We'll start with some definition:

Catholicism is a broad term that refers to the body of the Catholic faith, its theologies and doctrines, its liturgical, ethical, spiritual, and behavioral characteristics, as well as a religious people as a whole.[1] In one sense, it refers to the Roman Catholic Church and the Christians living in communion with the Church of Rome. In a broader sense, Catholicism is associated with any church, including Anglicanism, that claims continuity with the Catholic Church before separation into Greek or Eastern and Latin or Western.

Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on the life and teachings of Jesus.

No need to delve any further there. We all generally know (or so I hope in this forum) the teachings and ways of both of these. Such examples as love thy neighbour and so forth. So surely any doctrine(s) that holds that all people should be: treated as equals and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights and means of production being used for the good of everyone not just a few, where people live side by side in peace and prosperity should be ahdered to and/or sought after?

Incase you are lost the above pretty much equates to a socialist state that is moving towards a final communistic model. Ignoring the exclusion of religion in the marxist philosophy what is it about such a movement that would benefit mankind for the better overall is so against your teachings and way of living?

Whether you want to admit it or not, marxism provides more sense and familiarity in comparison to your teachings in its plans and attitudes in the global social organisation for mankind than anything else does.

So why don't religions endorse it? Is it because it renounces them? I renounce religion and yet they still say God loves me and the want for a good, safe decent life for me is still there from them no matter what.

There is no room in politics in spirituality.

Having said that religion is just the politicization of spirituality so they might bite the bait.

You'll never get Christianity to adopt it in principal; but you're right that in some ways they are similar so maybe some Christians will adopt it. Remember this a big different between Christians and the principals they follow.

Spirituality fits in well with de-centralization of power for sure.

You'll never get Christianity to adopt it in principal; but you're right that in some ways they are similar so maybe some Christians will adopt it. Remember this a big different between Christians and the principals they follow.

Being a marxist I used to hate religion and still do, but for different reasons than those in the past. I hate it now because people are more likely to pray their problems away and turn the other cheek in response to a large proportion of world problems. It detroys the mind. As Marx said "it is the opiate of the masses" because they seem so largely numb and almost happy-go-lucky about everything because of it.

Would I use religion in comparison to marxism to further marxisms cause though? Yes. Although I think religion should be something that is practiced in private and something that should remain seperate from the state I differ from most conventional marxists in that I believe religion could still co-exist in a true socialist state if people actually followed its teachings. The ideas of marxism and the social organisation it seeks to establish are not far from the dream-like utopia religious followers would want: peace between all, equality (as in rights, not personally belongings) and the means to provide whatever is needed for the people. They go hand in hand more or less.

So why don't we see more prominent support for the left from religions?

As a Christian you cant embrace Marxism / Socialism / Communism for two reasons. The first, is these ideologies are largely secular and some fiercely reject religion anyway in their culture. The second reason is that, when Jesus speaks about giving and following through with his teachings, he wants the individual to do it. Not The state, not the collective.

These big state ideologies are not based in giving, their based on stealing. Stealing your money to give to someone else. Based on enslaving us to each other, think about say social security. The older generation relies upon the younger generation to provide for them, so as long as the younger generation is bigger than that older generation. Obviously, there is no mercy and no compassionate love in being a slave or being robbed. However if you were free and their was a small state type ideology, than you as the individual can freely give and with low taxes and a free market you can freely give even more. Keep government out of your life and you will prosper and you will be able to follow the teachings of Christ.

How can you give and help in charity if you yourself are struggling to make ends meet? This is why government is bad all the more.

As a Christian you cant embrace Marxism / Socialism / Communism for two reasons. The first, is these ideologies are largely secular and some fiercely reject religion anyway in their culture. The second reason is that, when Jesus speaks about giving and following through with his teachings, he wants the individual to do it. Not The state, not the collective.

These big state ideologies are not based in giving, their based on stealing. Stealing your money to give to someone else. Based on enslaving us to each other, think about say social security. The older generation relies upon the younger generation to provide for them, so as long as the younger generation is bigger than that older generation. Obviously, there is no mercy and no compassionate love in being a slave or being robbed. However if you were free and their was a small state type ideology, than you as the individual can freely give and with low taxes and a free market you can freely give even more. Keep government out of your life and you will prosper and you will be able to follow the teachings of Christ.

How can you give and help in charity if you yourself are struggling to make ends meet? This is why government is bad all the more.

There isn't a state in communism. Look it up.

Socialism is far from "the state" having everything. It's still a democracy but one where the majority (the workers) are given more.

The first, is these ideologies are largely secular and some fiercely reject religion anyway in their culture.

Irrelevant. You can be a theist that pratices communism, which is all that matters. That many communist are secular or atheists does not refute this.

For example, many (most) people read the bible much differently than you do, yet that doesn't stop you.

The second reason is that, when Jesus speaks about giving and following through with his teachings, he wants the individual to do it. Not The state, not the collective

The individual would be giving in that he provides a service to society, society pools up all those services (or the results of those services) and spreads them around according to need. Nothing in that contradicts Christian teachings, in fact that is preciesly how the early Christians lived according to the bible.

These big state ideologies are not based in giving, their based on stealing. Stealing your money to give to someone else

1. Capitalism is based on stealing, in that the worker is never compensated for the full product of his labor.

2. Even if we accept this premise of yours, that it would be "stealing", nobody is stoping you from being a communist that believes in a completely voluntary grouping of the means of production. It might be improbable without the use of force, but that's hardly removes it from being an ideal.

Irrelevant. You can be a theist that practices communism, which is all that matters. That many communist are secular or atheists does not refute this. For example, many (most) people read the bible much differently than you do, yet that doesn't stop you.

You are comparing how I read something to a way of life?

Communism is founded by its root in Marxism. The Communist Manifesto clearly states that religion (like many other things) is a divisionary tool designed to keep certain "workers from not uniting with another group of workers." The Communist Manifesto proposes getting rid of religion altogether even tribal religions. Communism is based on militant secularism. True I can be a secularist and be a theist but one cannot claim to be a christian and call themselves a communist. Look at Pope John Paul II he was a strong opponent against Communism because he knew that it had the potential to threaten life, not help it.

The individual would be giving in that he provides a service to society, society pools up all those services (or the results of those services) and spreads them around according to need. Nothing in that contradicts Christian teachings, in fact that is precisely how the early Christians lived according to the bible.

Alright set up a PayPal account and give me $5. Would you be willing to do that to help your fellow worker? The entire point to these types of ideologies is that the government owns the labor you do. You are being forced to provide. On this forum many debate about "how stupid it is" to do good or face punishment. The same is true here, give unto yourself or go to jail. That is what you are basically telling me.

Times are much different then they were back than, on top of that their are many different ideologies in the world that we have to acknowledge and not arrogantly boast ours. Not all ideologies agree that we should give and give without considering ourselves. Christ told The High Priests to "Give Unto Ceasars what is Ceasars and Give Unto God what is Gods" because, these are things individuals do on an individual basis. So what your telling me now is that you want to get rid of these ideologies, foregoing the very freedom that allowed you to think about your own theory and your telling me that all the work and labor I do should be submitted unto a state instead of myself.

1. Capitalism is based on stealing, in that the worker is never compensated for the full product of his labor.

2. Even if we accept this premise of yours, that it would be "stealing", nobody is stopping you from being a communist that believes in a completely voluntary grouping of the means of production. It might be improbable without the use of force, but that's hardly removes it from being an ideal.

1. Capitalism is based on making money for yourself to live a life you wish to live, in other words I get compensated for my labor. I dont know about you but my labor is mine own, my actions are my actions I am not a slave and socialism is as Jefferson warned us so long ago "The Government making itself look good under the guise of taking care of us." There is only one person on this earth that cares about their own self-preservation and self-determination and that is you.

As corporations form the become more corrupt and intermingle with government as soon as you do that guess what socialism. Because these corporation "provide" for the people. People are partially aware of just how reliant they are upon big business just to get through their day to day demands. So how free are you really, if government and big business can take that all away if they really wanted? The idea is prevention, prevent the government from entering into ones own life.

You would be surprised to know that even communists are capitalist. If you took the time to understand the communist system... You would know that the nation runs like a big corporation. Capital = The means of Production. In communist countries people are considered capital in a way that they are essentially enslaved to big government. In communist countries you have your leader and that leader has his staff. In a communist country this staff is often dictatorial and oligarchical leaving no freedom to the people, the staff is essentially the shareholders, special interests, and corporate entities.

2. In the communist system you are forced to provide. Where is the freedom and the willingness to provide and give if you are forced to? In a free market economy where taxes are low and freedom is high there is the real opportunity to give of yourself. You can donate to charities and organizations that will take care of people, exactly because you have the money and because you are free the only compulsion is your own accord to help people with disabilities and other issues.

On top of that these charities and organizations will be fair with these people. The whole point to a capitalist society is low prices / high quality because of competition. However, in a communist society where government is economy there is no competition so prices rise and the quality suffers.

=====

So let me summarize my beliefs for you should you choose the Communist/ Marxist/ Socialist Route, you will have:
* An Oligarchy that runs the nation. Based upon their own subjective view of how to run and manage the population, telling you what is yours and what is theirs. This offers little room for freedom since Christ wanted people to give willingly and not have some state determine the outcome.
* Poor Quality and More Poverty. Because their will be no competition and because people will have no competition than prices go higher and people become reliant on the government to help them survive. Where is the freedom in giving what is yours freely, if you are relying upon someone else to provide for you? In fact, when quality suffers quantity increases and as we know Christ was a man of quality not quantity.

Should you choose the Capitalist / Free Market / Libertarian Approach:
*A Republic is Established. One that follows with an objective set of laws that are designed not to be violated and counted upon as a tradition and set of values that will lead to prosperity for all. This offers maximum freedom since these rules will constrain government size and allow for more freedom thus allowing people to be free and prosperous so that they will be able to willingly give and feel good about giving.
*High Quality at Lowest Price. Will allow for the maximum amount of people to live life with quality and prosperity. This will help the people (not government) determine how many actual disabled or unfortunates their are in the nation. Thus an organization is set up designed to help these people become the most they can be, or just take care of them. With high quality and low prices keeping all business entities competing than those who really need the help will get it.

=====

On top of that:

George W. Bush is a Neo-Con and theirs nothing new nor anything conservative about that man. The Neo-Cons were in fact Marxists Americans and George W. Bush lives under the guise of being a so-called Christian.

Communism is founded by its root in Marxism. The Communist Manifesto clearly states that religion (like many other things) is a divisionary tool designed to keep certain "workers from not uniting with another group of workers." The Communist Manifesto proposes getting rid of religion altogether even tribal religions. Communism is based on militant secularism. True I can be a secularist and be a theist but one cannot claim to be a christian and call themselves a communist. Look at Pope John Paul II he was a strong opponent against Communism because he knew that it had the potential to threaten life, not help it.

Most of that is just plain fucking wrong.

1. Communism predates Marxism by ages, so it's the other way around: Marxism has it's roots in communism. Marx didn't invent communism, communism existed long before Marx. Marx merely defined it it more objective terms, studied the capitalist systems of his time, and the economic history of mankind.

2. The Communist Manifesto says absolutely no such thing. The word "religion" is used, at most, about 3 or 4 times in the whole manifesto and it's never references negatively. (In fact, Marx anticipates a very similar baseless accusation and deals with it in the manifesto).

I dare you you find, at any point in the Communist Manifesto, the proposal that religion be abolished. You are either lying through your fucking teeth or you're jaw-droopingly ignorant of what you're talking about. And if you're talking about Marx's comment that religion is the opium of the people (which he didn't make in the Communist Manifesto), then you should know it has been taken wildly out of context.


3. I didn't say "secularist and be a theist" I said "communist and be a theist", and you definitely can. You can be a communist and a theist, a Christian theist in fact. So much so that's there's a whole subset of socialist/communist idelogies centered around Christianity: Christian Socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism) & Christian communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism). Like I already explained to you, the Early Christians lived in a communistic society:


"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
-- Acts 4:32-37:


"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"

-- Marx. Critique of the Gotha Program. 1875.


Alright set up a PayPal account and give me $5. Would you be willing to do that to help your fellow worker? The entire point to these types of ideologies is that the government owns the labor you do. You are being forced to provide. On this forum many debate about "how stupid it is" to do good or face punishment. The same is true here, give unto yourself or go to jail. That is what you are basically telling me.1. Giving you $5 dollars is like giving you a fish. I'd rather end the system that doesn't provide for your necessities and thus perpetuates your need for money.

2. There is absolutely no requirement in communism that one be sent to jail if you do not work. Communism is merely the communal ownership of the means of production. That's it. You can go about it a million different ways; some might take the route of making some sort of "work" mandatory, while others might not.

And even if we accept that false notion as true for the sake of argument, in capitalism the difference is worse... You either work or you starve!


1. Capitalism is based on making money for yourself to live a life you wish to live, in other words I get compensated for my labor. I dont know about you but my labor is mine own,While I don't know what your case is, that is not true for the vast majority of people. A shoemaker that works in a shoe factory produces (lets say as an example) 10 pairs of shoes an hour. Each of those pairs has a value of (lets say as an example) $50 on the market. The shoe maker is paid $10 an hour. Thus, his labor produces $500 dollars worth (i.e. $50 x 10) but he is only paid $10.

Your labor, or rather the majority of what you produce, belongs to someone else.

----

I've ignored the rest because I'm not here to listen to you make baseless accusations or state your worthless opinion. This thread isn't a capitalism vs. communism debate, it's a thread regarding the teachings in Christianity and how they relate to communism.

I think if Christian's were to adopt it (who know's maybe some have) it would become a denomination of Christianity; but Christianity would most likely reject it as a cult.

Christianity in one sense is the aggregated of all denominational doctrine.

But to use the word "Christianity" is to identify the doctrines and principals all Christian's adhere to; the universal ones.

Most of that is just plain fucking wrong.

1. Communism predates Marxism by ages, so it's the other way around: Marxism has it's roots in communism. Marx didn't invent communism, communism existed long before Marx. Marx merely defined it it more objective terms, studied the capitalist systems of his time, and the economic history of mankind.

2. The Communist Manifesto says absolutely no such thing. The word "religion" is used, at most, about 3 or 4 times in the whole manifesto and it's never references negatively. (In fact, Marx anticipates a very similar baseless accusation and deals with it in the manifesto).

I dare you you find, at any point in the Communist Manifesto, the proposal that religion be abolished. You are either lying through your fucking teeth or you're jaw-droopingly ignorant of what you're talking about. And if you're talking about Marx's comment that religion is the opium of the people (which he didn't make in the Communist Manifesto), then you should know it has been taken wildly out of context.


3. I didn't say "secularist and be a theist" I said "communist and be a theist", and you definitely can. You can be a communist and a theist, a Christian theist in fact. So much so that's there's a whole subset of socialist/communist ideologies centered around Christianity: Christian Socialism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism) & Christian communism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_communism). Like I already explained to you, the Early Christians lived in a communistic society:

1. The world has become much more so complicated than it was 1000+ years ago. So it could have worked by than. On top of that communism works in theory, never in practice. Consider the christian doctrine on humans. Fallen people, people who are tempted to do wrong, some more so strongly than others. So although it may work for a time, the system will eventually be forced to serve the interests of a few because we have to account for human lust, greed, sloth and avarice. Whereas if they were free people (like in a free market) than they would only harbor the responsibility on themselves instead of the community.

2. Again it may work in theory but never in practice. You know the Marxist had revisionism because they saw that marxist ideas need to be applied differently than what was written about by Marx in order to function in the world.

3. I'm aware of that, and again its sounds like some ideal. But often these ideals are never reached and there is disappointment because things need to be revised in order to make it function in the world. Lets not forget to account for original sin being that this is a Christian Relation To Communism discussion.


"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 33 And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 34 Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 35 And laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. 36 And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, 37 Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles' feet.
-- Acts 4:32-37:


"In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!"

-- Marx. Critique of the Gotha Program. 1875.

1. Okay I can throw just as many verses back at you, here's a few:

"Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse those who have leprosy, drive out demons. Freely you have received, freely give." [MT 10:8] "Where do you come from? he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. Do you refuse to speak to me? Pilate said. Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you? Jesus answered, You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin." [John 19:9-11] " Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God." [1 Peter 2:16] "They promise them freedom, while they themselves are slaves of depravity—for a man is a slave to whatever has mastered him." [2 Peter 2:19]

The first verse states, freely receive so freely give. However, I cant freely give under communism because, the state force me to give and submit, again I remind you where is the freedom in that giving and receiving relationship? The next verse states, that the the government (whom Pilate represents) has no power over anyone unless it is given by God and in which point the people will naturally acknowledge that state as a legitimate entity. The third verse states, to live as a free man. It cant be clearer than that, be free and enjoy life. How can I be free if the state is telling me where to go and what to do? Finally the forth verse states clearly, the master is the community, the communist state is the master of the individual so you are enslaving yourself to the state.

2. Okay, so concerning the Critique I see here the words:
"Enslaving" of the individual to the divisions of labor
"Labor" as a prime want.

Now i don't know about you but the individual must be free. Christ taught a doctrine of freedom and life. So I dont want to be subordinate to some division of labor because that's how corporations are run. Communism is a National Corporation, in which the rights of individuals are non-existent and threatened. On top of this, life is more than just Labor and Work all day long. The Protestant Work Ethic was not prominent during early Christianity. Live Life, Enjoy Life, Be Free is my motto. I don't see communism as a means to that end, keeping in mind what I replied to.

1. Giving you $5 dollars is like giving you a fish. I'd rather end the system that doesn't provide for your necessities and thus perpetuates your need for money.

2. There is absolutely no requirement in communism that one be sent to jail if you do not work. Communism is merely the communal ownership of the means of production. That's it. You can go about it a million different ways; some might take the route of making some sort of "work" mandatory, while others might not.

And even if we accept that false notion as true for the sake of argument, in capitalism the difference is worse... You either work or you starve!

1. So you would rather barter? Trade a fish for cheese? Let me ask you something, do you have any clue what the purpose is to money? Money has the following purposes: a medium for exchange and determination of values. If you wish to barter a car how do you know its determined value? The Barter System is primitive and does very little to help a national economy. Perhaps you should watch out for your own ignorance of economics before you tell me I am ignorant, which is Ironic because Christ taught that "How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"[Mt 7:2-4] Ironically the way you are treating me only makes my point that people cant make such an ideal society possible because of their various personal problems.

2. Really, you know Paul lived in this commune lifestyle and by the doctrines of Paul (so-called founder) of Christianity he made it pretty clear: "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." [2 Thess 3:10] So under your guise of trying to do good in a communist christian matchmaking I made the point that in your theoretical society people couldn't reap the benefits unless they labored.

While I don't know what your case is, that is not true for the vast majority of people. A shoemaker that works in a shoe factory produces (lets say as an example) 10 pairs of shoes an hour. Each of those pairs has a value of (lets say as an example) $50 on the market. The shoe maker is paid $10 an hour. Thus, his labor produces $500 dollars worth (i.e. $50 x 10) but he is only paid $10. Your labor, or rather the majority of what you produce, belongs to someone else.

This is the exchange, you are given a job (production or service) and you are given employment for that service. On top of that, in the socialist countries they tax you on your labor which produces the income you need its called an Income Tax. So this basically tells me that I get taxed on my work, on my labor. I work and I am demanded to give a portion of my labor to the state. There is still no freedom in that, in my eyes and I see it as stealing.

I've ignored the rest because I'm not here to listen to you make baseless accusations or state your worthless opinion. This thread isn't a capitalism vs. communism debate, it's a thread regarding the teachings in Christianity and how they relate to communism.

You've ignored the rest because you know I am right. As far as it is concerned any parts you did not comment on tells me that my position is the position closest to reality/fact and you will not admit it. On top of that I am trying to show that a Free Market Republic is much more conducive to freedom, life and Christ teachings than a Planned Economy under a big government.

There isn't a state in communism. Look it up.

Socialism is far from "the state" having everything. It's still a democracy but one where the majority (the workers) are given more.

Yeah, there is a state in communism at first and it so far has never left that position to the advancement of becoming a stateless society in which anarchy does not ensue. I think the word "socialism" is pretty close to "Nationalizing" everything, which means it is owned by the state. Socialism is usually government taking control of necessary infrastructure. However, think about it if the government takes control of the necessities than it can coerce the businesses into doing what it wants them to. Keep in mind government always desires to get bigger. Socialism is just another name for big government.

I still remember what the words were spoken by Gerald Ford: "A government big enough to provide you with everything you have is big enough to take it away." Hey, a government can simply put pressure on the people (economically) and have them surrender their freedom to have the necessities of survival. Thus, the state gets bigger and stronger which equals the centralization of power.

1. The world has become much more so complicated than it was 1000+ years ago. So it could have worked by than. On top of that communism works in theory, never in practice. Consider the christian doctrine on humans. Fallen people, people who are tempted to do wrong, some more so strongly than others. So although it may work for a time, the system will eventually be forced to serve the interests of a few because we have to account for human lust, greed, sloth and avarice. Whereas if they were free people (like in a free market) than they would only harbor the responsibility on themselves instead of the community.

Not only are these more of your utterly baseless accusations (since you cannot show it only works in theory not in practice) but even if we accept that as true it is completely meaningless to this thread! Again, for the second time, get it through your head that this isn't a capitalism vs. communism thread. Whether you think communism is viable or not is unimportant.

Jesus doesn't say "Take the lesser of two evils just because it's more viable".

2. Again it may work in theory but never in practice. You know the Marxist had revisionism because they saw that marxist ideas need to be applied differently than what was written about by Marx in order to function in the world.

What the fuck does that have to do with the fact that you are either a blatant liar or grossly misinformed on the subject? I'm not going to let you gloss over the fact that you made completely baseless accusations:

The Communist Manifesto says absolutely no such thing. The word "religion" is used, at most, about 3 or 4 times in the whole manifesto and it's never references negatively. (In fact, Marx anticipates a very similar baseless accusation and deals with it in the manifesto).

I dare you you find, at any point in the Communist Manifesto, the proposal that religion be abolished. You are either lying through your fucking teeth or you're jaw-droopingly ignorant of what you're talking about. And if you're talking about Marx's comment that religion is the opium of the people (which he didn't make in the Communist Manifesto), then you should know it has been taken wildly out of context.

Now please, do the honest thing and either admit you're were lying or that you were talking out of your ass.


3. I'm aware of that, and again its sounds like some ideal. But often these ideals are never reached and there is disappointment because things need to be revised in order to make it function in the world. Lets not forget to account for original sin being that this is a Christian Relation To Communism discussion.

Irrelevant. Jesus does not say "Settle for something less than the ideal just because the ideal is difficult". If anything Jesus would say the opposite, he would say one should strive towards the ideal as much as possible. In fact, according to Christianity, through god nothing is impossible.



The first verse states, freely receive so freely give. However, I cant freely give under communism because, the state force me to give and submit, again I remind you where is the freedom in that giving and receiving relationship? The next verse states, that the the government (whom Pilate represents) has no power over anyone unless it is given by God and in which point the people will naturally acknowledge that state as a legitimate entity. The third verse states, to live as a free man. It cant be clearer than that, be free and enjoy life

Wrong again. You are grossly misinformed on the subject, so I suggest you open a book before you keep making a fool out of yourself.

Communism is the communal ownership of the means of production. That's it. Anything else (i.e. forced labor, force "giving", forced what have you) would be different ways of implementing communism.

Like I already said, and you ignored, the Early Christians lived in a communistic society where they freely gave the good they had to one another based on need. Whether you think that would be too difficult to implement now is utterly unimportant, because this thread isn't about what you think the viability of communism is.


1. So you would rather barter? Trade a fish for cheese? Let me ask you something, do you have any clue what the purpose is to money? Money has the following purposes: a medium for exchange and determination of values. If you wish to barter a car how do you know its determined value? The Barter System is primitive and does very little to help a national economy. Perhaps you should watch out for your own ignorance of economics before you tell me I am ignorant, which is Ironic because Christ taught that "How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"[Mt 7:2-4] Ironically the way you are treating me only makes my point that people cant make such an ideal society possible because of their various personal problems.

2. Really, you know Paul lived in this commune lifestyle and by the doctrines of Paul (so-called founder) of Christianity he made it pretty clear: "For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." [2 Thess 3:10] So under your guise of trying to do good in a communist christian matchmaking I made the point that in your theoretical society people couldn't reap the benefits unless they labored.


1. What the fuck are you babbling about? Have you even read what I said? I never once mentioned the word Barter. Follow the discussion. You asked me for money as if that were going to help you. I, trying to allude to Jesus' famous words, said that giving you money is as good as giving you a fish: it doesn't fix the underlying problem. That's it. Stop rambling like a mad man.

2. Again, what the fuck are you babbling about? You claimed that if one didn't work in communism one would necessarily be sent to prison. That is false. Communism can be established in many different ways; there is no requirement, a side form it being an classless society with communal ownership of the means of production.


This is the exchange, you are given a job (production or service) and you are given employment for that service. On top of that, in the socialist countries they tax you on your labor which produces the income you need its called an Income Tax. So this basically tells me that I get taxed on my work, on my labor. I work and I am demanded to give a portion of my labor to the state. There is still no freedom in that, in my eyes and I see it as stealing.


Of course you're giving a job... I already considered that in my example, hence the pay check of $10 dollars an hour. What you ignored is that the vast majority of the value of what you produced is belongs to someone else.

As for the income tax remark, not only does income tax exist in capitalist societies, but income tax in a socialist society pays for the goods and services you receive (i.e. universal health care, universal education, etc.).

Jesus doesn't argue against taxation.


You've ignored the rest because you know I am right. As far as it is concerned any parts you did not comment on tells me that my position is the position closest to reality/fact and you will not admit it. On top of that I am trying to show that a Free Market Republic is much more conducive to freedom, life and Christ teachings than a Planned Economy under a big government.

No, I ignored the rest because it's utterly irrelevant to the discussion. It's you turning it into a capitalism vs. communism discussion when that was never the intention. The intention was to see the link between Christian teachings and tenets in communism. The link is there, and has been shown, you can definitely be a Christian communist.

Sorry to break this to you, but I've debated the subject of communism here on totse with far more intelligent people than you (i.e. people who didn't make the increadibly stupid claim that "The Communist Manifesto proposes getting rid of religion altogether even tribal religions."); so this has nothing to do with you being right (a claim that's made all the more hilarious when you've provided no proof of your claims, and when most of it is merely your opinion i.e. "in my opinion it's stealing").

If you want you can start a thread in P:LR&C, where your off-topic babbling would be relevant.

Not only are these more of your utterly baseless accusations (since you cannot show it only works in theory not in practice) but even if we accept that as true it is completely meaningless to this thread!

Really? Is it so baseless as to say that times have changed a lot since humanity had begun building nations? Is it so baseless as to say that since this thread was founded under the idea of how Christianity can work with communism than we must account for the Christian doctrines of the fallen nature of humanity. Because we must account for this than communism cannot work because not everyone will agree with the ideals you wish to express.

The Communist Manifesto says absolutely no such thing. I dare you you find, at any point in the Communist Manifesto, the proposal that religion be abolished. You are either lying through your fucking teeth or you're jaw-droopingly ignorant of what you're talking about.

"There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience... Law, morality, religion, are to him [The Proletariat] so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests. " - Communist Manifesto

"Marx proposes that religion internalizes in people a set of beliefs that are contrary to their interest but are in the interest of the ruling class. In short, it teaches obedience to authority as a condition for achieving future happiness through salvation. Both Halévy (1971 [1906]) and Thompson (1966), for instance, suggest that the rise of Methodism in England was a primary force that dissipated political fermentation that, in their opinion, otherwise would have led to revolution. In fact, Marx was even skeptical of Christian socialism's ability to serve the interests of the proletariat. He comments that just "as the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord, so has Clerical Socialism with Feudal Socialism. . . . Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priests consecrate the heartburn of the aristocrats" (Marx and Engels 1968 [1848]: 55)."- Commentary: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Marx.ht

How about you do the honest thing, grow up and stop being so naive about The Hammer and Sickle. Realize that communism cant work with Christianity and that even Marx himself metaphorically laughed at the idea of Christian Socialism/communism.

Irrelevant. Jesus does not say "Settle for something less than the ideal just because the ideal is difficult". If anything Jesus would say the opposite, he would say one should strive towards the ideal as much as possible. In fact, according to Christianity, through god [I]nothing is impossible.

I agree that we should strive towards Ideals, they are the only things that help maintain a healthy society. However, your blind faith makes you forget that God works in the world through us. When we are indulging in vice instead of virtue how will a communist society even leave the use for government (as is stated is needed in the beginning) if men have a lust for power? You cant, be free, give me a republic and freedom I will set up a monastery and you and anyone else who wants to live in a commune lifestyle will do so. What you propose is that all Christians should be forced to enter the monastery and never be allowed to get out.

Wrong again. You are grossly misinformed on the subject, so I suggest you open a book before you keep making a fool out of yourself. Communism is the communal ownership of the means of production. That's it. Anything else (i.e. forced labor, force "giving", forced what have you) would be different ways of implementing communism. Like I already said, and you ignored, the Early Christians lived in a communistic society where they freely gave the good they had to one another based on need. Whether you think that would be too difficult to implement now is utterly unimportant, because this thread isn't about what you think the viability of communism is.

Really? I Read the 10 Planks of The Communist Manifesto. I am strongly against it and strongly believe that is not a set of Christian Values. It is the state taking away things by force, how many times to I see the words Abolition, Confiscation, and Centralization? 5 Times. If it is the states property, than it is not really your own private property which means the act of giving freely is not really you giving but items being transferred from one state to another. Look at it this way, hypothetically speaking:

"You ask for a hardware kit as a gift (you really need it for something and you wouldn't give it back), under communism, this hardware kit belongs to the state, because its a communal thing we all have property to it." However, the state is going to say you have to give it or go to jail. "Whereas, lets say you ask for a hardware kit as a gift again you really need it and your not sure if/when you will give it back. I worked for the hardware kit you are asking for, but when not under communism, it belongs to me, it is my property. I say you can have it." Which seems more genuine and giving? The second one because, I worked hard to get the hardware kit, I am willing to give it knowing I may not get it back, I understood the value behind the idea I am freely giving away. Whereas under communism, its communal, its everyone's, so the value is diminished and it just goes from place to place. I BELIEVE COMMUNISM COULD WORK IF IT IS NOT INSTITUTED AS A GOVERNMENT, BUT RATHER AS A SOCIAL AGREEMENT (e.g. A people who agree with the idea of communism, family, or a very small town). Anything out side of the examples given it falls apart.
1. What the fuck are you babbling about? Have you even read what I said? I never once mentioned the word Barter. Follow the discussion. You asked me for money as if that were going to help you. I, trying to allude to Jesus' famous words, said that giving you money is as good as giving you a fish: it doesn't fix the underlying problem. That's it. Stop rambling like a mad man.2. Again, what the fuck are you babbling about? You claimed that if one didn't work in communism one would necessarily be sent to prison. That is false. Communism can be established in many different ways; there is no requirement, a side form it being an classless society with communal ownership of the means of production.
1. Hey, I thought you said if you wanted $5 I would give you wanted out of $5, you alluded to a fish. So I thought you were talking about abolishing money. Since, I thought you were, I was trying to illustrate that currency is a medium of transaction. You cant get rid of money.

2. Really? Well following in line with Christian dogma one of the vices is sloth. So hey if that guy can get away with not working, than I will not either. Soon that idea spreads like wildfire and when the community falls to shit because of sloth than whose going to make the community go back to work? On top of that, Paul The Apostle is a founder of Christianity and in the letter to the Thessalonians those who dont work dont eat, they are punished. If a government enforced communism the punishment would be confinement.
Of course you're giving a job... I already considered that in my example, hence the pay check of $10 dollars an hour. What you ignored is that the vast majority of the value of what you produced is belongs to someone else. As for the income tax remark, not only does income tax exist in capitalist societies, but income tax in a socialist society pays for the goods and services you receive (i.e. universal health care, universal education, etc.). Jesus doesn't argue against taxation.

Yeah, but in your communist manifesto I refer to 2 of the 10 planks. First, A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Second, Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. So my labor is submitted up to a few private bankers who determine the outcome of the community. I could only trust these central bankers if they had the morality to stand up and say no to any temptations, but humanity is tempted and falls frequently to those temptations under Christian doctrine. Look into the history of a Central Bank, I believe their is a debate in the Politics Forum about any advantages to a central bank as opposed to the many opposed to the disadvantages.

Actually, no if you were really aware you'd realize that the American Economy is largely mixed and with recent economic events the American Economy has become largely socialized/nationalized. Since the Amendment that allowed government to tax my income was ratified, this nation went on to a socialist track. There is no income tax in a capitalist/free market system because the income is yours and its the fruit of your labor and no one has the right to tax you on that unless agreed in a social contract with said government. In fact, the only taxes that help and are applied are Local and State Taxes. Our income tax goes largely to paying off our debt to the central bank that produces our money.
No, I ignored the rest because it's utterly irrelevant to the discussion. It's you turning it into a capitalism vs. communism discussion when that was never the intention. The intention was to see the link between Christian teachings and tenets in communism. The link is there, and has been shown, you can definitely be a Christian communist. Sorry to break this to you, but I've debated the subject of communism here on totse with far more intelligent people than you (i.e. people who didn't make the increadibly stupid claim that "The Communist Manifesto proposes getting rid of religion altogether even tribal religions."); so this has nothing to do with you being right (a claim that's made all the more hilarious when you've provided no proof of your claims, and when most of it is merely your opinion i.e. "in my opinion it's stealing"). If you want you can start a thread in P:LR&C, where your off-topic babbling would be relevant.
Yet, their not their... People were expected to give freely without some institution telling them to give, whether because its already owned by the state or because the state forces you to. News flash Ive never met someone so naive as to put their faith in a system that takes away individual liberty.
I dont think you read the communist manifesto... maybe an intro to it but not the full thing. I found what you asked me for so you can, swallow your damn condescending pride as well as naive trust in communism... Did you even bother to look into Revisionism and why it came about? Your behavior towards me is a clear example, of how human nature only seeks to get over someone else. N
Actually I have talked to many people about Communism and Free Market Economics and I see more freedom in the Free Market than the exploitation of the Planned Market. Watch this Movie, realize that Christ wanted people to be free, realize how a Free Market Republic applies that freedom and bears the mark of Christ's Teachings: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6732659166933078950&ei=vpdSSbHKNoLorgL44qnyCw&q=America
"Warsaw, Moscow, Budapest, Berlin, Prague, Sofia and Bucharest have become stages in a long pilgrimage toward liberty. It is admirable that in these events, entire peoples spoke out — women, young people, men, overcoming fears, their irrepressible thirst for liberty speeded up developments, made walls tumble down and opened gates." — Pope John Paul II (1989)

I think what you might be referring to in the Christian Context is Monasticism and the political context as CommunALISM not CommUNISM. I would be all for communal living but keep in mind anything that has to do with the community = the collective. The only way communalism works is IF the people in the group are willing to make it work. Under Communalism, which is much different than Communism I mean:

"Communal living or communal property, among others. Communalism is defined as a theory of a society that is divided into several small, independent communes and the state is just a confederation of these communes. The term "communalism" is often used instead of "communism" as a way to denote those communal societies that are not based on Marxism. It is sometimes said to put the interests of the community above the interests of the individual, but this is usually only done on the principle that the community exists for the benefit of the individuals who participate in it, so the best way to serve the interests of the individual is through the interests of the community."

What I would also be willing to make compromise on is that I would want individual liberty to be recognized by the state, so that their are no issues over free will. That way I maybe able voice my opinion, my concerns, and allow for freedom of information. For people to organize and gather to discuss as a community what to do with infringing upon the rights of others.



Essentially I am looking for a communal township that does not infringe upon my rights as an individual. This is what I think Christs teachings are all about. I mean if the rights of the individual were respected back during The Passion of Christ he would have never been Crucified.

I see two conflicts here. One is that Private Property and liberty often go together, you take liberty out from private property you get fascism the other way around you end up with some anarchy of sorts. I am looking to decentralize power to keep it small and containable not to have an overbearing state that Communism, at first (and interestingly enough never leaves behind) requires in order to achieve its goals. The second, is that if you watched the video you would realize that individual is subjected to the community by way of relying upon everyone to play the part. Whereas if it were private property, you do what you want with it, the responsibility and the consequences of your actions are confined to you and not the community at large.

"There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience... Law, morality, religion, are to him [The Proletariat] so many bourgeois prejudices, behind which lurk in ambush just as many bourgeois interests. " - Communist Manifesto

"Marx proposes that religion internalizes in people a set of beliefs that are contrary to their interest but are in the interest of the ruling class. In short, it teaches obedience to authority as a condition for achieving future happiness through salvation. Both Halévy (1971 [1906]) and Thompson (1966), for instance, suggest that the rise of Methodism in England was a primary force that dissipated political fermentation that, in their opinion, otherwise would have led to revolution. In fact, Marx was even skeptical of Christian socialism's ability to serve the interests of the proletariat. He comments that just "as the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord, so has Clerical Socialism with Feudal Socialism. . . . Christian Socialism is but the holy water with which the priests consecrate the heartburn of the aristocrats" (Marx and Engels 1968 [1848]: 55)."- Commentary: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Marx.ht

How about you do the honest thing, grow up and stop being so naive about The Hammer and Sickle. Realize that communism cant work with Christianity and that even Marx himself metaphorically laughed at the idea of Christian Socialism/communism.


I'll reply to the rest later on, but I just couldn't contain myself with this nugget of sheer stupidity you decided to lay on us.

If you had bothered to actually read the Manifesto, instead of desperately doing google searches like a fucking moron, you'd see that Marx is quoting someone else. He is not saying those words, he is in fact anticipating that accusation (i.e. anticipating people will accuse communism of abolishing religion) and replying to it.


Here's the full quote, context and all. I have no inserted any quotation marks, so that you can see that it is Marx who uses them because he's quoting someone else making that accusation. I have only italicized the text and bolded the parts that should make it obvious to anyone that Marx isn't proposing that, but responding to the accusation:

When the ancient world was in its last throes, the ancient religions were overcome by Christianity. When Christian ideas succumbed in the 18th century to rationalist ideas, feudal society fought its death battle with the then revolutionary bourgeoisie. The ideas of religious liberty and freedom of conscience merely gave expression to the sway of free competition within the domain of knowledge.


“Undoubtedly,” it will be said, “religious, moral, philosophical, and juridical ideas have been modified in the course of historical development. But religion, morality, philosophy, political science, and law, constantly survived this change.”


“There are, besides, eternal truths, such as Freedom, Justice, etc., that are common to all states of society. But Communism abolishes eternal truths, it abolishes all religion, and all morality, instead of constituting them on a new basis; it therefore acts in contradiction to all past historical experience.”


What does this accusation reduce itself to? The history of all past society has consisted in the development of class antagonisms, antagonisms that assumed different forms at different epochs.


But whatever form they may have taken, one fact is common to all past ages, viz., the exploitation of one part of society by the other. No wonder, then, that the social consciousness of past ages, despite all the multiplicity and variety it displays, moves within certain common forms, or general ideas, which cannot completely vanish except with the total disappearance of class antagonisms.


-- Communist Manifesto. Chapter 2.


Marx is replying to the accusation that communism seeks to abolish religion. Thanks for proving you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

I'll reply to the rest of your post when I have the time.

3. I'm aware of that, and again its sounds like some ideal. But often these ideals are never reached and there is disappointment because things need to be revised in order to make it function in the world. Lets not forget to account for original sin being that this is a Christian Relation To Communism discussion.

Good, so you contend a Christian can be a communist.

Communism has a variety of applications and forms, but the underlying simple vision of just about all communism is this:

Working together for the betterment of everyone working together.

Now tell me what is un-christian about the above statement.

-------

Really? Is it so baseless as to say that times have changed a lot since humanity had begun building nations?

It is baseless (i.e. you haven't established it aside from running your mouth), to say that they have changed to the point of making communism impossible and un-Christian (the point of the thread).

I agree that we should strive towards Ideals, they are the only things that help maintain a healthy society. However, your blind faith makes you forget that God works in the world through us. When we are indulging in vice instead of virtue how will a communist society even leave the use for government (as is stated is needed in the beginning) if men have a lust for power? You cant, be free, give me a republic and freedom I will set up a monastery and you and anyone else who wants to live in a commune lifestyle will do so. What you propose is that all Christians should be forced to enter the monastery and never be allowed to get out.

1. The Christian God, - assuming he exists for this discussion - works in whatever way he wishes. You don't get to limit him to only working on the world "through us".

2. You essentially reiterated the same point ("How could we accomplish it, it's too difficult and/or impossible"), which I already dealt with: Nothing is impossible through the Christian God.

3a. You have no fucking clue what I proposes, so I suggest you stop putting words in my mouth. The sheer dishonesty coming from you in this thread is disgusting.

3b. As I've already shown the Early Christians - people who were vastly more knowledgeable about Jesus' and his teachings than you or I, practiced communism without forcing everyone in the world to partake. Whether you think that's difficult to establish now is irrelevant, it still proves what I've said: You can be a Christian Communist contrary to your erroneous claims.





Really? I Read the 10 Planks of The Communist Manifesto. I am strongly against it and strongly believe that is not a set of Christian Values. It is the state taking away things by force, how many times to I see the words Abolition, Confiscation, and Centralization? 5 Times. If it is the states property, than it is not really your own private property which means the act of giving freely is not really you giving but items being transferred from one state to another. Look at it this way, hypothetically speaking:


You're exposing your ignorance on the subject yet again. The 10 "planks" in the communist manifesto are Marx's opinion. Marx is neither the inventor of communism (communism as an idea and as a practice existed long before he was alive) nor the ruler or dictator of what communism is. His opinion on what road a communist society must take is not absolute (and he never claimed it was). You are essentially railing against a specific subset of communist thought (Marxism - actually a parody of Marxism since you're so grossly misinformed) and are generalizing against all forms of communism.

Again: The Early Christians live in a communistic society. There was no "state forcing them to give".

1. Hey, I thought you said if you wanted $5 I would give you wanted out of $5, you alluded to a fish. So I thought you were talking about abolishing money. Since, I thought you were, I was trying to illustrate that currency is a medium of transaction. You cant get rid of money.

2. Really? Well following in line with Christian dogma one of the vices is sloth. So hey if that guy can get away with not working, than I will not either. Soon that idea spreads like wildfire and when the community falls to shit because of sloth than whose going to make the community go back to work? On top of that, Paul The Apostle is a founder of Christianity and in the letter to the Thessalonians those who dont work dont eat, they are punished. If a government enforced communism the punishment would be confinement.

1. I'm glad we both agree you failed are reading what I said.

2. Again, I find myself repeating to you that the Early Christians lived in a communistic society. It worked for them, obviously.

Yeah, but in your communist manifesto I refer to 2 of the 10 planks. First, A heavy progressive or graduated income tax. Second, Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly. So my labor is submitted up to a few private bankers who determine the outcome of the community. I could only trust these central bankers if they had the morality to stand up and say no to any temptations, but humanity is tempted and falls frequently to those temptations under Christian doctrine. Look into the history of a Central Bank, I believe their is a debate in the Politics Forum about any advantages to a central bank as opposed to the many opposed to the disadvantages.

Again, see above. The Communist Manifesto represents Marx's and Engels view of communism. They neither invented communism, nor did they dictate what it has to be. There are endless different ways of establishing it so citing the 10 planks found in the manifesto, at best, would only argue against a subset of the humongously large set of communist thought.

The early Christians basically implemented none of those "planks" and lived in a communistic society,



Actually, no if you were really aware you'd realize that the American Economy is largely mixed and with recent economic events the American Economy has become largely socialized/nationalized.

Actually, if you were aware you would know that what you call "mixed" is still capitalism. Contrary to your wrrtonous beliefs, the idea of capitalism as a "free marker" is pretty new. If you look a a vast array of different encyclopedic sources you'll see that the requirement of a "free market" is largely absent.

Yet, their not their... People were expected to give freely without some institution telling them to give, whether because its already owned by the state or because the state forces you to. News flash Ive never met someone so naive as to put their faith in a system that takes away individual liberty.


They are most certainly there. I gave you various sources showing you prominent Christian theologians that are embraced communism/socialism/ I showed you the biblical description of how the Early Christians lived in a communistic society. What have you done to refute this? Complained that it's too difficult to implement - which refutes absolutely nothing of what was said.

The fact remains: Not onyl can you be a Christian communist, the Early Christians - the people closest to Jesus' and his real teachings, praticied in their community.


I dont think you read the communist manifesto... maybe an intro to it but not the full thing. I found what you asked me for so you can, swallow your damn condescending pride as well as naive trust in communism...

Actually, you found nothing of the sort as I showed above. Marx was not proposing the abolishing of religion in the manifesto. He was responding to the accusation, which is why he explicitly calls it an accusation and puts in fucking quotes!

The only thing you managed to do was justify my condescending pride; you've made it righteous because you're either a moron or dishonest.

Good, so you contend a Christian can be a communist.

Communism has a variety of applications and forms, but the underlying simple vision of just about all communism is this:

Working together for the betterment of everyone working together.

Now tell me what is un-christian about the above statement.

-------

You glanced over one important topic:

The World-> The World is society in the Christian context. A government is a worldly institution. In communism, the government takes the power from the individual and transfers it to the state. The point I want to make clearly is that it is up to the individual to improve the world in which they live in not a government to direct that improvement.

Think about it this way, you see that the garbage needs to be cleaned up in your town, you know exactly what needs to be done and how it should be done. However, under communism, some far off bureaucratic government will tell you what you need to do, and they dont directly understand the situation at hand but you do, knowing that dont you think that if the individual led the way the problem in your community would be taken care of and minimized instead of having a bureaucratic nightmare tell you what to do being that they can fully realize the situation at hand. So let people have Communalism not communism.

Also, keep in mind that Christ was largely a non-conformist to the established collective of his time. He fought a spiritual battle between the power holders of the collective (i.e. the jewish priests, the roman empire... etc.) and that of the kingdom of heaven. Now be aware that communism, socialism, and any other form of government that has a central power is a form of collectivism. But, Christ fought against collectivism, and wanted people to be free, to learn and live for themselves that THEY may provide for the community at large.

I am uncomfortable calling a christian someone capable of being called a communist and would be more closer to to saying that a Christian can be called a communalist. Which is a different definition in my most recent post.

In communism, the government takes the power from the individual and transfers it to the state.

Marxists, along with other socialists, prefer to use terms like "communism" for the post-socialist stage Marx predicted, in which the government (or State) has "withered away", so I would find it highly amusing for you to cement that assertion as a fact. Provide me with some citations please because you are dead fucking wrong.

It sounds like you have misunderstood the dictatorship of the proletariat and lumped it into your deluded views.

By The Way, I like how you complete skipped over my post that came just before you argument that communism is not out to take away religion. For argument sake I Will point out that I DO NOT Believe the early Christians lived in a socialist / communist lifestyle. I would think what they did live in was a communalistic lifestyle which is slightly different. I will agree and make a compromise here and say: Christians can be far better Communalists than Communists. Look up the definition of: Communalism. However if I had to describe myself in a political ideology that would come close to communalism I would say that I would be a "Libertarian Municipalism".

Libertarian municipalism is a term first used by the well-known libertarian socialist theorist Murray Bookchin, and is used to describe a system in which libertarian institutions of directly democratic assemblies would oppose and replace the state with a confederation of free municipalities. Libertarian municipalism intends to create a situation in which the two powers — the municipal confederations and the nation-state — cannot coexist. Its supporters believe that it is the means to achieve a rational society, and that its structure would become the organization of society.

Yes I acknowledge that this idea was founded by a socialist however a specifically defined socialist. I hold libertarianism to be the key to a free and prosperous society. So consider that compromise on my part.

---

Really, nothing has changed since humanity first began building nations some 10,000 years ago? How about the recent phenomena such as Globalism? The worlds become smaller, if it is cheaper to obtain "X Product" in China instead of in my own community than how is that communism? Because, even in a communistic society one still needs a indication of value (eg money).

Now communism will only come about by a revolution, if the world is enslaved to this globalist order than they will fight against anyone who will try to destroy this globalist order. However, this is violence and in the purely Christian sense violence is not a Good Christian thing to do, at least dogmatically speaking.

---

Read the Bible, the are tons more cases of God The Father working though people, physical bodies much more so than just Genesis like events. God works through humanity because we are the sentient beings on which God's will manifests in the world. Im not boasting, in fact if you allow it this awareness is quite awe inspiring and humbling. I guess you still need to be aware of it.

In you communistic society, is their any central power? According to your title there is in the Catholic sense. Lets use the Catholic sense. Obviously their is a heirarchy in Catholicism so lets say that the higher heirarchy directs the lower heirarchy. Their is the temptation that those in the higher will manipulate those in the lower for their own selfish gains, after all people have vices that they take part in. On top of that we ALL KNOW that Communism seeks to create a classless society in which all are equal, how can anyone be equal if their is a heirarchy?

---

Clearly the argument beginning to take place is an argument concerning whether The Early Christians were Communistic or Communalistic. I say it worked for them because it was Communalistic. If you had bothered to look at the definition maybe you would agree.

---

Your ignorance in economics is just as bad as my alleged ignorance of communism. Mixed is mixed so obviously it will still have elements of capitalism. Im simply pointing out that our nation is in the process of nationalizing many things which is a socialist thing to do. If you knew about economics, you would know what I am talking about and in a communal lifestyle economics is important for the survival of the community. In fact, Marxs agrees with me on that because Marx acknowledges that everything that has happened with humanity is based on economic circumstances. So in order for your communal lifestyle to do anything it needs working knowledge of economics, something you do not have but I do and telling you that the economics behind communism and socialism THUS FAR has been the result of much suffering and chaos.

---

I wish to establish one more thing with you, something that I had not fully gave much attention to:

Ideas are pure and abstract because they rest in the above, but when they manifest in the physical they come out impure and not perfect. In your mind, you probably think Christianity and Communism can be married, in my mind I think that Libertarianism as well as communalism and Christianity can be married to create a better world. You have your reasons (ideas) as to why you think your path is better and reasons (which I established much earlier) as to why I think my path is better. But lets be honest, to make your ideas into manifest you need the help of others, let say you succeed in your quest the world will change undoubtedly but your perfectly pure and abstract idea you set in your mind at this present moment will come into contact with variations of your idea (variations rooted in those who helped you get to this goal) what will happen if they want a hand in the world you wish to create? Your perfectly pure idea that you set in your mind at this present moment will no longer be pure, it will be compromised again and again. THE POINT IS: Do not think that your good intentions are going to be viewed as good, likewise, do not believe that the world you are trying to build is going to be without problems.Because, the world you ideally had in your mind would have only worked for you, but with compromise and compromise it will no longer be perfect and you will be disappointed causing further problems.

Also, I dont presume to think that I know more about Christianity than you or anyone else from our time does. However, Early Christians were much closer to the real meaning of the teachings of christ. Fundamentalism had not run rampant like today and so people wee more insightful and had more understanding to KNOW how to make it work. Today, their is much ignorance that goes around with Christianity that we do not KNOW how to make it work. Keep in mind early Christianity was rich with the collections of a lot of writings and messages of spiritual insight. Today, that spirit of insight and knowledge is all but gone except to the true seeker of God.

Who are you responding to? Because it seems you're responding to me based on some of the (counter) arguments you made yet you say things like "According to your title there is in the Catholic sense"... which I have no clue what that means. What title? You mean the title of the thread? Because I didn't make the thread...

I'm going to assume you're responding to me and reply to your points. If you were talking to Toothlessjoe in parts or all of your post, then sorry but you're not making things clear:

By The Way, I like how you complete skipped over my post that came just before you argument that communism is not out to take away religion.

I "skipped" because I didn't see it. Quite frankly after dealing with your previous post I wasn't in the mood to keep reading.


For argument sake I Will point out that I DO NOT Believe the early Christians lived in a socialist / communist lifestyle. I would think what they did live in was a communalistic lifestyle which is slightly different. I will agree and make a compromise here and say: Christians can be far better Communalists than Communists. Look up the definition of: Communalism. However if I had to describe myself in a political ideology that would come close to communalism I would say that I would be a "Libertarian Municipalism".

You're grasping at straws because you have a phobia of the word "communism" based on your ignorance what it it entails and the biased things you've learned.

The fact of the matter is that they practiced communism. Communism: "theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state."

Does this apply to the early Christian community? Yes. The description shows us that they united their property and divided it amongst the community based on need.


In fact, if you read the very definition of "communalism" that you provided, you will see they never say it is not communism. They explicitly say that they use the term "communalism" to differentiate it from Marxism. Communism is not the same as Marxism. Marxism is the implementation of communism as proposed by Marx. You can have many other different implementations that are communism (in that they fit the definition of communism) but are different from Marx's view!



Really, nothing has changed since humanity first began building nations some 10,000 years ago? How about the recent phenomena such as Globalism? The worlds become smaller, if it is cheaper to obtain "X Product" in China instead of in my own community than how is that communism? Because, even in a communistic society one still needs a indication of value (eg money).


Who said "since humanity first began building nations some 10,000 years ago"? Tell me, because I sure as fuck didn't. You're putting words in people's mouths, creating strawmen and then claiming some hollow victory. Stop being dishonest. Read what people actually said, not your ridiculous inventions and respond to what they actually said.



Read the Bible, the are tons more cases of God The Father working though people, physical bodies much more so than just Genesis like events. God works through humanity because we are the sentient beings on which God's will manifests in the world. Im not boasting, in fact if you allow it this awareness is quite awe inspiring and humbling. I guess you still need to be aware of it.

I didn't say that the Christian god couldn't work through people. I know that he can according to Christianity, and I know he has according to the Bible. I said he can work through whoever or whatever he wants. The only one restricting him is you, not me. The fact of the matter is that according to Christianity nothing is impossible through god and the Christian god can work in whatever way he wants.


In you communistic society, is their any central power? According to your title there is in the Catholic sense. Lets use the Catholic sense. Obviously their is a heirarchy in Catholicism so lets say that the higher heirarchy directs the lower heirarchy. Their is the temptation that those in the higher will manipulate those in the lower for their own selfish gains, after all people have vices that they take part in. On top of that we ALL KNOW that Communism seeks to create a classless society in which all are equal, how can anyone be equal if their is a heirarchy?


1. Again, this is irrelevant. That you think it would be difficult to achieve (i.e. difficult to resist any temptation you claim there would be) does not refute the point being made. Everything is possible through god, according to Christianity, including resisting that temptation and Jesus doesn't tell us to take the easy road.

2. Communism in the way Marx described it does not seek an absolutely equal society. It seeks an end to social classes. An end to social classes does not mean absolutely no "hierarchy" of any sorts, and it doesn't mean absolute equality. That is precisely what set it apart from most other forms of communism that preceded it!


Clearly the argument beginning to take place is an argument concerning whether The Early Christians were Communistic or Communalistic. I say it worked for them because it was Communalistic. If you had bothered to look at the definition maybe you would agree.

See above. They practiced communism. You are simply afraid of the label "communism" and are ignoring the blatant fact that their society fits the very definition of communism.




Your ignorance in economics is just as bad as my alleged ignorance of communism. Mixed is mixed so obviously it will still have elements of capitalism. Im simply pointing out that our nation is in the process of nationalizing many things which is a socialist thing to do. If you knew about economics, you would know what I am talking about and in a communal lifestyle economics is important for the survival of the community. In fact, Marxs agrees with me on that because Marx acknowledges that everything that has happened with humanity is based on economic circumstances. So in order for your communal lifestyle to do anything it needs working knowledge of economics, something you do not have but I do and telling you that the economics behind communism and socialism THUS FAR has been the result of much suffering and chaos.

1. Your ignorance isn't alleged. It has been proven. You've routinely said ignorant remarks regarding communism. That is a demonstrable fact, as I already showed with your ignorant claim that Marx was promoting abolishing religion in the Manifesto.

2. I never said it didn't have elements of capitalism. Read what I said again. I said it wasn't a free market, that it was mixed and it was still capitalism. You apparently agree, so why the fuck would that be ignorance on my part?


3. "... it needs working knowledge of economics, something you do not have but I do and telling you..."

Are you a child?


THE POINT IS: Do not think that your good intentions are going to be viewed as good, likewise, do not believe that the world you are trying to build is going to be without problems.Because, the world you ideally had in your mind would have only worked for you, but with compromise and compromise it will no longer be perfect and you will be disappointed causing further problems.

1. I haven't even said what I personally believed. You're assuming you know what that is.

2. I don't think that my good intentions will necessarily be viewed as good by all people.

3. I don't believe that if my good intentions were to be implemented, it would be without problems.

So if that's your point, your point is utterly inconsequential. You merely want to escape the actual topic because the result is one you don't like: Christians can be, and some have been, communist.


Also, I dont presume to think that I know more about Christianity than you or anyone else from our time does. However, Early Christians were much closer to the real meaning of the teachings of christ.

... That's exactly what I said! I said the early Christians would be more familiar with Jesus' teachings than either you or I.

Your irrational fear of the word "communism" not withstanding, the early Christians practiced communism since their property was held in common, just like the definition of communism states!

Okay This Is To Rust:

1. Sorry to see you not the mood but you just missed a big compromise on my part. Regardless, of how much you've shitted on me throughout this debate I still took the time to read everything you had to say. So what does this have to say about you?

2. Your damn right I am scared shitless of communism. I find it to be counter productive to individual liberty, if not an overall threat to liberty. I find communism and socialism to be the state squandering the wealth ofeach individual under the guise of taking care of them.

For the religious argument sake, Jesus Christ did not say that you must give or face the consequences he says that you must genuinely will yourself to give. For as Christ had said: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."(Matthew 9:13) If you took the moment to think about these two words you would realize that a person must be genuinely compelled to give, because that is a true sign of mercy. Whereas a sacrifice is all form without substance, a ritual you do to get something out of it. To me marxism communism/socialism what have you is more of a sacrifice on the individual than on the mercy of the individual.

Also, keep in mind Marxism spoke of this communist ideal/end-result as something that would come about progressively. First, a Crisis in Capitalism. Than, a socialist state. Finally, the communist stateless society. So, socialism itself will not last forever, it must end in communism.

3. RUST YOU SAID: "It is baseless (i.e. you haven't established it aside from running your mouth), to say that they have changed to the point of making communism impossible and un-Christian (the point of the thread)."

What do you think I am doing now, but establishing how humanity has changed since Ancient times. That change is called Globalism and you can read my post again about Globalism to understand what it is I am talking about.

4. Do not presume that I am limiting God The Father, the very one who I acknowledge as being the infinite All In All as being limited just through us. Look at the story of Jonas after all. I am simply using humanity as a point that if we refuse to cooperate with his will than there will be much suffering within the community because in a communist/socialist society everyone relies upon everyone instead of just themselves. To me this is good intentions leading to slavery of the people and people running away from their own personal responsibility.

5. If there is no equality than it is not Christian than. Simple as that. Again proving my point that Marxism and Christianity cannot go together.

6. I say they practiced communalism not communism because the definition suggests that Communalism is:
1. a theory or system of government according to which each commune is virtually an independent state and the nation is merely a federation of such states. 2. the principles or practices of communal ownership. 3. strong allegiance to one's own ethnic group rather than to society as a whole.

My argument here isn't about communal ownership. You provided the evidence. However, I am simply being the antithesis to the thesis. I am a Christian but I am no communist, nor a broad generalization of a socialist. I am a Libertarian. I am pointing out that Christians made it work largely because they had the pure desire to make it work, they did not have the desire to threaten each others freedoms, and finally because they were with other Christians. It was an ethnic based thing therefore, it fits with communalism not communism.

7. Like how you put the quote of mine out of context... I am simply telling you that the economics behind communism cant work. That a free market is the only way to make the economics work. I had tried earlier before giving you examples of how it could work you saw them irrelevant when I told you that THERE IS a better way to apply the teachings of christ without having communism. The whole entire idea that I am trying to tell you is that: "To give freely it must be mine to give, if it is 'ours' than I am not really giving and the lesson about mercy and charity is missed altogether." Am I being a child for pointing out something you do not understand? I am pretty sure that is a grown up thing to do. If I was being childish than, I would have let you went on your merry way without knowing better.

8. I am simply pointing out that ideas are perfect but when we want ideas to be made manifest they are less than perfect. I simply wanted to point that out my argument was not about what your beliefs and intentions were. I am simply putting you in the hypothetical hot seat.

9. So than it is agreed that communism can coincide with Christianity. FINE! I Yeild the argument to you. BUT I am not done, neither are you. Because, I still believe that one does not NECESSARILY need Communism or Socialism to be called a Christian. I propose from my side of the argument that what works best is Libertarianism to help coincide with the Christian ideology as well.

Okay This Is To Rust:

1. Sorry to see you not the mood but you just missed a big compromise on my part. Regardless, of how much you've shitted on me throughout this debate I still took the time to read everything you had to say. So what does this have to say about you?

1a. Why would I need to compromise? You alleged compromise is based on false premises. There is no need to compromise. Just as I wouldn't compromise with someone claiming 2+2 = 5, I won't compromise here when your posts are just plain false. The early Christians practiced communism. Period. You are bringing up "communalism" because of your phobia of the word "communism", not because there is a need to.

1b. What does it say about me? It says I am a man that tires of shoddy, dishonest bullshit easily; a man that loses interest in putting effort into a reply when similar effort isn't being put in return by the other person.

For example, your outrageous claims regarding Marx and the manifesto. You could have easily searched for the Manifesto and read it carefully before making the claim. That's elementary level research right there. Instead you made a ridiculous claim without making an ounce of effort to research it. I, on the other hand, did search for my copy of the Manifesto and did search to see if what you claimed was true before replying; so much so that I even explained to you Marx had only mentioned religion a coupled of times and never negatively ( a clue that I had just done the research and knew such details because they were fresh in my mind).

So please spare me the act of "you taking the time to read everything I said". It loses it's weight completely when you didn't even take the time to back up your accusations.


2. Your damn right I am scared shitless of communism. I find it to be counter productive to individual liberty, if not an overall threat to liberty. I find communism and socialism to be the state squandering the wealth ofeach individual under the guise of taking care of them.


2. Which proves what I said: The fact that Christians can be communist has already been established by numerous sources. Yet instead of doing the honest thing and admitting you were wrong and admitting that Christian can be (and have been) communist), you keep ranting and raving about how evil you think communism is and bringing up the term "communalism" as a last ditch attempt at not having to use the word "communism".


For the religious argument sake, Jesus Christ did not say that you must give or face the consequences he says that you must genuinely will yourself to give. For This has already been covered: There are many different forms of communism, and many different implementations of communism. Not everyone of them is the same. The early Christian practiced a form of communism where they "genuinely" gave.


So, socialism itself will not last forever, it must end in communism.a. Who said other wise?

b. There are different forms of socialism as well. Marx described it as a transition from capitalism to communism, yes, but others have decided it can be implemented on a permanent basis. You are generalizing, once again.



3. RUST YOU SAID: "It is baseless (i.e. you haven't established it aside from running your mouth), to say that they have changed to the point of making communism impossible and un-Christian (the point of the thread)."
3. Yes. I know I said that, you don't have to repeat it. Read what you just quoted me as saying. Did I claim that it hasn't changed at all? NO. I said you hadn't established that it had changed to the point of making communism impossible and un-Christian. The two statements (i.e. what I did say and what you decided to conjure up) are not the same.


4. I am simply using humanity as a point that if we refuse to cooperate with his will than there will be much suffering within the community because in a communist/socialist society everyone relies upon everyone instead of just themselves. To me this is good intentions leading to slavery of the people and people running away from their own personal responsibility.Then your point is irrelevant! That you think socialism or communism is "good intentions gone wrong" is unimportant. That doesn't change the fact that Christians can be communist.


5. If there is no equality than it is not Christian than. Simple as that. Again proving my point that Marxism and Christianity cannot go together.
5. I didn't say there couldn't be equality! Are you doing this on purpose now? I said Marxism (as specific form of communism - so I wasn't even talking of all communism in the first place) seeks to abolish social classes, and that abolishing social classes does not automatically mean equality. That is the truth.

That does not mean you cannot both abolish social classes and strive for absolute equality.

You are not reading things correctly and are responding with your knee-jerk reactions instead of studying the word-choice I'm using.

6. I say they practiced communalism not communism because the definition:The definition you bolded (i.e. #3) doesn't preclude the actual definition of communism! That's the point: they practiced communism in the sense that they had communal ownership. That you claim their community was based on ethnicity does not refute that.

A community of Africans that has a communal ownership of the means of production as well as a strong allegiance their African ethnic group is still communist. It just happens to be "communalist" as well if we define that as you are doing.


7. Like how you put the quote of mine out of context... I am simply telling you that the economics behind communism cant work. That a free market is the only way to make the economics work. I had tried earlier before giving you examples of how it could work you saw them irrelevant when I told you that THERE IS a better way to apply the teachings of christ without having communism. The whole entire idea that I am trying to tell you is that: "To give freely it must be mine to give, if it is 'ours' than I am not really giving and the lesson about mercy and charity is missed altogether." Am I being a child for pointing out something you do not understand? I am pretty sure that is a grown up thing to do. If I was being childish than, I would have let you went on your merry way without knowing better.7a. The context doesn't help your quote. It's utterly childish with or without context. It's you saying "I know this and you don't so take that!"

7b. You are telling me the economics of communism cannot work. That's correct. Telling. Not showing with actual evidence, but simply incessantly telling me till you're blue in the face.

7c. The Early Christians joined everything they had together thus refuting your baseless assertion that " if it is 'ours' than I am not really giving and the lesson about mercy and charity is missed altogether." They, who knew more about the teachings of the Christ than you or I do, joined everything together.

8. I am simply pointing out that ideas are perfect but when we want ideas to be made manifest they are less than perfect. I simply wanted to point that out my argument was not about what your beliefs and intentions were. I am simply putting you in the hypothetical hot seat.

8. I caught that. I'm telling you that is a superfluous comment that didn't need to be said. At no point in time have I doubted, questioned, not known, or disagreed with the statement that "ideas are perfect but when we want ideas to be made manifest they are less than perfect".

Stop convoluting the discussion with things I don't need to hear.


9.BUT I am not done, neither are you. Because, I still believe that one does not NECESSARILY need Communism or Socialism to be called a Christian.Who here said that they necessarily needed to be communist or socialist to be called Christian? You're putting words in people's mouths, again.

A principled Christian should endorse communism just as any moral and caring person should endorse communism

it is not religious factors that prevent the movement being universally accepted; rather, it is the multifarious human factors

thats what ive been trying to tell rust. the human factors hold it back. in idea and theory it works but in application its bound to be corrupted the only way it will work are those who are willing to make it work but because we dont think the same there is bound to be problems so it will most likely work locally.

thats what ive been trying to tell rust. the human factors hold it back. in idea and theory it works but in application its bound to be corrupted the only way it will work are those who are willing to make it work but because we dont think the same there is bound to be problems so it will most likely work locally.


Yes, telling me as opposed to substantiating it with meaningful evidence, something completely irrelevant to the thread.

This thread isn't called "What holds communism back?" is it? It's titled "Shouldn't those who fall under Christianity/Catholicism endorse marxism/communism?" thus the discussion hinges on whether the ideals of Christianity are (or can be) in line with the ideals of communism. I have already shown how the Early Christians practiced communism, and how there are compelling Christian socialist and Christian communist movements.