Jesus for theft then?

And, of course, all this assumes that there is actually a zero sum argument here.

In order to believe this, you have to believe that the only reason that people do not want a socialist/Marxist/Communist/fascist tyranny is because we are so selfish we want to keep everything to ourselves, and that is the only possible reason we could be opposed to it. That is a false choice.


want more than the next person... or to be equal with someone who is more successful? is one more deserving than another?

you gotta work for it and prove it...



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   

WaterBottle
Jesus would be economically communist
edit on 15-12-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)


Based of course, on nothing He has ever said or did.

Communism is anti-Christian just for its concern for the collective over the individual.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   

iRoyalty
I now think it means more that the 'money bags' you have in heaven will not grow old... not sure what that could mean though... still interested in your view.
edit on 15-12-2013 by iRoyalty because: (no reason given)





Do not be afraid any longer, little flock, for your Father is pleased to give you the kingdom.

Sell your belongings and give alms. Provide money bags for yourselves that do not wear out, an inexhaustible treasure in heaven that no thief can reach nor moth destroy.


There is no need for material things in Heaven, the moneybags are for the treasure of everlasting life; salvation.

Luke was a bit blustery and eager to keep the restless crowd engaged, again remember: These are not commands, but his sermonic embellishment, accurate or not (rather flowery and fanciful) is not outside the simplicity of accepting the new covenant.

Luke 16:19-31 was another parable, a way for Luke to describe what he thinks would happen when the unconcerned rich man died and the experience he would have. Its an illustrative hypothetical.

The entire chapter is very interesting and is a good sermon about charity.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by iRoyalty
 


Odd take, but one that seems to be increasingly popular as the world lurches to the left.

The prohibitions are not against money per se, nor against being rich. What they are against is placing Earthly wealth ahead of God. People who do that are creating their own god out of money, and ignoring the biblical God. It's a matter of what one prioritizes. They are breaking the first commandment of the ten, placing other gods before God. It is also why it was written that you can't serve two masters - you can't serve both God and money. One will have to be your master, and the other your servant, but both cannot be masters.

So, it's not about being rich, it's about who or what you serve, and who or what serves YOU.

Oddly, leftists and "humanists" are guilty of the same thing - placing something else before God. In their case, they are placing other humans before God, and tending towards using God as a mere tool to further their agenda, while only paying lip-service to God.

They cannot serve two masters, either. They cannot serve both God and "the masses".

In BOTH cases they are serving a material master, and telling God to get into the back seat and make them some more fodder for their "other master". They think they are mid-level managers, serving their true master and forcing God to in turn do their bidding so that they can do that.

Jesus did not force any rich man to do anything - he gave the man a choice. "If you want to get to heaven, this is what you have to do...", but that choice was ALWAYS up to the individual in question, never governmentally mandated. If the guy wanted to get to heaven, then he would put his Earthly master back into the servant's quarters - and money is not the only Earthly master people can have. It could be any variety of things, but whatever it is, THAT is what you have to put in it's place.

Joseph of Arimathea was certainly rich, and remained so, but was not hell bound for it. He had sorted out just who his master was, and kept his monetary servant in perspective.

Materialistic minds think only in materialistic ways, and will get their materialistic reward. Nothing more.




edit on 2013/12/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Destinyone
reply to post by iRoyalty
 


I personally don't think God warned us about anything. He supposedly gave us free will to make choices. To give us warnings of any kind negates free will. I also think, everything attributed to God as being his word, is nothing more than the projections of ego by man.

jmoho...

Des


"Free will" and "free rein" are not the same thing.

"Free will" is negated, of no consequence, when one does not know that there are choices involved. With no choices, one just goes where his head leads, aimlessly. When warning is given, only THEN are choices meaningful.

"Free will" means that you have to use your "will" to make a choice.

"Free rein" is mere aimless wandering, not knowing that there are choices, because no direction has been given to either choose for or against.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 10:09 PM
link   

iRoyalty

Ok, perhaps I phrased the title badly... What I meant was that my understanding of the bibles verses on the rich, led me to believe that God would not want people to be gaining extreme wealth, in fact a someone who gave up all their riches to the poor seems to have a good shot at eternal happiness!



No.

That would be trying to get to heaven on a technicality. It would be saying to God "See? I gave away all my money, so in spite of all the rest of the things I do, you HAVE to let me in!"

It would be just an attempt to BUY a ticket to heaven, using the poor to grease your bearings.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   

iRoyalty

--------

TheWrightWing
Left wing ideology demands property be removed from any who they designate as wealthy by force and penalty of law for the greater good and to build a government big enough and powerful enough to impose that will.

--------


Can you source this please? I've never heard of this before.


The Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels, 1848





edit on 2013/12/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 10:28 PM
link   

iRoyalty


Ah, you are referring to communism... well since they dismantled the church I doubt that Jesus would approve of those... Also communism was terrible since the people in power got SUPER rich... You can't lump all socialist ideology in with that lot, otherwise I should be lumping you in with the Nazis...



They were BOTH collectivist, as were also the Nazis, Fascists, and Corporatists in general. All birds of a feather, the only difference was in WHO sits on the top branch and collects all the wealth. ALL of them think it's a good idea to submerge the individual into a collective, then bleed that collective dry. The "collective" itself is just a mechanism to get the little guys to give their all to the top dawgs. That's why in all of those cases they are hard after assimilating EVERYONE into their collective by force, whether that individual wants to belong to their gang or not.




As for the OWS I think you missed their point, they wanted bankers and stock brokers to stop gambling away money and then call for a bailout which took money away from the social structure of society.



If they ever had a "point", it got lost on the sea of demands they had, demands which were all over the map, but which all had in common "memememe! Give it to ME! I don't wanna have to work for it! Someone else needs to work for it, but give it to ME!"





edit on 2013/12/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 10:49 PM
link   

iRoyalty

No I agree, everyone should be charitable regardless of political orientation. Yes left wing politics tax more and the front will be on the rich, I get what your saying though, having that tax put on them is the same as forcing it from them, however, if they were a good christian and they knew their money was going to help the poor people of this country, should they not be happy?


If they were "good Christians", there would be no need to force them. I don't think anyone should be happy about getting robbed, and having their choice, their free will, taken away from them.

Likewise, if they are NOT "good Christians", then they should also be allowed the free will choice of NOT going to heaven, just as Jesus himself allowed them that choice. The ONLY rewards those people will have are in this world, not the next, and it's a sin to take what little happiness they have and ever will have away from them.

God allows It's sun to shine on the just and the unjust alike - by "taking away their sunshine", you are trying to take God's decisions away from It.




So you do not think Jesus would approve of the re-distribution of the wealth of the rich going into the hands of the poor?



No, I do not think so. Not if it is done by force and removes their free will in the matter.

In the incident of the rich young man you are continually referring to, Jesus told him that one thing remained, to sell all he had, give it to the poor, and follow Jesus. What he did NOT do was to whip out a sword, put it to the guy's neck, and say "Cough it up, dude. There are mouths to feed!"

He left that man to make his own choice in the matter, in his case to remove the god of material possessions and replace it with God, to put God in the driver's seat. It wasn't about feeding the poor (for Jesus knew that we will always have the poor among us), it was about getting that guy to realign his priorities with God at the front, and money in the rear.

It was an interaction on an individual level, to get that guy to see and realign his priorities if HE chose to do so, not an interaction on a collective level, not a shakedown to feed the poor.







edit on 2013/12/15 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 11:05 PM
link   

iRoyalty
Now before I begin, I would like to point out that I am not a man of God,


True Wisdom and ignorance spoken in the first sentence! This explains everything.

I am a man of god.



posted on Dec, 15 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   

iRoyalty

Right there, nail on the head. Capitalism DEMANDS profit and profit will come before charity, humanity and even the good lord himself! I do not believe this Capitalist society where profits are more important than COMMON HUMAN KINDNESS is what Jesus had in mind. My main point on this whole thread (that no one has picked up on, perhaps I should have made it clearer) is that Jesus would not approve of this capitalist system based on never ending profit. In fact the bible warns us that greed will not get you into the Kingdom of heaven, so what do the 'Christian' leaders do? Create a system built on greed.



BUT -

trying to rob the rich of the wealth THEY have amassed just so YOU can have what was THEIRS is no less greedy.

Either way, your screwed if gain, not God, is you main motive.

That is the reason that Jesus said "Blessed are the poor..."

They are poor because greed is not their main motivator.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by iRoyalty
 


He warned us about ATS that's for sure!



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


The only people whose wealth has been robbed, has been the middle class and working class in the biggest redistribution of wealth in human history, with the bailouts in 2008 not to mention QE. Both policies benefitted the rich, who have increased their overall wealth in the following years. Recessions are a great time when your rich and can buy up real estate and property at bargain prices.

But yeah I guess its always about envy and wanting to steal from the rich.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 


I wouldn't know. I've never attained the level of "middle class". Oh, I used to make scads of money at times, but never kept enough of it to be considered middle class. I pissed it away or gave it away. It never meant enough to me to try to hang on to it.



posted on Dec, 16 2013 @ 10:28 AM
link   

woodwardjnr
reply to post by nenothtu
 


The only people whose wealth has been robbed, has been the middle class and working class in the biggest redistribution of wealth in human history, with the bailouts in 2008 not to mention QE. Both policies benefitted the rich, who have increased their overall wealth in the following years. Recessions are a great time when your rich and can buy up real estate and property at bargain prices.

But yeah I guess its always about envy and wanting to steal from the rich.


Yes! This is more what I had in mind... We went a bit off track, I was NOT saying Jesus was a communist, however the Capitalist system we have at the moment that does stuff like bailout ridiculously rich banks and stock brokers over the working and lower middle class (the poor) is surely not something Jesus would approve of? Yet the people pushing measures like this are "Christian" Replublicans and Democrats. It all seems very un-christian and something that Jesus tried to prevent with his words on greed and amassing a great amount of wealth.

Those banks would not sacrifice ANY profit for a bit of charity, otherwise there would have been leniency and people in need might have been able to keep their houses, or they would have provided different cheap accommodation AT LEAST. This form of Capitalism we have favours the greedy and it has bred it in abundance, this is why I think Jesus wouldn't approve.

Everyone who has been for Jesus liking Capitalism has been saying forcing the wealth from the rich to the poor is un-christian but what about the rich forcing money from the poor? Which is very common and can be seen in the tent cities that have popped up everywhere, where most of the people residing there were hard working people.
edit on 16-12-2013 by iRoyalty because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join