Socalism & Christianity, a perfect match or a complete clash of ideologies?
- Thread starter Jaxy
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Acts chapter 2 is an early church, but not a model for the New Testament. They had things in common out of choice, rather than compulsion. I do think we should help one another and meet needs where possible. However,Modern socialism is a construction of Marx, Engles and Lenon.
These men were totally opposed to anything Biblical. What they believed was different from what the Bible teaches.
Anyhow, that's not nearly as important as where we will go some day.
Here's what the Bible says about the most important subject in the Bible concerning us all.
Bible Way to Heaven
These men were totally opposed to anything Biblical. What they believed was different from what the Bible teaches.
Anyhow, that's not nearly as important as where we will go some day.
Here's what the Bible says about the most important subject in the Bible concerning us all.
Bible Way to Heaven
-
4
- Show all
P
Hey Jaxy, watch the video on the Amish and while I can not be certain, you may find some very unusual views which they express. It could give you a new perspective on how some Christians view politics. I get the impression that the Amish of Lancaster, Pa., live a socialist lifestyle and are politically right leaning at the Federal level at least. I don't know for certain and if you watch some of the videos about them you might get a better feel than I do since I am pretty much apolitical.
There was one video of Amish or possibly Mennonite in Wyoming or Montana and the socialistic aspect of that community was appreciated by their neighbors. It may have been one of the Dakotas. Then there was a video of a group in Canada where the neighbors were quite upset about the socialistic ways because they were so productive. Hard to compete with.
If you are thinking that your choice of religion should be based on politics that is not going to lead you in the right direction regarding salvation and salvation is the primary focus of Christianity. You can work out the 'flavor' of Christianity over time. You will find that there are a great many different thoughts on politics amongst Christians but that should never be conflated with salvation.
I would think the socialist leaning groups of Christians may be in large cities and maybe New Hampshire where Bernie Sanders is from. Almost sure about Bernie's home state. But you might also find that certain regions of the country will be more amenable to socialistic ways. California comes to mind. You will likely find that some preachers are misled and try to preach politics rather than Jesus and that is something to be cautious of. Charles Stanley is a long time solid preacher of Jesus and he has a large diverse congregation in Georgia that likely has a big mix of people with mixed political views. Almost certain of this.
There was one video of Amish or possibly Mennonite in Wyoming or Montana and the socialistic aspect of that community was appreciated by their neighbors. It may have been one of the Dakotas. Then there was a video of a group in Canada where the neighbors were quite upset about the socialistic ways because they were so productive. Hard to compete with.
If you are thinking that your choice of religion should be based on politics that is not going to lead you in the right direction regarding salvation and salvation is the primary focus of Christianity. You can work out the 'flavor' of Christianity over time. You will find that there are a great many different thoughts on politics amongst Christians but that should never be conflated with salvation.
I would think the socialist leaning groups of Christians may be in large cities and maybe New Hampshire where Bernie Sanders is from. Almost sure about Bernie's home state. But you might also find that certain regions of the country will be more amenable to socialistic ways. California comes to mind. You will likely find that some preachers are misled and try to preach politics rather than Jesus and that is something to be cautious of. Charles Stanley is a long time solid preacher of Jesus and he has a large diverse congregation in Georgia that likely has a big mix of people with mixed political views. Almost certain of this.
H
I didn't listen to the video so don't know exactly where they're coming from, but I can say from my experience. I've had many Amish and Mennonite friends and I wouldn't call their ways socialistic... they may take up a regular offering to have in store for anyone in their church who may have a big hospital bill cuz they don't have health insurance. . . Or they may donate their time to build a barn to raise the funds, but they don't share everything like the Hutterites do. Many Amish and Mennonites are very wealthy, while some are not.
-
1
- Show all
P
Very good. I did see a video of Hutterites in Canada, maybe Alberta, and they were as you point out very 'communal' in their lifestyle. While they lived comfortably in what appeared to be single or possibly duplex type homes, they had a community dining facility and each person was given a very small allowance each month, maybe $20 in today's money.
The social structure of Amish and Mennonite do seem in some communities to be close to average Americans but some are more community minded than average Americans. At least from my point of view as a southside Chicago born and raised individual. Jaxy, who posted this is getting a bit off track maybe and just trying to let Jaxy know that Christians are of many varieties.
And thanks for posting at witness of the Holy Spirit and why did I become a Christian? In case you didn't see Siddhikoli's post of being disabled with cerebral palsy now you know and I once was somewhat close with a person with that condition and know how tough they have it and nice to see you post there.
The social structure of Amish and Mennonite do seem in some communities to be close to average Americans but some are more community minded than average Americans. At least from my point of view as a southside Chicago born and raised individual. Jaxy, who posted this is getting a bit off track maybe and just trying to let Jaxy know that Christians are of many varieties.
And thanks for posting at witness of the Holy Spirit and why did I become a Christian? In case you didn't see Siddhikoli's post of being disabled with cerebral palsy now you know and I once was somewhat close with a person with that condition and know how tough they have it and nice to see you post there.
Luke 16
9I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.
Jesus revealed something about money and about eternity here. Do you think people are more likely to fondly remember the people who gave them money through socialist programs or those who used capitalism to milk them for the highest premium possible?
Also, Jesus is talking about spending money now, today, in the present, to your advantage. This tells me that those in the "eternal dwellings" welcoming others in will have a remembrance of the generosity, or lack thereof, of people they knew in the world.
9I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.
Jesus revealed something about money and about eternity here. Do you think people are more likely to fondly remember the people who gave them money through socialist programs or those who used capitalism to milk them for the highest premium possible?
Also, Jesus is talking about spending money now, today, in the present, to your advantage. This tells me that those in the "eternal dwellings" welcoming others in will have a remembrance of the generosity, or lack thereof, of people they knew in the world.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Socialism does not deal with loving others or helping others.. It deals with taking from one person and giving it to another.. socialism is theft.. Socialism always leads to poverty for all.. by taking away incentive from all..
Socialism is like the little red book mentioned in the Book of Revelation.. It tastes sweet in the mouth but becomes bitter in the stomach
(Revelation 10:8-10) "And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. {9} And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. {10} And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter."
Socialism is like the little red book mentioned in the Book of Revelation.. It tastes sweet in the mouth but becomes bitter in the stomach
(Revelation 10:8-10) "And the voice which I heard from heaven spake unto me again, and said, Go and take the little book which is open in the hand of the angel which standeth upon the sea and upon the earth. {9} And I went unto the angel, and said unto him, Give me the little book. And he said unto me, Take it, and eat it up; and it shall make thy belly bitter, but it shall be in thy mouth sweet as honey. {10} And I took the little book out of the angel’s hand, and ate it up; and it was in my mouth sweet as honey: and as soon as I had eaten it, my belly was bitter."
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I wouldn’t call it stealing if the money is extracted through legal taxation. If people’s’ bank accounts are being raided by the government then that would be stealing. As far as I know, that doesn’t normally happen.
Those with a lot of money are more likely to turn a critical eye to socialism while those with little to no money likely praise it. On the other hand, the same can be said of capitalism, but for different reasons.
The systems we have generally chase the money. The problem is there are a lot more people who don’t have a lot of money, but through the distribution of well, make a large money pool, but due to their individual weaknesses, are often unable to have greater power than the wealthy or corporations.
We still live in a society where there is a ruling class and a serving class. The servants eventually get tired of that, historically.
Those with a lot of money are more likely to turn a critical eye to socialism while those with little to no money likely praise it. On the other hand, the same can be said of capitalism, but for different reasons.
The systems we have generally chase the money. The problem is there are a lot more people who don’t have a lot of money, but through the distribution of well, make a large money pool, but due to their individual weaknesses, are often unable to have greater power than the wealthy or corporations.
We still live in a society where there is a ruling class and a serving class. The servants eventually get tired of that, historically.
In the OT the levitical priesthood did the function of government. The taxes to support the levitical priesthood were one tenth of your gross income. This is what I feel is the most important point, it should be set in stone that government must function on a set tax base of 10%.
Second, the Levitical priesthood had no control over the army. If the nation were attacked they had to raise an army from every tribe. The analogy would be that each state would have a militia, like the National guard, only under the supervision and control of the state. Or, if it made more sense you could divide the US into ten regions where the military was under the control of each region. So the military would be like public school with each state having their own, but they could still work together. You would think each of the ten regions would want jets and tanks and rifles, these could all be part of a single contract. You would also think that the "navy" that Missouri would want would be very different from Florida. Some states would need a "coast guard" others would want boats for rivers, others for the great lakes, and still others for swamps. If you did this the military would become much more focused on national security and far less interested in foreign incursions.
Second, the Levitical priesthood had no control over the army. If the nation were attacked they had to raise an army from every tribe. The analogy would be that each state would have a militia, like the National guard, only under the supervision and control of the state. Or, if it made more sense you could divide the US into ten regions where the military was under the control of each region. So the military would be like public school with each state having their own, but they could still work together. You would think each of the ten regions would want jets and tanks and rifles, these could all be part of a single contract. You would also think that the "navy" that Missouri would want would be very different from Florida. Some states would need a "coast guard" others would want boats for rivers, others for the great lakes, and still others for swamps. If you did this the military would become much more focused on national security and far less interested in foreign incursions.
Yes they did, but the Levitical priesthood didn't have access to that. My point is the size of the federal government and budget of the federal government was limited to 10% and the function of the federal government was well defined.
Obviously there was also a state government that at the very least controlled their militia and that would also have a cost. I would think the people who controlled the state governments (tribes) were the landholders as every family of that tribe had been given a portion of the land.
Obviously there was also a state government that at the very least controlled their militia and that would also have a cost. I would think the people who controlled the state governments (tribes) were the landholders as every family of that tribe had been given a portion of the land.
-
1
- Show all