A question to Christians

[Psilon]

..........

[Cyber E.]

Now I am no pro at this stuff but just because these people are saying that they are Christians doesn't actually mean they follow the entire faith. They really don't have a speific religion they just say "I am a Christian" because it most fits there lifestyle. It sickens me sometimes when I see so called Religios People yet they hardly understand anything on what they say they believe in.

Hope I helped some.

[Calhoun07]

I don't listen when somebody tells me they are Christian. "Christian" means "Christ Like" and I am offended anybody would be so concieted to take that title upon themselves. In the early days of the Church (in ACTS) to be called "christian" (I forget the exact term in Acts) was an insult hurled upon followers of Christ by Gentiles. It was meant to be durogatory, much like Holy Roller or Bible Banger are bantered about by unbelievers today.

The only person who has the ability to look upon any person on this Earth and call them Christ-ian is Jesus Himself. True Christians, IMO, are too humble to call themselves that title, but Jesus sees it in them, and calls those people by His name.

I always quote a favorite phrase from a Steve Taylor song: the chicken who squaks loudest lays the biggest egg. IMO, and from personal experience, it's those who shout their "Christianity" the loudest that are the farthest from God. Remember, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand does. The people Jesus smiled upon in the New Testament were humble and quiet about their faith, such as they lady with the one shilling (or whatever it was) and the people who prayed in their closets at home, not in public to be seen. Likely, if you see somebody in public making all these claims to be so close to God, they more than likely aren't.

[loyalheart]

i agree with some of what Calhoun07 said..

i am a christian well i 'study' the faith and i know god works IN people..so it may seem silly to you but when i do something good i dont always take the credit i credit my faith which is God. and i dont judge someone cuz their gay.

I may not approve of it but IMO Prejudice is like a sin and being mean or holding something against homosexuals is Prejudice.

Also you CAN have a reashinship with god but that doesnt mean you should brag about it... If you know what i mean..

I dont know their is so many sterotypes of christians and some feed into those. which kinda stinks.

[Zechs]

The term Christian is used today to represnet the peopel who bleive in Christ . I consider my self a Christian because I try to follow Christian ways. Another term that comes to mind as you have already stated is True Christian which tends to mean you are very Christ like or at least try to do so. This is the one pepoel claim to be . Funny thing is they go to chruch yet they still sin and call themselves True Christians . I have a looooooooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go before I reach that I may not reach it till the day I die. But it just galls me at how many people think going to church and doing things for the church makes them True Christians when they are doing the same things that they look down on others or doing . They will be suprised to find that going to church and putting on a false face is not enough. In short just because they look Christian on the outside dosen't mean their Christian on the inside which is where it really counts.

[Lucky Bob]

Because of a little verse in the Bible that says that if a man doesn't work, he shouldn't eat. I'll have to look it up later, I just woke up.

Oh, and Calhoun07, in the Bible it says that we will be Christ-like one day, and we are striving for that goal now. In God's sight, being justified through Christ makes us as righteous as Christ. Not in the physical sense of the word, but in the spiritual sense. Also, the term Christian wasn't an insult per se. The Jewish leaders wouldn't even use it because of the implications it had. (They used the term, "The Sect of the Nazarenes.") Just so you know.

[Zoddman]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Yes, that is reasonable. If you don't work you dont eat. However, there are so many people who do not work but eat a tremendous amount of food and people who work a lot and get morsels. However, work is different from greed. Capitalism does not work because it relies on people working but relies on peoples greed which makes them work. That is why it is so "practical", though that is debatable.I do believe that is a rather broad assumption to make about the capitalist system, that "It does not work,". Isn't the major political push of Canada socialist? As well, why should it matter what hardships come to you on Earth (Let's face it folks, because of human sin, life is not fair.) If you are a good christian, you will be rewarded in Heaven.


Originally posted by Psilon2011
I don't mean to pick on you guys, but I find Christians have become too revionsist and some what lazy. I find that today people choose what works in Christ's teachings and use it, and then say "We are mortal, we are not like Christ" and block the other stuff. A true Christian follows the path of Christ. (When I mean follow I mean truly understand and practise). Anything short of this I find is unacceptable. It goes back to the human sin thing I think. People are more responsive to a twisted, un-christian view of things that satifies their flawed human needs. Good people are out there, Psilon, you just have to know where to look.


Originally posted by Psilon2011
One small question, before I go. If you were to see Hitler or Osama would you treat them the same as your own mother, brother, sister or country men? All of you would say no, but then are you really a Christian. Again you make a broad assumption by saying we would all treat Hitler and/or Bin Laden differently. Doesen't the Bible say "Judge not, yest ye be judged."?

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
[Yes, that is reasonable. If you don't work you dont eat. However, there are so many people who do not work but eat a tremendous amount of food and people who work a lot and get morsels. However, work is different from greed. Capitalism does not work because it relies on people working but relies on peoples greed which makes them work. That is why it is so "practical", though that is debatable.

I don't think it relies on people's greed. Socialism doesn't work for the factors you mentioned above. A lot of people don't work in such a system, and yet they get lots of benefits. And yet many people work, and everything they get goes to taxes to fund those benefits. (Of which they recieve mere morsels.) Capitalism is not about greed, it's about what you want to make of yourself in the world. Anybody can make it to the top, and many have in spite of much difficulty. If you're willing to take that risk, you can succeed. Therefore, it's a system of working.


I don't mean to pick on you guys, but I find Christians have become too revionsist and some what lazy. I find that today people choose what works in Christ's teachings and use it, and then say "We are mortal, we are not like Christ" and block the other stuff. A true Christian follows the path of Christ. (When I mean follow I mean truly understand and practise). Anything short of this I find is unacceptable.

Christ's teachings were those of the spirit. How to lead a successful spiritual life, in other words. (Through belief in Him, and following his commands to love God and your neighbors.) He didn't bother going out and rebelling against the status quo of the Roman Empire, because that wasn't His mission.

I belive that Christians ought to be subject to the laws of the nation in which they are citizens. However, when the laws expressly force them to do something against God's commandments, then that's where one needs to draw the line. Not in violent revolt, but in respectful appeal.

Our government provides for many freedoms that until now have ever been heard of. Anyone can run for office, and we the people have a say as to who governs us. For that matter, I think Christians should play an active role in government, voting and otherwise, because we now have the freedom to. They didn't have such freedom in Jesus's day.


One small question, before I go. If you were to see Hitler or Osama would you treat them the same as your own mother, brother, sister or country men? All of you would say no, but then are you really a Christian.

No, they are not my brother, sister, or countrymen in the first place. If I was called on as a soldier of my country to go after them, I would because that's what God made governments for. Protection! However, if I did meet them, I'd have the moral duty of turning them in, dead or alive because my country has asked me to.

[Zoddman]

Ha! Beat you, Bob! ;)

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by Zoddman

Again you make a broad assumption by saying we would all treat Hitler and/or Bin Laden differently. Doesen't the Bible say "Judge not, yest ye be judged."?

And I am one who does not rule out the possibility that Hitler could be in Heaven. Before he died, who knows if he didn't have an encounter with God, and repent, and, like the thief on the cross, found favor with God? The fact is that nobody knows, so I hold off on any judgment calls until all the tallies are in.

[Nightflower]

Originally posted by Zoddman
I do believe that is a rather broad assumption to make about the capitalist system, that "It does not work,". Isn't the major political push of Canada socialist? As well, why should it matter what hardships come to you on Earth (Let's face it folks, because of human sin, life is not fair.) If you are a good christian, you will be rewarded in Heaven.


Nope, we've got a flarked-up system that pretends to be ultimately under the monarchy, but is still somewhat capitalist. More liberal than the States, I'd say, but certainly not socialist.

[Chosen Raven]

I may not approve of it but IMO Prejudice is like a sin and being mean or holding something against homosexuals is Prejudice .

Kim, look up the thread "when will we all be equal...." to see what most Christians believe on the subject(it's in the Cafe Toon Zone forum).


I find it odd when Christians say allowing homosexuality is revisionist but supporting blood thirsty companies is not revisionist.

What do you mean by revisionist? I believe what you are talking about is "Corporate Capitalism". It's basically Capitalism un-guided by honor, decency, and respect. No system, no matter how good it is, can work if good people are not behinde it. It may not be the perfect system, but it's the best in the world right now.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Zoddman
I do believe that is a rather broad assumption to make about the capitalist system, that "It does not work,". Isn't the major political push of Canada socialist? As well, why should it matter what hardships come to you on Earth (Let's face it folks, because of human sin, life is not fair.) If you are a good christian, you will be rewarded in Heaven.

It goes back to the human sin thing I think. People are more responsive to a twisted, un-christian view of things that satifies their flawed human needs. Good people are out there, Psilon, you just have to know where to look.

Again you make a broad assumption by saying we would all treat Hitler and/or Bin Laden differently. Doesen't the Bible say "Judge not, yest ye be judged."?

First of all I am not a socialist, I am nothing.

When did I say captialismi did not work? I merely mentioned the fact that it is debatable if it truly works, since it was debated several times on these boards.

I am sorry if I presumed too much. I shouldn't have said 'all'. I'll replace it with 'most'

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I don't think it relies on people's greed. Socialism doesn't work for the factors you mentioned above. A lot of people don't work in such a system, and yet they get lots of benefits. And yet many people work, and everything they get goes to taxes to fund those benefits. (Of which they recieve mere morsels.) Capitalism is not about greed, it's about what you want to make of yourself in the world. Anybody can make it to the top, and many have in spite of much difficulty. If you're willing to take that risk, you can succeed. Therefore, it's a system of working.

Christ's teachings were those of the spirit. How to lead a successful spiritual life, in other words. (Through belief in Him, and following his commands to love God and your neighbors.) He didn't bother going out and rebelling against the status quo of the Roman Empire, because that wasn't His mission.

I belive that Christians ought to be subject to the laws of the nation in which they are citizens. However, when the laws expressly force them to do something against God's commandments, then that's where one needs to draw the line. Not in violent revolt, but in respectful appeal.

Our government provides for many freedoms that until now have ever been heard of. Anyone can run for office, and we the people have a say as to who governs us. For that matter, I think Christians should play an active role in government, voting and otherwise, because we now have the freedom to. They didn't have such freedom in Jesus's day.

No, they are not my brother, sister, or countrymen in the first place. If I was called on as a soldier of my country to go after them, I would because that's what God made governments for. Protection! However, if I did meet them, I'd have the moral duty of turning them in, dead or alive because my country has asked me to.

That is extremly naive of you to believe that capitalism does not rely on greed. Come on, it's practically the party line. It relies on our 'bad' emotions to work. If you're going to dismiss this, then you are building a wall of ignorance around you. This fact is repeated dozens of times by capitalists more than anyone else. At least Chosen accepts this truth.

You are also being naive when you talk about working hard and making it to the top. A lot of people have a very very very large headstart in life because of where they are born. So no matter how hard you work you have a very slight chance to make it to the level of person who was born into a richer more privelaged family. Talking about the tech boom to try to disprove this point, would be pointless as something like that will probably never happen again. And even after the tech boom, the rich of now were the rich of the past, with a few exceptions.

Now I must question your religious knowledge

Christ's teachings were obviously of the spirit, of the individual. Yet, it is the individual who is the building block of society. Christ's reformation of the human spirit, is the ultimate rebelling. It is a thousand times more 'dangerous' than a revolutionist picking up gun. You have not understood his teachings or have not taken them to heart. You have sectioned off his teachings, you are Christian only when you choose to be and only in certain situations.

You say that you do not consider Hitler like your brother or sister or countrymen. Then you have not gone beyond hate and love, and you are not a true follower of Christ.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Chosen Raven
.

Kim, look up the thread "when will we all be equal...." to see what most Christians believe on the subject(it's in the Cafe Toon Zone forum).



What do you mean by revisionist? I believe what you are talking about is "Corporate Capitalism". It's basically Capitalism un-guided by honor, decency, and respect. No system, no matter how good it is, can work if good people are not behinde it. It may not be the perfect system, but it's the best in the world right now.

Corporate Capitalism, is there any other kind?

[RockItShipper]

Good capitalism involves people achieving their personal best without stepping on others. Others being able to do their own personal best is ultimately in everyone's best interest, but this is often compromised by greed

The fact that the first full period of history following the rise of Christianity was the Dark Ages is not a condemnation of the religion, but an indication that it wasn't taken to heart. Same with the slave trade and every other awful thing people do to eachother.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by RockItShipper
Good capitalism involves people achieving their personal best without stepping on others. Others being able to do their own personal best is ultimately in everyone's best interest, but this is often compromised by greed

The fact that the first full period of history following the rise of Christianity was the Dark Ages is not a condemnation of the religion, but an indication that it wasn't taken to heart. Same with the slave trade and every other awful thing people do to eachother.

my point exactly

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
That is extremly naive of you to believe that capitalism does not rely on greed. Come on, it's practically the party line. It relies on our 'bad' emotions to work. If you're going to dismiss this, then you are building a wall of ignorance around you. This fact is repeated dozens of times by capitalists more than anyone else. At least Chosen accepts this truth.

But not all of them feel that way. If a person just wants a better life for himself, or to provide for his family, is that greed? I know of many honest buisinessmen who might like to disagree with you.

Capitalism can be used or misused. In fact, when you really look at it, most every human institution or man-made object can. But to take the actions and assumptions of a few and apply it to the whole? Sorry, does not compute.


You are also being naive when you talk about working hard and making it to the top. A lot of people have a very very very large headstart in life because of where they are born. So no matter how hard you work you have a very slight chance to make it to the level of person who was born into a richer more privelaged family. Talking about the tech boom to try to disprove this point, would be pointless as something like that will probably never happen again. And even after the tech boom, the rich of now were the rich of the past, with a few exceptions.

That's not always the case. Charles Schultz was a loser in just about everything, including art. Harlan Sanders was a 65-year-old retired faliure. Thomas Edison had to leave school. There are numerous other people who don't make the everyday news who are making a "comfortable" living. Why, I just saw on CNN a while ago that a man makes a 6-figure income by just going out and retrieving lost golf balls from lakes! If you have an innovative idea, or drive, you can get most anywhere you want in the system.

As for the tech boom, I sorta admire them for actually going out and trying. Quite a few pulled through, many didn't. But that's the way things go. As with all businesses, you need to find ways of keeping your customers coming. But if you don't have that drive, then it won't work.


Now I must question your religious knowledge

Christ's teachings were obviously of the spirit, of the individual. Yet, it is the individual who is the building block of society. Christ's reformation of the human spirit, is the ultimate rebelling. It is a thousand times more 'dangerous' than a revolutionist picking up gun. You have not understood his teachings or have not taken them to heart. You have sectioned off his teachings, you are Christian only when you choose to be and only in certain situations.

Wait a second, Christ never did tell His people to rebel against authority. Look at the early Christians. Many of them were martyered for their faith, and yet I see no history of a major Christian revolt in the Roman Empire. Even Paul was content in his bonds. The only place I can find in the Bible where authority was challenged the right way was in the book of Daniel where he and his friends had to appeal many times to the king because his laws went against God's Law.


You say that you do not consider Hitler like your brother or sister or countrymen. Then you have not gone beyond hate and love, and you are not a true follower of Christ.

First, Hitler is not a female. :) Second, it's doubtful if he ever accepted Christ. Third, he was not an American. I don't hate him as a person, though. It would have been nice if he had accepted Christ. But given the circumstances surrounding his death, and his previous resolve, I'd say that it was HIGHLY unlikely. I cannot agree with the things he did AT ALL! But if I was in a position to bring him to justice, I would have. It has nothing to do with hate.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
But not all of them feel that way. If a person just wants a better life for himself, or to provide for his family, is that greed? I know of many honest buisinessmen who might like to disagree with you.

Capitalism can be used or misused. In fact, when you really look at it, most every human institution or man-made object can. But to take the actions and assumptions of a few and apply it to the whole? Sorry, does not compute.

That's not always the case. Charles Schultz was a loser in just about everything, including art. Harlan Sanders was a 65-year-old retired faliure. Thomas Edison had to leave school. There are numerous other people who don't make the everyday news who are making a "comfortable" living. Why, I just saw on CNN a while ago that a man makes a 6-figure income by just going out and retrieving lost golf balls from lakes! If you have an innovative idea, or drive, you can get most anywhere you want in the system.

As for the tech boom, I sorta admire them for actually going out and trying. Quite a few pulled through, many didn't. But that's the way things go. As with all businesses, you need to find ways of keeping your customers coming. But if you don't have that drive, then it won't work.

Wait a second, Christ never did tell His people to rebel against authority. Look at the early Christians. Many of them were martyered for their faith, and yet I see no history of a major Christian revolt in the Roman Empire. Even Paul was content in his bonds. The only place I can find in the Bible where authority was challenged the right way was in the book of Daniel where he and his friends had to appeal many times to the king because his laws went against God's Law.


First, Hitler is not a female. :) Second, it's doubtful if he ever accepted Christ. Third, he was not an American. I don't hate him as a person, though. It would have been nice if he had accepted Christ. But given the circumstances surrounding his death, and his previous resolve, I'd say that it was HIGHLY unlikely. I cannot agree with the things he did AT ALL! But if I was in a position to bring him to justice, I would have. It has nothing to do with hate.

There are obvious exceptions. But in general it is not the truth. Taking the exceptions does no good. I don't think I am using the exception cases or assuming, I think the evidence is right in front of us. Talking about business men is pointless. I'm talking about major corporations. Corporate Capitalism as Rock says.

Ok, first off all, I said nothing about Christ leading a revolution, and building a resistance movement. I don't understand where you got the notion that I said that Christ wanted you to revolt to authority. I talked about the revolution of the spirit. You are misunderstanding me.

Ok so you don't hate Hitler, Osama etc. However, do you love your father, mother etc more than Hitler or Osama? Answer truthfully.

[Mackenzie Rainelle]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Christianity encourages compassion and kindness and capitalism encourages cutthroatness and competitiveness. I don't think that just because you give a prayer and donate a small amount of money gets rid of all your sins. I find it odd when Christians say allowing homosexuality is revisionist but supporting blood thirsty companies is not revisionist.

Who says competition has to be cutthroat? For instance, I'm in the school marching band, and last night, we were at a marching festival. Aside from Gibbs, all of the bands, despite having to go against each other on the field, were really nice. We joked, found fellow instruments, tossed a few casual jibes, and then cheered for each other as well as ourselves when the ratings and awards were announced. We made friends from other bands, caught up with old buddies who'd moved to other bands, and it was generally fun. Comeraderie, courtesy, and politeness can be involved in competition as well.

And before you say I singled out Gibbs just to be rude, lemme say this: Yes, we do have a bit of a rivalry with the school, but let me tell you the main reasons why:

1) They commonly crack jokes about our school, being as we're one of the poorer schools in the county, and somewhat backwards.
2) They insult our playing abilities whenever possible, even after we congratulate them on a job well done. (Example, the competition at Soddy-Daisy two weeks ago. I and a few other woodwinds told theirs that they had pulled off a really good performance. Their response? "Well, we did better than you, and it's only a couple of hours til the scores show it."
3) Their band director insulted ours in the city newspaper over the fact that she's 6 months pregnant and 4 months married and said perhaps a more suitable candidate for the position could be found. (Nevermind that she singlehandedly turned the program around, got the administration to sit up and take notice of how well we could really do, and nearly doubled the size of our group in two years because people actually wanted to STAY in band now.)

As for the whole capitalism thing, I really don't care. As long as I can make enough to get art supplies to work, food to eat, and a bed to sleep in, I'll be happy. A few things on the side would be nice, but they're not the main thing, and they never will be.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
There are obvious exceptions. But in general it is not the truth. Taking the exceptions does no good. I don't think I am using the exception cases or assuming, I think the evidence is right in front of us. Talking about business men is pointless. I'm talking about major corporations. Corporate Capitalism as Rock says.

Funny, earlier on you seemed to say that supporting capitalism in general is supporting greed. Now it's just "corporate capitalism?" Come on, we've just had a coupla companies go wrong. They've gotten their due. (Can anybody say "Enron"?)


Ok, first off all, I said nothing about Christ leading a revolution, and building a resistance movement. I don't understand where you got the notion that I said that Christ wanted you to revolt to authority. I talked about the revolution of the spirit. You are misunderstanding me.

We WERE talking about Christ and politics. Then, you said something about" Christ's reformation of the human spirit, is the ultimate rebelling. It is a thousand times more 'dangerous' than a revolutionist picking up gun." I naturally assumed that you were using it in the same vein of discussion.

BTW, Christ's act was not rebellion. He is God incarnate, and he can change the rules. He made them! (Not that He did change the basic rule, the wages of sin is still death. However, we can now avoid that consequence by accepting His death as our substitute.)


Ok so you don't hate Hitler, Osama etc. However, do you love your father, mother etc more than Hitler or Osama? Answer truthfully.

I see nowhere in the Bible that says I have to love my neighbor as my relatives. Unless you can provide a chapter and verse for that.

[Venom234]

Since when is greed bad? Greed can be a great motivational tool to help those who are less fortunate. Greed does not mean screwing over the poor folk to get ahead. Are there people like that, sure, their are people who use anything for evil. You can't condemn the best system in the world because of a few bad apples. Socialism could never work in the United States because Americans have the desire to succeed and Socialism prevents people from living to their full potential. Not all corporations just like not all socialists are nice thoughtful people.

Stop generalizing in order to further your flawed ideology.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Funny, earlier on you seemed to say that supporting capitalism in general is supporting greed. Now it's just "corporate capitalism?" Come on, we've just had a coupla companies go wrong. They've gotten their due. (Can anybody say "Enron"?)

We WERE talking about Christ and politics. Then, you said something about" Christ's reformation of the human spirit, is the ultimate rebelling. It is a thousand times more 'dangerous' than a revolutionist picking up gun." I naturally assumed that you were using it in the same vein of discussion.

BTW, Christ's act was not rebellion. He is God incarnate, and he can change the rules. He made them! (Not that He did change the basic rule, the wages of sin is still death. However, we can now avoid that consequence by accepting His death as our substitute.)

I see nowhere in the Bible that says I have to love my neighbor as my relatives. Unless you can provide a chapter and verse for that.

Check my reply to Rock.

Lets take this back to the beginning we have gotten off track.

Capitalism relies on greed, plain and simple. Greed is the insatiable desire for wealth . To be competitive you have to want something with all of your heart. If you did not care for material wealth, you would not be competitive. I wonder if Christ wanted material wealth :rolleyes:. My whole point is that if you want to be Christian you should be close as possible to Christ and his teachings. Capitalism may work, I won't doubt that, however its principles are not the same as Christs. I am not advocating socialism, I am explaining that Christ and teachings would not approve of being greedy of material wealth.

Ok, I am not talking about rebellion or revolution in the same sense you are. Christ understood the nature of God, it is too bad so many of his followers don't.

Don't read the Word, understand the Word. Christ went beyond hate and love. His love was the love of the universe,

The "love" (which probably ought not be called love at all) exhibited by the Christ is Agape, or unconditional love; it is expressed towards all things equally.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Venom234
Since when is greed bad? Greed can be a great motivational tool to help those who are less fortunate. Greed does not mean screwing over the poor folk to get ahead. Are there people like that, sure, their are people who use anything for evil. You can't condemn the best system in the world because of a few bad apples. Socialism could never work in the United States because Americans have the desire to succeed and Socialism prevents people from living to their full potential. Not all corporations just like not all socialists are nice thoughtful people.

Stop generalizing in order to further your flawed ideology.

From Christ's point of view, I would have to condemn capitalism. However, from pragmatic approach I would applaud capitalism.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Mackenzie Rainelle
Who says competition has to be cutthroat? For instance, I'm in the school marching band, and last night, we were at a marching festival. Aside from Gibbs, all of the bands, despite having to go against each other on the field, were really nice. We joked, found fellow instruments, tossed a few casual jibes, and then cheered for each other as well as ourselves when the ratings and awards were announced. We made friends from other bands, caught up with old buddies who'd moved to other bands, and it was generally fun. Comeraderie, courtesy, and politeness can be involved in competition as well.

And before you say I singled out Gibbs just to be rude, lemme say this: Yes, we do have a bit of a rivalry with the school, but let me tell you the main reasons why:

1) They commonly crack jokes about our school, being as we're one of the poorer schools in the county, and somewhat backwards.
2) They insult our playing abilities whenever possible, even after we congratulate them on a job well done. (Example, the competition at Soddy-Daisy two weeks ago. I and a few other woodwinds told theirs that they had pulled off a really good performance. Their response? "Well, we did better than you, and it's only a couple of hours til the scores show it."
3) Their band director insulted ours in the city newspaper over the fact that she's 6 months pregnant and 4 months married and said perhaps a more suitable candidate for the position could be found. (Nevermind that she singlehandedly turned the program around, got the administration to sit up and take notice of how well we could really do, and nearly doubled the size of our group in two years because people actually wanted to STAY in band now.)

As for the whole capitalism thing, I really don't care. As long as I can make enough to get art supplies to work, food to eat, and a bed to sleep in, I'll be happy. A few things on the side would be nice, but they're not the main thing, and they never will be.

That is why Sun Tzu's Art of War is one of the most popular books in the world of corporate business.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Check my reply to Rock.

Lets take this back to the beginning we have gotten off track.

Capitalism relies on greed, plain and simple. Greed is the insatiable desire for wealth . To be competitive you have to want something with all of your heart. If you did not care for material wealth, you would not be competitive. I wonder if Christ wanted material wealth :rolleyes:. My whole point is that if you want to be Christian you should be close as possible to Christ and his teachings. Capitalism may work, I won't doubt that, however its principles are not the same as Christs. I am not advocating socialism, I am explaining that Christ and teachings would not approve of being greedy of material wealth.

Question, what system is the closest to what Christ taught about, then?


Ok, I am not talking about rebellion or revolution in the same sense you are. Christ understood the nature of God, it is too bad so many of his followers don't.

Let me tell you something, first Christ IS God. So, understanding His own nature isn't too hard. Second, there are some things about God that are beyond human comprehension. For example, can you honestly envision eternity?




The "love" (which probably ought not be called love at all) exhibited by the Christ is Agape, or unconditional love; it is expressed towards all things equally.

However, there's certain codes of conduct for different situations. The Bible says to love everyone, and yet it also tells me to "Honor your father and mother." I could never honor Bin Laden or Hitler as my father or mother, since the Bible never commanded that. But I can love them as people. However, does love mean not punishing evil when it is our duty to do so? Should we just let evildoers go because we "love them?"

[Venom234]

From Christ's point of view, I would have to condemn capitalism. However, from pragmatic approach I would applaud capitalism
Oh Okay now I understand, I'm a Jew so I could care less what Christ wants. :p

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Question, what system is the closest to what Christ taught about, then?

Let me tell you something, first Christ IS God. So, understanding His own nature isn't too hard. Second, there are some things about God that are beyond human comprehension. For example, can you honestly envision eternity?

However, there's certain codes of conduct for different situations. The Bible says to love everyone, and yet it also tells me to "Honor your father and mother." I could never honor Bin Laden or Hitler as my father or mother, since the Bible never commanded that. But I can love them as people. However, does love mean not punishing evil when it is our duty to do so? Should we just let evildoers go because we "love them?"

Do u then concede that capitalism does not share the same principles of Christ?

Let us move on after this.

The problem I have with your understanding of Christ, is a problem I have with many people. They blame their laziness on Christ's divinity.

"We are not Christ, nor should even try to become like him, he is God." You have given up too easily.

Can I envision eternity? No, not yet, but I am on the path.

Your concepts of good and evil are flawed and show that you do not truly understand His word. You do not love all things equally.

The Bible commanded, The Bible commanded. You are still human, that means rational still exists in you, Christ did not intend for you to not use the rational. In fact, only when you use rational can you hope to understand Him.

[Lucky Bob]

Answer my question, please.

[Captain Yurika]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
This post is not supposed to offend anyone in any way. If it does I apologize in advanced....

It looks like most Christians are on the right wing of the political system. I don't seem to understand why so many Christians support major coorporations whose greed is unfathomable. Most Christians I meet are die hard capitalists. Christianity encourages compassion and kindness and capitalism encourages cutthroatness and competitiveness. I don't think that just because you give a prayer and donate a small amount of money gets rid of all your sins. I find it odd when Christians say allowing homosexuality is revisionist but supporting blood thirsty companies is not revisionist.


Not offended at all!!
However even as a lifelong Christian I can't say that I pay too much attention to the political side of things. The people that I personally know are not capitalists at all. I am Lutheran to be exact and we are a pretty socialable group as far as things go and not all concerned with "blood thirsty companies".
Now there are so many different groups of Christians some more liberal than others.
As Lutherans, and more specifically (we have different groups as well) Wisconsin Synod Lutherans, we are THE most conservative group you'll meet. Technically in my church they do not approve of homosexuality, though they are becoming more lenient I think. I personally, do not have a problem with them. As for the forgiveness thing, I don't know of any Christian group that does this. To "get rid of your sins" as you say one only needs to feel remorse for what he or she has done and ask God for forgiveness and that is it.
A common myth for Christians, and in some groups it could be true, though not for ours, people think they are just after money. We believe in Stewardship and giving back to God as a gift for what He's given us. Everything little thing we have comes from Him and to give in the church is our way of thanking him and supporting the place we worship in. Whatever money is given is for operating the church, and covering utlitities as well as the salary for the pastor. Money given is never used frivolously. However I would be naive to think that ALL churches, and all Christians would be like this, which is what gives us a bad name.

Also to Calhoun, who mentions the "Christian" thing. I call myself Lutheran first, though most don't know what Lutheran is, so I would say Christian. We believe that in Christ's dying for us, we are seen as "Christ-like" because he's paid for our sins.

[Captain Yurika]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
[B]Question, what system is the closest to what Christ taught about, then?


I don't know who this was addressed to, but for my point of view, it's hard to say.
I am Lutheran, and we'd say we were, but in all fairness, Catholics would say the same thing, as would Baptists and Methodists and all other groups out there.
I honestly think it's a matter of what you believe in your heart.

[Mek]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
This post is not supposed to offend anyone in any way. If it does I apologize in advanced....

It looks like most Christians are on the right wing of the political system. I don't seem to understand why so many Christians support major coorporations whose greed is unfathomable. Most Christians I meet are die hard capitalists. Christianity encourages compassion and kindness and capitalism encourages cutthroatness and competitiveness. I don't think that just because you give a prayer and donate a small amount of money gets rid of all your sins. I find it odd when Christians say allowing homosexuality is revisionist but supporting blood thirsty companies is not revisionist.

Nah, not offended. I've gotten lots of crap thrown at me because of my beliefs. (I used to be an agnostic before I re-converted back to Christianity earlier this year) And this isn't the least bit offensive. =)

Anyways, to answer your question...

Yeah, I'm a Christian, and yeah... I'm a Republican. I wouldn't say I'm a captialist, and neither are any members of my family too. It is true that the beliefs DO stress compassion and kindness, and I use that as my moral compass. I think that the Christians who DO support captialism are a bit hypocritical. It just doesn't make any sense to me at all.

As for saying a prayer and donating money to forgive your sins... I pray to ask for forgivness to my God, but I don't think money should play any part in it. If somepeople do think that, then well... it makes me sad. My way of following God doesn't involve money at all.

Errm... sorry for rambling on like that. ^^;;; But that's my opinion on it. Then again, I'm not your typical Christian. ^^ (I've shocked a few by saying that I support homosexuality and such, but hey...)

[The Old Maid]

Interesting thread, if somewhat incoherent. I can see why it hadn't been staying on topic.

The statements Jesus made about Himself might be more appropriate for another thread. However, everything Jesus taught about the Great Commandment (to love the LORD your God will all your heart and mind and strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself), economics, hypocrisy, the obligations of a ruler, social justice, and the end of the world can all be found in the Tanakh.

What system is the closest to what Christ taught? Well, what were those teachings? Amos and Malachi, for example. A rule of economics that could be called, "You shall not cheat the LORD your God by withholding the tithe or giving less than your best, and you shall not cheat your neighbor of his wages or property or withhold aid when he is in need." Living in assorted economic circumstances doesn't excuse you from fulfilling these obligations the best you can.

In fact the Zealots and other first-century groups wanted Jesus to overthrow the Roman Empire. He responded "pay unto Caesar what is due unto Caesar and pay unto God what is due unto God." It wasn't an endorsement. Rather, Jesus was trying to change more important things than governments.

Also, let's keep in mind that financial corruption exists in dictatorships, monarchies, and anarchies, not merely in capitalist countries. We are merely more aware of corruption because we have the media to report on it and the power to challenge it.

The statement "He who does not work shall not eat" derives from II Thessalonians and it was situation-specific. In I Thessalonians Paul described a few things that would happen at the end of the world. It was misinterpreted. Some believers concluded The End was moments away, so they quit their jobs and joined the line of widows and orphans who were getting food and housing from the church. Paul had to write II Thess. to tell the freeloaders to go back to work. From this we derive two lessons : that if you can work, you should ; and that support of the destitute is an obligation of all believers.

People forget that work is not a punishment. Work existed in the Garden of Eden before the Fall. In fact the word given for Eve ("helpmeet," azer), means "to work alongside." Eve was created to be another worker. (Thanks to Frederick Kohn of The Last Farmer for that little jewel.) Work only became grievous after the Fall, when humans toiled with little or nothing to show for it.

There's a saying that "capitalism is what people do naturally if you leave them alone." Look at the Plain Churches, such as the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites, Shakers, etc. They have lived through empire, monarchy, dictatorships, anarchy, and capitalism, yet change very little. They still work if they can, support those who can't, and donate to charity. (Of these, the Mennonite Relief Fund is the biggest and best-known.) The history of the Jews took them through many economic circumstances, and the commandments on them didn't change, either.

How did the States become so profit-driven? Part of it can be traced to the Puritans. They believed you could gauge God's opinion of you, based on your economic success. God wanted you to be rich. So if you were poor, you must have some hidden flaw.

Many people who disagreed with the Puritans on other things adopted this position. That's probably why The Prayer of Jabez is so popular. It feeds into the belief that God wants you to be rich. Two problems, though : it goes against what Jakat prayed in Proverbs 30 to have just enough. Secondly, it may be another misunderstanding. The October 23rd issue of Christian Century proposes that Jabez prayed for more land because he was, uh, a plump man even from birth, and feared running out of food. Read it if you have time. Still, I think the real reason God would want anyone to be rich is so that you have more to give to the poor. That is the real reason "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of the needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven ; nevertheless, with God all things are possible." If you die rich, it may be because you hoarded it for yourself.

Are the words Christian, conservative, capitalist interchangeable? No. You'll find plenty of Christians (and so-called Christians) on the liberal front. William Penn founded Pennsylvania as a haven for all peaceful people, regardless of their beliefs. (That's why the Plain Churches settled there.) Dorothy Day supported labor unions ; to this day the Catholic Church is strongly pro-union. The welfare model of the 1960s arose from the Judeo-Christian obligation to help the poor. Christian liberals went to jail for protesting against nuclear proliferation. Or what about Oscar Romero and the four nuns -- murdered for opposing political and economic corruption that robbed the poor. Christian liberals march in many of the protests and picket lines outside corrupt corporations today. And although many signers of the Declaration of Independence were wealthy conservatives (they were content until their taxes went too high), the impoverished, hungry foot-soliders were liberals (they had nothing but utopian dreams).

So if there are many Christians, and many hypocrites, in one public arena (such as business), it's because there are many Christians and hypocrites in every public arena. We would do well to avoid stereotyping people.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Answer my question, please.

We're not in grade 2, changing the topic is pointless. I am not promoting any system. I am questioning why so many "Chritians" promote capitalism, as you do.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
We're not in grade 2, changing the topic is pointless. I am not promoting any system. I am questioning why so many "Chritians" promote capitalism, as you do.

I think it's a perfectly reasonable question. You seem convinced that capitalism is an evil system, so it only seems right that you tell us what IS the best system that goes with Christ's commands.

[Anyone00]

How well do Christians tend to fair in most governments and social systems that are (or claim to be :rolleyes: ) socialist or communist?

The Christians that do support capitalism usually stress that business leader should have a strong ethical core based on honesty and not an ethic of self-entitlement; and the last thing they want is to see things return to the days of Social Darwinism.
Many Christian groups that would be considered liberal or conservative support forgiving of foreign depts and taking humanitarian Position on many issue over business interests such as the recently passed "Sudan Peace Act".

"Chick-fil-A" is the closest think you'll find to a business that ideally capitalistic to many Christians that support capitalism.


Question, what system is the closest to what Christ taught about, then?

The one that will exists after all that stuff in Revelations happens.


Originally posted by Captain Yurika
As Lutherans, and more specifically (we have different groups as well) Wisconsin Synod Lutherans, we are THE most conservative group you'll meet.

No your not, I attend an Assemblies of God Church.


Originally posted by Calhoun07
I always quote a favorite phrase from a Steve Taylor song: the chicken who squaks loudest lays the biggest egg. IMO, and from personal experience, it's those who shout their "Christianity" the loudest that are the farthest from God. Remember, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand does. The people Jesus smiled upon in the New Testament were humble and quiet about their faith, such as they lady with the one shilling (or whatever it was) and the people who prayed in their closets at home, not in public to be seen. Likely, if you see somebody in public making all these claims to be so close to God, they more than likely aren't.

Then what about the people who continually exhort how tolerant and/or open-minded they are?
And what about all that stuff after the Day of Pentecost and the like in Acts?

Anyway as far as alot of people are concerned if you eat your a glutton and if you fast your a fanatic; there's just no pleasing people.

[Captain Yurika]

Originally posted by Anyone00


No your not, I attend an Assemblies of God Church.



LOL....you're probably right! I take that back. I had a friend who was in that, but he got really weird later. :eek: :confused:

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I think it's a perfectly reasonable question. You seem convinced that capitalism is an evil system, so it only seems right that you tell us what IS the best system that goes with Christ's commands.

Why should I answer your question, when you are not answering my question. Do you now believe capitalsim still shares the same principles of Christ? That is all I am asking, all you're trying to do is change the topic and attack whatever system (maybe I have no system) I come up with and then induce therefore capitalism represents Christs teaching. Such an arguement is illogical. Its Hogwash. Answer the question at hand.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Why should I answer your question, when you are not answering my question. Do you now believe capitalsim still shares the same principles of Christ? That is all I am asking, all you're trying to do is change the topic and attack whatever system (maybe I have no system) I come up with and then induce therefore capitalism represents Christs teaching. Such an arguement is illogical. Its Hogwash. Answer the question at hand.

I believe that the "fact" that capitalism is based on greed is merely your impression. You seem to use the terms "capitalism" and "corporate capitalism" interchangably, when you have indicated that they are two different things. I believe that Capitalism is the closest we have to a perfect system, but no human institution can be perfect. All other systems have given rise to dictators and despots that create more evil. For that reason, I'm standing behind Capitalism until Jesus sets up His own system. (And He will.)

There, I've answered my question, now how about yours?

[Krayenhoff]

It looks like most Christians are on the right wing of the political system.

Well, maybe. Not all Christians are gung-ho right-wingers, like Catholics, who are for whatever reason liberal voters.


I don't seem to understand why so many Christians support major coorporations whose greed is unfathomable.

Some corporations are greedy, yes, but I think it's hard to brand them all as greedy. Just because someone wants to make money doesn't mean they're greedy. If you think that, then you're too short-sighted to tackle this question properly.


Most Christians I meet are die hard capitalists. Christianity encourages compassion and kindness and capitalism encourages cutthroatness and competitiveness.

It encourages cutthroat and competitive behavior...

And that also is not necessarily true. Competition doesn't automatically mean you try to kill the entire opposition. Take a look at sports. Do you see basketball players out there trying to kill or injure each other?


I don't think that just because you give a prayer and donate a small amount of money gets rid of all your sins.

Oh, and Christians do? Thanks for giving us some credit.


I find it odd when Christians say allowing homosexuality is revisionist but supporting blood thirsty companies is not revisionist.

Here we go with the "evil dangerous mean corporations" again. I do not think that even most corporations exist solely to destroy people, so I think you ought to stop using such loaded language.

And if we want to get confrontational about it, let's examine your system. How much has socialism advanced anyone's condition? Look at socialist countries and you see utter mediocrity and poverty. Does that make sense? Is that uplifting? And let's not forget socialism's proneness to being hijacked by true monsters like Castro and Stalin. I think you need to take a look at the big picture before you try to accuse Christians as being hypocrites.

[Joe Wagner]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
Well, maybe. Not all Christians are gung-ho right-wingers, like Catholics, who are for whatever reason liberal voters.


I've got to strongly disagree with this - as a Roman Catholic I know this not to be true as a large majority is conservative.

As for the question at hand - Jesus taught us to help those in need and to follow the commandments that he taught. Capitalism is a competitive field that tends to bring out the best in people - causing them to be creative with new ideas, find inexpensive ways to make progress and better the lives of themselves and others. It is only when these goals are taken into the hands of immoral people that problems start to arise - as seen by many corporations that have recently revealed embezzelment and had been padding the pockets of people in the Clinton administration to cover this up (Enron, the overstating of the economy by 30% by Clinton in 2000). When companies have followed guidelines and rules created by moral business people we have seen significant improvement to communities and the people within these communities. Like any organization and leadership though - when these values are compromised they hold a lot of power and are able to affect a lot of people in very negative ways.

-Joe!

[Krayenhoff]

I've got to strongly disagree with this - as a Roman Catholic I know this not to be true as a large majority is conservative.

Oh no, this isn't true. Catholics vote for Democrats, plain and simple.


As for the question at hand - Jesus taught us to help those in need and to follow the commandments that he taught. Capitalism is a competitive field that tends to bring out the best in people - causing them to be creative with new ideas, find inexpensive ways to make progress and better the lives of themselves and others. It is only when these goals are taken into the hands of immoral people that problems start to arise - as seen by many corporations that have recently revealed embezzelment and had been padding the pockets of people in the Clinton administration to cover this up (Enron, the overstating of the economy by 30% by Clinton in 2000). When companies have followed guidelines and rules created by moral business people we have seen significant improvement to communities and the people within these communities. Like any organization and leadership though - when these values are compromised they hold a lot of power and are able to affect a lot of people in very negative ways.

Hear hear.

[Joe Wagner]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
Oh no, this isn't true. Catholics vote for Democrats, plain and simple.


I've got to contend with this my friend - in the area which I live a large majority of Catholics tend to vote for conservative Republicans, however, from living all over the US I do know that this tends to change from area to area - it really depends on your location that dictates the way people tend to vote.

-Joe!

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I believe that the "fact" that capitalism is based on greed is merely your impression. You seem to use the terms "capitalism" and "corporate capitalism" interchangably, when you have indicated that they are two different things. I believe that Capitalism is the closest we have to a perfect system, but no human institution can be perfect. All other systems have given rise to dictators and despots that create more evil. For that reason, I'm standing behind Capitalism until Jesus sets up His own system. (And He will.)

There, I've answered my question, now how about yours?

You seem to have ignored the whole previous discussion. Capitalism is corporate capitalism. You have not answered the question. THE question is whether capitalism principles are the same as Christs principles.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
Well, maybe. Not all Christians are gung-ho right-wingers, like Catholics, who are for whatever reason liberal voters.



Some corporations are greedy, yes, but I think it's hard to brand them all as greedy. Just because someone wants to make money doesn't mean they're greedy. If you think that, then you're too short-sighted to tackle this question properly.



It encourages cutthroat and competitive behavior...

And that also is not necessarily true. Competition doesn't automatically mean you try to kill the entire opposition. Take a look at sports. Do you see basketball players out there trying to kill or injure each other?



Oh, and Christians do? Thanks for giving us some credit.



Here we go with the "evil dangerous mean corporations" again. I do not think that even most corporations exist solely to destroy people, so I think you ought to stop using such loaded language.

And if we want to get confrontational about it, let's examine your system. How much has socialism advanced anyone's condition? Look at socialist countries and you see utter mediocrity and poverty. Does that make sense? Is that uplifting? And let's not forget socialism's proneness to being hijacked by true monsters like Castro and Stalin. I think you need to take a look at the big picture before you try to accuse Christians as being hypocrites.

IT seems like you have totally ignored the whole discussion. Please go back and read it. I am not advocating anything, I am saying that your advocating of capitalsim as a christian is wrong. Competivness for the attainement of material wealth was not Christs message. THIS is what I am saying.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
You seem to have ignored the whole previous discussion. Capitalism is corporate capitalism. You have not answered the question. THE question is whether capitalism principles are the same as Christs principles.


Originally posted by luckybob1985
I believe that Capitalism is the closest we have to a perfect system, but no human institution can be perfect. All other systems have given rise to dictators and despots that create more evil. For that reason, I'm standing behind Capitalism until Jesus sets up His own system. (And He will.)

I'm posting that again, as you seem to have missed it the first time.

[Nightflower]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I'm posting that again, as you seem to have missed it the first time.

Psilon... Luckybob... I'm seeing a lot of "Answer my question!" "YOU answer my question!" "I asked first!" "You didn't answer my question!" "You missed it!"... If you're going to engage in that sort of dialogue, please take it onto PM. There are more mature ways of arguing other than pointing fingers at each other.

[Lucky Bob]

My apologies, Nightflower and Psilon. :o


(Chalks up another mistake to experience)

[Krayenhoff]

IT seems like you have totally ignored the whole discussion. Please go back and read it. I am not advocating anything, I am saying that your advocating of capitalsim as a christian is wrong. Competivness for the attainement of material wealth was not Christs message. THIS is what I am saying.

It seems you haven't actually read the Bible, then. Please go back and read it.

Nowhere does Jesus say that everyone has to be poor and nobody is supposed to compete with each other. He does not decry material wealth as automatically bad. He does talk trash to the rich but that's because they were perceived as being money grubbers and uncaring. He also warns of the dangers of pursuing money such, as becoming avaricious. That is not the same as saying that money is inherently evil. If you can't distinguish between these concepts then you need to urgently rethink your argument.

Your entire argument is invalid, and you accuse me of missing the point? Did you even read the Bible, or are you regurtitating what some communist told you about it?

[The Old Maid]

I try not to repeat myself, but the thread does wander off-topic.


My church is the most conservative.

A red herring. "Conservative vs. liberal" theology is NOT interchangeable with "conservative vs. liberal" economic theory. There can be a dozen ways for a denomination and/or specific congregation to proclaim it has the Most Conservative Theology. (Which one has changed the least since its inception? Which is the oldest one that has changed the least since its inception? Which one prohibits musical instruments during service, even those instruments mentioned in the Scriptures? Which one has the least hierarchy? The most hierarchy? Which ones impose specific gender roles and the women resent it? Which ones impose gender roles and the women feel empowered by it? A code of conduct regarding dancing, movies, mixed-group swimming? Which one is the most anti-casino and anti-alcohol? Which one is dispensationalist? Which one is nondispensationalist? Speaking in tongues or not speaking in tongues? Conducts services in the original language, rather than the local language?) A thread about "What are the differences between Christian churches?" is a legitimate question for, well, another thread.

This thread is about economic theory, and what Christians should do about it. That is why I mentioned that :
"Capitalism is what people do naturally when you leave them alone."

In all societies people climb Maslow's Hierachy of Needs. In monetary-based societies people trade their belongings and/or labor for money, then trade their belongings/labor/money for the fulfillment of those basic needs.

A majority of posters on this thread apparently reject the thread's premise that capitalism and corporate capitalism are synonymous. This is equivalent to forcing square pegs into round holes. That is, it is conceded that holes exist, and that point alone. A 10-year-old with a lemonade stand ; a 15-year-old with a paper route ; a 20-year-old with a home bakery ; and a 30-year-old with a plumber's kit and truck are square pegs. Hardly the stuff of corporations. The overwhelming majority of non-employees in the States are not robber barons. They are small business owners. Small businesses outnumber franchises and corporations by a ratio of well over 10 to 1. Are they bastions of corporate greed?

These are the proposals of this thread as I understand them. Here is also why this thread has been going in circles.


Christians should not support bad things.


No disagreement here.


All Christians (or most, or too many) are economic conservatives.


This is a stereotype, bordering on a prejudice.


Capitalism is bad.
All forms of capitalism are corporate capitalism.
Economic conservatives support corporate capitalism.
Ergo, Christians support corporate capitalism.
Q.E.D. Christians support a bad thing.
The mere fact of being a resident/citizen of a specific country with a specific economic philosophy constitutes support of that economic philosophy.
Those who do not support the economic philosophy have no way to demonstrate this non-support, except by leaving.
Those who say otherwise are either ignorant, in denial, or are hypocrites.


The thread will continue to go in circles because this line of reasoning is divisive. I and many others disagree with these premises. Is there a way to restate the question that will not be divisive and will not promote stereotypes?

[Anyone00]

Those who say otherwise are either ignorant, in denial, or are hypocrites.

Quite a lot of individuals arguments seems to rest on that assumption these days?

[Psilon]

Originally posted by The Old Maid
I try not to repeat myself, but the thread does wander off-topic.

A red herring. "Conservative vs. liberal" theology is NOT interchangeable with "conservative vs. liberal" economic theory. There can be a dozen ways for a denomination and/or specific congregation to proclaim it has the Most Conservative Theology. (Which one has changed the least since its inception? Which is the oldest one that has changed the least since its inception? Which one prohibits musical instruments during service, even those instruments mentioned in the Scriptures? Which one has the least hierarchy? The most hierarchy? Which ones impose specific gender roles and the women resent it? Which ones impose gender roles and the women feel empowered by it? A code of conduct regarding dancing, movies, mixed-group swimming? Which one is the most anti-casino and anti-alcohol? Which one is dispensationalist? Which one is nondispensationalist? Speaking in tongues or not speaking in tongues? Conducts services in the original language, rather than the local language?) A thread about "What are the differences between Christian churches?" is a legitimate question for, well, another thread.

This thread is about economic theory, and what Christians should do about it. That is why I mentioned that :

In all societies people climb Maslow's Hierachy of Needs. In monetary-based societies people trade their belongings and/or labor for money, then trade their belongings/labor/money for the fulfillment of those basic needs.

A majority of posters on this thread apparently reject the thread's premise that capitalism and corporate capitalism are synonymous. This is equivalent to forcing square pegs into round holes. That is, it is conceded that holes exist, and that point alone. A 10-year-old with a lemonade stand ; a 15-year-old with a paper route ; a 20-year-old with a home bakery ; and a 30-year-old with a plumber's kit and truck are square pegs. Hardly the stuff of corporations. The overwhelming majority of non-employees in the States are not robber barons. They are small business owners. Small businesses outnumber franchises and corporations by a ratio of well over 10 to 1. Are they bastions of corporate greed?

These are the proposals of this thread as I understand them. Here is also why this thread has been going in circles.


Christians should not support bad things.


No disagreement here.


All Christians (or most, or too many) are economic conservatives.


This is a stereotype, bordering on a prejudice.


Capitalism is bad.
All forms of capitalism are corporate capitalism.
Economic conservatives support corporate capitalism.
Ergo, Christians support corporate capitalism.
Q.E.D. Christians support a bad thing.
The mere fact of being a resident/citizen of a specific country with a specific economic philosophy constitutes support of that economic philosophy.
Those who do not support the economic philosophy have no way to demonstrate this non-support, except by leaving.
Those who say otherwise are either ignorant, in denial, or are hypocrites.


The thread will continue to go in circles because this line of reasoning is divisive. I and many others disagree with these premises. Is there a way to restate the question that will not be divisive and will not promote stereotypes?

Ok, maybe I came too hard too fast. Let me first appologize if I have angered any one of you. Sometimes I go into a rant. As a result maybe my arguement is not clear. This thread is a question to Christians who support capitalism.

Here is my reasoning, I'll go through this step by step. Then if you have problem just reply.

First step:
Capitalism promotes the attainment of material wealth by competition. Anyone disagree with me here?

[The Old Maid]

Originally posted by Psilon2011

OK, maybe I came too hard too fast. Let me first apologize if I have angered any one of you. Sometimes I go into a rant. As a result maybe my argument is not clear.

No harm in a rant. It's only the over-generalization that might irk people. Maybe if you narrowed down the topic? For example, "Christians who support capitalism" is overly broad and probably inaccurate. As long as the greedy are rewarded and the honest poor fall through the cracks, a good Christian won't blindly support any economic system.

The Christian is required to pay the tithe and to perform the acts of mercy, to wit : to feed the hungry ; give water to those who thirst ; to clothe the naked ; to shelter the homeless ; to tend the sick ; to visit the imprisoned ; to bury the dead. These obligations are binding upon the Christian in any country, in any time. We who live in comfortable circumstances have no reasonable excuse for not performing moral duties. Money is merely a tool to accomplish these duties. It's not money that is the root of all evil. The precise verse is "the love of money is the root of all evil."

(Though I do like L.M. Montgomery's proposal that "fear is the original sin. Almost all the evil in the world has its origin in the fact that someone is afraid of something." Fear of poverty, for example, promotes greed.)

In the First Century the Christians of The Book of Acts sold the excess they had and put it into a church purse. This money helped the widows, the orphans, and the injured or ill. Those who could keep working continued to do so. (Paul kept working as a tentmaker.) The question of how they would have dealt with modern-styled banking and investments is unclear -- they didn't have banks as we understand them, nor did they have our methods of credit. For the common man it was very much a stuff-the-money-in-the-mattress economy. No doubt they would be intrigued by some developments in the 21st Century (no debtor's prisons) but horrified by others.


Capitalism promotes the attainment of material wealth by competition.

Random House defines capitalism as
"an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations, especially as contrasted to cooperatively or state-owned means of wealth."

Not all capitalists compete against each other. Some compete against themselves, or against nature (say, farmers). The Amish do not choose to compete, yet they are among the wealthiest and most successful private farmers in the world. Alternately, many alleged capitalists have no competition because they fill a void. The Shakers were among the nation's most prolific inventors, yet their inventions, medicines, and foodstuffs usually only displaced other products that would have been discontinued anyway.

The reason Christians (and other believers, and nonbelievers) gravitate to capitalist countries when they can is because that's the economic system that gives both the greedy and the honorable the greatest scope for the exercise of their gifts. Doesn't necessarily qualify as a moral endorsement ; it's just seen as the best of the available choices.

At the beginning of the thread, it said something about people who called themselves Christian but were clearly greedy and/or too heavily invested in the capitalist system to be trustworthy and admirable witnesses. Maybe a specific example instead?


Is it moral to buy a $20,000 car when a dented but dependable $5,000 car would do?
Is it moral to buy even a budget car if public transportation is available?
Is it moral to buy a new house -- knowing the neighborhood has destroyed a forest, meadows, wetlands, and the animals that once lived there -- when a used house in an established neighborhood was available?
Is it moral to buy expensive jewelry, clothes, or other toys?
To run up your credit cards?
To declare bankruptcy?
Is it moral to invest in a mutual fund?
Is it moral if you choose a socially-responsible fund like Pax World?
Is it moral if you choose a specific stock and only that? One that you screened yourself?
If you give money to a cause because you get a tax write-off, should it count as a good deed? Or is it organized posturing? (I think you mentioned this at the beginning of the thread. I've seen people do that, by the way.)


Were these questions closer to what you had in mind?

[Psilon]

No, those are not the questions I like to get answered.

When you give the cases of capitalism where competition is not there or they are competing with themselves. This is almost a complete carbon copy of the 'ideals' in socialist/communist whatever you want to call it system.

Capitalism. It is the lure of money to create and therefore encourage competition.

People who created new things, by competing with themselves will exist any system.

BTW Random House definition is more loaded than anything I have written. According to it, the majority of wealth is held by a minority, corporations and individuals. I can rip into that but I will not.

BTW...When you say it is the best of the choices. I think thats a copout. Choosing between the lesser evils is a pragmatic approach not a Christian approach. I don't think Christ would settle for lesser of evils.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Nightflower
Psilon... Luckybob... I'm seeing a lot of "Answer my question!" "YOU answer my question!" "I asked first!" "You didn't answer my question!" "You missed it!"... If you're going to engage in that sort of dialogue, please take it onto PM. There are more mature ways of arguing other than pointing fingers at each other.

I humbly appologize.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011

BTW...When you say it is the best of the choices. I think thats a copout. Choosing between the lesser evils is a pragmatic approach not a Christian approach. I don't think Christ would settle for lesser of evils.


You seem to forget the fact that man is sinful. Do you not agree with that? As such, man is incapable of doing or making anything perfect. Do you also agree with that?

I advise you to look at the teachings of Christ once more. Did He ever lay down any guidlines saying "Okay, don't ever follow capitalism, we're going to do it this way..."? How then can we say that Capitalism goes against his teachings?

I know your answer: "Well, it breeds competitive companies that rob from the people and generally turn into evil Enrons!" Okay, let's look at it this way. Let's say that there are evil people in this world (and there are), does that mean that life is a flawed instrument that we should stop following? Does that mean that we humans should stop reproducing because man is evil? Does it mean that we should let the animals have a chance because we humans blew it?

I dunno, this all sounds like the argument for gun control. "People kill with guns, so we must outlaw guns!" While we're at it, let's outlaw knives and baseball bats! Same with this capitalism. Just because some people use it for evil doesn't mean the object is evil.

There will never be a perfect system untill Christ sets up His kingdom. So, why not go with the best we got? That's not a cop-out, that's just the plain reality!

[EinBebop]

I can't believe noone's mentioned Jesus' parable of the ten talents.


Matthew 25:20-21 So he who had received five talents came and brought five other talents, saying, "Lord, you delivered to me five talents; look, I have gained five more talents besides them.' His lord said to him, "Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.


Matthew 25:24-27Then he who had received the one talent came and said, "Lord, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you have not sown, and gathering where you have not scattered seed. And I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground. Look, there you have what is yours. "But his lord answered and said to him, "You wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown, and gather where I have not scattered seed. So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest.

Clearly, it's not immoral to profit from our resources, wit, and labor. Why, Jesus even suggests using bankers, who pays that interest by 'borrowing and lending'! *gasp*

Another important principle is that everything the servant has belongs to the Master, and is used in such a way to please Him. Here is your glimpse at "the perfect system".

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
You seem to forget the fact that man is sinful. Do you not agree with that? As such, man is incapable of doing or making anything perfect. Do you also agree with that?

I advise you to look at the teachings of Christ once more. Did He ever lay down any guidlines saying "Okay, don't ever follow capitalism, we're going to do it this way..."? How then can we say that Capitalism goes against his teachings?

I know your answer: "Well, it breeds competitive companies that rob from the people and generally turn into evil Enrons!" Okay, let's look at it this way. Let's say that there are evil people in this world (and there are), does that mean that life is a flawed instrument that we should stop following? Does that mean that we humans should stop reproducing because man is evil? Does it mean that we should let the animals have a chance because we humans blew it?

I dunno, this all sounds like the argument for gun control. "People kill with guns, so we must outlaw guns!" While we're at it, let's outlaw knives and baseball bats! Same with this capitalism. Just because some people use it for evil doesn't mean the object is evil.

There will never be a perfect system untill Christ sets up His kingdom. So, why not go with the best we got? That's not a cop-out, that's just the plain reality!

Man is sinful, only if he wants. He can choose to be sinful or not. Sin is an option.

No it is a copout. You sound like a communist.

"Its a good thing, its just that humans can manipulate any object and make it evil", wow that sounds familiar :rolleyes:

Ok, my understanding is that the majority of you believe material wealth can be attained without the desire for wealth. This is the spirit of capitalism according to you. Doing something cause you like to do it and then geting money for it, which you don't really care for. I'm sorry man, but the type of people described here exist in all economical systems. I know many people like this.

How capitalism differs from other systems in that it gives the lure of material wealth so that people will compete with each other to attain said wealth and therefore create better products.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Man is sinful, only if he wants. He can choose to be sinful or not. Sin is an option.

The Bible clearly states that "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." It's human nature.


No it is a copout. You sound like a communist.

Merely your impressions.


"Its a good thing, its just that humans can manipulate any object and make it evil", wow that sounds familiar :rolleyes:

I don't know where you got that quote, but it wasn't in my post. Please don't start the old argument again.


Ok, my understanding is that the majority of you believe material wealth can be attained without the desire for wealth. This is the spirit of capitalism according to you. Doing something cause you like to do it and then geting money for it, which you don't really care for. I'm sorry man, but the type of people described here exist in all economical systems. I know many people like this.

Nope. Take a look at the Soviet Union. NOBODY was rich, except the government dictators.


How capitalism differs from other systems in that it gives the lure of material wealth so that people will compete with each other to attain said wealth and therefore create better products.

And the bad part is...?

BTW, you seem to equate ANY desire for wealth as greed. Look at this def. from dictionary.com:

Greed: An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth:

[Joe Wagner]

I would like to add something to this arguement as well - it seems to be the belief that captialism is bad because of the few companies that have used their companies for their own profit. However it is also capitalism that has found a way to get the most out of the resources around us and use these resources for the betterment of mankind. It is the competition of capitalism that allows people to explore new idea and for the determination to be made which ideas are cost effective and will use our limited resources to the greatest potential. While profit is a primary motive in capitalism it is also a way for people to support their families and not become a burden on society. It also allows people to focus more on the problems of others - after all, it's much harder to try and stop these problems if you are constantly strugling for the survival of yourself and your family.

Also, it is our capitalistic system that allows the US to give the largest amount of money to countries all over the world in an effort to help people the world over. Why? Because we have the largest economy in the world and are stable enough that we can provide for the betterment of many other countries and populations, something that would be nearly impossible for us to do if we had never been able to shape our country into a strong nation - and a major factor of this shaping was capitalism, the desire for people to want to provide for themselves and the understanding that people had to work together to achieve their goals and find innovative ways for resources to be used.

-Joe!

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
The Bible clearly states that "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God." It's human nature.



Merely your impressions.


I don't know where you got that quote, but it wasn't in my post. Please don't start the old argument again.

Nope. Take a look at the Soviet Union. NOBODY was rich, except the government dictators.

And the bad part is...?

BTW, you seem to equate ANY desire for wealth as greed. Look at this def. from dictionary.com:

Greed: An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth:

No, I think this is major beef I have with the majority of "Christians" that I have talked to. Though this arguement is posed many times from "atheists." They say sin, and therefore evil is part of human nature and give up right there. How do you know, have you challenged it, have you tried to battle sin. Have you made a serious concious effort to elliminate sin from your mind?

About you sounding like a communist. Normally, the arguement between capitalists and communists is:

COMMUNIST : "The ideals are good, its just that a few people manipulate the ideals and use it for evil"

REBUTTAL: "That is why communism is not practical and therefore a flawed system"

Now you are saying almost the exact same thing as the communist when you refer to capitalism.

"Nope. Take a look at the Soviet Union. NOBODY was rich, except the government dictators. "

I wasn't talking about these individuals gettin rich. But these people do not care about money. They care about about doing what they love. These people exist in any system.

Ok from your remarks you seem to agree with my extremly forgiving definition of capitalism. I will go back eventually to the Random House definition that was provided by Old Maid later. However, everyone here seems to agree with mine so far.

Can I proceed, or are there any other arguements.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
No, I think this is major beef I have with the majority of "Christians" that I have talked to. Though this arguement is posed many times from "atheists." They say sin, and therefore evil is part of human nature and give up right there. How do you know, have you challenged it, have you tried to battle sin. Have you made a serious concious effort to elliminate sin from your mind?

Yes, I have. And continue to. However, the Bible clearly states that sin is a part of human nature. Read Romans 6, 7, and 8 sometime.


About you sounding like a communist. Normally, the arguement between capitalists and communists is:

COMMUNIST : "The ideals are good, its just that a few people manipulate the ideals and use it for evil"

REBUTTAL: "That is why communism is not practical and therefore a flawed system"

Now you are saying almost the exact same thing as the communist when you refer to capitalism.

There's a difference. Communism has ALWAYS been run by the corrupt people because it goes on the naive assumption that man is basically good. Capitalism hasn't. Communism has failed every time. (And the countries in which it is implemented continue to fail.)



"Nope. Take a look at the Soviet Union. NOBODY was rich, except the government dictators. "


I wasn't talking about these individuals gettin rich. But these people do not care about money. They care about about doing what they love. These people exist in any system.

Maybe, but how come the majority of them are in the capitalistic society?


Ok from your remarks you seem to agree with my extremly forgiving definition of capitalism. I will go back eventually to the Random House definition that was provided by Old Maid later. However, everyone here seems to agree with mine so far.

I said the EXTREME desire to attain wealth. Not just the desire to attain wealth. If a man wants to attain wealth to provide a comfortable lifestyle for himself and his family, is that greed?

[The Old Maid]

Originally posted by Psilon2011

The Random House definition is more loaded than anything I have written. According to it, the majority of wealth is held by a minority, corporations and individuals. I can rip into that but I will not.

When you say it is the best of the choices, I think that's a copout. Choosing between the lesser evils is a pragmatic approach not a Christian approach. I don't think Christ would settle for lesser of evils.

And I do?

I think you and I won't be able to come to an agreement.

When I consulted Random House, my immediate reaction was, "Oh, that makes sense" because to me "private individual" means me. It means you, and anybody, and everybody. If your definition is different -- one in which I don't control my money and therefore have no responsibility for it -- then I'm guessing I won't understand it.

By the same coin, I think you may not understand my definition of "rich." To me "rich" means having your basic needs met. And by needs I don't mean cable, cars, and phone. I mean food, clothing, and shelter. To have those things makes you rich, because so many in this world have less. Unless you've ever been really, truly poor, I'm not sure you can understand that. Now if by reason of a sound mind and hard work you earn more than you need, you now have more to give to the poor -- but you were obligated to give even when you were poor, because there's always someone worse off than you. That is my approach to money, and I think it is a Christian one.

I don't see how the fact that I ended up living in a specific time and place constitutes choosing evil, let alone choosing between evils. My obligations and responsibilities to God and neighbor would be binding on me wherever I landed. It just happens that in the West I have more freedom to follow God to the best of my ability. I don't see how having gratitude for that opportunity makes me a cop-out. I've never been called such a name, and am at a loss as to how to respond.

[Krayenhoff]

No, I think this is major beef I have with the majority of "Christians" that I have talked to. Though this arguement is posed many times from "atheists." They say sin, and therefore evil is part of human nature and give up right there. How do you know, have you challenged it, have you tried to battle sin. Have you made a serious concious effort to elliminate sin from your mind?

You know, Psilon's right. Just because we haven't tried doesn't mean it's impossible.

Why, you know what? I want to see Tibet freed. So I think I'll just get a BB gun, hop a plane to India, march through the Himalayas, and announce to the Chinese army, "I hereby declare Tibet to be free. If any of you have a problem with that, step forward to be struck down!" I mean, I know what some of you are thinking. The nay-sayers will say that it can't happen. But how do we know if no one's ever tried?

Psilon, let's be serious. It's been 1970 years since Jesus died. Do you honestly think that no one has come around since and tried to totally purge himself of evil? I know people like St. Francis and St. Augustine tried, and they tried hard, but they failed. So what makes YOU think that it's possible?


About you sounding like a communist. Normally, the arguement between capitalists and communists is:

COMMUNIST : "The ideals are good, its just that a few people manipulate the ideals and use it for evil"

REBUTTAL: "That is why communism is not practical and therefore a flawed system"

No, a communist would argue that communism/socialism IS correct and that it always leads to the best for everyone. The argument you say a communist would have is actually what a capitalist would have. Communism's a great idea (to some people, at least). Who wouldn't want everyone to have a comfortable home, guaranteed income, security, etc? The problem is it does not work at all and denis basic human behavior.

Capitalism, on the other hand, affirms man's desire to compete and better himself (in almost all cases). Now why would Jesus be opposed to that?


Now you are saying almost the exact same thing as the communist when you refer to capitalism.

Nope, you don't understand the argument between communism and capitalism (more accurately, the argument between socialism and capitalism). Were you asleep during the Cold War?


I wasn't talking about these individuals gettin rich. But these people do not care about money. They care about about doing what they love. These people exist in any system.

You think communists care about things like that? Maybe the deluded ones who were raised in indoctrination schools, but not true communists. At least, not after the fall of the Soviet Union, the collapse of China, North Korea's insanity, Vietnam looking for any way out, and Cuba, oh man, all you have to say is "Cuba" and you get the picture!

Communism is all about centralizing power, nothing more.

I find it suspicious that Psilon ignores Jesus' parable about the talents. Excellent job in pointing that out, whoever you were, for that totally disrupts Psilon's false assumption that Christ was against capitalism and the pursuit of money through investment. Psilon, if you can't even argue that Jesus was against capitalism, then how can you begin to assume that it is wrong for Christians to be capitalists?

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Yes, I have. And continue to. However, the Bible clearly states that sin is a part of human nature. Read Romans 6, 7, and 8 sometime.

There's a difference. Communism has ALWAYS been run by the corrupt people because it goes on the naive assumption that man is basically good. Capitalism hasn't. Communism has failed every time. (And the countries in which it is implemented continue to fail.)

Maybe, but how come the majority of them are in the capitalistic society?

I said the EXTREME desire to attain wealth. Not just the desire to attain wealth. If a man wants to attain wealth to provide a comfortable lifestyle for himself and his family, is that greed?

You say you have but you say it is impossible. It is possible, there have been people through out history who have eliminated sin from their mind and their soul.

"Maybe, but how come the majority of them are in the capitalistic society?"

Communists have had plenty of intellectuals and technocrats. I am not going to toot the horn of the soviet union. But, they created plenty of intellectuals that rivalled the number from the states. True intellectuals do not care that much for money. Any society from state controlled facism like Nazi Germany to the soviet union had plenty of intellectuals. And we also remember one small fact, there have been more capitalist countries than communist or facist in history.

I am not talking about the extreme desire of wealth. I am just talking about the desire for material wealth. I define greed differently.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
You know, Psilon's right. Just because we haven't tried doesn't mean it's impossible.

Why, you know what? I want to see Tibet freed. So I think I'll just get a BB gun, hop a plane to India, march through the Himalayas, and announce to the Chinese army, "I hereby declare Tibet to be free. If any of you have a problem with that, step forward to be struck down!" I mean, I know what some of you are thinking. The nay-sayers will say that it can't happen. But how do we know if no one's ever tried?

Psilon, let's be serious. It's been 1970 years since Jesus died. Do you honestly think that no one has come around since and tried to totally purge himself of evil? I know people like St. Francis and St. Augustine tried, and they tried hard, but they failed. So what makes YOU think that it's possible?



No, a communist would argue that communism/socialism IS correct and that it always leads to the best for everyone. The argument you say a communist would have is actually what a capitalist would have. Communism's a great idea (to some people, at least). Who wouldn't want everyone to have a comfortable home, guaranteed income, security, etc? The problem is it does not work at all and denis basic human behavior.

Capitalism, on the other hand, affirms man's desire to compete and better himself (in almost all cases). Now why would Jesus be opposed to that?



Nope, you don't understand the argument between communism and capitalism (more accurately, the argument between socialism and capitalism). Were you asleep during the Cold War?



You think communists care about things like that? Maybe the deluded ones who were raised in indoctrination schools, but not true communists. At least, not after the fall of the Soviet Union, the collapse of China, North Korea's insanity, Vietnam looking for any way out, and Cuba, oh man, all you have to say is "Cuba" and you get the picture!

Communism is all about centralizing power, nothing more.

I find it suspicious that Psilon ignores Jesus' parable about the talents. Excellent job in pointing that out, whoever you were, for that totally disrupts Psilon's false assumption that Christ was against capitalism and the pursuit of money through investment. Psilon, if you can't even argue that Jesus was against capitalism, then how can you begin to assume that it is wrong for Christians to be capitalists?

I haven't got to my essential arguement. I have been giving pieces. I will come to it eventually, but I have to take this step by step or I will loose coherency, which I seem to be loosing, as I responding to so many people.

BTW When I say communist I mean the idealist who first reads about communism.

[Krayenhoff]

You say you have but you say it is impossible. It is possible, there have been people through out history who have eliminated sin from their mind and their soul.

Names, please? And I didn't know that mind-reading was another one of your talents. You should be a judge, or something.


Communists have had plenty of intellectuals and technocrats. I am not going to toot the horn of the soviet union. But, they created plenty of intellectuals that rivalled the number from the states. True intellectuals do not care that much for money. Any society from state controlled facism like Nazi Germany to the soviet union had plenty of intellectuals. And we also remember one small fact, there have been more capitalist countries than communist or facist in history.

Communists intellectuals are frauds who can't be believed. Why? Because they were communists, and communism has failed. That is all that needs to be said.


I am not talking about the extreme desire of wealth. I am just talking about the desire for material wealth. I define greed differently.

Oh, so you want to play that game, do you? You just challenged the wrong guy.

Let's see... okay, let's redefine "the extreme desire of weath." The new definition will be "making sense."

Let's change the definition of "the desire for material weath" into "ignoring any case that is devastating to my point."

There, I can define things differently, too.

[Krayenhoff]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
I haven't got to my essential arguement. I have been giving pieces. I will come to it eventually, but I have to take this step by step or I will loose coherency, which I seem to be loosing, as I responding to so many people.

BTW When I say communist I mean the idealist who first reads about communism.

Well then get to it! Stop beating around the bush and come right out with your essential point. The way I see it, you have nothing left to go to.

Also, your signature contains a word that I'm pretty sure does not exist. I think you're looking for "contentment," not "contentedness."

[Psilon]

Originally posted by The Old Maid
And I do?

I think you and I won't be able to come to an agreement.

When I consulted Random House, my immediate reaction was, "Oh, that makes sense" because to me "private individual" means me. It means you, and anybody, and everybody. If your definition is different -- one in which I don't control my money and therefore have no responsibility for it -- then I'm guessing I won't understand it.

By the same coin, I think you may not understand my definition of "rich." To me "rich" means having your basic needs met. And by needs I don't mean cable, cars, and phone. I mean food, clothing, and shelter. To have those things makes you rich, because so many in this world have less. Unless you've ever been really, truly poor, I'm not sure you can understand that. Now if by reason of a sound mind and hard work you earn more than you need, you now have more to give to the poor -- but you were obligated to give even when you were poor, because there's always someone worse off than you. That is my approach to money, and I think it is a Christian one.

I don't see how the fact that I ended up living in a specific time and place constitutes choosing evil, let alone choosing between evils. My obligations and responsibilities to God and neighbor would be binding on me wherever I landed. It just happens that in the West I have more freedom to follow God to the best of my ability. I don't see how having gratitude for that opportunity makes me a cop-out. I've never been called such a name, and am at a loss as to how to respond.

Oh, my brother, I have known poverty. I have known it I have seen it, my father has known it, my father's father has known it.

I like your defintion of rich...however your richness has been attained in several communist countries.

Old Maid, I am not refferring to Christians living in capitalist country. I am refferring to christians who endorse capitalism. They are mutually exclusive.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
Well then get to it! Stop beating around the bush and come right out with your essential point. The way I see it, you have nothing left to go to.

Also, your signature contains a word that I'm pretty sure does not exist. I think you're looking for "contentment," not "contentedness."

No the word does exist. The arguement will go off into too many tangents. Though I have revealed a sizeable chunk of it. Sadly, the real debate has not begun yet.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Krayenhoff
Names, please? And I didn't know that mind-reading was another one of your talents. You should be a judge, or something.

Communists intellectuals are frauds who can't be believed. Why? Because they were communists, and communism has failed. That is all that needs to be said.

Oh, so you want to play that game, do you? You just challenged the wrong guy.

Let's see... okay, let's redefine "the extreme desire of weath." The new definition will be "making sense."

Let's change the definition of "the desire for material weath" into "ignoring any case that is devastating to my point."

There, I can define things differently, too.

"Communists intellectuals are frauds who can't be believed. Why? Because they were communists, and communism has failed. That is all that needs to be said." That doesn't even make sense. There is no logical process to it. I am not refferring to Lenin or Trotsky. I am reffering to the scientists, innovators etc.

"Names, please? And I didn't know that mind-reading was another one of your talents. You should be a judge, or something."

Lets see, the vedas in the Gita, buddha, Lao Tsu, Hakuin, Bodhidharma.

I knew you would do that. This is typical standard philosophy. Fine I shall create a new word for this occasion.

grabtabga-the desire of wealth. are you happy.

I want to move on. It seems most are happy with this EXTREMLY forgiving definition.

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
You say you have but you say it is impossible. It is possible, there have been people through out history who have eliminated sin from their mind and their soul. This in direct contradiction with the Bible.
Romans 7:21-25 It seems to be a fact of life that when I want to do what is right, I inevitably do what is wrong. I love God's law with all my heart. But there is another law at work within me that is at war with my mind. This law wins the fight and makes me a slave to the sin that is still within me. Oh, what a miserable person I am! Who will free me from this life that is dominated by sin? Thank God! The answer is in Jesus Christ our Lord. So you see how it is: In my mind I really want to obey God's law, but because of my sinful nature I am a slave to sin.
Originally posted by Psilon2011 No, I think this is major beef I have with the majority of "Christians" that I have talked to. Though this arguement is posed many times from "atheists." They say sin, and therefore evil is part of human nature and give up right there.A true Christian's conscience will always be at war with his sinful nature. He may lose some battles but will not "give up" in the sense of using that as an excuse to justify continued sin.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by EinBebop
This in direct contradiction with the Bible.A true Christian's conscience will always be at war with his sinful nature. He may lose some battles but will not "give up" in the sense of using that as an excuse to justify continued sin.

so he will fight against sin no matter what, and therefore will never choose "the lesser of evils" yes?

[ccffan01]

Don't most religons encourage kindness and compassion......

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
so he will fight against sin no matter what, and therefore will never choose "the lesser of evils" yes? Your question assumes that there is a third option.

Kill one congenital twin to save the other, or allow both to die?

Civil disobedience against a government commiting unthinkable acts?

Lie to the angry mob to keep them from killing the Hebrew spies?

"Lesser of two evils" has also become a saying for two choices that people don't like, but aren't necessarily evil. Election time is an excellent example of that, but I don't think too many politicians deserve to be called 'evil'. There's no sin involved with such a choice; they're just crappy choices.

But in theory, yes, a Christian should always look for a third option to 'two evils'.

Since I think you're trying to get this back to capitalism vs communism, however, I have to say that I don' t consider either one evil. As I showed with the parable of the talents (post #58), obviously I don't believe capitalism is evil, nor that it requires greed to be successful.

I also don't believe that communism is evil, but I don't think it can operate as successfully in a corrupt world, where a few will always be trying to take control of the system. Capitalism allows the greedy to pursue their own devices whereas the more spiritual-minded can pursue their own goals with less concern of the economy being taken over by a few.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
You say you have but you say it is impossible. It is possible, there have been people through out history who have eliminated sin from their mind and their soul.

Alright, then! Are you saying the Bible is flawed? It's there, just read the passages I've pointed out. It might help if you put down Nietzche first.


"Maybe, but how come the majority of them are in the capitalistic society?"

Communists have had plenty of intellectuals and technocrats. I am not going to toot the horn of the soviet union. But, they created plenty of intellectuals that rivalled the number from the states. True intellectuals do not care that much for money. Any society from state controlled facism like Nazi Germany to the soviet union had plenty of intellectuals. And we also remember one small fact, there have been more capitalist countries than communist or facist in history.

Intellectuals, eh? The only intellectuals that the Soviet Union had were state-induced ones. That's not being an intellectual, that's being a puppet.

BTW, would you rather go out and watch a movie on Saturday night, or an intellectual? Just a thought.


I am not talking about the extreme desire of wealth. I am just talking about the desire for material wealth. I define greed differently.

That's fine. That's between you and the dictionary. Just don't be surprised when everyone disagrees with that definition.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Alright, then! Are you saying the Bible is flawed? It's there, just read the passages I've pointed out. It might help if you put down Nietzche first.

Intellectuals, eh? The only intellectuals that the Soviet Union had were state-induced ones. That's not being an intellectual, that's being a puppet.

BTW, would you rather go out and watch a movie on Saturday night, or an intellectual? Just a thought.

That's fine. That's between you and the dictionary. Just don't be surprised when everyone disagrees with that definition.

My brother, I have read but I have also read Kierkgarrd, who I have a deep respect for.

Intellectuals...I'm not changing the topic. If you read my previous posts, I am not referring to intellectuals as communist spouting propaganda drones but inovators, the type of people who do work because they like what they do and not motivated my wealth. People like this exist in all economic policies.

"BTW, would you rather go out and watch a movie on Saturday night, or an intellectual? Just a thought. "

I'm not quite sure I understand what you are saying, but if you are asking whether I would prefer the path of wisdom over material and sensual pleasure. I would prefer the path of wisdom.

Ok, so now we have found that capitalsim relies on the desire for wealth. Can you have two masters, material wealth and God? To find God you must be totally committed to Him and the task. Even the smallest bit of desire other than the desire of God, taints your soul. Desire cannot be split, or be a subset of another set of desire which has nothing to do with it. God has nothing to do with material wealth.

"No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despire the other. You cannot serve both God and Mammon."

[Rafeal v1.0]

Ok, so now we have found that capitalsim relies on the desire for wealth. Can you have two masters, material wealth and God? To find God you must be totally committed to Him and the task. Even the smallest bit of desire other than the desire of God, taints your soul. Desire cannot be split, or be a subset of another set of desire which has nothing to do with it. God has nothing to do with material wealth.

God doesnt disapprove of wealth, he disapproves the love of wealth.

and since when has a desire become a master? its only a master if you let it be.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by Rafeal v1.0
God doesnt disapprove of wealth, he disapproves the love of wealth.

and since when has a desire become a master? its only a master if you let it be.

Yes, ok, but that is my point, the love, or desire or lust for wealth.

You cannot be dedicated to wealth and God. One is material, one is spirtual. Choose...

When you desire something, it controls you. As a Christian your desire should be God and nothing else.

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
You cannot be dedicated to wealth and God. One is material, one is spirtual. Choose...

When you desire something, it controls you. As a Christian your desire should be God and nothing else. So my desire for food, water, shelter... even sex... controls me? Nonsense! There are many desires in our hearts, including the desire to do evil. If Jesus had no desire for food or wealth, then the whole notion that Satan tempted him was a sham. He might as well have promised Jesus a beat-up old shoe for what it was worth.


Ecclesiastes 5:18-20
Even so, I have noticed one thing, at least, that is good. It is good for people to eat well, drink a good glass of wine, and enjoy their work--whatever they do under the sun--for however long God lets them live. And it is a good thing to receive wealth from God and the good health to enjoy it. To enjoy your work and accept your lot in life--that is indeed a gift from God. People who do this rarely look with sorrow on the past, for God has given them reasons for joy.There are so many promises of wealth and prosperity in the Bible to those who are wise and trust God... what would be the point of those promises if we had no desire for such things? To desire something and to, as you say, be dedicated to it, are two entirely different things. But our desire for God is to be our greatest desire, because, as you said, He is to be our only Master.

So if desiring wealth is not a crime, what does 'greed' mean? Since the dictionary's definition has been called into question, let's define greed within the context of the Bible, using Biblical descriptions of greedy people: greedy people are compared to animals devouring their prey; they want to get rich quick, and will not hesitate to do so at the expense of others. Greedy people are idolaters who are never satisfied.

Summed up: Greed is the endless pursuit of wealth, above God and absent of His command of compassion for others.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by EinBebop
So my desire for food, water, shelter... even sex... controls me? Nonsense! There are many desires in our hearts, including the desire to do evil. If Jesus had no desire for food or wealth, then the whole notion that Satan tempted him was a sham. He might as well have promised Jesus a beat-up old shoe for what it was worth.

There are so many promises of wealth and prosperity in the Bible to those who are wise and trust God... what would be the point of those promises if we had no desire for such things? To desire something and to, as you say, be dedicated to it, are two entirely different things. But our desire for God is to be our greatest desire, because, as you said, He is to be our only Master.

So if desiring wealth is not a crime, what does 'greed' mean? Since the dictionary's definition has been called into question, let's define greed within the context of the Bible, using Biblical descriptions of greedy people: greedy people are compared to animals devouring their prey; they want to get rich quick, and will not hesitate to do so at the expense of others. Greedy people are idolaters who are never satisfied.

Summed up: Greed is the endless pursuit of wealth, above God and absent of His command of compassion for others.

Desire is part of human nature. The desire to provide for yourself and your loved ones is not evil, it's part of what makes humans living beings.

So, you're saying that we should have no desire for wealth or to attain wealth. Okay, so should we live unproductive lives in the woods as hermits? Kill our own food only when absolutley neccesary for survival, and avoid any modern convenience?

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by EinBebop
Either you're replying to the wrong person, or I lost you completely somewhere.

Sorry, I was just "adding to" your argument. Guess I didn't explain that very well!

I just woke up, okay? :D

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I just woke up, okay? :D Understood. :)

[Psilon]

Originally posted by EinBebop
So my desire for food, water, shelter... even sex... controls me? Nonsense! There are many desires in our hearts, including the desire to do evil. If Jesus had no desire for food or wealth, then the whole notion that Satan tempted him was a sham. He might as well have promised Jesus a beat-up old shoe for what it was worth.

There are so many promises of wealth and prosperity in the Bible to those who are wise and trust God... what would be the point of those promises if we had no desire for such things? To desire something and to, as you say, be dedicated to it, are two entirely different things. But our desire for God is to be our greatest desire, because, as you said, He is to be our only Master.

So if desiring wealth is not a crime, what does 'greed' mean? Since the dictionary's definition has been called into question, let's define greed within the context of the Bible, using Biblical descriptions of greedy people: greedy people are compared to animals devouring their prey; they want to get rich quick, and will not hesitate to do so at the expense of others. Greedy people are idolaters who are never satisfied.

Summed up: Greed is the endless pursuit of wealth, above God and absent of His command of compassion for others.

Wealth, I believe in spiritual wealth.

Did Jesus act on his desire for wealth...

Desire of wealth, is the same as the desire to live...Interesting

Your desires must be a subset of the desire for God.

You believe material wealth is a subset to the path of God....Interesting

LuckyBob1985, I thought you said you love everyone, or do you love someone more, and therefore you have degrees, then you must have hate.

You believe productivness is gaining material wealth?...Interesting

Who said you had to live as hermits. If you love the universe, if you love all things, then you would work for all your loved ones. Yes?

The self does not matter when it comes to God.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011


LuckyBob1985, I thought you said you love everyone, or do you love someone more, and therefore you have degrees, then you must have hate.


Huh?

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Huh?

We had this conversation earlier during this thread. About the love of the universe.

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Wealth, I believe in spiritual wealth.Without a doubt. And you could argue that many of the passages that promise wealth and prosperity could be referring to spiritual. But some definitely refer to earthly wealth. Such as the passage from Ecclesiastes that I chose above.


Did Jesus act on his desire for wealth...

Desire of wealth, is the same as the desire to live...Interesting

Your desires must be a subset of the desire for God.

You believe material wealth is a subset to the path of God....InterestingFirstly, I certainly do not believe that all desire for wealth and desire for life is the same; they have different places on the hierarchy of needs. But they are the same in that both are things that can get in the way of God's will, such as when Jonah refused to go to Ninevah in fear of his life. This was the context in which I was speaking, because it was also the context in which you were speaking when you made the distinction between material desires and spiritual desires.

I'm not sure where you're going with the Jesus thing. It sounds almost like you are suggesting.. well, maybe not living as a hermit, but perhaps forgoing all worldly possessions? And so it seems we're coming back to the definition of wealth. Did Jesus get paid when he was a carpenter? How much is too much? Do I really need a computer? Or a car? The people living in the run-down part of my town look pretty wealthy to the homeless. Does "wealth" mean great riches, or just a certain level of comfort?

There is a danger that goes with a little wealth. It leads to a desire for more. That's why the verse I quoted above says to enjoy your work and accept your lot, enjoying the wealth you're given. Your lot is God's plan for you; there's nothing wrong with following his plan, knowing there's a little gold at the end of the rainbow. We don't want to give into greed and rebel against His will.

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
We had this conversation earlier during this thread. About the love of the universe.

Please don't go off topic by bringing up old off-topic debates.

BTW, I have yet to hear you use any Biblical references in you debate against capitalism. Could you please provide me with some? (Chapter and verse included?)

[The_NewCatwoman]

I myself am a christian, I believe in Yeshua and all of that, but as a christian I also have been sickened by the people who call themselves by that title and then twist the religion to include all sins that they commit. Kind of like the slaveholders in the south using christianity as a means to keep slaves in line. Or colonialists in Afrika using christianity and even islam as a means of control and separation instead of as a means to connect and use tolerance. I am horribly disgusted by most forms of capitalism but find socialism offensive as well because it teaches that there should be no religion at all. Commercialism to me is a huge sickness that one only notices once they step outside of that form of thinking.

Okay, I've gone on long enough.

tNC

[Psilon]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
Please don't go off topic by bringing up old off-topic debates.

BTW, I have yet to hear you use any Biblical references in you debate against capitalism. Could you please provide me with some? (Chapter and verse included?)

It wasn't off topic...go back and read it, then read what I have said.

[Psilon]

Originally posted by EinBebop
Without a doubt. And you could argue that many of the passages that promise wealth and prosperity could be referring to spiritual. But some definitely refer to earthly wealth. Such as the passage from Ecclesiastes that I chose above.

Firstly, I certainly do not believe that all desire for wealth and desire for life is the same; they have different places on the hierarchy of needs. But they are the same in that both are things that can get in the way of God's will, such as when Jonah refused to go to Ninevah in fear of his life. This was the context in which I was speaking, because it was also the context in which you were speaking when you made the distinction between material desires and spiritual desires.

I'm not sure where you're going with the Jesus thing. It sounds almost like you are suggesting.. well, maybe not living as a hermit, but perhaps forgoing all worldly possessions? And so it seems we're coming back to the definition of wealth. Did Jesus get paid when he was a carpenter? How much is too much? Do I really need a computer? Or a car? The people living in the run-down part of my town look pretty wealthy to the homeless. Does "wealth" mean great riches, or just a certain level of comfort?

There is a danger that goes with a little wealth. It leads to a desire for more. That's why the verse I quoted above says to enjoy your work and accept your lot, enjoying the wealth you're given. Your lot is God's plan for you; there's nothing wrong with following his plan, knowing there's a little gold at the end of the rainbow. We don't want to give into greed and rebel against His will.
Well doesn't this go back to my original point. For me wealth is not the basic requirements, it is more than what is neccessary.

I believe wealth means more than what is absolutely neccessary.

No, I don't believe little wealth leads for a desire for more if you are in the correct mind set. I believe it works the other way, the more you have the more desire.

You may argue about communist countries. Which had revolutions because they did not have enough wealth. But the reason why they had revolution was because they did not have the base requirements.

Where as from casual observation, we can see several accounts where wealthy people people who have above the neccessary requirements of living want more. Capitalism in its present form uses this fact.

It says enjoy your work and accept your lot. Do you believe lot is a swimming pool with a mansion, or a PS2?

[Lucky Bob]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
It wasn't off topic...go back and read it, then read what I have said.

I give up. Psilon, this is nothing personal, but I don't see this debate going anywhere past "Go read that last post." I'm out. I've got better things to post on.

If you don't like capitalism, that's your choice. But never confuse human philosphy with God's Word.

[EinBebop]

Originally posted by Psilon2011
Well doesn't this go back to my original point. For me wealth is not the basic requirements, it is more than what is neccessary.

I believe wealth means more than what is absolutely neccessary.Then we are in agreement here; wealth does not necessarily mean a mansion and a limo; it's about a level of comfort. It's debatable how much comfort is really necessary.


No, I don't believe little wealth leads for a desire for more if you are in the correct mind set. I believe it works the other way, the more you have the more desire..I believe they both work the same way; the greedy are never satisfied, whether they have a little or a lot. A little wealth is a little dangerous. A lot of wealth is very dangerous. The poor have the fortune of just wanting the basic necessesities. What happens once they have those? Well, that depends on the mindset that you spoke of. Are there eyes on God, thankful for what they have and what He will continue to give them, or are there eyes on their possessions, and attaining more?


Where as from casual observation, we can see several accounts where wealthy people people who have above the neccessary requirements of living want more. Capitalism in its present form uses this fact.Does capitalism really use greed, or does greed use capitalism? :) Capitalism is a blessing and a curse. It started out as the former, a blessing on this country. It's turning into a curse, as this country turns our eyes from God.


It says enjoy your work and accept your lot. Do you believe lot is a swimming pool with a mansion, or a PS2? My apologies if I'm mistaken, but I'm wondering if you're defining 'lot' correctly. 'Lot' is your place in life, whether you're a peasant or a king, Jew or Roman. It almost seems you're defining lot by the amount of possessions you have, which is just a part of it.

God blesses some with great wealth, such as Solomon, and to some he gives a little wealth. He's also said it's harder for a rich man to get into heaven than it is for a camel to get through the eye of a needle. What does that mean? Why would he curse Solomon? Or does this go back to God's promise that he will never give us more than we can handle? If we follow God's plan we will what we need, and possibly then some. If we ignore God and give into greed, that which we would seek to acquire becomes a curse to us.

[Krayenhoff]

Originally posted by luckybob1985
I give up. Psilon, this is nothing personal, but I don't see this debate going anywhere past "Go read that last post." I'm out. I've got better things to post on.

If you don't like capitalism, that's your choice. But never confuse human philosphy with God's Word.

I'm with luckybob. Psilon can't even make a convincing argument that the desire of wealth is inherently evil, so what's the point?

[Psilon]

Originally posted by EinBebop
Then we are in agreement here; wealth does not necessarily mean a mansion and a limo; it's about a level of comfort. It's debatable how much comfort is really necessary.

I believe they both work the same way; the greedy are never satisfied, whether they have a little or a lot. A little wealth is a little dangerous. A lot of wealth is very dangerous. The poor have the fortune of just wanting the basic necessesities. What happens once they have those? Well, that depends on the mindset that you spoke of. Are there eyes on God, thankful for what they have and what He will continue to give them, or are there eyes on their possessions, and attaining more?

Does capitalism really use greed, or does greed use capitalism? :) Capitalism is a blessing and a curse. It started out as the former, a blessing on this country. It's turning into a curse, as this country turns our eyes from God.

My apologies if I'm mistaken, but I'm wondering if you're defining 'lot' correctly. 'Lot' is your place in life, whether you're a peasant or a king, Jew or Roman. It almost seems you're defining lot by the amount of possessions you have, which is just a part of it.

God blesses some with great wealth, such as Solomon, and to some he gives a little wealth. He's also said it's harder for a rich man to get into heaven than it is for a camel to get through the eye of a needle. What does that mean? Why would he curse Solomon? Or does this go back to God's promise that he will never give us more than we can handle? If we follow God's plan we will what we need, and possibly then some. If we ignore God and give into greed, that which we would seek to acquire becomes a curse to us.

It is sad, that so many give up so fast.

Lucky, I am not confusing human philosphy with God's word. By endorsing capitalism you are confusing human philisophy with God's word.

Krayenoff, you have posed no valid arguements. You have built your walls, I can do nothing. The only ones who have proposed proper arguements are Ein and Old Maid. And I am very close in agreement with them on many things.

To Ein, I think capitalism in its present form does use the desire of wealth (more than what is absolutely neccessary). I agree with almost everything you have said.

However, I think you are romanticizing capitalism.