Biblical Christianity is not socialist ...

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: chr0naut

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 thought that Satanism, at least the Anton LaVey kind, was highly 'acquisitive'.

Self-indulgent, hedonistic, materialist, amoral, profit motivated, capitalism.

Satanic behavior includes many things

This is from Proverbs

Proverbs 14:12

“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

Verily, I can, hitherto, do in like wise:

Matthew 19:23-25

"Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

What was a rich man then ?
What was the "eye of a needle" ?
Most "rich men" of the time disregarded the Sabbath and even set up market in the Synagogues on the Sabbath.
The "eye of the needle was a very small passage into Jerusalem (and others) that allowed traders to enter the city after the main gates were closed at night. It only allowed for one human or camel at a time , and the camels had to kneel and crawl through.
So , not impossible for a "camel" to pass through the "eye of the needle".
Happened all the time.
All symbolic.
You gave me some information , and I am returning in kind.

I know about the gate called the eye of the needle. Similarly, there has been suggestion that 'camelos' can also mean 'rope' (a bit of aramaic-latin translational word play).

However, the response of the disciples I think clarifies the sense of what was being said.

They were (mostly) not what would have been considered wealthy at the time (although someone must have been paying for the disciples and Jesus to keep them fed and clothed for the years of His ministry, so it is possible that there was some money available to them).

Overall, though, they seemed to be responding as if what Jesus just said, was an impossibility.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: Gothmog

Why, how, I can’t prove a negative

forwhatsaiththescriptures.org...

But I asked you to prove the “needles eye”
You won’t. Can’t?

Worse, you won’t can’t even accept you may be wrong

No, you would rather believe wealthy people can’t go to heaven, you truly think that?
Are you a Christian?
Have you ever studied theology?

Prove your statement, if it’s true, prove it

Vine’s Concise Dictionary of Bible Words has the following information under the entry of “needle:”

“Note: The idea of applying ‘the needle’s eye’ to small gates seems to be a modern one; there is no ancient trace of it. The Lord’s object in the statement is to express human impossibility and there is no need to endeavor to soften the difficulty by taking the needle to mean anything more than the ordinary instrument. An attempt is sometimes made to explain the words as a reference to the small door, a little over 2 feet [0.61 meter] square, in the large heavy gate of a walled city. This mars the figure and receives no justification from the language and traditions of Palestine.”


Oh and that scary face emoji, really intimidating.
Now ante up or fold

You can prove a negative.
Why should I have to prove anything ?
You stated I was wrong
Now , prove it.
That's the way a debate works.

Shhh...I have pictures of the one in Jerusalem
And , here is some info online
With pictures
Jerusalem: The Eye of the Needle Gate
Game over

Right then you are using bad information, the gate known as the Eye of THE Needle in Jerusalem is most probably a much later entrance, a narrow gate built long after the leveling of the older Hebrew city by the Roman's following revolt of the Jews and there subsequent enslavement and expulsion.

The Gate you mention therefore is NOTHING, I REPEAT in capitals in case that is not getting through - NOTHING to do with the parable that Christ gave - the eye of A needle.

But it may have been built and named that either in Arabic times or perhaps in Byzantine time's as it has sparked some christian traditions were it is concerned and there are those that believe it is but a Camel could NOT pass through especially not a rich man's camel with it's load.

Again I refer you to this.

23Then Jesus said to His disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. 24Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” 25When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?”

It is obvious he is not referring to a gate way but the literal eye of A needle though the other interpretation also work's quite well, you must leave the things of this world behind to enter God's kingdom, you can not take it with you as the Egyptian's and many other heathen cultures believed which led to them being buried with great store houses of good's that then served them no purpose, the parable of the rich fool comes to mind.

I personally do NOT believe that gate existed in the time of Jesus but it's name may have been inspired by the parable he told and it was most likely build long after, remember the city was leveled by Rome, the most plausible location for the REAL temple is in the grounds of what is today a convent and the temple mount was actually the location of the pre-revolt Roman fortress, the entire city you see today began over the ruins of the destroyed city rebuilt by the Roman's themselves, then by Byzantium, the Arab invaders and then the Crusaders and then the Arab's again (whom even had the gate closest to the mount of olives sealed up for fear that the Jewish messiah would come through it and depose there illegitimate claim to the city but of course stone's will not stop the lord when he return's).

a reply to: Raggedyman


Socialism enforced by government is evil because it codifies "Thou Shalt Not Steal" into law on a massive scale. In a society where no one can keep anything they have produced for themselves, what else is it but theft unless the people involved are pooling the fruits of their labor voluntarily which cannot and does not happen in a command economy.

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

You pay your property taxes? If 'yes' then you're a Satanist.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan
a reply to: incoserv

I'm not interested in arguing the validity of faith or religion. I know that there are people on this forum who think that religion is foolish and the root of all bad, but somehow have a grasp on some transcendent moral code that defines bad, and who believe in the power of nothingness to create reality out of nothing (a belief that requires a greater step of blind faith than anything that I as a Christian, believe. Those are topics for another thread. I'm interested in bouncing these ideas off of people who are interested in the idea of the Christian orthodoxy on economics.

Or how about all the people killed in the name of God?

So, what if a person murdered a whole bunch of people and that murderer used your name when authorities asked him who he was. Since it was done in your name, that makes you guilty, right? Wrong. So, why do people blame God all the time when people kill in the "name of God?" God said "Thou shalt not kill." The people who keep saying things like "Or how about all the people killed in the name of God?" are either bashing Christianity intentionally or without knowing any better. Learn from this so that you can stop bashing Christianity for either reason.

a reply to: LABTECH767

The young man came to Jesus looking for works to buy his salvation. He was not being faithful in His heart.

Consider - Jesus had very wealthy Apostles, but He didn't ask them to give up all their wealth in the same way. Why? They followed Jesus but still had their possessions and wealth behind them. The answer is that they followed Christ first and foremost. They followed Christ so much that they continued on even after Christ's death, even after His Resurrection and seeing Him be taken to Heaven ... even though only one (? I think) of them actually lived for all his life (the rest were martyred for their faith, wealth or no).

Every single Apostle gave up everything in his heart, even if materially they appeared to have given up nothing. Jesus didn't have to ask them to because He knew their hearts, knew their faith was that strong.

With the young man, it was different. The young is one of the "good" people we hear about all the time. Sure he was kind hearted, sure he did all sorts of good things and treated his fellow man well, but he had no Faith, and the central lesson Christ came to teach is salvation through Faith. You cannot buy your way in, nor can you work your way in. None of us is good before the Lord.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Socialism is Satanism.

It is a worship of government, instead of God

You pay your property taxes? If 'yes' then you're a Satanist.

I dont think so, and Christ indicated otherwise, but my childrens great great grand father was one. He was a top Mason. Wizard or Dragon or something like that they have a glass bowl from him etched with a Satanic sign on it. Take that!

originally posted by: visitedbythem
I dont think so...

You'd be wrong since property taxes go to pay for municipal services making them socialistic as they are pooled with your neighbors.

He was a top Mason. Wizard or Dragon or something like that they have a glass bowl from him etched with a Satanic sign on it. Take that!

Good for him. Hopefully he packed lightly for the Lake of Fire. Hail Satan.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Arent you one too?


And did you want Christs statement on paying taxes?

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Arent you one too?

I'd think my screenname makes it fairly obvious.

And did you want Christs statement on paying taxes?

He rendered unto Caesar like a good little do-bee socialist. All that tax money went for infrastructure and wars, just like it does now.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LABTECH767

The young man came to Jesus looking for works to buy his salvation. He was not being faithful in His heart.

Consider - Jesus had very wealthy Apostles, but He didn't ask them to give up all their wealth in the same way. Why? They followed Jesus but still had their possessions and wealth behind them. The answer is that they followed Christ first and foremost. They followed Christ so much that they continued on even after Christ's death, even after His Resurrection and seeing Him be taken to Heaven ... even though only one (? I think) of them actually lived for all his life (the rest were martyred for their faith, wealth or no).

Every single Apostle gave up everything in his heart, even if materially they appeared to have given up nothing. Jesus didn't have to ask them to because He knew their hearts, knew their faith was that strong.

With the young man, it was different. The young is one of the "good" people we hear about all the time. Sure he was kind hearted, sure he did all sorts of good things and treated his fellow man well, but he had no Faith, and the central lesson Christ came to teach is salvation through Faith. You cannot buy your way in, nor can you work your way in. None of us is good before the Lord.

Very well written and I mostly agree except I would point out that they forsook there wealth and left everything and walked in poverty with Christ, they rejected this world - all except Iscariot - in favour of the kingdom the Lord showed them in his teaching.

There are many rich that will be saved and many poor that will be damned because you are correct in that, it is there faith first and foremost that matters, we are not saved by work's - though they do help you know - but by Grace but unlike many of the TV evangelists these day's we can not go asking god for money, he has told us to reject this world, to hate and despise it (the accruing of earthly wealth - the rich fool) and to love God and our true life which is to come.

Remember those martyrs singing in the amphitheatre, many of them had given up great wealth - and given it to the poor - and privilege in this world, many of them had been high born Roman's whom heard the voice of the Lord in the word's of the Apostles and so came to there salvation, they died horribly yet many died smiling because they knew they were truly going home and not dying at all for this world is death and in Christ we receive life that does not die.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: LABTECH767

The young man came to Jesus looking for works to buy his salvation. He was not being faithful in His heart.
.

He didn’t come to buy salvation, the young ruler came because he thought his actions made him worthy of Gods kingdom
No doubt the rich young ruler was a very good, kind and righteous man but, Jesus was not interested in works and people who thought highly of themselves

We are saved by faith in Christ and love is our reaction to Gods work, not saved by wealth or works or righteousness. In the Old Testament God blessed good people financially to some degree, a wealthy person felt they had a blessing on them.
The rich young ruler failed, simply because he thought he could earn salvation through righteousness not faith in Christ

His wealth was considered as evidence of salvation, Christ corrected him, salvation through Jesus alone

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Raggedyman


Socialism enforced by government is evil because it codifies "Thou Shalt Not Steal" into law on a massive scale. In a society where no one can keep anything they have produced for themselves, what else is it but theft unless the people involved are pooling the fruits of their labor voluntarily which cannot and does not happen in a command economy.

Kets, you are right, it’s not perfect but if we destroyed everything that was not perfect there would be nothing left, (but probably me 😬). Just have to take the good with the bad
I don’t mind the society I live in, mostly

a reply to: LABTECH767

Many had, but many also had not.

Faith is the first requirement. If you believe, you will do what you should because that's part of belief.

We are also talking about work, not just good works of charity, but the hard work of one's hands. A man (or woman) who works hard in society will likely end up prospering. It's sort of the inevitable outcome, and husbanding your prosperity wisely so that it grows enables you to do more good than throwing it all out as soon as it comes in.

I know everyone hates the Kochs, but how much did and have they given out over the years to all kinds of philanthropic projects?

Now, in no way am I claiming they are Christian, far from it, but I am pointing to their example of how prosperity enables charity on a wider scale. If every one of us gives up everything we have, then none of us can care for the other.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Yes, he did.

He wanted to know what deeds he could do to "earn" his way in. He very much wanted to buy his way into Heaven.

a reply to: ketsuko

Maybe the rich young ruler did want to buy his way into heaven but one thing is sure, faith in money is not going to get a person there, only a relationship with Christ bridges the gap.

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan
...
Do you pay taxes? then you are a socialist...

That's ignorant to claim... Taxes have existed since BEFORE socialism was ever envisioned by anyone...

The ancient Romans had taxes, were they socialist?...

The kings and queens of old all implemented taxes on the people. Were they socialist?...

Every ancient civilization which had complex societies/cities and built roads, buildings, etc either used slaves, or used taxes before socialism ever existed...

originally posted by: NoFearsEqualsFreeMan
All the death by socialist you mention, dont you forget to mention that capitalist countries like the USA has killed millions of people, in the name of capitalism...? Or how about all the people killed in the name of God?

I agree that none of the forms of goverment ever tried, is worth trying again.

As for your FALSE claim that the U.S. has killed millions...that's yet another false claim... How about you give an actual reliable source to corroborate your claims?...

The only systems that we know off which has killed "millions of people" has been socialism/communism.

www.hawaii.edu...

I know many leftists are more than willing to claim "capitalism has murdered millions" just like you have claimed. But the FACT is that when government centralizes all power, including taking sides with businesses that is not a free market/capitalism.

When the U.S. government decided to regulate businesses such as the railroad the government used the army even against regular people. That's "centralization of power" and all centralization of power is left-wing, not right-wing.

Monopolies are not part of a free market system either. It is more "centralization of power." When power is centralized and the people have no rights, or their rights can be suppressed by the government for the good of x (insert excuse) that's when problems occur. That's when atrocities occur, which is why government should not have all the power, nor should it control/regulate the free market. Neither should corporations control the free market because it turns into a monopoly aka centralization of power to a few people.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

You'd be wrong since property taxes go to pay for municipal services making them socialistic as they are pooled with your neighbors.

Property taxes shouldn't exist as they are a contradiction to having a right to private property. If a property owner has paid off his/her house, but suddenly finds himself/herself not able to pay the taxes on their home that property does not really belong to them. Initially the only property taxes that some of the founding fathers wanted and implemented were on property that makes money. But the large majority of private property is property in which the owners live and don't make any money on. Thus those taxes are in contradiction to the "right to private property" as envisioned by the U.S. Founding Fathers.

The modern estate tax was actually implemented in 1916 by none other than Woodrow Wilson, a progressive democrat, and with the help of the democrat controlled Congress. The modern IRS and it's complex taxes were also implemented by Wilson and the democrats. So some of the taxes we do have are socialistic because they are "progressive."

Many in the left want to claim that such taxes made the U.S. prosperous again, but that is false because back then the IRS still did not have the power it acquired in the later 20th century. But because at first the IRS still didn't have that much control many people hid their earnings hence not paying many of those taxes that Wilson implemented. Back then many "rich people" had two books, one for themselves, and one for the IRS/government making it easy to hide their real earnings.

In fact, Wilson's taxes and regulations are the reason why eventually certain corporations have become monopolies and for the most part control certain resources. The Federal Reserve Act, giving power of the economy to the Federal Reserve, was also implemented by Wilson and the democrats.

Every time the government gets involved with the "free market" it in facts restricts it allowing only a few to become rich.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Same # different smell.

What the defining limit or percentage between capitalism an socialism when it come taxing?

Here is the text of a speech by a Mormon who notes that socialism is against the form of united order they used to practice:

runwin.tripod.com...

In regards to individual charity and compassion:

Socialism takes: United Order gives

That is the spirit of socialism: We're going to take. The spirit
of the United Order is: We're going to give.