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.
Rulers are gods servants until they stop serving gods true purposes. Do you imagine that a communist despot like Mao or Stalin served god ? I don't think so. . Should they be obeyed just because they were rulers? Would Jesus today advocate letting us be continually taken advantage of by evil despots ?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Jobeycool
Romans 13:1-5 All of you must obey the government rulers. Everyone who rules was given the power to rule by God. And all those who rule now were given that power by God. 2 So anyone who is against the government is really against something God has commanded. Those who are against the government bring punishment on themselves. 3 People who do right don’t have to fear the rulers. But those who do wrong must fear them. Do you want to be free from fearing them? Then do only what is right, and they will praise you.
4 Rulers are God’s servants to help you. But if you do wrong, you have reason to be afraid. They have the power to punish, and they will use it. They are God’s servants to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must obey the government, not just because you might be punished, but because you know it is the right thing to do.
I don't know about you, but that looks an AWFUL lot like a political message to me.
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Rulers are gods servants until they stop serving gods true purposes.
Do you imagine that a communist despot like Mao or Stalin served god ? I don't think so. . Should they be obeyed just because they were rulers? Would Jesus today advocate letting us be continually taken advantage of by evil despots ?
originally posted by: TheJourney
Seems clear to me that Jesus and his disciples were communist. Maybe socialist, but it seems pretty clear they were trying to establish communism.
Most people think Communism is an ideology dedicated to championing workers and the poor. This was an incredibly successful ruse which manipulated millions. The New World Order is Communism
Communism is not a movement to help the downtrodden people of the world, but Communism is actually being run today by capitalists, the very people who control the wealth of the world that Communism is supposedly fighting against. Very few Americans know that Karl Marx was a correspondent and political analyst for Horace Greeley who controlled and managed the New York Times newspaper.
The Illuminati going to America
Communism is a monopoly over everything, including thought, enforced by the "State." The "State" is a front for the Illuminati Jewish central bankers who own its debt. Anything that increases "State" power is Communist. World government will take this to the next level. Most people think Communism is an ideology dedicated to championing workers and the poor.
This was an incredibly successful ruse which manipulated millions. Behind this artifice, "Communism" is devoted to concentrating all wealth and power in the hands of the central banking cartel (the Rothschilds and their allies) by disguising it as State power.
What is "Communism" ?
The real motive behind Communism is not to distribute the world equally, but the Communist Party is just a front for the super-rich as an instrument for gaining and using power. It is not the Communists that run Communism. There is yet another controlling power behind Communism. Communism and socialism are just arms of the more devilish conspiracy working behind the public eye that is not being run from Moscow or Peking, but from New York, Paris and London.
These are very serious and dangerous times. This is a very serious and dangerous movement that has been working politically and socially since the French Revolution to destroy the world.
'Pandora's Box - The Ultimate "Unseen Hand" Behind the New World Order
Komov believes that if you “dig deep enough into the ideological roots of these socialist movements, you end up finding satanic roots in them.” And although only a softer version is prevalent now, “it is still very dangerous,” he says. “I would warn all those people fascinated by socialist ideas that they have never worked in human history — never worked.” Alexey Komov
Roots of Socialism
Evil Roots Of Socialism
There is NO such thing as "Christian Communism." All Communism is of the Devil. Communism is not an ideology; but rather, a secret weapon of THE ILLUMINATI intended to enslaved the human race. It was Karl Marx himself, unquestionably the father of modern Communism, who said:
"My object in life is to dethrone God and destroy capitalism." —Karl Marx
It was Whittaker Chambers, a former Communist and Soviet spy, who said:
"The Communist vision is the vision of man without God. It is the vision of man's mind displacing God as the creative intelligence of the world."
Dethrone God? Man without God? Can a person dethrone God? Absolutely not!!! The very essence of Communist philosophy is the absence of God.
Didn't The Early Church Practice a Form of Communism? No! The early Christians in Acts DIDN'T practice Communism in any way, fashion, or form. They weren't Communists. The communalism described in the Bible (Acts 2:44; 4:32) was a voluntary sharing of goods that had absolutely nothing to do with heathen Communism, which is a blueprint for world takeover, outlined in the Communist Manifesto authored by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in 1848.
www.jesus-is-savior.com...
A common misunderstanding is that the early Church practiced communal socialism, which some believe based on what they read in the beginning chapters of Acts. The believers at the time felt extremely blessed, grateful, hospitable and generous. Many who had extra assets sold some of them to help finance the living expenses of others. The expression “all things in common” means this: “I love you, and therefore your needs are just as important to me as my own needs. I consider all that I have as being yours also.”
However, keep in mind that they could not sell what they did not own. They were voluntarily selling some of their privately owned property so they could help others. This was charity, not communism. No one was compelled to sell his property, nor did anyone confiscate one's property or income to give it to others, as many governments do today.
The Early Church Was Not Communist - and Neither Was Jesus
Question: "Does the Bible support Communism?"
Answer: Communism, a branch of socialism, is an experimental social system based on a set of ideals that, at first glance, seem to agree with some biblical principles. On closer examination, however, little evidence can be found that the Bible truly supports or endorses communism. There is a difference between communism in theory and communism in practice, and the Bible verses that seem to comply with communist ideals are in fact contradicted by the practices of a communist government.
There is a surprising sentence in a description of the church in Acts 2 that has led many people to wonder whether the Bible supports communism, and has led some people to defend strongly the idea that communism is actually biblical. The passage reads, “All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need” (Acts 2:44-45). This statement seems to imply that communism (which has, at its heart, a desire to eliminate poverty by “spreading the wealth around”) is found here in the earliest of Christian churches. However, there is a crucial difference between the church in Acts 2 and a communist society that must be understood.
www.gotquestions.org...
That's true their economy suffered, but Russia had previously been poor with most being peasants, it wasn't industrial at first when soviets took over in 1917. They already had a worse economy than rest of world. Soviets tried to modernize but like here most of the gains went to the rich 1%, called party members there or nomenklatura. They went nuts with power and it corrupted them absolutely so they did nutty stuff like outlawing xmas. If you piss off all the people with nutty laws and corruption, well people get fed up.
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: HorusChrist
USSR banned Christmas. Hence why it eventually failed. They took the fun out of socialism. Really it was cuz the party elites wanted more power for themselves. But come on. People like Christmas.
Erm, no. The USSR failed for many reasons, predominantly economic. When you're creating economic plans based on production figures that lower level officials are submitting based on what they think you want, you have a disaster in the making. Especially when corruption then rears its ugly head. And the USSR had its own version of Father Christmas - Grandfather Frost if I recall correctly.
originally posted by: HorusChrist
That's true their economy suffered, but Russia had previously been poor with most being peasants, it wasn't industrial at first when soviets took over in 1917. They already had a worse economy than rest of world. Soviets tried to modernize but like here most of the gains went to the rich 1%, called party members there or nomenklatura. They went nuts with power and it corrupted them absolutely so they did nutty stuff like outlawing xmas. If you piss off all the people with nutty laws and corruption, well people get fed up.
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: HorusChrist
USSR banned Christmas. Hence why it eventually failed. They took the fun out of socialism. Really it was cuz the party elites wanted more power for themselves. But come on. People like Christmas.
Erm, no. The USSR failed for many reasons, predominantly economic. When you're creating economic plans based on production figures that lower level officials are submitting based on what they think you want, you have a disaster in the making. Especially when corruption then rears its ugly head. And the USSR had its own version of Father Christmas - Grandfather Frost if I recall correctly.
originally posted by: TheJourney
Your very reference of 'the rich 1%' proves it wasn't actually a communist system. There is, definitionally, no rich/elite class in an actual communist system. So everyone is forming their opinions on communism based on non-communist systems, which doesn't make any sense.
vhb: You and I alone know that Jesus was an ESSENE; no one else will understand this
BuzzyWigs:Wait....
*I* understand it!!
I do!!!
The Nations people never freely call themselves 'communists' in *JOY*, would you; if you were denied the right to leave that nation and travel freely, worship the God of your choice (for starters). There are just a few at the top that rule those unfortunates that find themselves without any control over the direction (therefor meaning) of their lives. State owned, state controlled slaves. Where/when did this idea of communism become a religion? I don't see it anywhere listed as one of the major religions of Mankind, more of an intellectual concept that looks good on paper but in practice rapidly defuses into corruption.
originally posted by: TheJourney
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: TheJourney
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: TheJourney
Communists don't believe in religious dogma (GOD). Why would Jesus NOT be their first best Christian poster child for a communism whose espousers should recognize as the obvious initial creator: SON OF COMMUNISUM; forget the lame Lenin or Trotsky.
You can't generalize communists. My ideal form of government/society is probably communist, anarchy-communist to be exact. While I don't support dogmatic structures of organized religion, which yes Marx was highly critical of, I am also very spiritual, and support persona spirituality. And I'm sure many others who support communism are that way as well. Communism is essentially a spiritual idea, imo.
I am not generalizing them; they do so themselves by their actions. If so 'spiritual' how does this nebulous idea manifest into murderous physical action? Stalin's, Pol Pot's, Kim Jung Ung; extermination of millions of their own people that are not agreeing with the exact same 'spiritual' idea?
A concept is not a label. A nation that calls itself communist, but acts in ways fundamentally opposed to communism...is not communist. Are the crusades and the various terrible things representative of christianity itself, in your opinion?
originally posted by: TheJourney
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
originally posted by: TheJourney
originally posted by: vethumanbeing
a reply to: TheJourney
Communists don't believe in religious dogma (GOD). Why would Jesus NOT be their first best Christian poster child for a communism whose espousers should recognize as the obvious initial creator: SON OF COMMUNISUM; forget the lame Lenin or Trotsky.
You can't generalize communists. My ideal form of government/society is probably communist, anarchy-communist to be exact. While I don't support dogmatic structures of organized religion, which yes Marx was highly critical of, I am also very spiritual, and support persona spirituality. And I'm sure many others who support communism are that way as well. Communism is essentially a spiritual idea, imo.
I am not generalizing them; they do so themselves by their actions. If so 'spiritual' how does this nebulous idea manifest into murderous physical action? Stalin's, Pol Pot's, Kim Jung Ung; extermination of millions of their own people that are not agreeing with the exact same 'spiritual' idea?
Furthermore, citing 3 humans as proof of a whole group of people, is the definition of generalizing. Lol.
There is no abundant life under communist rule and the elites are not going to bring prosperity with no matter how much the Utopians keep trying to tell us.
originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Good works always produce good fruit if the intention is pure and free of corruption...
Yeah good point. Socialism in one country is what Stalin made up. Why? In one country implies fighting against the rest of the capitalist world, not cooperating like they had in WWII anyway. Cold war. Perfect for keeping people at home scared and perfect for them to turn to a strong man to keep them safe. Meanwhile we did similar propaganda here in this country at same time. Anthony Sutton showed how there was not much difference between New Deal with FDR, Nazis where they funded things like autobahn with wall st money, and Stalins Russia that had help from American companies like the Koch brothers dad.
originally posted by: TheJourney
originally posted by: HorusChrist
That's true their economy suffered, but Russia had previously been poor with most being peasants, it wasn't industrial at first when soviets took over in 1917. They already had a worse economy than rest of world. Soviets tried to modernize but like here most of the gains went to the rich 1%, called party members there or nomenklatura. They went nuts with power and it corrupted them absolutely so they did nutty stuff like outlawing xmas. If you piss off all the people with nutty laws and corruption, well people get fed up.
originally posted by: AngryCymraeg
originally posted by: HorusChrist
USSR banned Christmas. Hence why it eventually failed. They took the fun out of socialism. Really it was cuz the party elites wanted more power for themselves. But come on. People like Christmas.
Erm, no. The USSR failed for many reasons, predominantly economic. When you're creating economic plans based on production figures that lower level officials are submitting based on what they think you want, you have a disaster in the making. Especially when corruption then rears its ugly head. And the USSR had its own version of Father Christmas - Grandfather Frost if I recall correctly.
Your very reference of 'the rich 1%' proves it wasn't actually a communist system. There is, definitionally, no rich/elite class in an actual communist system. So everyone is forming their opinions on communism based on non-communist systems, which doesn't make any sense.
guillotines
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: TheJourney
Question: Human nature being what it is, how do you propose people achieve a "true" communist system?
Please enlighten us.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: TheJourney
Question: Human nature being what it is, how do you propose people achieve a "true" communist system?
Please enlighten us.