Biblical Christianity is not socialist ...

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan

Yes, taxes are a form of theft.

Or enforced charity, perspectives?

"Charity by force" ceases to be charity by definition.



If that's the fiction you need to tell yourself to feel better about having something stolen from you by force, then so be it, but I don't kid myself with what it actually is.

Let's get real. Those burglars climbing into the window by night to take your stuff are also performing "charity by force" too. They're taking what you have that they don't and think they need.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan
a reply to: incoserv

Didn't say I was not interested in debating it, just not here. Heading off what is known as thread drift. If you want to start a thread on those topics, I'll chime in and I promise not to bring anything regarding the ramifications of Christian ethics and morality on economic policy into your thread. Howzat?

just mentioning it, because you put arguments supporting your view, in your disclaimer asking people not to discuss this. Some people will debate you on that, and i think that is fair. Lets get back to topic.


Thanks for understanding. I would be happy to discuss those issues in another thread.

And you comment about how capitalist countries like the US have, likewise, been implicit in much death and destruction goes to bolster my argument: No system is perfect, but capitalism is the one that allows most liberty to the individual.

Like i said, i agree that no current systems are perfect. But i dissagree that capitalism is the best we got. Any system build to capitalize on the weak, is a bad system if you ask me. We do need some kind of free market though, just one that is fair for everybody.

Then, I'm interested in knowing what, in your opinion, would be the better system. Seriously. This why I started this thread, to hear other perspectives.

The message of the biblical narrative, as I see it, is one of liberty. Every man is free to do as he sees fit, even when it harms others. The reality, though, is that in the end, there will be a comeuppance. Justice will be served and it will not be escapable. This is what pisses people off when one speaks of sin and judgment. It is a harsh reality and nobody wants to face it.

I dont know about that. So we are "free" to do whatever we want, but if dont do exactly what we are told, we gonna burn in eternity in hell? Doesnt sound like "free will" to me.

I disagree there. We are given a standard by which to conduct ourselves, and there are consequences to not following that standard. This is true in every facet of life, is it not? Whether in regards to civil law, moral law, relationships, there are always consequences to whatever we choose to do, be those consequences good or bad.

You cannot act without resulting consequences, whether it's choosing whether or not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, whether or not to steal money from your employer, whether or not cheat on your spouse. We are all free to do as we wish, but we are never free from the consequences.

If I choose not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, I enjoy the consequence of better health. If I choose not to steal from my employer, I don't have to worry about being caught and the legal consequences. If I choose to not cheat on my spouse, the moral and relationship issues are of no concern. If I choose to do any of those things, I am free to do them, but I must realize that I cannot escape the consequences.

What is what you are talking about any different?

originally posted by: underwerks
Given today's political climate, Biblical Christianity is socialist. Loving immigrants like your neighbor, empathy and concern for your fellow man. Putting the well being of people over material objects like money.

Which of those are right wing values? I don't remember "Screw you I got mine" being in the bible.

What I'm saying is that socialism per se institutionalizes those things and forces them to be done. Christianity first, as someon else said earlier in this thread, addresses the heart of mankind, then care for the neighbor comes out of that spiritual change of heart. It's not coerced, it's not government mandated.

Please read my two original posts.

a reply to: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan

Like i said, i agree that no current systems are perfect. But i dissagree that capitalism is the best we got. Any system build to capitalize on the weak, is a bad system if you ask me. We do need some kind of free market though, just one that is fair for everybody.

This is something I have been seeking for in all sense of philosophy. Every great thinker has attempted to make such a statement wrong. How can you take a system as productive as capitalism and make it 'fair' for the everyday person.
Regarding the original initial two posts in this discussion the maker of this thread mentions Marx, probably the biggest, and most well known critic of the capitalist system even praises capitalism as humanities greatest achievement for social structure in human civilization.

There seems to be a consistent question of how to make sense of what is 'fair' within the human species. I think the answer is actually written' within ourselves as a collective, the technology we advance will unfold the truth.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

This is why Antifa behaves Satanic. They are

I don't know that I'd say that socialism is Satanism. It's actually humanism. In the end, both reject the sovereignty of God and usurp his authority in an attempt to "fix" things. As the cover of Jethro Tull's album Aqualung said, "In the beginning, man created god in his own image.".

Socialism is a usurpation of the divine order. That never works.

I"m enjoying this discussion and appreciate the thoughtful input. Even (especially) from people who may not agree with me. I have a commitment to attend to, but I'll try to check back here later.

Again, thanks. This quality of discussion is, IMO, what ATS is about.

originally posted by: underwerks
Given today's political climate, Biblical Christianity is socialist. Loving immigrants like your neighbor, empathy and concern for your fellow man. Putting the well being of people over material objects like money.

Which of those are right wing values? I don't remember "Screw you I got mine" being in the bible.

Romans 13:1

It was quoted above you. Did those "immigrants" you talk about show that respect for our governing authorities here in the States or did they flagrantly break our laws expecting us to simply give them everything?

A true Christian has God's law written on his or her heart and would know Romans 13:1 as part of loving his or her neighbor and respecting their ways and laws instead of simply barging in and demanding everything be given.

Most legal immigrants show that respect and they're given respect in turn. The ones who try to break in and demand all things be given to them? They're the ones shown the door.

a reply to: incoserv

I would say that I agree that socialism is Satanist in the sense that it is man's effort to perfect humanity on his own. Perhaps anti-God or Anti-Christ would be a better way to put it. You might even make the argument that when the final Beast System rises - no buying or selling without the Mark and all that (it sounds very economic in the end among other things) - we're looking at a centralized command economy system, whether socialist, fascist, or communist in nature.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

This is why Antifa behaves Satanic. They are

So is capitalism...

He who does not work shall not eat......

Im a Centrist, but I see the Republicans value God given rights, and also the right to life. In the temple of Diana, the priestesses were prostitutes. They kept aborted babies in clay jars.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

This is why Antifa behaves Satanic. They are

I don’t think we can call socialism satanism, that’s a bit unfair.
Socialism is not worshipping government, it’s a system based on common wealth and sharing

Socialism in and of itself is not evil, the problem with any system is malevolence.
Put a human in charge of the perfect system and they will corrupt it

Christianity is a faith made to adapt to any society, within and also without, showing compassion and charity to those with less. Obviously not exposing oneself to destitution

I don’t think Christianity is a political ideology, don’t think Jesus ever expected to change the world, think He wanted to change individual hearts. We start with ourselves and love others

But as for the OPs comments, I agree, the bible is not a socialist manifesto

Societies that practice the morals of Christianity prosper. As they turn away from God, they falter and fall. They lose all freedom

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

This is why Antifa behaves Satanic. They are

I don't know that I'd say that socialism is Satanism. It's actually humanism. In the end, both reject the sovereignty of God and usurp his authority in an attempt to "fix" things. As the cover of Jethro Tull's album Aqualung said, "In the beginning, man created god in his own image.".

Socialism is a usurpation of the divine order. That never works.

Humanism is a form of Satanism.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
He who does not work shall not eat......

That is a critical part of this discussion, IMO. Christianity is merciful and generous at its core, but biblically it acknowledges that people are inherently lazy and shiftless (i.e., depraved in theological terminology). It acknowledges that many (not all) will take advantage of the kindness of others. This is a universal truth. People steal. People allow others to carry their load.

One of the passages that I noted in my original posts says that if a member of the church does not provide for his own, he is worse than an unbeliever. This is a judgment applied not to the world outside of the church, but to those within.

I Timothy 5:9, “But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

Along with the mandate to the church to provide for those truly in need is the mandate to be as productive as we can be. Jesus admonition to give to those who ask does not include supporting a person's drug habit or laziness. I have refused people who have asked for a handout. Often, I'll attach some small act to my offer to measure how serious they are. (Example: A guy once approached me saying that his truck was out of gas and he needed a couple of gallons to get to his next job in a town about thirty miles down the road, could I give him some cash. Said his truck was down the road, near a gas station. I offered to walk down there with him and buy his gasoline. He said thanks, he's see me down there in half and hour. Mmm-hmm...)

There's nothing that says we should support or encourage behavior that is unbiblical, immoral or unproductive.

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

This is why Antifa behaves Satanic. They are

I don't know that I'd say that socialism is Satanism. It's actually humanism. In the end, both reject the sovereignty of God and usurp his authority in an attempt to "fix" things. As the cover of Jethro Tull's album Aqualung said, "In the beginning, man created god in his own image.".

Socialism is a usurpation of the divine order. That never works.

Humanism is a form of Satanism.

Ultimately, yes. But there is a difference.

An old preacher i used to know told a story about a lady in his church who was worried about a bar opening up in their small town. She said she was praying against it and rebuking the devil. The old preacher told her she wasn't going to accomplish much rebuking the devil, that human nature was plenty corrupt without the devil's input. I add to that (tongue-in-cheek), that the poor ol' devil gets the blame for a lot of stuff he's not responsible for; fallen human nature can do plenty of harm without his help.

a reply to: visitedbythem

I think there is also a clear difference between does not or will not work and cannot work too.

It's one thing when we support those who clearly cannot do for themselves, and quite another when someone games the system because they won't do for themselves.

a reply to: incoserv

Then, I'm interested in knowing what, in your opinion, would be the better system. Seriously. This why I started this thread, to hear other perspectives.

I dont know, maybe i should have just said that the system is not perfect. The problem is, it is NOT a free market. It is owned and controlled allready, by all the big players.
Money is a scam, and is only meant to control us.

I have seen some alternatives to a free market explained on youtube, but cant find the videos right now. But you should check this guy out Man Against The State for other perspectives.

I disagree there. We are given a standard by which to conduct ourselves, and there are consequences to not following that standard. This is true in every facet of life, is it not? Whether in regards to civil law, moral law, relationships, there are always consequences to whatever we choose to do, be those consequences good or bad. You cannot act without resulting consequences, whether it's choosing whether or not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, whether or not to steal money from your employer, whether or not cheat on your spouse. We are all free to do as we wish, but we are never free from the consequences. If I choose not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, I enjoy the consequence of better health. If I choose not to steal from my employer, I don't have to worry about being caught and the legal consequences. If I choose to not cheat on my spouse, the moral and relationship issues are of no concern. If I choose to do any of those things, I am free to do them, but I must realize that I cannot escape the consequences. What is what you are talking about any different?

Ying and Yang
I do agree, every action has an reaction.
But there is a difference. When i make an action, to lets say shoot a loaded gun directly into my brain. the consequence will be i die!!! according to the bible, i will then also go to hell, even though i allready faced the consequences of my actions. It was my free choise, to face the consequences of my actions, then some dictator chooses to punish me further. So to me that is not freedom.
To me, what heaven and hell is all about, is in this life. With my actions i create heaven or hell around me. I like heaven, so i try to behave in what we call "good" manners. Not because of fear of God, but because i dont want to live in hell.
I dont care what people believe or doesnt believe. I dont like organized religion, cause it seems like the people in power, only want to enslave people with their religion. All these religions, with all the big ones believing in the same God, are the source of endless wars and killing of people - Was all that part of Gods big plan?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: visitedbythem

I think there is also a clear difference between does not or will not work and cannot work too.

It's one thing when we support those who clearly cannot do for themselves, and quite another when someone games the system because they won't do for themselves.

BIG DIFFERENCE!!!!!

I refer back to a couple of my previous posts. The biblical mandate is to care for those truly in need, but we are also told that if one does not work (if he is able, obviously), he should not eat. And if one does not provide for his on family, he is to be considered "worse than an unbeliever."

He who does not work shall not eat...... Im a Centrist, but I see the Republicans value God given rights, and also the right to life. In the temple of Diana, the priestesses were prostitutes. They kept aborted babies in clay jars.

a reply to: visitedbythem

I do agree with you, in what youre saying here. But doesnt socialist or communist people work?
Every system have people working for their money, only difference is who is taking the money from you. Is it goverment, dictators or companies? And does it really matters who are taking them?
The standard of living is just as high as the capitalist USA, if not even better in the "socialist" scandinavien countries like Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

I got one even better than yours:
He who does the work, doesnt earn the money...

This is true for all the forms of goverment/systems, am i wrong?

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan
a reply to: incoserv

Then, I'm interested in knowing what, in your opinion, would be the better system. Seriously. This why I started this thread, to hear other perspectives.

I dont know, maybe i should have just said that the system is not perfect. The problem is, it is NOT a free market. It is owned and controlled allready, by all the big players.
Money is a scam, and is only meant to control us.

I have seen some alternatives to a free market explained on youtube, but cant find the videos right now. But you should check this guy out Man Against The State for other perspectives.

I disagree there. We are given a standard by which to conduct ourselves, and there are consequences to not following that standard. This is true in every facet of life, is it not? Whether in regards to civil law, moral law, relationships, there are always consequences to whatever we choose to do, be those consequences good or bad. You cannot act without resulting consequences, whether it's choosing whether or not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, whether or not to steal money from your employer, whether or not cheat on your spouse. We are all free to do as we wish, but we are never free from the consequences. If I choose not to have that double cheeseburger, large fries and milkshake, I enjoy the consequence of better health. If I choose not to steal from my employer, I don't have to worry about being caught and the legal consequences. If I choose to not cheat on my spouse, the moral and relationship issues are of no concern. If I choose to do any of those things, I am free to do them, but I must realize that I cannot escape the consequences. What is what you are talking about any different?

Ying and Yang

I do agree, every action has an reaction.
But there is a difference. When i make an action, to lets say shoot a loaded gun directly into my brain. the consequence will be i die!!! according to the bible, i will then also go to hell, even though i allready faced the consequences of my actions. It was my free choise, to face the consequences of my actions, then some dictator chooses to punish me further. So to me that is not freedom.
To me, what heaven and hell is all about, is in this life. With my actions i create heaven or hell around me. I like heaven, so i try to behave in what we call "good" manners. Not because of fear of God, but because i dont want to live in hell.
I dont care what people believe or doesnt believe. I dont like organized religion, cause it seems like the people in power, only want to enslave people with their religion. All these religions, with all the big ones believing in the same God, are the source of endless wars and killing of people - Was all that part of Gods big plan?

1. Well, to paraphrase Churchill as I did in my OP, it's the worst system there is ... except for all the others. In its rawest and purest form, it is good. Again, it's rotten human nature that screws it up.

As a CS Lewis quote earlier in this thread mentioned ...

There is a portion of C.S.Lewis's Mere Christianity where he talks about it, and he says that a perfectly Christian world might look similar to what socialists think the world would be, but it wouldn't be socialist. The reason for that is that everyone would be sewing, growing, prospering on their own in their own fields, so to speak, but at the same time, no one would stint at generously helping their neighbors in times of need with the extra they had to give. And since no one would think to take advantage of that aid which would always be there from their neighbors, everyone would be constantly striving to work back into their own prosperity so that when the time came, they'd be able to help in their turn as needed.

That is what I call morally centered, altruistic capitalism. Everyone has an internal incentive to work, to produce as best he can and to share with others. The motivation is not because the state or the church says so, but because I know that it is best for myself and everyone else.

2. I don't know about the shooting yourself meaning you'll go straight to hell. I don't see the Bible as being clear on that. At any rate ...

I have a different take on hell. I suspect that the fire and worms are more metaphorical than literal. Here's what I think the fire that's never quenched and and worms that never die are.

We spend our entire life in this realm, on this earth, developing appetites, desires, loves or lusts that become the core of who we are. Now, there are essentially two kinds of desire: the desire that is earthly in nature, carnal and rooted in this world, and the desire that is heavenly in nature, spiritual and rooted in the world to come.

Preoccupation with sexual gratification, greed and covetousness (money, riches), power, bodily delights are all rooted in this world and achieve gratification by means of the use of the physical body and the material objects of this realm.

Truly spiritual and eternal ends, though, are beyond this realm. Things like love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control, things against which there is no law, emanate from the Spirit and from the spiritual realm.

Now, if we spend our life gratifying ourselves in the former set of pleasures (and they are undeniably pleasurable for a while), then "When we have shuffled off this mortal coil," we lose our connection to everything that has gratified us for the entire time of our existence. What if that fire that burns without quenching and those worms that never die are the lusts, the desires, the fires of want that we have stoked all of our life but now cannot satisfy because the source of those desires and the took for engaging them (the physical body) are no longer available?

Maybe sex was my thing, but now I cannot engage in sexual gratification. My eternal soul burns for it, the worms of desire eat at me without ceasing, but I can do nothing about it. Or power, or food, or whatever it was that my life was about.

If I have spent my time here on earth developing an affinity for things like love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control, then when I "shuffle off this mortal coil," I find that the spiritual things that I fed myself on are still a part of the landscape of my existence.

Just a thought. But I personally believe that this is what hell is about. The fires and the worms come from within.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan

He who does not work shall not eat...... Im a Centrist, but I see the Republicans value God given rights, and also the right to life. In the temple of Diana, the priestesses were prostitutes. They kept aborted babies in clay jars.

a reply to: visitedbythem

I do agree with you, in what youre saying here. But doesnt socialist or communist people work?
Every system have people working for their money, only difference is who is taking the money from you. Is it goverment, dictators or companies? And does it really matters who are taking them?
The standard of living is just as high as the capitalist USA, if not even better in the "socialist" scandinavien countries like Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

I got one even better than yours:
He who does the work, doesnt earn the money...

This is true for all the forms of goverment/systems, am i wrong?

In theory it is true. In practice, it didn't work out that way. Here's how it worked out.

I work. I like to work because I want to enjoy the benefit of my labor. I bust my ass to produce.

The guy next to me is a lazy slug. He doesn't do squat, just watches me work.

At the end of the day, we are expected to share the fruit of our labors ... because socialism. I see him partaking of the fruit of my hard work while he's done little to nothing to earn what I earned. I have to share the fruit of my sweat with him.

I decide, if that slug can get by without doing anything, why should I bust my ass to to support his laziness. I'll do just what I need to get by.

This little parable is a good example of what I'm talking about. And, no, I don't think it's a true story (said "parable"), but it makes the point well.

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich; a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class socialism”. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little. The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the third test rolled around, the average was an F. As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, all failed and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed. It could not be any simpler than that.

This is the way it ultimately works out. I lived in a post-Soviet country and saw this very attitude. Took years to readjust.

When we were moving in, we wanted lunch one day and, as we were working on our apartment and were not set up to cook yet, we went down to a restaurant around noon for lunch. The restaurant was empty as we walked in, a lone person sitting at the back. I told them we wanted to eat and they said that everyone was gone and restaurant was closed as it was lunch time. True story!

There was no incentive to serve.