On Capitalist Jesus. The Evil of Christianity.

[Theocrat]

Religious Beliefs Matter Much and Are Inescapable

I don't see how you can compare a religious's worthiness with an economic system. One has a choice about religion, if you don't like it get the hell out of it. If you have an evil economic system you will suffer greatly with no choice. And history has shown that all religions at some point in time have had a negative impact on society, some more than others. This is another list that Christianity and Catholicism are on top of, unfortunately.

[Emphasis mine]

The same applies to religion. After all, we're all religious by nature, created to worship something. If you have an evil religious belief, then you will suffer greatly with no choice. The difference between having a wrong economic belief system and a wrong religious belief system is that the punishment for the wrong religion doesn't just occur in this life. It carries on to eternity after you die. That is why religious beliefs are far important than economic ones. As a matter of fact, economics is based upon one's own religious worldview because it deals with predicting the nature of humans in how they interact in exchange of goods/services and what they do with property.

All except your religion right? And BeFranklin's.

If I have truly learned anything from this forum, it's that one can not argue with blind faith. They will attack you personally, try to undermine your credibility, argue with points which aren't related to the topic, and quote scripture to defend scripture.

If by our religion you mean "Christianity," then yes. That is exactly what I'm referring to. Do I need to quote some Founding Fathers to vindicate my point?

Also, Christianity is not based on blind faith. There have been numerous times when evidences have been given for the truth of Christianity, both philosophical and material in nature, in this forum. The problem is those who are against Christianity do not accept or like those evidences. That is because those who disagree with Christianity lack the correct presuppositions to see the evidence, and that comes from being spiritually blind (1 Corinthians 1).

 

[Theocrat]

Asking the Wrong Thing

Well, I suppose Theo and Bef could give us a list of which religions should be protected by the law and which ones shouldn't?

Law is itself based on a religious belief system which seeks to account of and provide sanctions for a particular code of morality. So the proper question is what religion should be the basis for civil law (click on the link in my signature for more information about that).

 

[LATruth]

After all, we're all religious by nature, created to worship something...

...It carries on to eternity after you die...

I disagree with these points, and respect your opinion. I am okay with "fizzling out", and the possibility of the end of my existence. How much religious zeal stems from the want of an afterlife? And if there were none, would you still impose said rules on your life?

 

[idiom]

Law is itself based on a religious belief system which seeks to account of and provide sanctions for a particular code of morality. So the proper question is what religion should be the basis for civil law (click on the link in my signature for more information about that).

So its not even a list, just one religion then.

 

[Theocrat]

Afterlife is the Result, Not the Motive

I disagree with these points, and respect your opinion. I am okay with "fizzling out", and the possibility of the end of my existence. How much religious zeal stems from the want of an afterlife? And if there were none, would you still impose said rules on your life?

I can't speak for other people in other religions, but zeal for God in the Christian religion does not stem from want of an afterlife. It stems from a zeal to be righteous and holy in God's sight because we love Him for redeeming us from sin and giving us an inheritance with our God and Savior. The afterlife is just the victory over death to those who have been chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and reborn by God's Spirit, and it is the vindication unto death to those who die in their sins because they did not want God.

To answer your second question, how would a person know that there is no afterlife when we die? That question can only be answered if the person had absolute knowledge about the afterlife, and if that were the case, that person would be God. Since God does possess absolute knowledge, and He has told us there will be an afterlife in Heaven or hell, then I would say we can know from God's testimony that there is an afterlife.

The imposition of rules is not even correlated with belief in an afterlife. Rules are part of life, and therefore, they are inevitable. There are rules in nature. There are rules to civics. There are rules when playing a game. And most definitely, there are rules to living. Man cannot be autonomous nor can he be arbitrary about how he lives because this universe was created for us to live by a certain way. Our consciences about right and wrong even testify that is the case, even though we are imperfect to do what is right and wrong without God.

 

[Theocrat]

One Religion, One Truth

So its not even a list, just one religion then.

Yes, and as I stated in an earlier post, exclusivity is also granted when we discuss the superlative system of economics which will bring the most prosperity and respect for God-given rights of private property and ownership, that being capitalism.

 

[PaulaGem]

Also, Christianity is not based on blind faith. There have been numerous times when evidences have been given for the truth of Christianity, both philosophical and material in nature, in this forum.

Bull - Faith is not faith unless it is blind to the things of this world. "Faith is the evidence of things not seen". Which means your faith should be supported by your experience of the One. Philosophical and material proofs of faith are against the Bible.

Um, you HAVE read the book, haven't you?

 

[PaulaGem]

How much religious zeal stems from the want of an afterlife?

Sometimes I think that these zealots don't have a life at all, in this world or in Spirit. If you study the teachings of Yeshua the "Kingdom" is present tense. "Heaven" and the pearly gates stuff is Zoroastrian pagan, not Jewish or the teaching of Yeshua.

The Kingdom is a state of reconciliation with God. It is here and now and for anyone who opens their heart. At that time the Kingdom becomes a reality and God's Kingdom comes first in the life of that person.

This does not mean that that person is perfect, withot sin, better than anyone else, etc. What it means is that the path of that person has changed. The focus is on the eternal, the main priority is Love; Love of oneself and Love of one's neighbor.

If your focus is on the Kingdom you don't try to convert others, you try to eminate the Spirit of Christ so that others may come to understand.

In Christ,
Paula

 

[PaulaGem]

God-given rights of private property and ownership, that being capitalism.

Um, then why did Yeshua say:

Matthew 6:25-33

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

 

[PaulaGem]

I can't speak for other people in other religions, but zeal for God in the Christian religion does not stem from want of an afterlife. It stems from a zeal to be righteous and holy in God's sight because we love Him for redeeming us from sin and giving us an inheritance with our God and Savior. .....

The imposition of rules is not even correlated with belief in an afterlife. Rules are part of life, and therefore, they are inevitable.

But the Apostle Paul complained of his personal shortcomings, that when he sought to be "righteous" he often fell on his face, and he also said that we were no longer under the law (rules), but should live by faith and Christ within us.

 

[TurtleBurger]

Um, then why did Yeshua say:

How do you know he actually said that? Maybe that is part of the tampering.

 

[PaulaGem]

How do you know he actually said that? Maybe that is part of the tampering.

Faith mostly, and a knowledge of ancient history that confirms the likelihood that this is someting this Rabbi named Yeshua would have said.

I have been a Christian all of my life. The more I understood about the history of the church and the dogma and lies that were put in the place of Truth, the more the person of Yeshua became real to me.

He had a simple message. Many other teachers taught basically the same message. Truth is eternal, it is only natural that it would be so.

I have also had certain "mystical" experiences in my own life, the "evidence of things not seen". These are times when I knew things because of a Word from God, not an experience in this world. The Knowledge came first, confirmation by physical reality came later.

The Kingdom IS, and if you are waiting around for it in the next life, you are missing out.

Paula

 

[PaulaGem]

How technically does the Holy Spirit communicate the correct interpretation to you? How is it possible (for example) for one Bible Protestant to believe infant baptism is mandatory, and another to believe that infant baptism is an abomination, when both are guided by the Holy Spirit?

You asked this of someone elese this earlier in the thread. The best way that I can explain it is a "voice without a voice". The Word, the message is clear, but there is no writing, the is no aural perception, it just IS. This is how I hear Spirit.

 

[Conservative Christian]

2 Thessalonians 3:6-15 (King James Version)

6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

7 For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you;

8 Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:

9 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an example unto you to follow us.

10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies.

12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.

13 But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.

14 And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed.

15 Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.

 

[Theocrat]

Faith is NOT Opposed to Evidence

Bull - Faith is not faith unless it is blind to the things of this world. "Faith is the evidence of things not seen". Which means your faith should be supported by your experience of the One. Philosophical and material proofs of faith are against the Bible.

Um, you HAVE read the book, haven't you?

You're quoting from Hebrews 11:1, but in Verse 3 the text says, "Through faith, we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." That is what the "evidence of things not seen" is talking about. We cannot see God, but we see clearly that the things which God has made and done are from Him. The greater context of Hebrews 11 discusses how the saints of old received God's promises from afar, not having seen the total fulfillment of them. That is the essence of what the passage you quoted is talking about. Faith has nothing to do with being blind to the things of this world, and I challenge you to find me one passage in the Bible where it teaches that. Your definition of faith is sorely lacking, and it's unbiblical.

In 1 John 1:1-3, the apostle John states,

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.

Those things which John observed with his senses was of God and from God. John's faith was based on concrete evidences that God is Who He said He was, and John was an eyewitness to those things and wrote them for our edification. He did not appeal to some ethereal "blind faith" as the basis for his belief in God. Yet, that is what you are stating faith is about with no Biblical warrant for such a notion.

Philosophical and material evidences of God are not opposed to God, and they are the kinds of evidences which become more real to the person that meditates on God's word day and night (Psalm 1). You need to stop adopting the world's definition of faith (that it is based on blind things) and be grounded by what God's word has declared about it. Faith is not believing what you want to be so, nor is it picking up from where reason leaves off.

So the only question that remains is have you read (and studied) the Book?

 

[idiom]

The economic system is selected because it gives the most space to be as free as possible to follow any choices you want.

You can join with a group of communists and live in a commune in a capitalist state, but not vice versa.

The options allows for groups like the mennonites to exists.

Capitalism is non-prescriptive. That is why it is selected for the government. The goal of a liberty based government is to be as non-prescriptive as possible. That the whole point of the NAP.


You are saying that because you think you are right, your version of truth should be prescriptively applied to everyone.

 

[Theocrat]

It's a Matter of Priorities

Um, then why did Yeshua say:

Matthew 6:25-33

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature? And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: 29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith? Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

That passage of Scripture has nothing to do with ownership of private property. Jesus is talking to His disciples about the priorities of the Gospel kingdom. Earlier in the chapter, Jesus talks about not laying up treasures on earth, but laying them up in heaven Matthew 6:19, 20). He says this in relation to where our hearts should be first and foremost. However, in Verse 10, Jesus says, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven," when teaching the "Lord's Prayer". Notice Jesus did not say "Thy will be done in heaven and that's it." No, Christ still cares about the things of this earth, but they have to be used with an eye towards Heaven.

The greater context of Matthew 6 is seeking the Kingdom of God FIRST, and THEN the earthly blessings (property, ownership of goods, etc.) will be added to us (v. 33). Once again, the chapter is not abolishing ownership of property. It is forming priorities between building the Kingdom of God based on material things exclusively or building the Kingdom of God based on heavenly things supremely.

 

[PaulaGem]

That passage of Scripture has nothing to do with ownership of private property. Jesus is talking to His disciples about the priorities of the Gospel kingdom. Earlier in the chapter, Jesus talks about not laying up treasures on earth, but laying them up in heaven Matthew 6:19, 20). He says this in relation to where our hearts should be first and foremost. However, in Verse 10, Jesus says, "Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven," when teaching the "Lord's Prayer". Notice Jesus did not say "Thy will be done in heaven and that's it." No, Christ still cares about the things of this earth, but they have to be used with an eye towards Heaven.

The greater context of Matthew 6 is seeking the Kingdom of God FIRST, and THEN the earthly blessings (property, ownership of goods, etc.) will be added to us (v. 33). Once again, the chapter is not abolishing ownership of property. It is forming priorities between building the Kingdom of God based on material things exclusively or building the Kingdom of God based on heavenly things supremely.

So where did "Jesus" have his home in the 'burbs? I bet he paid for it with wine sales - pretty easy when you can make it from water, ya know....

 

[Theocrat]

You Do Greatly Err, "Christian"

So where did "Jesus" have his home in the 'burbs? I bet he paid for it with wine sales - pretty easy when you can make it from water, ya know....

Jesus, being God Who was manifested in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16), owns the entire world and is ruling the nations by the power of His word (Hebrews 1:1-3). He doesn't need "a home in the 'burbs" when His throne is in Heaven and His Spirit abides within the fleshly stones of His people, the Church. God has given the world as an inheritance to His children (Matthew 5:5; Ephesians 1:10-12).

 

[jsu718]

The greater context of Matthew 6 is seeking the Kingdom of God FIRST, and THEN the earthly blessings (property, ownership of goods, etc.) will be added to us (v. 33). Once again, the chapter is not abolishing ownership of property. It is forming priorities between building the Kingdom of God based on material things exclusively or building the Kingdom of God based on heavenly things supremely.

The greater context of of Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:17 Luke 11, Luke 12:33, Luke 18:18-22, Acts 2:44-45, Acts 4, would all tend to disagree with your view of ownership of property. Selling all your possessions, giving to the poor, having everything in common with your Christian brothers, communal living, all would indicate that the Christian ideal is communism, not capitalism. That would probably knock a hole in your idea that earthly "blessings" have anything to do with wealth.