PDA

View Full Version : Reminder of the Evils of Communism!


KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-09-2009, 11:23 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyUu-8nbd58

rockdawg21
03-09-2009, 11:46 PM
I thought it was going to be a picture of this:

http://i149.photobucket.com/albums/s78/rockdawg21/socialists.jpg

Jonlion
03-10-2009, 12:54 AM
What a brilliant song in the background!

Didnt watch it all but the thing is i dont believe in a communist society but i think Marx had some good ideas. Its a shame that peope betray the ideal. Plus most lefties are insufferable fools.

The only thing is that, it makes comments over Stalin killing millions and he was a brutal man but Russia had a history for this. Was Stalin any worse than the Tsarist regimes?

Or without aggresive Russian industrialisartion spearheaded by Stalin needed to beat back the Nazi regime.

ITs difficult but there is more to it, in my view

J.B.
03-10-2009, 01:12 AM
A quote I always liked is...

"the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money"

Jonlion
03-10-2009, 01:14 AM
A quote I always liked is...

"the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money"

:laugh:

Tyburn
03-10-2009, 01:44 AM
A quote I always liked is...

"the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other peoples money"
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

aint that the truth

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-10-2009, 01:45 AM
The whole concept behind Communism is that ALL property belongs to the government to distribute as they see fit! It don't matter who worked for it of who earned it it still belongs to the Government! In Communism the Government controls everything! Communism does not recognize any God given rights. Only Government given rights to be taken away at the whim of the Government. And that my friends is a brief and simple summery of Communism!

Tyburn
03-10-2009, 02:15 AM
And that my friends is a brief and simple summery of Communism!
No my friend, that is not.

Communism is an ideal of fairness to all through equality of wealth. In the eyes of a communist what is grossly unfair is the division between rich and poor.

Communism also take a utilitarian approach to ethics. The Government look out for the people, and they work under the mantra "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" Therefore when thinking about liberty and basic rights, the level of freedom and equality is not given on an individual level, that is selfish. Rather it is a team effort. So if a few individuals need sacrificing to ensure the good and wellbeing of the rest communism supports that. The whole is more important then a sum of its parts.

Now on a small scale Communism works exceptionally well. It prevents feudalism. But the group needs to be less then a couple of hundred to make the system work. What you see in communist countries is categorically NOT Communism, but a failed version of it that has been corrupted by a State. Sadly the corruption comes when Wealth is kept and stored rather then fully distributed, creating a system of slavery over the masses, rather then the masses freed from want.

Thats not any more Karl Marx fault, then Einstein being blamed for what happened in Hiroshima, or Nietzsche being blamed for the Aryan Ubermensch concept. The creators arent always involved in the future use of their ideals.

I have to say that Utilitarianism, the basis for the morals that guide Communism are things that we look up to also. Think about an Army Officer who is killed whilst defending his Team? What he has done is decide that the good of the team goes before his own personal good. If he is called upon to sacrifice himself for the team, then he will do that. You and I both look on that as a noble principle.

In the same way you see this reflected in the world around us. In the Amazon every year the river bursts its banks and floods major parts of the forrest floor. This proves to be a difficulty to certain types of Ants who nest on the floor, for they are in grave danger of drowning. The ants prepare for this by assembling enmass one atop the other in a huge square, in the middle of that square they bundle their queen. When the water comes the living raft of ants floats on the serface.

This living raft is attacked by sea and air. Fish from below begin to pick off and eat the ants on the bottom part of the ramp, birds take those ants on top. The ideal is that they float until they hit something that hasnt been submerged, then they try and nest as best they can.

They live as a team, they die for their team. The team, the whole, the collective is more important then their individuality. They are Communist. :mellow:

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-10-2009, 08:19 AM
Maybe you should read the Communist manifesto and give real thought to what it means to own nothing. Most every Communist Country has set the Government up as God! God gave individuals basic human rights. As for equal distribution of wealth it may sound good in theory but it don't work in practise. Under Communism you are not rewarded based up on your work. But what the ruling class thinks you need. When the state owns everything everybody but the state suffers! I know it's trendy nowadays (especially in some left wing college circles) to think that Communism is a Noble concept but it ain't. As for that Army story you told. Big difference! The Soldier that is that dedicated is probably serving of his own free will and decides for himself to make the sacrifice. That most definitely ain't communism!

Tyburn
03-10-2009, 01:04 PM
Maybe you should read the Communist manifesto and give real thought to what it means to own nothing. Most every Communist Country has set the Government up as God! God gave individuals basic human rights. As for equal distribution of wealth it may sound good in theory but it don't work in practise. Under Communism you are not rewarded based up on your work. But what the ruling class thinks you need. When the state owns everything everybody but the state suffers! I know it's trendy nowadays (especially in some left wing college circles) to think that Communism is a Noble concept but it ain't. As for that Army story you told. Big difference! The Soldier that is that dedicated is probably serving of his own free will and decides for himself to make the sacrifice. That most definitely ain't communism!

I have read it. I did a module of Political Philosophy, Political Evolution and Ethics.

In a small group the division of wealth CAN wrok. On a Kabbutz, in a Monastic (religious) foundation it works perfectly...have you never read the Book of Acts? That ran on a kabbutz style for quite a while by the sound of it? What did Saint Peter do to the guy who refused, or held back some of his wealth from the collective?

Lets not mix up Communism and Utilitarianism shall we. I demonstrated them together to show you how close proper Communistic principles are. See true Communists follow the rule of their own free will, they are not forced.

If you could get Communism to work properly under a large scale then I'm sorry to tell you that, the ideal, the concept is quite noble. Its just that it doesnt translate well in large country sized groups because it doesnt take into consideration the individual...and it certainly doesnt consider selfishness or greed

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-10-2009, 07:43 PM
So you think doing away with ALL private property is Noble? To have everything controlled by a select few is Noble? No thanks! Most Folk's work harder and better when they get to choose how their money is used. The only one that can have the kind of power Communism gives to the ruling class without being corrupted is the Good Lord his self! As for the book of Acts I don't recall any Communism in it! I'm assuming your talking about the King James Bible?


By the way I ain't against safety nets for those that are truly in need but I am against Government seizure of ALL private property!

NateR
03-10-2009, 09:00 PM
If you read the Old Testament, the bible is very clearly on the side of respecting private property. GOD knew that if the Jews felt a sense of personal ownership in the land of Israel, that they would care for it much better and protect it more vigilantly, than if it was just all community property.

Just look at public parks and public roads, nobody cares about them because nobody really owns them. If people have no sense of ownership, then there is no reason to take care of property.

Tyburn
03-10-2009, 11:00 PM
So you think doing away with ALL private property is Noble? To have everything controlled by a select few is Noble? No thanks! Most Folk's work harder and better when they get to choose how their money is used. The only one that can have the kind of power Communism gives to the ruling class without being corrupted is the Good Lord his self! As for the book of Acts I don't recall any Communism in it! I'm assuming your talking about the King James Bible?


By the way I ain't against safety nets for those that are truly in need but I am against Government seizure of ALL private property!
Do you ever LISTEN to what I say?

Did I not tell you that on a country size Communism as a political system doesnt work?

but in a Kabbutz it does just fine...and YES in a Monastic Foundation what do you think the Monks and Nuns "owned" ???? The land belonged to the Church, the provisions were provided for by the Church...and if you want to enter a true monastic foundation now you have to GIVE AWAY your WORLDLY goods!!

Find it hard to depend on GOD alone for your needs? (remember, I've had a few years experience of living in a Religious Community, not under any Shared wealth though...but I understand the concept having worked alongside Nuns who DO!

This has nothing to do with inequality or poverty. You dont care about the poverty and distruction and slavery. what YOU care about is the Government. The Americans are all frightened that if they give their Government any power at all it will abuse the position. Maybe they are right, but unlike most of the rest of the world they've never experienced it...and...whilst we're at it, lets not also forget the selfishness involved

Its not like your worry is for other countries under communism...its purely a worry for YOURSELF against YOUR government. So long as your Government leaves you to anarchy on the whole you dont mind. Infact, you probably hate your government right now for bailing out banks and stuff. Which just goes to show how introspective this is for you. Whilst you americans were trying to stall your Government...you pushed major parts of Europe into Nationaliszation on a financial front. Congratulations for just CAUSING Other Governments to enslave their peoples out of neccessety becuase of your Greedy and selfish Civilians who caused this problem in the first place!!!

I try to be reasonable. I try to show you the TRUTH, but you dont want to see. You care about yourself, and thats the basis of it. So long as you are free. So long as you are safe from your Government...so individualistic, no wonder you have trouble thinking of a system which puts the collective above the individuals, and an ethical system which looks after the MAJORITY rather then the minority...your to frightened of being in that minority...and for the first time some of you guys are feeling it with the rise of Obama...finally you are learning that in a Democratic state, republic or not, a MAJORITY wins...if you are not that majority you LOSE.

Welcome to the real world.

I'd like you to tell me about Saint Stephen in the new testament...I'd like for you to tell me what his role was? what his specific function was. I'd like for you to explain how that was the start of the end of the Pauline Kabbutz and the SPECIFIC reason the Apostles ended their Kabbutz...youll be horrified at that as I was.

Tyburn
03-10-2009, 11:03 PM
If you read the Old Testament, the bible is very clearly on the side of respecting private property. GOD knew that if the Jews felt a sense of personal ownership in the land of Israel, that they would care for it much better and protect it more vigilantly, than if it was just all community property.

Just look at public parks and public roads, nobody cares about them because nobody really owns them. If people have no sense of ownership, then there is no reason to take care of property.
Ownership?

The book of Acts CLEARLY shows a Kabbutz..a SHARED wealth and belongings and COLLECTIVE responsibility.

You've been in the Army, dont tell me you dont understand the principles of Sacrifice and COLLECTIVE Team ownership, responsibility. Dont tell me that you dont know what its like to have the State in someway provide for you enmass like they do in the Armed Forces. Did you "OWN" your barracks? could you bring every bit of property you wanted to "bootcamp" with you?

GOD even speaks of Israel as if to personify into a SINGLE entity, a MASS of people.

I know you understand what I'm saying. You might dissagree with me, but you can see what I'm saying. I'm not sure if KRB can understand me or really doesnt see what I'm talking about.

Jonlion
03-11-2009, 02:41 AM
I think Ronald Reagan got it spot on and this is my view on communism!

How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.

rockdawg21
03-11-2009, 02:42 AM
I think Ronald Reagan got it spot on and this is my view on communism!

How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.
Time to break into Obama's library.

NateR
03-11-2009, 05:03 AM
The book of Acts CLEARLY shows a Kabbutz..a SHARED wealth and belongings and COLLECTIVE responsibility.

Exactly which passage in Acts are you talking about?

NateR
03-11-2009, 05:05 AM
I think Ronald Reagan got it spot on and this is my view on communism!

How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin.

Nice! :cool:

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-11-2009, 08:38 AM
I'm gonna try to correct some of your mistakes here! First it ain't just me being selfish and greedy as you claim! I strongly believe that the Freedom and capitalism does more good for more people than any communist Government! As for us causing the rest of the world all them problems. Why ain't they calling the shots for their own Country? Americans tend to be a Generous people as long as you don't try a demand things from us! We like to help of our own free will. However we do NOT want to be ordered around like little Children! As for the Bank bailouts, YES I DO RESENT THAT! Let them take some responsibility for their own screw ups. I can sympathize with Folks who lost a job through no fault of their own but it ain't our job to bail out Folks that don't know how to run a business. Now onto the selfish Freedom thing! Of course we expect freedom! Our Ancestors faught a war for it! I also believe that without our help the rest of the world would have lost to Hitler. As for the Monks. As long as they are there of their own free will, knew and accepted the rules going in. Then that's their choice not mine! If you think Communism is such a Noble concept I won't stop you from going where ever it is you need to in order to live under it. Before you go however you can post chapter and verse on where exactly in the Bible it endorses Communism cause I sure don't remember reading it. In fact Folk's in the Bible did own property. At least some did! You see here in America the way it was originally set up the Governments job was to protect the Peoples Freedom, not take it from them. In fact our founders believed that our rights come not from the Government but from God! You have already admitted its a failure on a large scale so it boggles the mind that you still think its a Noble thing!

Jonlion
03-11-2009, 01:58 PM
I'm gonna try to correct some of your mistakes here! First it ain't just me being selfish and greedy as you claim! I strongly believe that the Freedom and capitalism does more good for more people than any communist Government! As for us causing the rest of the world all them problems. Why ain't they calling the shots for their own Country? Americans tend to be a Generous people as long as you don't try a demand things from us! We like to help of our own free will. However we do NOT want to be ordered around like little Children! As for the Bank bailouts, YES I DO RESENT THAT! Let them take some responsibility for their own screw ups. I can sympathize with Folks who lost a job through no fault of their own but it ain't our job to bail out Folks that don't know how to run a business. Now onto the selfish Freedom thing! Of course we expect freedom! Our Ancestors faught a war for it! I also believe that without our help the rest of the world would have lost to Hitler. As for the Monks. As long as they are there of their own free will, knew and accepted the rules going in. Then that's their choice not mine! If you think Communism is such a Noble concept I won't stop you from going where ever it is you need to in order to live under it. Before you go however you can post chapter and verse on where exactly in the Bible it endorses Communism cause I sure don't remember reading it. In fact Folk's in the Bible did own property. At least some did! You see here in America the way it was originally set up the Governments job was to protect the Peoples Freedom, not take it from them. In fact our founders believed that our rights come not from the Government but from God! You have already admitted its a failure on a large scale so it boggles the mind that you still think its a Noble thing!


1) No Taxation without representation!

2)Nazi Germnay may well of conquered the whole of mainlain Europe and maybe Russia if they weren't fighting on two fronts. However i wouldn't of bet against the Red Machine turning the tide.

And one nation stands alone, You will know of the Battle of Britain, you will know that British pilots, heroes flew in the skies and repelled Germany's offensive to invade this beloved Isle. Nay, this nation has only been truly conquered once by them warlike Normans and they were a fine race!

However the point being Nazi Germany was beaten and givena bloody nose by us Brits, i contest that we would not have been conquered, the fact is, we went and that cannot be denied.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsKDGM5KTBY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkTw3_PmKtc&feature=related

I ask you to listen for two minutes! The sacrifice we as a nation made was great to fight this tyranny and i maintain that we always would have.

However, the American entry into the war of course turned things in Europe and helped immensely in the war being won. However we all bled together to fight that evil and it was not communism but fascism.

And i promise that this year i am going to the fields in Belgium,Flanders, Yrpes and elsewhere to see and pay my respects for all the Allied forces that fought in the great wars. I have to do that this year i feel and i will thank and appreciate the sacrifice made by so many young men.

3) i personally with my limited knowledge think Communism is brilliant, in its principle, in what it means, it sounds superb but like many things in principle it sounds great, the reality of it, is just not viable and it would never work without comprimising its truths. Which means that i dont believe in it.

I am a capitalist baby, it is all i know and i guess i would say that this is he form of soceity i believe in, but i think there are many flaws also and that it indeed needs soe work!

Neezar
03-11-2009, 02:10 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsKDGM5KTBY&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkTw3_PmKtc&feature=related

I ask you to listen for two minutes! The sacrifice we as a nation made was great to fight this tyranny and i maintain that we always would have.



I listened and enjoyed. Thanks, Jon. :cool:



The actual quote that winston said about being drunk was to his maid, Bessie Braddock
Bessie: Winston your drunk
Winston: Bessie, i may be drunk but your ugly, in the morning I shall be sober.



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 02:53 PM
Exactly which passage in Acts are you talking about?
The one where Saint Peter kills one of the Community Members who has not given all his wealth and/or land and surrendered it to the Apostles.

The Apostles gave up on the Commune by the sounds of it after the Martyrdom of Saint Stephen. If you recall the problem was that the Jewish Community who accepted Christ had began to come into conflict with the converts to Messianic Judaism. They were Greeks in a foreign land with no wealth and no home. Supporting them became such a task that the Apostles felt it distracted them from their mission and they set up a body, a council, for distribution and looking after the Community, of which several members were brought in to represent the Hellenistic converts.

After Stephen was killed, it sounds like the Apostles changed tactics. They left the nest and began plantations around Missionary Circuits. At that point its probably safe to say that the Communistic era of the Early Church ended..we know this because we know that when they set up these new Churches they DID NOT set them up like the original Pentecost.

The originals had no priests and worshiped DIRECTLY alongside the Jews. But the Jew tollerated them less and less, Saint Stephen was one case, but even later Saint Paul discovered that the two faiths couldnt opperate from the same base. Christ changed everything. He designed the Pontifical Church, a structure which is NOT Communist, but Fuedal infact.

When the Commune Ended, the split between Jew and Christian was complete. Several centuries later the Roman Catholic Church would take up the Pontifical Structure outlined by Saint Paul, but base it from Saint Peters domain in Rome. Constantine would try to move that Centre towards Saint Andrew and Saint Barnabus in the Eastern Orthodox Church, but the Empire fragmented and the Byzantium Empire split the Roman Church in two, the West remained Roman Catholic, the East was like Roman Catholic stuck in suspended animation. Want to look at what the Catholics were...look at the Orthodox Church, its like a snapshot of 5th Century Rome that never progressed.

Meanwhile in Israel and in France and other places dotted around the globe the Communistic Structure of living in a community, known as a Monastic Foundation, continued right up until the Reformation. Within the walls of the Foundations, Monks and Nuns lived solitary lives of contemplation and prayer, producing the great mystic christian tradition. Living a shared life of work, worship, study..and giving up their assets to the church and to the world.

When Henry split with Rome, he burned and smashed and distroyed the Foundations. as Protestism spread through northern Europe, less people joined the Continental Foundations...they litterally dried up and died out. So sad.

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 03:24 PM
1)I'm gonna try to correct some of your mistakes here! First it ain't just me being selfish and greedy as you claim! I strongly believe that the Freedom and capitalism does more good for more people than any communist Government!

2) As for us causing the rest of the world all them problems. Why ain't they calling the shots for their own Country? Americans tend to be a Generous people as long as you don't try a demand things from us! We like to help of our own free will.

3) However we do NOT want to be ordered around like little Children!

4) As for the Bank bailouts, YES I DO RESENT THAT! Let them take some responsibility for their own screw ups. I can sympathize with Folks who lost a job through no fault of their own but it ain't our job to bail out Folks that don't know how to run a business.

5) Now onto the selfish Freedom thing! Of course we expect freedom! Our Ancestors faught a war for it!

6)I also believe that without our help the rest of the world would have lost to Hitler.

7)As for the Monks. As long as they are there of their own free will, knew and accepted the rules going in. Then that's their choice not mine! If you think Communism is such a Noble concept I won't stop you from going where ever it is you need to in order to live under it. Before you go however you can post chapter and verse on where exactly in the Bible it endorses Communism cause I sure don't remember reading it. In fact Folk's in the Bible did own property. At least some did!

8)You see here in America the way it was originally set up the Governments job was to protect the Peoples Freedom, not take it from them. In fact our founders believed that our rights come not from the Government but from God!

10) You have already admitted its a failure on a large scale so it boggles the mind that you still think its a Noble thing!
1) who said anything about communism in government. I already told you on a large scale it doesnt work

2) Well thats because of your issolationistic views. You know, when your country didnt want to fight for the freedom of others, but wanted to burry its head in the sand. Consequently when you joined the war, you were the only country with any money left to rebuild once the war was won. The rest of us had to sacrifice our wealth so that you could be the super-power you have become.

Your now the base-trade of the world.

3)but you are little Children. You have a country of less then 500 years History, you've never faced half the fears your so frightened of. You ignore those countries who have lived for thousands of years, who know a tiny bit more then you from direct experience.

You speak of freedom, but your country has never know serious bondage. You act as if your Empire is the worlds liberator and your the only country to have done that. There is no shame in learning from older countries.

4) so to teach a bank owner (who didnt actually cause the entire issue) a lesson, you would sacrifice the rest of the world to nationalization? All to get back at a few bankers who arent going to learn from their mistakes anyway, but if worst comes to worst leave the working world with their millions. Meanwhile you preach about liberation, freedom, and being unselfish and a staunch hater of communism...? Your vendetta against the banks would have cost you a world full of political enemies...is that a sensible trade??

5) Wrong. What most Americans expect is anarchy. Freedom is always within boundaries. In every Country Freedom is restricted by the Law...in America it is not complete freedom, but Freedom UNDER GOD.

6) maybe, maybe not. Your geographical situation saves you from a lot. I do believe that two things stopped the entire Asian, African, and European plane from being sucked under Hitler. One was Hitlers regime itself. Adolf was abandoned by the best minds in his military. He foolishly went after Russia when he shouldnt have done. Secondly, the extra reserves brought in by the United States were, or would have been needed eventually.

Once the rest of the world was under Hitler, the United States would have been next.

7) with all due respect, you dont seem to know the difference between Communism as an Ideal, and Communism as a political structure. The latter doesnt work, the former in small groups works and is noble, and you see it all around you.

8) No, your government is a slave to the whims of its people. It is expected to provide the bear basics, and act at the control of the mob. Ever heard the term "Rome is The Mob" the Senate in Rome where THE PEOPLE changed the course of the Government...they were a rabble of arguing citizens. Just look how your people cant make up their mind Invade Iraq, dont invade Iraq, avoid the United Nations, support the United Nations. Your Government isnt allowed to lead, its not even allowed to maintain knowledge on its people lest they think their Government is being too nosy! its like...they are a bloody Government...what do you expect? They need to excersie a certain amount of control....give them a break :laugh:

10) because the concept isnt quite the same as the practise. In a small group it works well. You see it everytime you partake in something which involves more then you, everytime you take one for the team, rather then yourself as an individual.

I'm sorry for shouting at you before. That was uncalled for :unsure-1:

NateR
03-11-2009, 04:38 PM
The one where Saint Peter kills one of the Community Members who has not given all his wealth and/or land and surrendered it to the Apostles.

The Apostles gave up on the Commune by the sounds of it after the Martyrdom of Saint Stephen. If you recall the problem was that the Jewish Community who accepted Christ had began to come into conflict with the converts to Messianic Judaism. They were Greeks in a foreign land with no wealth and no home. Supporting them became such a task that the Apostles felt it distracted them from their mission and they set up a body, a council, for distribution and looking after the Community, of which several members were brought in to represent the Hellenistic converts.

After Stephen was killed, it sounds like the Apostles changed tactics. They left the nest and began plantations around Missionary Circuits. At that point its probably safe to say that the Communistic era of the Early Church ended..we know this because we know that when they set up these new Churches they DID NOT set them up like the original Pentecost.

The originals had no priests and worshiped DIRECTLY alongside the Jews. But the Jew tollerated them less and less, Saint Stephen was one case, but even later Saint Paul discovered that the two faiths couldnt opperate from the same base. Christ changed everything. He designed the Pontifical Church, a structure which is NOT Communist, but Fuedal infact.

When the Commune Ended, the split between Jew and Christian was complete. Several centuries later the Roman Catholic Church would take up the Pontifical Structure outlined by Saint Paul, but base it from Saint Peters domain in Rome. Constantine would try to move that Centre towards Saint Andrew and Saint Barnabus in the Eastern Orthodox Church, but the Empire fragmented and the Byzantium Empire split the Roman Church in two, the West remained Roman Catholic, the East was like Roman Catholic stuck in suspended animation. Want to look at what the Catholics were...look at the Orthodox Church, its like a snapshot of 5th Century Rome that never progressed.

Meanwhile in Israel and in France and other places dotted around the globe the Communistic Structure of living in a community, known as a Monastic Foundation, continued right up until the Reformation. Within the walls of the Foundations, Monks and Nuns lived solitary lives of contemplation and prayer, producing the great mystic christian tradition. Living a shared life of work, worship, study..and giving up their assets to the church and to the world.

When Henry split with Rome, he burned and smashed and distroyed the Foundations. as Protestism spread through northern Europe, less people joined the Continental Foundations...they litterally dried up and died out. So sad.

That passage is not about Communism, Dave, it's about lying to the Holy Spirit. They tried to claim that they were giving all of the proceeds of the sale to the church, in order to gain prestige and notoriety among the church members, but they had actually held back some of the money for themselves. So they were punished for fraud. If they had just been truthful and said that they were keeping some of the money, then GOD would not have struck them dead.

There's absolutely nothing in the Bible that implies Communism.

Also the lifestyles of those monks and nuns was not a biblical one and just another example of Christian legalism. You can't be a light to the world if you shut yourself off from it.

Here's a question for you, what system of government with Jesus establish on the Earth during His 1,000 year reign?

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 05:14 PM
1)That passage is not about Communism, Dave, it's about lying to the Holy Spirit. They tried to claim that they were giving all of the proceeds of the sale to the church, in order to gain prestige and notoriety among the church members, but they had actually held back some of the money for themselves. So they were punished for fraud. If they had just been truthful and said that they were keeping some of the money, then GOD would not have struck them dead.

There's absolutely nothing in the Bible that implies Communism.

2) Also the lifestyles of those monks and nuns was not a biblical one and just another example of Christian legalism. You can't be a light to the world if you shut yourself off from it.

Here's a question for you, what system of government with Jesus establish on the Earth during His 1,000 year reign?
1) Nope. Its more complex then that. It certainly hints that all proceeds were to go to the church, and any keeping of material wealth to oneself, is morally wrong.

Sure they lied about some of their assets...but they would have been required to give all they had to the Apostles. That is why they lied. To stop everything going to the Apostolic Kabutz. They lied, the lie killed them, but the lie was avoiding the Communistic sharing of labour and wealth. Think about it Nathan. If all Creation is GODs, it all belongs to Him anyway...your freedoms, your possesions, your labours...they arent yours...you own nothing. "We brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. The Lord Gavest, The Lord Takest Away" Selfish, selfish, selfish...to think that what you have is truely yours. If it doesnt belong to you, what right do you have to complain if its taken, or must be given away?

Even Christ said to the Roman who condemned him, that No harm, nor anything can happen to Jesus, except on the authority of GOD. Pontius had no power of His own...GOD let him have the illusion of power, but Christ wasnt worried about his liberties or even life. He knew that GOD was in total control. GOD alone had the authority, Pontius was nothing but a pawn

2) Where do you think the idea of public schooling comes from? Again this is where you fall down because your country was so young it stole this section of devlopment from other cultures. It wasnt the Government that introduced Schooling and Education. It was the Monastic Foundation. The Universities, the Schools, the teaching of illiterate masses, was part of a service that the monks did with their local community (it was the study aspect) Another thing they did was develope the idea of a Health care service. The doctors of that epoch were again, the monks who were self trained and taught in herbalism and the likes.

When I said they lived solitary lives, what I meant was not that they hid in their foundations and never came out. The fact you question shows your complete and utter lack of knowledge. What I mean was, they set themselve apart from the community. They gave up their lives, worldly possessions and moved into the Church. The foundation looked after them, spreading whatever wealth they brought back. The Monks and Nuns worked in the community, but because they were not part of it, they had time to reflect and ceaselessly pray. Therefore they were the contemplatives, the mystics, a shared community life.

3) A monarchy of course. :) Like we have in the United Kingdom...like you Americans find very restricting. What will you all do when Christ TELLS you to do something, and takes away your "Rights" you have no rights under Him but what he gives you...thats what American culture fails to realize is written into its own legislature.

Your Forefathers knew. They knew what Freedom meant, and their freedom was under a supreme Monarch, a freedom which granted them, personally, NO Rights, but those that GOD gives.

Your culture has warped and twisted this. It thinks the "rights" were to stop governmental corruption. Not at all, the government never came into it. It was assumed a Christian Government would follow Christ. and "freedom" to do anything, which is not what the United States is all about, or at least not how it was conceived...what about the "one Nation" idiom...does that not implicate a team? a family? a shared and united existance of freedom under Christ?

The more you understand the more obvious it becomes that ideals, and politics are two separate things, and politics never fulfils the ideal. It cant. For whilst the ideals are good in the construct of Human thought...they get tarnished by sin when they are made manifest.

Its a fallen world. :sad:

NateR
03-11-2009, 06:08 PM
1) Nope. Its more complex then that. It certainly hints that all proceeds were to go to the church, and any keeping of material wealth to oneself, is morally wrong.

False.

Jonlion
03-11-2009, 06:25 PM
I listened and enjoyed. Thanks, Jon. :cool:





:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


I'm glad you liked them, the way he speaks really inspires! Its bizaare to think that what 50 years ago, people like us were expecting an invaision and preparing to defend their land.

It seems like time has changed so much but its scary to think how it all can escalate!

That quote is one of the funniest i have ever heard! A great reply to anyone who accuses you of being drunk!

Here is another one of his genius!

Lady Astor - "Winston, if you were my husband, i would flavour your coffee with poison"

Churchilll - "Madam, if i were your husband, i should drink it"


:laugh: :laugh:

NateR
03-11-2009, 06:32 PM
3) A monarchy of course. :) Like we have in the United Kingdom...like you Americans find very restricting. What will you all do when Christ TELLS you to do something, and takes away your "Rights" you have no rights under Him but what he gives you...thats what American culture fails to realize is written into its own legislature.

Technically, it will be a theocracy, but a monarchy is a reasonable approximation in our limited human terms. Although dictatorship would also be a good description.

The only reason that America rejected the monarchistic form of government is that, while we are living in this fallen world, then we have no choice but to choose fallen and corrupt human beings as our monarchs. Which is why so many checks and balances were put into place to ensure that no single US government official attained too much power (of course, that's been corrupted as well, which is why our country is having the problems it is).

Your Forefathers knew. They knew what Freedom meant, and their freedom was under a supreme Monarch, a freedom which granted them, personally, NO Rights, but those that GOD gives.

That's pretty close. Basically the way it's understood is that GOD is the source of human rights, morality and freedom, not the government. If the government is the source, then the government can eliminate freedoms at will. Giving the government ultimate power over their populations, thus creating tyranny.

Also, freedom and morality are most definitely not a matter of public opinion. Only the uneducated idiots being brought up in modern American public schools believe that nonsense.

Since GOD is the only true source of human freedom, then no human governor or president has the authority to infringe upon those freedoms. However, that doesn't erase the fact that we are responsible for our actions and that we must face consequences if we act irresponsibly.

This is why George Washington stated that any person who tries to subvert religion and morality cannot honestly call themselves a patriot of the United States.

What that basically means is that, if you are an atheist, then you can't possible call yourself patriotic towards the US. It simply doesn't work that way.

NateR
03-11-2009, 06:33 PM
Lady Astor - "Winston, if you were my husband, i would flavour your coffee with poison"

Churchilll - "Madam, if i were your husband, i should drink it"


Best comeback EVER. :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Miss Foxy
03-11-2009, 06:51 PM
Wow, I am learning so much from reading these posts. Everyone here has such valid points!! Im like scratching my head pondering.. haha.. I know the debates get heated, but all of you that contribute are smart cookies!! :laugh:

bradwright
03-11-2009, 07:39 PM
Technically, it will be a theocracy, but a monarchy is a reasonable approximation in our limited human terms. Although dictatorship would also be a good description.

The only reason that America rejected the monarchistic form of government is that, while we are living in this fallen world, then we have no choice but to choose fallen and corrupt human beings as our monarchs. Which is why so many checks and balances were put into place to ensure that no single US government official attained too much power (of course, that's been corrupted as well, which is why our country is having the problems it is).



That's pretty close. Basically the way it's understood is that GOD is the source of human rights, morality and freedom, not the government. If the government is the source, then the government can eliminate freedoms at will. Giving the government ultimate power over their populations, thus creating tyranny.

Also, freedom and morality are most definitely not a matter of public opinion. Only the uneducated idiots being brought up in modern American public schools believe that nonsense.

Since GOD is the only true source of human freedom, then no human governor or president has the authority to infringe upon those freedoms. However, that doesn't erase the fact that we are responsible for our actions and that we must face consequences if we act irresponsibly.

This is why George Washington stated that any person who tries to subvert religion and morality cannot honestly call themselves a patriot of the United States.

What that basically means is that, if you are an atheist, then you can't possible call yourself patriotic towards the US. It simply doesn't work that way.
so let me see if i understand this Nate,
if somebody was a citizen of the USA and doesn't believe in god then there is no possible way they could love,support or deffend their country,
and all because George Washington said so,
well that sounds more like a dictatorship then a democracy,

i think the thing your missing here is God is only relevant in your argument if you happen to believe in him,atheists, i'm pretty sure,dont,

KENTUCKYREDBONE
03-11-2009, 07:40 PM
Like Nate Said Our rights are given to us by God and only God has the moral authority to take them away without just cause! So our rulers are suppose to be controlled by the People not the other way around. As for nosy Governments, Well myself I don't think its any of the Governments business how many guns or dogs I own! It also ain't none of the Governments business if I want to eat a Double Quarter pound er or something else. I guess part of where we differ is I see Communism as a Government acting the part of God! Sometime we may have to discuss our views of Anarchy cause I suspect we differ on what that is. On a side note I do not discount the efforts of others in fighting Hitler but do point out that in my view that is at least one time Selfish Americans saved the World!

NateR
03-11-2009, 08:07 PM
so let me see if i understand this Nate,
if somebody was a citizen of the USA and doesn't believe in god then there is no possible way they could love,support or deffend their country,
and all because George Washington said so,

Well it's not just George Washington. John Jay, one of the authors of the Declaration of Independence and the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court also stated that it was in the best interests of our nation to only elect Christians to run our Christian nation.

These are the men who founded this country and they were very clear that they intended for America to be a Christian nation first and foremost.

So, if you are an atheist or a secular humanist, then what is the source of human freedom? It has to come from somewhere.

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:08 PM
False.
prove it. Show me a quote. Because I can give you whole passages that say what I imply is not only reasonable, but logical. :)

NateR
03-11-2009, 08:10 PM
Like Nate Said Our rights are given to us by God and only God has the moral authority to take them away without just cause! So our rulers are suppose to be controlled by the People not the other way around. As for nosy Governments, Well myself I don't think its any of the Governments business how many guns or dogs I own! It also ain't none of the Governments business if I want to eat a Double Quarter pound er or something else. I guess part of where we differ is I see Communism as a Government acting the part of God! Sometime we may have to discuss our views of Anarchy cause I suspect we differ on what that is. On a side note I do not discount the efforts of others in fighting Hitler but do point out that in my view that is at least one time Selfish Americans saved the World!

Anarchy can never really exist for more than a few days in the real world. It is always replaced by martial law and then progresses into to a dictatorship, as the citizens, desperate for order to be restored, will appoint whoever they believe can accomplish that the fastest.

J.B.
03-11-2009, 08:13 PM
Anarchy can never really exist for more than a few days in the real world. It is always replaced by martial law and then progresses into to a dictatorship, as the citizens, desperate for order to be restored, will appoint whoever they believe can accomplish that the fastest.


Don't tell Jeff Monson that... he might get mad and spray-paint another wall in protest.

Fight the power dude! :laugh:

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:20 PM
1)Technically, it will be a theocracy, but a monarchy is a reasonable approximation in our limited human terms. Although dictatorship would also be a good description.

The only reason that America rejected the monarchistic form of government is that, while we are living in this fallen world, then we have no choice but to choose fallen and corrupt human beings as our monarchs. Which is why so many checks and balances were put into place to ensure that no single US government official attained too much power (of course, that's been corrupted as well, which is why our country is having the problems it is).



2) That's pretty close. Basically the way it's understood is that GOD is the source of human rights, morality and freedom, not the government. If the government is the source, then the government can eliminate freedoms at will. Giving the government ultimate power over their populations, thus creating tyranny.

Also, freedom and morality are most definitely not a matter of public opinion. Only the uneducated idiots being brought up in modern American public schools believe that nonsense.

Since GOD is the only true source of human freedom, then no human governor or president has the authority to infringe upon those freedoms. However, that doesn't erase the fact that we are responsible for our actions and that we must face consequences if we act irresponsibly.

This is why George Washington stated that any person who tries to subvert religion and morality cannot honestly call themselves a patriot of the United States.

What that basically means is that, if you are an atheist, then you can't possible call yourself patriotic towards the US. It simply doesn't work that way.
1) No, technically a Monarchy. A theocrasy is where you have a religion running a country, a Theocrasy would be like the Church running the State. This is not a governing body Nathan. There will be not Parliament, No Councils, no Senate, No Congress, No Democrasy. It will be GODs Rule, and when he comes he will not come as Sacrifice he will come as Disctator, as outright JUDGE of all men. He will be like noone has ever seen him before, because its a side of his character he tries very hard to supress out of love and out of mercy...there will be little of that for those he condemns during his Reign.

He is a Heatherns Worst Nightmare, tenfold. His Armies will not only be Earthly, but be heavenly. The Old Testament Prophets describe the Angels as locusts, that move in all directions at once in battle, that CANT be slain even if wounded.

Theocrasy is what you have in Islam...its dictatorial, but its not controlled by one person, even Rome, the Pope has his Cardinals. No, this is a totally supreme Ruller. Absolute Far Right. He will have finally run out of patience with his creation. Finally be sick and tiered and fed up of always supporting and always saving Israel because she just wont listen to him. He will shout at her Nathan :ninja: The Temple will be filled with smoke, and they will all run screaming from Jerusalem I have absolutely no doubt about that.

2) The problem we have with that is its open to interpretation what exactly is a GOD given right...and it was created, interpreted first by a Governing Body. An Enlightened One..but all the same, the product of an Archiaic Fallen American Administration

But I aggree with you about the Christian bit. In order to remain in adhereance with the TRUE America, one MUST be Christian. Without that, the whole stack of cards comes down because Christ and HIS authority is the corner of the Morals that make America what it was designed to be. You cant and shouldnt separate the two....but so many Americans have changed the meaning of America so that she fits around them!! They change the "freedom" bit, and its down hill from there :unsure-1:

(not that England can talk of course :sad: )

NateR
03-11-2009, 08:24 PM
prove it. Show me a quote. Because I can give you whole passages that say what I imply is not only reasonable, but logical. :)

Here's the facts.

First of all, the word "church" shouldn't even be in the English translation of the Bible. The true Greek word used is ekklesia, which means "congregation" or "assembly." It's the exact same word used to refer to the nation of Israel in the Old Testament. So, according to the original manuscripts of the Bible, there is no distinction whatsoever between Israel and the "Church."

So, with that in mind, you need to go back and read the Old Testament laws pertaining to property and wealth.

Exodus 20:15
"You shall not steal."

Exodus 20:17
"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

So, tell me, if GOD wanted us to be Communists, then why are these two commandments even necessary? You can't steal something that already belongs to you. And how can you covet your neighbor's house if that house is community property? If it already belongs to you, then how can that sin even exist?

Exodus chapter 22 also covers responsibility for property, to include a commandment that states that if someone breaks into your home and you kill him while he is on your property, then you are not guilty of murder. Doesn't really sound like Communism to me.

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:24 PM
Like Nate Said Our rights are given to us by God and only God has the moral authority to take them away without just cause! So our rulers are suppose to be controlled by the People not the other way around. As for nosy Governments, Well myself I don't think its any of the Governments business how many guns or dogs I own! It also ain't none of the Governments business if I want to eat a Double Quarter pound er or something else. I guess part of where we differ is I see Communism as a Government acting the part of God! Sometime we may have to discuss our views of Anarchy cause I suspect we differ on what that is. On a side note I do not discount the efforts of others in fighting Hitler but do point out that in my view that is at least one time Selfish Americans saved the World!
There is no such thing as True Anarchy...

as soon as you have more then a few people trying to live, they will end up in a hierachy. One person will become dominant over another (Feudalism) another group will band together to survive (Communism) there is the basis of Left and Right...and you need less then Three living souls in close proximity to start that.

...oh GOD forbid I point out that America came into the war for a range of reasons, not all to help others, some to help herself and some to get revenge on the Japanese. But I see your point :laugh:

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:27 PM
Don't tell Jeff Monson that... he might get mad and spray-paint another wall in protest.

Fight the power dude! :laugh:
Listen to Monson. He doesnt want Anarchy, not really, because he's seeking a peaceful alternative. What he wants is a Commune.

He wants to be allowed to do his own thing with a band of people who think the same as him whooooops...a band of people...whooooops NOT Anarchy then. No Groups and NO power discourse in Anarchy :laugh:

NateR
03-11-2009, 08:35 PM
There is no such thing as True Anarchy...

as soon as you have more then a few people trying to live, they will end up in a hierachy. One person will become dominant over another (Feudalism) another group will band together to survive (Communism) there is the basis of Left and Right...and you need less then Three living souls in close proximity to start that.

...oh GOD forbid I point out that America came into the war for a range of reasons, not all to help others, some to help herself and some to get revenge on the Japanese. But I see your point :laugh:

That whole political spectrum thing, which puts Fascists as the ultra-right wing and Communists as the ultra-left wing is bollocks (to use a term you're familiar with:) ).

The spectrum should actually run from zero government (anarchy) to totalitarian government (big government that not only controls the actions of it's citizens, but their thoughts as well). So in that spectrum, Communism, Fascism, Dictatorships, Monarchies, and Political Correctness would all fall into the totalitarian end of the spectrum. Meaning that they are all equally evil and corrupt when run by human beings.

The Founding Fathers referred to government as a "necessary evil." Meaning that it was needed to run the day-to-day maintenance of a country, but should never be allowed to attain too much power. Otherwise it would stop being a servant of the people and would very rapidly become the master of the people.

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:43 PM
Here's the facts.

First of all, the word "church" shouldn't even be in the English translation of the Bible. The true Greek word used is ekklesia, which means "congregation" or "assembly." It's the exact same word used to refer to the nation of Israel in the Old Testament. So, according to the original manuscripts of the Bible, there is no distinction whatsoever between Israel and the "Church."

So, with that in mind, you need to go back and read the Old Testament laws pertaining to property and wealth.

Exodus 20:15
"You shall not steal."

Exodus 20:17
"You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his manservant or maidservant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

So, tell me, if GOD wanted us to be Communists, then why are these two commandments even necessary? You can't steal something that already belongs to you. And how can you covet your neighbor's house if that house is community property? If it already belongs to you, then how can that sin even exist?

Exodus chapter 22 also covers responsibility for property, to include a commandment that states that if someone breaks into your home and you kill him while he is on your property, then you are not guilty of murder. Doesn't really sound like Communism to me.
I didnt say GOD wanted us to live as communists...that wouldnt work, Communism only works on a small scale. I am telling you the Apostles set up what can validly be described as a "commune"

Step One- A ruling Elite

The Apostles were not the only converts at the start of the book of Acts, and yet they were above the converts. After Christ had Asscended they Chose a new person to replace Judus...they were going to continue to LEAD (that means Govern, Instruct, have power over, be authority over) the new converts. There was Criteria, they had to have been converted and a follower as long ago as certain chronological events. NEW BELIVERS NOT ALLOWED

15In those days Peter stood up among the believers[c] (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesusó 17he was one of our number and shared in this ministry." 18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

20"For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms,
" 'May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,'[d] and,
" 'May another take his place of leadership.'[e] 21Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection."

and a kabbutz was formed!

42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. End of ACTS chapter Two

So...no division of wealth? no living in community? no two tiered system of Elite (Apostles who taught) and Common (Believers who learned from)

Does that not sound like a Commune to you?????

But there is more....

Two chapters later, the Bible confirms...a well established Commune

32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There 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 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need. End of ACTS chapter Four

The VERY NEXT CHAPTER is the guy who didnt share his wealth. That previous chapter set the scene, the next chapter must be seen in context. We know they shared everything...we know the guy held stuff back...it wasnt a case of simply announcing the possessions you had...the bible clearly states TWICE prior to this the state of the Union (pardon the pun :laugh: )

Do you want me to go on to Saint Stephen or do you acknowledge that at least until the first martydom, the Apostles lived under communism :)

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 08:46 PM
That whole political spectrum thing, which puts Fascists as the ultra-right wing and Communists as the ultra-left wing is bollocks (to use a term you're familiar with:) ).

The spectrum should actually run from zero government (anarchy) to totalitarian government (big government that not only controls the actions of it's citizens, but their thoughts as well). So in that spectrum, Communism, Fascism, Dictatorships, Monarchies, and Political Correctness would all fall into the totalitarian end of the spectrum. Meaning that they are all equally evil and corrupt when run by human beings.

The Founding Fathers referred to government as a "necessary evil." Meaning that it was needed to run the day-to-day maintenance of a country, but should never be allowed to attain too much power. Otherwise it would stop being a servant of the people and would very rapidly become the master of the people.
well...people sometimes say its a circle, they say there is actually not much difference between EXTREME LEFT and EXTREME RIGHT...essentially, they are both tools to control a populas no?

But lets face it...your forefathers were right it is a NEEDED Evil...you cant simply do what you want with no government or laws at all, because you cant guarentee in a fallen world that people will follow Christ like they should without it all...they will follow themselves instead.

Its why I said some time ago that the ideals and the practical ellements...are different. the latter always depressingly lacking I'm afraid. I blame Lucifer myself :rolleyes:

NateR
03-11-2009, 09:12 PM
I didnt say GOD wanted us to live as communists...that wouldnt work, Communism only works on a small scale. I am telling you the Apostles set up what can validly be described as a "commune"

Step One- A ruling Elite

The Apostles were not the only converts at the start of the book of Acts, and yet they were above the converts. After Christ had Asscended they Chose a new person to replace Judus...they were going to continue to LEAD (that means Govern, Instruct, have power over, be authority over) the new converts. There was Criteria, they had to have been converted and a follower as long ago as certain chronological events. NEW BELIVERS NOT ALLOWED

15In those days Peter stood up among the believers[c] (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16and said, "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesusó 17he was one of our number and shared in this ministry." 18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

20"For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms,
" 'May his place be deserted;
let there be no one to dwell in it,'[d] and,
" 'May another take his place of leadership.'[e] 21Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, 22beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection."

and a kabbutz was formed!

42They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. 43Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. 44All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. 46Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. End of ACTS chapter Two

So...no division of wealth? no living in community? no two tiered system of Elite (Apostles who taught) and Common (Believers who learned from)

Does that not sound like a Commune to you?????

But there is more....

Two chapters later, the Bible confirms...a well established Commune

32All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. 33With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. 34There 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 35and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need. End of ACTS chapter Four

The VERY NEXT CHAPTER is the guy who didnt share his wealth. That previous chapter set the scene, the next chapter must be seen in context. We know they shared everything...we know the guy held stuff back...it wasnt a case of simply announcing the possessions you had...the bible clearly states TWICE prior to this the state of the Union (pardon the pun :laugh: )

Do you want me to go on to Saint Stephen or do you acknowledge that at least until the first martydom, the Apostles lived under communism :)

Well, I think your terminology is off. You have to remember that you're talking to people from a nation that spent over 50 years fighting against the evils of Communism. There was nothing Christian about North Korea, North Vietnam, the USSR, or China.

The idea that people take care of each other in small communities isn't Communism, it's reciprocity. That's what the second greatest commandment is all about, "Love others as yourself."

Moose
03-11-2009, 09:46 PM
That whole political spectrum thing, which puts Fascists as the ultra-right wing and Communists as the ultra-left wing is bollocks (to use a term you're familiar with:) ).

The spectrum should actually run from zero government (anarchy) to totalitarian government (big government that not only controls the actions of it's citizens, but their thoughts as well). So in that spectrum, Communism, Fascism, Dictatorships, Monarchies, and Political Correctness would all fall into the totalitarian end of the spectrum. Meaning that they are all equally evil and corrupt when run by human beings.


It's both. That's why you see a lot of political spectrums as a diamond shape. There's both right and left wing, and statism/big government on top or bottom and libertarianism/anarchy on the other. There's different ways to try to group things together, which I guess is what humans have been doing for millions, sorry scratch that, tens of thousands of years.

NateR
03-11-2009, 09:51 PM
It's both. That's why you see a lot of political spectrums as a diamond shape. There's both right and left wing, and statism/big government on top or bottom and libertarianism/anarchy on the other. There's different ways to try to group things together, which I guess is what humans have been doing for millions, sorry scratch that, tens of thousands of years.

6 thousand years, actually.:tongue0011:

I agree, it depends on how you group it. However, if you look at the results, then Fascism, Communism and Dictatorships are all guilty of unbelievable human rights violations and loss of life. Thus they are all on the same side of the coin.

Moose
03-11-2009, 09:53 PM
6 thousand years, actually.:tongue0011:

I agree, it depends on how you group it. However, if you look at the results, then Fascism, Communism and Dictatorships are all guilty of unbelievable human rights violations and loss of life. Thus they are all on the same side of the coin.

Oh, yeah. Both extreme ends have produced some truly terrible regimes.

Jonlion
03-11-2009, 10:11 PM
The political spectrum is a horsehoe.

I can't get the drawing up on here but basically, the Far Left and the Far Right almost meet like a horseshoe and are closer together than lets say the middle ground!

Anarchy i have found only exists for a small amount of time.

I would guess that the only time humans are truly free is in the middle of a riot, no laws, no order, no nothing but that can only last breifly

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 10:18 PM
Well, I think your terminology is off. You have to remember that you're talking to people from a nation that spent over 50 years fighting against the evils of Communism. There was nothing Christian about North Korea, North Vietnam, the USSR, or China.

The idea that people take care of each other in small communities isn't Communism, it's reciprocity. That's what the second greatest commandment is all about, "Love others as yourself."
No Nathan...thats where YOU cant see between the Ideal of Communism....and the politics of it.

On a small level Communism and principles of its morality bed from Utilitarianism work. You know, you must have seen it in the army, and you can understand it in principle.

See Communism itself as an ideal isnt Evil. Whats Evil is the corruption that comes by the States that use it. Essentially, we've never seen TRUE Communism on a Grand Scale because of corruption, but on a small scale it works, and its principles are indeed held as noble.

Now, if we venture back to the Early Church, the Kabbutz didnt last forever. Shortly thereafter the Converts arrived from Greece and put so much strain on the resources you started getting political corruption. Do you know what the Apostles did? They retired from that part of the leadership process, they deligated it to a Council which included representatives of all the Converted ethnicities. One of which was Saint Stephen.

Saint Stephen was not cultured in Judaism, he was a convert, and he really couldnt be arsed with the finer points of denominational differences between the Jews. I strongly suspect that when he charged the Temple and got killed, that probably put a stop to mass Messianic Jews at the Temple in bulk worship numbers as they had been up til then. The Apostles, one by one leave and when they found new communities, they DONT follow the Communistic lifestyle, they simply keep the ideal of a fellowship, support, teamwork...but they stop short of the pentecostal Kabbutz, we know this because of Saint Paul who designed a Church separate from the Jewish place of Worship, with ministers purely for converts, who didnt base themselves in the same Temples as the Jews.

They wisely moved onto something better as they grew. They werent Evil in using communistic principles, rather that then fuedalism. They simply outgrew it and shed it to move to bigger things as they grew.

This is not to be confused with the Communism you see practised over a country of billions. THAT isnt real Communism. Not the practise of it. What you fought against...and I say that in a removed sense,. because you didnt fight off communism in your own country, you fought it off in other parts of the world as you built an Empire, perhaps in not the same way as previous Empires, but it was certainly an ideological Empire. You have never faced Communism on American soil....Even you must therefore be able to see that the ideal of working together and mutual sacrifice on a small level works and is noble....where it faulters is when corruption takes place over many people. You can see the difference, I know you can, You havent really been fighting the ideal of communism, youve been fighting the political corruption of its malpractise. Does that make sense? :)

I still love you anyway, regardless of your views. The thing I like about you Nathan is that at least you are passionate. At least you care about somethings...so many people would read this conversation, just sigh and say "who cares" thats such sad apathy its a testament of how the Devil has made us believe these distictions, and these ideals dont matter. :w00t:

NateR
03-11-2009, 10:19 PM
I would guess that the only time humans are truly free is in the middle of a riot, no laws, no order, no nothing but that can only last breifly

Well a riot is a 'might makes right' scenario, so only the strong could be considered free. The weak (women, children, the elderly, sick and handicapped) become victims. Thus it's not real freedom.

Which is exactly why we have law, to protect those unable to protect themselves.

NateR
03-11-2009, 10:21 PM
No Nathan...thats where YOU cant see between the Ideal of Communism....and the politics of it.[/B]

On a small level Communism and principles of its morality bed from Utilitarianism work. You know, you must have seen it in the army, and you can understand it in principle.

See Communism itself as an ideal isnt Evil. Whats Evil is the corruption that comes by the States that use it. Essentially, we've never seen TRUE Communism on a Grand Scale because of corruption, but on a small scale it works, and its principles are indeed held as noble.

Now, if we venture back to the Early Church, the Kabbutz didnt last forever. Shortly thereafter the Converts arrived from Greece and put so much strain on the resources you started getting political corruption. Do you know what the Apostles did? They retired from that part of the leadership process, they deligated it to a Council which included representatives of all the Converted ethnicities. One of which was Saint Stephen.

Saint Stephen was not cultured in Judaism, he was a convert, and he really couldnt be arsed with the finer points of denominational differences between the Jews. I strongly suspect that when he charged the Temple and got killed, that probably put a stop to mass Messianic Jews at the Temple in bulk worship numbers as they had been up til then. The Apostles, one by one leave and when they found new communities, they DONT follow the Communistic lifestyle, they simply keep the ideal of a fellowship, support, teamwork...but they stop short of the pentecostal Kabbutz, we know this because of Saint Paul who designed a Church separate from the Jewish place of Worship, with ministers purely for converts, who didnt base themselves in the same Temples as the Jews.

They wisely moved onto something better as they grew. They werent Evil in using communistic principles, rather that then fuedalism. They simply outgrew it and shed it to move to bigger things as they grew.

This is not to be confused with the Communism you see practised over a country of billions. THAT isnt real Communism. Not the practise of it. What you fought against...and I say that in a removed sense,. because you didnt fight off communism in your own country, you fought it off in other parts of the world as you built an Empire, perhaps in not the same way as previous Empires, but it was certainly an ideological Empire. You have never faced Communism on American soil....Even you must therefore be able to see that the ideal of working together and mutual sacrifice on a small level works and is noble....where it faulters is when corruption takes place over many people. You can see the difference, I know you can, You havent really been fighting the ideal of communism, youve been fighting the political corruption of its malpractise. Does that make sense? :)

I still love you anyway, regardless of your views. The thing I like about you Nathan is that at least you are passionate. At least you care about somethings...so many people would read this conversation, just sigh and say "who cares" thats such sad apathy its a testament of how the Devil has made us believe these distictions, and these ideals dont matter. :w00t:

I disagree 100% and I didn't even need to read past your initial statement. :tongue0011:

I don't care how you try to defend it, GOD is not a Communist. End of story.

Tyburn
03-11-2009, 10:23 PM
I disagree 100% and I didn't even need to read past your initial statement. :tongue0011:

I don't care how you try to defend it, GOD is not a Communist. End of story.
:laugh:

READ it Nathan.

I'm not saying what you think I'm saying. Stop skimming...i know you... :ninja:

:tongue0011: