Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
Immortalist
according to his need
Some scholars trace the origin of the phrase to the New Testament. In
the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
"distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
once.
Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
them to all, according as anyone had need.
Acts 4:32-35 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. And
with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
unto every man according as he had need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_need
ken
But Karl Marx was a real person, the others not...
Sir Frederick Martin
A story by any other name is still a story.
Of course, 'humans', need stories.
'Stories' work, even 'self' 'stories'.
pyjamarama
I missed the part in the NT about leftist, state-enforced (by guns and
gulag, always) 'equity'...
Could you point it out for us?
Devils Advocaat
This may be so, but the maxim is a good one.
Wombat
Was the grave of Karl Marx yet another Communist plot?
Wombat
ken
>
> - Show quoted text -
True!
Dave has real needs, psychological and pharmaceutical, but other than
biblethumping, no real abilites that I can observe.
Mike Painter
Sorry, are you talking about the way Christianity was enforced for 1500
years or so or how communism was enforced more recently?
Or perhaps, without the guns, the way the OT talks about killing those who
do not believe - and many that did believe.
And remember Jesus did tell you to buy a sword and hate your parents.
DonH
news:dab2c947-0706-4cf3...@k10g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
# I think the Communists were forced to change the wording somewhat to
read - "according to his work", as there was a tendency for the idle rich to
be replaced by the idle poor.
Jeanne Douglas
I wasn't aware that the Israelis were forced onto kibbutzes.
JD
Rockinghorse Winner
DonH <donlhu...@bigpond.com> wrote:
There's no doubt that Marx, like all Western thinkers, was heavily
influenced by Christianity. In fact the whole trend of thought and social
policy which emphasises the poor, the underprivileged, the underdog -
derives from the same source.
*R* *H*
--
Powered by Linux |/ 2.6.32.26-175 Fedora 12
"No spyware. No viruses. No nags." |/ 2.6.31.12-0.2 OpenSUSE 11.2
http://www.jamendo.com |/Mutt 1.5.21 slrn 0.9.9p1 Irssi 0.8.15
"Preach the gospel always; when necessary use words." St. Francis
WR
> according to his need
Ayn Rand mocks that phrase quite effusively in her tomes, especially
Atlas Shrugged. I've always thought the phrase was rather ambiguous.
After all the essence of capitalism is to find a need and fill it, and
the study of economics is about the allocation of resources to needs.
If I'm a plumber and my neighbor's pipes need repair, and my neighbor
hires me, am I not, according to my ability, serving the one who
needs? (Even if I charge him or her for the service?)
ken
You're bad!
Immortalist
The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which
particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent
and repress them
Immortalist
wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 08:23:00 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> >according to his need
>
> >Some scholars trace the origin of the phrase to the New Testament. In
> >the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
> >given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
> >steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
> >communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
> >"distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
>
> >Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
> >another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
> >once.
>
> >Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
> >them to all, according as anyone had need.
>
> >Acts 4:32-35 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. And
> >with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
> >Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
> >and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
> >unto every man according as he had need.
>
>
> A story by any other name is still a story.
> Of course, 'humans', need stories.
> 'Stories' work, even 'self' 'stories'.
Why do we need stories?
Immortalist
“But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a
knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy
one."
Jesus telling his cronies to get weapons to fight with.
http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Luke+22
“Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the
things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).
This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship
between Christianity and secular authority. The original message,
coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to
pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations
about under what circumstances it is desirable for the Christian to
submit to earthly authority.
f. barnes
Yes it is. But what sort of controls are necessary to get from each
according to his ability and to assure that people take only according
to their needs? Human nature would suggest that tight totalitarian,
police-state, controls are necessary. But then, who controls the
controllers?
Of course, busybody social engineers will insist that given access to
our children's minds, they can change human nature. It has never
worked before, but that won't stop the busybodies from coming around
in a different guise and trying again,
Jonathan
"ken" <flak...@att.net> wrote in message
news:90fccb4d-3cb7-4e5a...@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 28, 8:23 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
>
Those two names shouldn't be spoken in the same breath.
Marx was just another power hungry mass-murderer that
/used/ those words to control and kill people, like a soldier
uses various weapons against the enemy.
And Christ was the very first, and greatest, martyr of all time.
In the non-linear math I hobby in, real world systems are analyzed
by how they respond to some ..disturbance. The transient length
begins at the moment the system is disturbed, and ends when
one can no longer tell it was disturbed. Call it the event length.
If you disturb a system too little, it quickly returns to it's previous
equilibrium, too much and the system breaks apart and into
chaos.
The ..idea is to disturb a system in such a was as to generate
the longest transient length possible. The longer a system is held
near it's tipping point from some disturbance, the more likely
self organization or evolution is likely to emerge.
Christ, or just the idea, (who cares when this math deals only
with effects) managed to disturb humanity for a couple of
thousand years already, with no sign of fading to be
seen, on the contrary.
That's considered a transient of nearly infinite length.
Whether by accident, luck, imagination or design
Christ defines perfection!
Mathematically perfect.
The theoretical ideal!
The 'Mona Lisa' of martyrs!
Someday modern science might be able to define
just how he effected the world so thoroughly.
But I doubt it.
Jonathan
s
Immortalist
> > "Immortalist" <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:dab2c947-0706-4cf3...@k10g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> >> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> >> according to his need
>
> >> Some scholars trace the origin of the phrase to the New Testament. In
> >> the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
> >> given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
> >> steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
> >> communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
> >> "distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
>
> >> Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
> >> another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
> >> once.
>
> >> Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
> >> them to all, according as anyone had need.
>
> >> Acts 4:32-35 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. And
> >> with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
> >> Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
> >> and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
> >> unto every man according as he had need.
>
>
> > # I think the Communists were forced to change the wording somewhat to
> > read - "according to his work", as there was a tendency for the idle rich to
> > be replaced by the idle poor.
>
> There's no doubt that Marx, like all Western thinkers, was heavily
> influenced by Christianity. In fact the whole trend of thought and social
> policy which emphasises the poor, the underprivileged, the underdog -
> derives from the same source.
>
Are you saying that all attempts or ideas about helping the poor are
copying Christianity? If so what did Christianity copy since humans
were helping the poor long before Christianity came around?
Immortalist
So are you saying that capitalism is a perfect system or just one that
is better than the other other alternatives? How would Rand deal with
an out of control growth difference between rich and poor, just let
anything happen that does, like in the Gilded Age?
Don Kresch
<mank...@yahoo.co.uk> scrawled in blood:
>On Mar 28, 5:47 pm, ken <flakey...@att.net> wrote:
>> On Mar 28, 8:23 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
>> > according to his need
>> But Karl Marx was a real person, the others not...
>
>This may be so, but the maxim is a good one.
No, it's not.
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in slacklessness trying not to.
tooly
What did the Frankfurt School [cultural marxism] decrea as the PRIME
target for dismantling in the west?
Immortalist
Corporate pigs in the wallowing in the mud of money? I give up, what
did did the Frankfurt School decrea as the PRIME target for
dismantling in the west?
Rockinghorse Winner
No, there have been many cultures and individuals who have come to a
religious understanding of God and the fondness of the Deity for 'the poor.'
By the poor, I refer not just to the economically disadvantaged but to the
whole gamut of suffering humanity. However, in the West, this understanding
was primarily passed on through the Christian tradition. Not exclusively,
but primarily. It's in the cultural genes.
Thus when Communism came along,
it found a ready ear in people who already 'knew' that the poor were to be
preferred to the wealthy, that economic injustice was an affront to the
natural order. It is this understanding that is part of every person's
makeup who is born in the West, passed on to him in his mother's milk, as it
were! Even when you are critisizing the Church, pounding on it for it's
hypocrisy, it's evil, it's whatever, you are doing it from a Christian
perspective.
In the West, there is no line between morality and Christianity. Our
morality has Christian tones to it, no matter how much we deny, deny, deny.
This forgetfulness of our roots is in fact part of what it means to be a
Westerner, these days. It is follows the story of the prodigal son, exactly.
Reread that story in the Bible, and you will read the story of modern
Europe.
The son asks his father for his inheritance. What is the Western inheritance
from our Father, if not our moral heritage? When we turn our backs on God,
we don't walk out penniless - we have our inheritance, our moral sense, to
guide us through the vicissitudes of life, thinking this is all we need.
However, we soon squander our moral freedom by debasing it - making it of no
account by indulging in pleasures to dull the remembrance of God, in fact to
take the place of God.
pyjamarama
>
> “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s, and unto God the
> things that are God’s” (Matthew 22:21).
>
> This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship
> between Christianity and secular authority. The original message,
> coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to
> pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations
> about under what circumstances it is desirable for the Christian to
> submit to earthly authority.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Hmmm...nothing about government forced "equity" there...
Did you not understand the question?
Immortalist
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Hmmm...nothing about government forced "equity" there...
>
> Did you not understand the question?
Hmmm, I guess I didn't understand the question. Are you looking for a
quote in the bible that would support positive rights? It may be hard
to understand bigoted language sometimes so maybe you could speak in
neutral terms before you jump all over me brother. Are talking about
the distinction between negative and positive rights or just about the
kind of politics and music you like or dislike?
Negative right
Negative rights are rights from certain things, usually freedoms from
abuse or coercion by others, as opposed to positive rights which are
the rights or guarantees to certain things.
One example of a negative right is the 1st Amendment of the
constitution of the USA, which prevents free speech from being reduced
by laws.
Positive right
Positive rights are rights or guarantees to certain things, as opposed
to negative rights which are the rights from certain things, usually
freedoms from abuse or coercion by others.
For example, a right to an education is a positive right because
education must be provided by a series of positive actions by others.
A school system, teachers and materials must be actively provided in
order for such a right to be fulfilled. The right to be secure in
one's home, however, is a negative right. In order for it to be
fulfilled, others need take no particular action but merely refrain
from certain actions, specifically trespassing or breaking into the
home in question.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Negative_right
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Positive_right
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Positive_Liberty
----------------------------------
The distinction between negative and positive rights can illustrate
the difference between political ideologies. For example, many
adherents to libertarian and conservative ideologies believe that the
primary role of government is to protect negative rights, and with
restrictions on government control the prosperity that is envisioned
by positive rights will follow.
Conversely, adherents to socialist and communist philosophies
sometimes justify restrictions on negative rights by arguing that
their systems are better at delivering positive rights. This
justification was popular in the 1950s and 1960s. However in the
1980s, it appeared that judged from their own standard of providing
positive rights such as the right to economic prosperity, socialist
and communist regimes appeared lacking, and the inability of communist
regimes to deliver on their promise of prosperity was one major factor
in the collapse of many regimes in the late 1980s.
The justification that economic prosperity overrides negative rights
was also used to justify right wing East Asian regimes in the 1960s
and is still used by the government of the People's Republic of China
to justify its political system.
The issue remains unresolved, and such documents as the International
Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights and Convention on
the Rights of the Child reflect the "positive rights" view. Conflict
between Western nations and the People's Republic of China on "human
rights issues" have likewise tended to reflect these differences: the
Chinese point to near-universal housing and literacy, despite a lack
of "negative rights" that would limit the government's power (see
Human rights in China).
tooly
>
> - Show quoted text -
To destroy CHRISTIANITY. They saw it as source of national fervor...
Sir Frederick Martin
>On Mar 28, 9:47 am, Sir Frederick Martin <mmcne...@fuzzysys.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> A story by any other name is still a story.
>> Of course, 'humans', need stories.
>> 'Stories' work, even 'self' 'stories'.
>
>Why do we need stories?
1. Because evolution found them useful.
2. Without them 'we' are 'zombies'.
3. The situation is so weird, strange, spooky,
and meaningless, that more friendly representation
is needed.
4. 'Our' brains operate on representations, such as qualia,
sensor qualia, 'self' qualia, and situation qualia. All stories.
5. In AI the 'blackboard' theory and 'virtual reality' theory,
depend on stories (representations). 'Our' brain functions
can be understood through such theories.
6. They(the maps, representation, stories) come with the territory.
7. More... if I thought about it more.
Immortalist
What did they mean by destroy and how does that determine anything
about Marx who was dead by then.
JohnN
> "ken" <flakey...@att.net> wrote in message
>
> news:90fccb4d-3cb7-4e5a...@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 28, 8:23 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> > according to his need
>
> Those two names shouldn't be spoken in the same breath.
>
> Marx was just another power hungry mass-murderer that
> /used/ those words to control and kill people, like a soldier
> uses various weapons against the enemy.
Really? Where did karl kill all those people?
>
> And Christ was the very first, and greatest, martyr of all time.
No. Christ had a kegger with his homies followed by a very bad
weekend.
>
> In the non-linear math I hobby in, real world systems are analyzed
> by how they respond to some ..disturbance. The transient length
> begins at the moment the system is disturbed, and ends when
> one can no longer tell it was disturbed. Call it the event length.
>
> If you disturb a system too little, it quickly returns to it's previous
> equilibrium, too much and the system breaks apart and into
> chaos.
>
> The ..idea is to disturb a system in such a was as to generate
> the longest transient length possible. The longer a system is held
> near it's tipping point from some disturbance, the more likely
> self organization or evolution is likely to emerge.
>
> Christ, or just the idea, (who cares when this math deals only
> with effects) managed to disturb humanity for a couple of
> thousand years already, with no sign of fading to be
> seen, on the contrary.
I think the people Christ disturbed are disturbed in a mintal way.
>
> That's considered a transient of nearly infinite length.
> Whether by accident, luck, imagination or design
> Christ defines perfection!
Good thing your analysis doesn't depend on there actually being a real
Christ, because there no valid evidence for same.
>
> Mathematically perfect.
> The theoretical ideal!
> The 'Mona Lisa' of martyrs!
>
> Someday modern science might be able to define
> just how he effected the world so thoroughly.
> But I doubt it.
Probably the way Ming the Merciless effected the American space
program.
Say good night gracie.
johnN
JohnN
Except for Liberation Theology because IIRC it required the rich to
make real sacrifices in a Christ like way. But the RCC finally
oppressed it because the South American dictators and their American
corporate masters were threatened.
JohnN
JohnN
JohnN
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
Bible aside, Capt John Smith of the Virginia colony required everyone
to work in order for them to get the fledgling colony's food. He was
the first modern Republican Tea Party organizer in the New World. It
worked because his soldiers had all the guns and the colonist didn't
know a damn thing about surviving in the wild.
And since Jamestown was successful, the Indians invented that notable
phrase: there goes the neighborhood.
JohnN
Jim Austin
> On Mar 28, 5:47 pm, ken <flakey...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 28, 8:23 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> > > according to his need
>
> > > the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
> > > given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
> > > steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
> > > communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
> > > "distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
>
> > > Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
> > > another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
> > > once.
>
> > > Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
> > > them to all, according as anyone had need.
>
> > > Acts 4:32-35 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. And
> > > with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
> > > Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
> > > and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
> > > unto every man according as he had need.
>
> > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_e...
>
>
> This may be so, but the maxim is a good one.
Actually no. It translates to: everybody works for nothing and gets
everything free.
Smiler
Except that Marx was born a Jew and didn't believe in your Christ
character.
--
Smiler,
The godless one. a.a.# 2279
All gods are tailored to order. They're made to
exactly fit the prejudices of their believers.
WR
You're reading too much into what I just said. I was playing a bit
with the old Marxist phrase, claiming it could be applied to
capitalism as well. Capitalism is far from perfect. In fact, pure
capitalism is a mirage, a myth. The Supply and Demand curves graphed
by Ricardo had to do with fungible commodities bought and sold at
auction on markets that had a large number of suppliers and buyers.
Most buying and selling in capitalist countries has to do with
fragmented demand curves, items that are not fungible, value that is
imputed and at the whim of taste and fashion. In addition, capitalist
businesses do everything they can to limit competition and claim a
monopoly or at least an oligopoly. That's why we have anti-trust laws.
Capitalists are the enemies of pure capitalism. They want to control
markets and drive out the other businesses. Whether its the old
Standard Oil or the new Walmart, all businessmen tend to be
pathologically greedy. They muck with the legislature and congress,
try to get protective laws passed and try to eliminate government
regulation. They bribe all sides and do everything they can to
ingratiate themselves with lawmakers and government executives.
WR
Read a bit more history. Smith wound up leading a splinter group that
left Jamestown because he was removed as chief (he was only
temporarily in charge) and he was disgusted with the imbeciles that
ran the place. Jamestown was a disaster, not a success. Most of the
settlers died. Smith was hardly a teabagger. He was an adventurer and
a scholar of sorts. He wrote nine books and later in life mapped
Boston Harbor. He's the one who anointed the Boston environs with the
name "New England."
Don Kresch
scrawled in blood:
>You're reading too much into what I just said. I was playing a bit
>with the old Marxist phrase, claiming it could be applied to
>capitalism as well. Capitalism is far from perfect. In fact, pure
>capitalism is a mirage, a myth. The Supply and Demand curves graphed
>by Ricardo had to do with fungible commodities bought and sold at
>auction on markets that had a large number of suppliers and buyers.
>Most buying and selling in capitalist countries has to do with
>fragmented demand curves, items that are not fungible, value that is
>imputed and at the whim of taste and fashion. In addition, capitalist
>businesses do everything they can to limit competition and claim a
>monopoly or at least an oligopoly.
No, only cronyist, mercantilist, and other sundry nonsense
tries that.
Oh--anti-trust is anticompetition.
Joebruno
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
>
> the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
> given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
> steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
> communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
> "distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
>
> Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
> another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
> once.
>
> Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
> them to all, according as anyone had need.
>
> Acts 4:32-35 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. And
> with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
> Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
> and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
> unto every man according as he had need.
>
Karl Marx's baby, Communism, was tried by the Russians for 70 years
and abandoned. It was tried by the Chinese for 40 years and abandoned.
It no longer exists in Eastern Europe or Asia, except for North Korea.
It exists one other place-Cuba. When Castro finally dies, it will
preobably be abandoned-it doesn't work in real life.
Rockinghorse Winner
Actually, Marx was fully exposed to Christianity as a youth and as an adult.
You don't have to be a Christian to absorb the culture.
Immortalist
> On Mar 28, 11:23 am, Immortalist <reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> > according to his need
>
Immortalist
That these traditions exist is not good evidence for why they are good
or bad.
Appeal to Tradition is a fallacy that occurs when it is assumed that
something is better or correct simply because it is older,
traditional, or "always has been done." This sort of "reasoning" is
fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it
correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by
the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause
disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause
diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-tradition.html
JaxKayaker
> according to his need
The biggest proble
JaxKayaker
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
n
JaxKayaker
> according to his need
The biggest problem with this premise is: Who determines what each
one needs?
I need a large family an expensive wife, a yacht , mansion on the
river and an inheritance for my grandchildren. These may be my needs
and I mqy be willing to work 18 hours a day for 30 years to achieve
them all. On the other hand I may be uneducated, poor and destitute
and my need is for a roof over my head a couple of meals a day and a
job and I might just be willing to settle for that. So do we let
people determine their own needs through the choices they make and
chose. or do we let someone else determine what our needs will be? Me,
I'll take the fist pick on any day. If my ability allows me to meet my
needs I am satisfied, If my ability requires that I meet the needs of
other people that don't have the ambition or refuse to make the right
choices, I have a problem with that, a big one! When people start
screaming "TAX THE RICH", it really is just another way of saying "You
have too much and I want you to give it to ME."
We can either choose our own destiny or let someone else do it for
us.
Giga2
"Immortalist" <reanima...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:dab2c947-0706-4cf3...@k10g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
>
abilities, so in a perfect world yes. In reality this is not possible to
establish.
tooly
>
> - Show quoted text -
See...this is the problem. Too many people think that with the fall
of the Berlin wall, communism somehow died. Consider, over a billion
people were under it's throes for that 70+ years. They did not just
'vanish' in thin air, or were magically converted instantly into free
marketers. There is an insiduous thing the children of all soviet
nations were taught for those 70 years called 'material
dialecticalism'. The DIALECTIC is a quite abstract thing without easy
definition. But what it essentially means that the pathway to
socialism is NEVERENDING...that like water seeking a path 'downhill',
that path WILL present itself in an 'ever changing' process. What
works today, may not work tomorrow, and new strategies will have to be
designed, new gamplans, new political avenenues...but always and
always with a single obssessive goal...'to bring down capitalism' that
a new global socialism can take it's place.
Do you think that just went away after the disenigration of the
USSR?
A think tank had already been set up in the late 20's in Frankfurt,
Germany devoted essentially to that dialectic...to find 'what works'
and to discard that which 'wasn't working'. And thusly, CULTURAL
MARXISM was born. The old Bolshevik method of 'forceful overthrow'
had not circumvented the world as first hoped, but was stopped cold by
a richer and more nationally engrained western world. The 'west'
would have to be won by other methods the Frankfurt intellectuals
wrote.
And so, Antonio Gramsci wrote that a 'NEW' proletariat would have to
be formed much akin to the old world peasantry of Tsarist Russia.
Only in the west, it would be organized from 'women, minorities,
criminals, and outcasts'...anyone with vested interest to bring down
the establishment. Look at that for a moment...and compare to the
DEMOCRAT party [usa] today. Women, minorities, criminals, and
outcasts [like gays?]...hmm...'if it walks like a duck...blah blah'.
So, no...those 'communists' did not just go away. They just dropped
back and punted and started a new set of downs once they got the ball
back [in Obama's election?]. But they've been busy as bees for more
than five decades now implementing their great new strategy as the NEW
cultural marxist manifesto...as a GRAND MARCH THROUGH THE
INSTITUTIONS...from ground up. And so they have, replanting that
marxist Frankfurt School at Columbia University and then branching out
to most campuses in the US today. And the slowly, planted new
'marxist' thinkers in key positions of journalism, media, television,
education...you name it...any institution where the mass mind can be
influenced and formed.
And that, my friend, is the insiduous nature of communism in today's
world, not a dead thing by a long long long shot...but very real, very
alive and well, and coming at you full bore in turning the minds of
youth and workers everywhere 'against' Humanity's last bastion of
FREEDOM...America herself.
So...go and march in Madison alongside Trumpka's socialists if you
want. But do it not as one of Lenin's useful idiots. Be aware...and
be very afraid...very afraid.
fasgnadh
> On Mar 28, 12:05 pm, Devils Advocaat<mankyg...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>
> Yes it is. But what sort of controls are necessary to get from each
> according to his ability and to assure that people take only according
> to their needs?
There are two possible approaches.
The first, which you have suggested, is 'controls' and that is
precisely what atheistic communism attempted, and in doing so
created the most abysmal tyrannies in human history:
> Human nature would suggest that tight totalitarian,
> police-state, controls are necessary.
That certainly was the atheist view, and Lenin, Stalin, Mao
and Pol Pot led atheist regimes which put it into practice.
As a result over 70,000,000 people were terrorised, tortured and killed.
The second approach is far more subtle.
It claims to be derived from the Manufacturer's manual and it
exhorts HUMANS WITH FREE WILL to consciously CHOOSE to share,
to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
Religion, with this single, revolutionary message, has inspired
and built the greatest and most enduring civilisations.
Why does the maxim plus theism work, and the maxim without it FAIL
IN EVERY CASE?
The answer lies in the CORE MESSAGE of religion;
Here it is in the Christian formulation:
Matthew 22
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
all your soul and with all your mind.’
38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’
40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”
The psychological dynamic is simple; Humans who believe in a being
GREATER than themselves are inspired to strive to become more like it..
they model on something SUPERIOR to themselves, and over thousands of
years successive generations asymptote toward perfection.
Per ardua ad astra
We can observe this in the historical progress from primitive
barbarism to the free, open, progressive, scientifically and
technologically advanced, secular democracies built IN EVERY CASE
by majority religious societies! 8^o
But how does one ACT to show love for God? God is invisible,
needs nothing from us, ... we need only listen.. and CHOOSE..
With vision fixed on higher ground, the second part is HOW one can
SHOW love for God IN ACTION... by loving our fellow man.
IT is a VOLUNTARY ACT. All acts of love are.
You cannot compel another human to love you, it is the act
of a free will.
God, in every religion says.. there are natural laws,
the greatest of them is Love.. if you follow these you
will prosper, and evolve and progress.
This is the radical transforming power of religion.
It explains why the Judeo/Christian/Islamic/Hindu global
civilisation, a merging of thousands of years of SEPARATE
development, into one planet wide civilisation, is the zenith
of human history... so far. B^]
(1 Corinthians)
14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace,
> But then, who controls the controllers?
The controllers are all dust. Their Empires are defunct.
Atheism, Nazism, Imperialism, Colonialism, Racism, are ALL
FAILED IDEOLOGIES.
Carboniferous Capitalism is currently running out of time.
The oil is depleted, we are burning, every year, oil
that it took HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS to produce.
You cannot run a civilisation based on the solar energy
stored in carbon fuels when those finite resources run out.
> Of course, busybody social engineers will insist that given access to
> our children's minds, they can change human nature. It has never
> worked before, but that won't stop the busybodies from coming around
> in a different guise and trying again,
The Cultural Revolution was the last great experiment in humans
attempting to consciously, forcibly, reshape human society by
re-programming culture and consciousness... it failed utterly.
It clearly did not understand what it is to be human.
The Believer
"Thus does Allah confound the unbelievers."
Sura [40.74]
(Isaiah)
41:29 Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing:
their molten images are wind and confusion.
Mary
"Seest thou not that We have set the devils on the disbelievers
to confound them with confusion ?"
Sura [19:83]
(Isaiah)
45:16 They shall be ashamed, and also confounded, all of them:
they shall go to confusion together that are makers of idols.
(James)
3:16 For where envying and strife is,
there is confusion and every evil work.
And THIS is why there are no great, enduring Atheist Civilisations!
--
---------
alt.atheism FAQ:
http://altatheismfaq.blogspot.com/
http://groups.google.com.au/group/alt.atheism/msg/7c0978c14fd4ed37?hl=en&dmode=source
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8290?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:8295?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:6348?context=latest
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17478?context=latest
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
http://www.atheistnexus.org/photo/2182797:Photo:17475?context=latest
http://www.c96trading.com/Nagant_NKVD_300h.jpg
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01001/Tsar-family_1001874c.jpg
fasgnadh
>> the maxim is a good one.
Sure, atheists are always plagiarising good idea's from religion,
otherwise they would have NONE! B^D
> Actually no. It translates to: everybody works for nothing and gets
> everything free.
Clearly atheists don't come from loving families...
for that Maxim is PRECISELY how loving parents ACT.
They give without asking in return, they LOVE because
it is as natural as breathing, they SACRIFICE because
they are capable of putting others BEFORE THEMSELVES.
They have a vision which lifts them BEYOND what they were,
they are TRANSFORMED by acting with Love.
And that, extended to the community level, to the nation and the World,
is the religious message.
This is the transforming power of Love, something no atheist
regime ever understood, let alone applied!
fasgnadh
>
It was a hole, just like every atheist state.
> Wombat
eats roots and leaves
fasgnadh
> "ken"<flak...@att.net> wrote in message
> news:90fccb4d-3cb7-4e5a...@r19g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> On Mar 28, 8:23 am, Immortalist<reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
>> according to his need
>>
>
>
> Marx was just another power hungry mass-murderer that
> /used/ those words to control and kill people, like a soldier
> uses various weapons against the enemy.
>
>
> by how they respond to some ..disturbance. The transient length
> begins at the moment the system is disturbed, and ends when
> one can no longer tell it was disturbed. Call it the event length.
>
> If you disturb a system too little, it quickly returns to it's previous
> equilibrium, too much and the system breaks apart and into
> chaos.
>
> The ..idea is to disturb a system in such a was as to generate
> the longest transient length possible. The longer a system is held
> near it's tipping point from some disturbance, the more likely
> self organization or evolution is likely to emerge.
>
> Christ, or just the idea, (who cares when this math deals only
> with effects) managed to disturb humanity for a couple of
> thousand years already, with no sign of fading to be
> seen, on the contrary.
>
> Whether by accident, luck, imagination or design
> Christ defines perfection!
>
> The theoretical ideal!
> The 'Mona Lisa' of martyrs!
>
> Someday modern science might be able to define
> just how he effected the world so thoroughly.
> But I doubt it.
Marx was not a killer. He was a tubby intellectual
with a creative understanding of Hegelian dialectic,
who produced some interesting theories on social
formation determined by the patterns of of economic organisation.
He liked to drink beer with Engels, and propound his theories, worked
occasionally in menial jobs, struggled to provide for his family,
and was hardly read, let alone understood, by Lenin and Mao.
Most of his works were not available to the atheist leaders of the USSR,
Maoist China and Cambodia under Pol Pot.
Their actions reveal their fundamental misunderstanding of Marx.
He argued that Communism would FOLLOW the last stages of Capitalism,
they attempted to introduce it BEFORE capitalism was established, let
alone fully developed, in their own countries.
They had the anti-theist slogans and a few other Blipverts from the
Communist Manifesto, and not much else. None of the Atheist 'Marxists'
had, for example, read Das Grundrisse, where Marx anticipated
mechanisation and specialisation freeing man from the NEED to work
in ADVANCED CAPITALISM. what he didn't understand is that rather
than take productivity increases from automation in the form of shorter
working hours, workers in capitalist societies would take it as
MORE STUFF. His work on the development of Oligopoly and Monopoly
may still be prophetic.. if passing peak oil doesn't destroy
carboniferous Capitalism altogether.
The rest of your post is fine.
>
> Jonathan
tooly
>
> - Show quoted text -
Destroy: "discredit, disavow, deconstruct, disempower, erase from
influence, resocialize away from..."
...to make silly.
The Frankfurt School theorized that why communism did not 'catch on'
in the west was due to the strong 'national' identity that existed
there. Instead of workers identifying with other workers across
national boundaries, against the Bourgeiuese [of any nation],
Frenchmen sided with other Frenchmen [whatever their class], over and
above say, German workers [and Germans like in kind etc].
They equated this 'strong' national identity to social evolution
relating to devotion to God and Country under old
monarchies...whereupon, Kings of the old realms were given authority
through God, ergo, the Christian religion being harbinger for self
indentity under nationalism in europe and the west.
Altruistic devotion to COUNTRY then eventually evolved to be almost
synonymous to servitude to God and the Christian ethos.
Anyway, the Frankfurt intellectuals declared that Christianity had to
first be 'destroyed' in the minds of the people before marxism could
be employed in any realistic manner. There were other targets, like
the paternally led family unit [what marx defined as a capitalist
construct]...but Christianity was first order.
fasgnadh
> gulag, always) 'equity'...
>
> Could you point it out for us?
That was added by the atheists, Lenin Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot...
after they had plagiarised the Bible maxim
Sir Frederick Martin
In the context of the 'human' brain based virtual reality,
as an understanding of 'human' condition, to "destroy"
implies the stoppage of the practicing of the stories provided by the
institutions. Of course behaviors are different, because the
experienced 'reality' is different as the representational situation
qualia are different.
Neither is 'correct' in any out of context consideration.
In context, including 'our' ubiquitous brain, perhaps the explicitly
religious collection of stories is more generally 'correct'.
The "Marx" collection of stories may serve idiosyncratically
a more limited group.
Actually, another collection of stories is needed, one not
so based on limited folk talk.
fasgnadh
> years or so ,
Christianity, in Europe was, during most of that time, the only
game in town, if you wanted a civilisation.
Even the Romans converted, and the Christians certainly couldn't have
FORCED them.
> or how
atheistic
> communism was enforced more recently?
the only way atheism EVER comes to power, at the BARREL OF A GUN!
> Or perhaps, without the guns, the way the OT talks about killing those who
> do not believe -and many that did believe.
Wheeas the atheist regimes ACTUALLY DID IT. 8^o
It seems, that when it suits the atheists, in their biased and selective
propaganda about HISTORY, they ACCEPT the Bible as an AUTHORITY, but
ONLY FOR THAT WHICH THEY BELIEVE SHOWS IT IN THE NEGATIVE, and the rest
they ignore. pfffffft
That is sheer IGNORANCE and bigotry, just like the atheist regimes
showed when they terrorised tortured and killed over 70,000,000 people,
and, unlike the atheist propaganda, THAT IS WELL DOCUMENTED.. EVERY
ATHEIST REGIME IN HISTORY HAS BEEN A TOTALITARIAN TYRANNY, and they
killed more people than ANY RELIGION in history.
Those are the facts which make EVERY ATHEIST IN USENET RUN AWAY FROM THE
TRUTH. B^]
> And remember Jesus did tell you to buy a sword and hate your parents.
That simply makes you look foolish.
If you have read the New Testament and that is your conclusion you are
either a cretin or a malign atheist propagandist.
fasgnadh
Atheists never acknowledge the source of their moralist,
even when one of their own has admitted that Marx plagiarised
the NEw Testament! B^D
It creates cognitive dissonance because it is the beginning of the
admission that all that they have, the very civilisation they
are part of, they owe to religion. It makes them feel inferior..
which is their one accurate insight!
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAAA
fasgnadh
> On Mar 28, 11:23 am, Immortalist<reanimater_2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> according to his need
>
> Atlas Shrugged.
Hmmm.. mockery.. that's ALL Ayn Rand, and atheism for that
matter, EVER ACHIEVED! B^]
> I've always thought the phrase was rather ambiguous.
You really should try and have more diverse thinking,
otherwise you will remain a typical atheist drone who lets
fifth rate intellects, like Rand, Lenin, Mao, etc do their
thinking for them.
Atheist Freethinkers convention:
http://www.thearchetypalconnection.com/images/RedGuardsLow.JPG
(They are free to think about the Little Red Book of Slogans
for as long as Mao likes)
> After all the essence of capitalism is to find a need and fill it,
you mean create and fill..
Since when do people need cigarettes, or push up bra's for pre-teens?
> and the study of economics is about the allocation of resources
> to needs.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAAA
You seemed to have missed the entire G.E.C.
Oh, and by the way.. hows 'the invisible hand of the Market' (the
atheists version of God) going allocating for needs with the passing
of Peak Oil?
Atheists not only plagiarise the TEACHINGS of Christ, they
even imitate his STYLE, here is a little atheist Parable(you
can see why every atheist regime has been a CATASTROPHIC FAILURE ;-);
> If I'm a plumber and my neighbor's pipes need repair, and my neighbor
> hires me, am I not, according to my ability, serving the one who
> needs? (Even if I charge him or her for the service?)
What if he's installing his fifth spa bath in his mansion,
in which he plans to seduce your pre-teen daughter?
Your definition of needs via the market allows for slavery, you fuckwit.
Epsilon
>
>
> Atheists never acknowledge the source of their moralist
And the source of a belief in one or more sky fairies is....?
Nathan Levesque
Atheistic communism eh? And how were any of the policies derived from
atheism? If you have no answer, as history would indicate, than it is
erroneous to refer to them as atheistic.
> > Human nature would suggest that tight totalitarian,
>
> > police-state, controls are necessary.
>
> That certainly was the atheist view, and Lenin, Stalin, Mao
> and Pol Pot led atheist regimes which put it into practice.
How is that the atheist view?
> As a result over 70,000,000 people were terrorised, tortured and killed.
No, that was a result of numerous factors. World wars, civil war,
poverty, famine, class warfare, aristocracy, the list goes on.
> The second approach is far more subtle.
>
> It claims to be derived from the Manufacturer's manual and it
> exhorts HUMANS WITH FREE WILL to consciously CHOOSE to share,
> to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
>
> Religion, with this single, revolutionary message, has inspired
> and built the greatest and most enduring civilisations.
Explain how these great civilizations were derived from religion, and
from this maxim.
> Why does the maxim plus theism work, and the maxim without it FAIL
> IN EVERY CASE?
>
> The answer lies in the CORE MESSAGE of religion;
>
> Here it is in the Christian formulation:
>
> Matthew 22
> 36 �Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?�
>
> 37 Jesus replied: ��Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
> all your soul and with all your mind.�
> 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
> 39 And the second is like it: �Love your neighbor as yourself.�
> 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.�
>
> The psychological dynamic is simple; Humans who believe in a being
> GREATER than themselves are inspired to strive to become more like it..
Thus genocide, barbaric torture, and ritual sacrifice was born. Or
was that not what you were talking about?
> they model on something SUPERIOR to themselves, and over thousands of
> years successive generations asymptote toward perfection.
No, what we have is a long period of absolute failure followed by the
collapse of aristocracy and the advent of secular democracy.
> Per ardua ad astra
>
> We can observe this in the historical progress from primitive
> barbarism to the free, open, progressive, scientifically and
> technologically advanced, secular democracies built IN EVERY CASE
> by majority religious societies! 8^o
In every case the communist regimes were built by majority religious.
> But how does one ACT to show love for God? God is invisible,
> needs nothing from us, ... we need only listen.. and CHOOSE..
Most conceptions of god claim that he requires worship, sacrifice, and
adherence to rituals.
> With vision fixed on higher ground, the second part is HOW one can
> SHOW love for God IN ACTION... by loving our fellow man.
Is that why slavery was justified with the bible for centuries?
> IT is a VOLUNTARY ACT. All acts of love are.
>
> You cannot compel another human to love you, it is the act
> of a free will.
>
> God, in every religion says.. there are natural laws,
> the greatest of them is Love.. if you follow these you
> will prosper, and evolve and progress.
And then proceeds to command the slaughter of innocent people.
> This is the radical transforming power of religion.
> It explains why the Judeo/Christian/Islamic/Hindu global
> civilisation, a merging of thousands of years of SEPARATE
> development, into one planet wide civilisation, is the zenith
> of human history... so far. B^]
Is that why most genocides around the world occur between Christians
and Muslims? Why Sudan seperated into two countries, the Muslim
north, and the Christian south?
> (1 Corinthians)
>
> 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace,
>
> > But then, who controls the controllers?
>
> The controllers are all dust. Their Empires are defunct.
>
> Atheism, Nazism, Imperialism, Colonialism, Racism, are ALL
> FAILED IDEOLOGIES.
Nazism and racism go together. Imperialism and Colonialism go
together. Atheism has nothing to do with any of the others, and is
not an ideology.
Neither does religion, which is why in the developed world it is
becoming extinct.
> And THIS is why there are no great, enduring Atheist Civilisations!
>
No, the reason is that it is a nonsensical concept.
"How exactly can a country be atheistic? A country can be "theistic",
in a sense, not exactly in the same way a person can be, but close.
If we were to say theism is to theocracy as atheism is to [blank],
what would you propose for blank? In this case we are jumping from a
concept of belief to a kind of government, and a position of non-
belief to [blank]. Immediately we have to realize that this
comparison if a little bit off. Because theism as to theocracy has
always been a particular theism. In a meaningful sense there has
never been a government that just enforced the belief in an undefined
god plain and simple. It has always been a particular religion. And
with this religion came dogma, scripture, rituals and practices. You
just don't get that with atheism. Unless you consider Theism is to
[examples Christian Theocracy] as Atheism is to [example Communism].
But this is an even less fair comparison. The communist ideology is
derived from a different political ideology, never once is it derived
from atheism. In the case of an example Theocracy it is in fact
derived from that Theism, not the god belief.
To even try to put a god belief and a non-belief on equal grounds,
especially when I'm defending atheism on the grounds that it
isskepticism and rationality that dictates the non-belief; we should
put it beside deism. I do not think in any meaningful sense could we
fill in the following blanks: Theism is to theocracy as deism is to
[blank] as atheism is to [blank].
*And commence spewing of communist propaganda* "
Jonathan
"fasgnadh" <fasg...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Cvjkp.14509$gM3....@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
>
> Marx was not a killer.
Ya, I have a bad habit of linking Lenin and Marx
like they were Lennon and McCartney. I keep
forgetting Marx died in the late 1800's.
> He was a tubby intellectual
> with a creative understanding of Hegelian dialectic,
> who produced some interesting theories on social
> formation determined by the patterns of of economic organisation.
Although the sentiment behind socialism, or the proletarian
'revolution', is certainly well-meaning. I believe it's one
of the Biggest Lies of all time. Socialism claims it wants
to restore social justice by ending class warfare.
But they do that be merely ...replacing... the wealthy
and powerful and putting all the power in their own hands.
The biggest lie possible, which is /why/ it works.
If we really want to design society properly, Nature shows
the way. As any system capable of creating life and intelligence
(beauty and truth) certainly must be considered The Standard
to which all else is compared.
The new math of Complexity Science, my hobby, differs in some
key ways from Darwinian stereotypes.
For instance, justice and prosperity can only flow from the
dynamic interaction between two primary opposing forces.
However, the interaction must be positive sum (cooperative)
not negative sum (conflict), as assumed in Nature. That
difference translates to a system which evolves towards
the ideal, and all by itself.
Night-and-day!
Emergence and Evolution - Constraints on Form
"The view of evolution as chronic bloody competition among
individuals and species, a popular distortion of Darwin's notion
of 'survival of the fittest,' dissolves before a new view of continual
cooperation, strong interaction, and mutual dependence among
life forms. Life did not take over the globe by combat, but by
networking."
http://www.calresco.org/emerge.htm
http://www.calresco.org/emerge.htm
fasgnadh
>> even when one of their own has admitted that Marx plagiarised
>> the NEw Testament! B^D
>
I can't explain why you believe in sky fairies, or why you think your
inane comment is in any way relevant to the discussion about atheist
self-contradiction and confusion.. but thanks for further demonstrating
the atheist delusions I'm talking about;
>> It creates cognitive dissonance because it is the beginning of the
>> admission that all that they have, the very civilisation they
>> are part of, they owe to religion. It makes them feel inferior..
>> which is their one accurate insight!
>>
>> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAAHAAA
Epsilon
>
>
> I can't explain
Nothing new there.
WR
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:18:58 -0700 (PDT),WR<wrya...@gmail.com>
Perhaps in your strange world, Don, but for the rest of us market
leaders ardently try to put rivals our of business and, if there were
no antitrust laws, there wouldn't even been niche markets.
Olrik
Don imagine that in his libertarian world, he'd be a leader, maybe even
a king. And yet, in this life, he's just a sheepish taxpayer without
courage and balls.
fasgnadh
Atheist's naturally think of CONTROLS, it is the FIRST impulse of
totalitarians and dogmatists.
The maxim, as presented by Jesus, is a FREE CHOICE..
as the Qur'an clearly states:
"Let there be no compulsion in Religion."
- Sura 2 Verse 256
>> There are two possible approaches.
>>
>> The first, which you have suggested, is 'controls' and that is
>> precisely what atheistic communism attempted, and in doing so
>> created the most abysmal tyrannies in human history:
>
> Atheistic communism eh?
You haven't heard of it?
Your ignorance is appalling:
"atheistic communism - About 594,000 results (0.19 seconds) Google"
> And how were any of the policies derived from atheism?
Ask the avowedly atheist leaders of those avowedly atheist states,
you ignorant fucktard, I have no time to educate fools;
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"We must combat religion"
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
“Down with religion and long live atheism;
the dissemination of atheist views is our chief task!”
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
> If you have no answer,
The atheists IN CHARGE OF THOSE ATHEIST TYRANNIES HAVE ANSWERED
YOUR IDIOTIC DENIAL OF HISTORICAL FACT...! B^D
Suck it UP, sonny Jim! SUCK IT UP! B^D
> as history would indicate,
Lenin Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, the most prominent atheist
public figures of the 20th century all implemented the
forced indoctrination of children with atheism.
Tell us how that wasn't a policy, you gutless, lying apologist
for atheist TYRANNY.
> than it is erroneous to refer to them as atheistic.
Only by ignoring the historical reality could you be that stupid;
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/9642/atheistperspective.jpg
Pull your head out of your arse, you stupid, self deluding fuckwit,
the evidence that the atheist states were REAL is overwhelming;
“We do not fight against believers and not even clergymen.
WE FIGHT AGAINST GOD to snatch believers from Him.”
-Vechernaia Moskva, a Soviet newspaper
“Let us drive out the Capitalists from the earth,
and God from Heaven!” (early Soviet slogan)
"the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
- Daniel Peris,
"Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
"Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
"Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
in winter until they turned to ice-pillars."
- John Shelton Curtis, The Russian Church and the Soviet State
(Boston: Little Brown, 1953)
>>> Human nature would suggest that tight totalitarian,
>>
>>> police-state, controls are necessary.
>>
>> That certainly was the atheist view, and Lenin, Stalin, Mao
>> and Pol Pot led atheist regimes which put it into practice.
>
> How is that the atheist view?
>
>> As a result over 70,000,000 people were terrorised, tortured and killed.
>
> No, that was a result of numerous factors.
"How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
- Lenin
Grow the fuck up, you stupid atheist apologist for atheist TYRANNY!
> World wars, civil war, poverty, famine,
> class warfare, aristocracy, the list goes on.
Your list has NO FACTS, NO EVIDENCE, WHATSOEVER.. here's what they look like
In 1935 Stalin intensified the suppression of the Church in
the Ukraine and the forced collectivisation of farms,
which resulted in famine and the deaths of over 5 million.
ANY DEATH IN HISTORY IS CITED BY YOU HYPOCRITICAL ATHEIST FUCKS
AS THE DIRECT FAULT OF RELIGION if ANYONE CLAIMING TO BE 'RELIGIOUS'
HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE TIME.. and yet with
Lenin Stalin Mao and Pol Pot all EXPLICITLY ADVOCATING THEIR ATHEISM
and IMPLEMENTING VIOLENT SUPPRESSION OF RELIGION, SLAUGHTER OF BELIEVERS
AND THE FORCED INDOCTRINATION OF CHILDREN WITH ATHEISM.. you pathetic
hypocritical apologists for atheist tyranny stuff your heads up your
arses and claim you 'can't see anything linking the deaths of 70,000,000
in EXPLICITLY ATHEIST states to atheism!!!!!!!!!!!"
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!
You're FUCKED! B^]
>> The second approach is far more subtle.
>>
>> It claims to be derived from the Manufacturer's manual and it
>> exhorts HUMANS WITH FREE WILL to consciously CHOOSE to share,
>> to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
>>
>> Religion, with this single, revolutionary message, has inspired
>> and built the greatest and most enduring civilisations.
>
> Explain how these great civilizations were derived from religion, and
> from this maxim.
What makes you think I'm talking to YOU, you stupid atheist tool!
You are my teaching aid. Others see you unable to mount a SINGLE fact
in support of your lies and evasions;
http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/9642/atheistperspective.jpg
The more you assume the atheist orthodox position whenever any of
you are confronted with the facts ..the STRONGER my dominance of your
pathetic little sheltered workshop in alt.atheism becomes. B^]
>> Why does the maxim plus theism work, and the maxim without it FAIL
>> IN EVERY CASE?
Atheists can never answer the important questions.
They run away screeching their scripted slogans.
>> The answer lies in the CORE MESSAGE of religion;
>>
>> Here it is in the Christian formulation:
>>
>> Matthew 22
>> 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"
>>
>> 37 Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
>> all your soul and with all your mind."
>> 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
>> 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
>> 40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
Upon such, with a spirit of sincerity, are great civilisations built.
And, because they DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS, atheists have NEVER managed
even a tiny little democratic state.. let alone a great and enduring
civilisation.
>> The psychological dynamic is simple; Humans who believe in a being
>> GREATER than themselves are inspired to strive to become more like it..
>
> Thus genocide, barbaric torture, and ritual sacrifice was born.
Oh, give it a rest.
You infants carry on as if you are the only ones who know
there have been crusades and inquisitions, but what you NEVER
acknowledge, wehat makes you such UNBALANCED FANATICS and thus
despised rejected and IMPOTENT is that you cannot acknowledge
that those things occurred while a great theist civilisation
was dragging mankind out of barbarity... something NEVER DONE
BY ATHEISTS, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME.
Your petty jealousy and mindless CARPING is ridiculous.
Your feigned victimhood just a joke...
Because, UNLIKE RELIGION, atheism has NO REDEEMING MERIT,
no ACCOMPLISHMENTS.. no art, music, hospitals, soaring
architecture, sublime sculpture, or even the free open
tolerant and progressive SECULAR DEMOCRACIES built, in EVERY CASE,
by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES...
Atheism is a ple of useless SHITE! B^D
And YOU are the reeking stink from it. B^p
> Or was that not what you were talking about?
You have NEVER understood what I am talking about and you likely
never will.. I talk PAST YOU, not to you, so that no innocent
adolescent stumbling into your cults nest of vipers might be seduced
by your facile nonsense! B^D
>> they model on something SUPERIOR to themselves, and over thousands of
>> years successive generations asymptote toward perfection.
>
> No, what we have is a long period of absolute failure
the seventy years of atheist tyrannies in the 20th century is not a long
period.. it was a mere abberration..
All the atheist states crumbled... there will be no more of them. B^]
> followed by the
> collapse of aristocracy and the advent of secular democracy.
Secular democracy?? NOT IN ANY ATHEIST REGIME IN HISTORY, you moron..
EVERY SECULAR DEMOCRACY WAS BUILT BY A MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETY!!!!
You can't name a single ATHEIST STATE that has ever delivered a
democracy.. they were ALL .. TYRANNIES!
That is your endgame, you are FUCKED, Sonny Jim!!
>> Per ardua ad astra
or for the atheists,
"to the dustbin of history, with universal cheering!"
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA
>> We can observe this in the historical progress from primitive
>> barbarism to the free, open, progressive, scientifically and
>> technologically advanced, secular democracies built IN EVERY CASE
>> by majority religious societies! 8^o
>
> In every case the communist regimes were built by majority religious.
Don't be ridiculous, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot,
Beria Trotsky, Malenkov.. EVERY ATHEIST LEADER of EVERY ATHEIST
STATE... **AND** all the Party Members of the Politburo and Central
Committees... was an ATHEIST..
You are the dumbest atheist I have ever met.
Your lies are so DESPERATE you just look deranged telling them. B^D
>> But how does one ACT to show love for God? God is invisible,
>> needs nothing from us, ... we need only listen.. and CHOOSE..
>
> Most conceptions of god claim that he requires worship, sacrifice, and
> adherence to rituals.
Yawn, you are clueless enough about the DOCUMENTED HISTORY of atheism,
don't make an even bigger fool of yourself by revealing your
infantile delusions about religion. B^D
>> With vision fixed on higher ground, the second part is HOW one can
>> SHOW love for God IN ACTION... by loving our fellow man.
>
> Is that why slavery was justified with the bible for centuries?
No, that is why it was ABOLISHED in the MAjority religious societies
as they evolved and IMPLEMENTED IN EVERY ATHEIST REGIME as they
REGRESSED back into barbarity under athesit rule while the rest of the
world moved FORWARD.
B^]
History is not the atheists friend, sport. B^D
All your carping about the (already acknowledged) FAILURES of religion
is worthless, because the ATHEIST REGIMES WERE FAR WORSE, and .. unlike
the civilisations we live in, all built by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS democratic
societies, atheism has NO POSITIVE HISTORICAL OUTCOMES..
NOT A SINGLE DECENT DEMOCRACY.. to redeem it's evil track record of
terror, torture and death.
Game, Set, Match! B^]
>> IT is a VOLUNTARY ACT. All acts of love are.
>>
>> You cannot compel another human to love you, it is the act
>> of a free will.
>>
>> God, in every religion says.. there are natural laws,
>> the greatest of them is Love.. if you follow these you
>> will prosper, and evolve and progress.
>
> And then proceeds to command the slaughter of innocent people.
You are confusing God with your atheist tyrants.
The majority religious democracies which even you atheist HYPOCRITES
choose to live in have NOT killed over 70,000,000 of their OWN CITIZENS
as the USSR and Maoist China did.
You are on a hiding to nothing! B^D
Just keep stepping slugging away, punchie! B^D
>> This is the radical transforming power of religion.
>> It explains why the Judeo/Christian/Islamic/Hindu global
>> civilisation, a merging of thousands of years of SEPARATE
>> development, into one planet wide civilisation, is the zenith
>> of human history... so far. B^]
>
> Is that why most genocides around the world occur between Christians
> and Muslims?
Try some facts, you NEVER SEEM to have any;
# http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism#Wolak2004
#
# "State atheism is the official promotion of atheism
# by a government, typically by active suppression of
# religious freedom and practice."
# - "Protest for Religious Rights in the USSR:
# Characteristics and Consequences,
# David Kowalewski,
# Russian Review, Vol. 39, No. 4 (Oct., 1980), pp. 426-441,
#
#
# "An atheist, Pol Pot suppressed Cambodia’s Buddhist religion:
# monks were defrocked; temples and artifacts, including statues of
# Buddha, were destroyed; and people praying or expressing
# other religious sentiments were often killed.
# ...the government emptied the cities through mass evacuations
# and sent people to the countryside. Cambodians were overworked
# and underfed on collective farms, often succumbing to disease or
# starvation as a result. Spouses were separated and family meals
# prohibited in order to steer loyalties toward the state
# instead of the family.
#
# About 1.7 million Cambodians, or about 20 percent of the population,
# were worked, starved, or beaten to death under Pol Pot’s regime."
# - http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761579038/pol_pot.html
#
# The Cambodian Genocide:
http://www.lietuvos.net/istorija/communism/communism_photos2/392millones.jpg
#
# "The country's 40,000 to 60,000 Buddhist monks,
# regarded by the regime as social parasites,
# were defrocked and forced into labor brigades.
# Many monks were executed; temples and pagodas were
# destroyed or turned into storehouses or jails.
# Images of the Buddha were defaced and dumped into
# rivers and lakes. People who were discovered praying
# or expressing religious sentiments in other ways
# were often killed.
#
# The Christian and Muslim communities were among the most
# persecuted, as well. The Roman Catholic cathedral of
# Phnom Penh was completely razed.
#
# The Khmer Rouge forced Muslims to eat pork, which they
# regard as an abomination. Many of those who refused were killed.
# Christian clergy and Muslim imams were executed."
# - http://countrystudies.us/cambodia/29.htm
#
# "Forty-eight percent of Cambodia's Christians were killed
# because of their religion."
#
http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk158/CANDEMIELDA/44camboyano.jpg
#
#
# "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
# - Daniel Peris,
# "Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
# Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
#
#
# "State atheism has been mostly implemented in communist
# countries, such as the former Soviet Union,[1] China,
# Communist Albania, Communist Afghanistan, North Korea,
# Communist Mongolia and Poland under communist rule also
# promoted state atheism and suppressed religion.
# - Forced out: the fate of Polish Jewry in Communist Poland.
# Wolak, Arthur J. p 104
#
# In these nations, the governments viewed atheism as an
# intrinsic part of communist ideology.
And the only person in alt.atheism to have openly
advocated GENOCIDE is your ATHEIST WARLORD, to
universal acclaim from his cult followers:
# From: Steve Knight <skni...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.religion.islam
# Subject: Re: Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
# Message-ID: <8t6ve5hs41qn3a2rv...@4ax.com>
# Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:58:18 -0800
#
# On Mon, 2 Nov 2009 21:22:32 +0200, "Katrina"
# <blondes_g...@yahoo.com> wrote:
#
# >Islam: the perfect religion and way of life for all
#
# It is the most foul, disgusting filth on Earth.
# The sooner we nuke you fuckers, the better.
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
# From: Steve Knight <skni...@cox.net>
# Newsgroups: alt.atheism
# Subject: A.A. BAAWA - FAQ
# Message-ID: <p8mrb5lvaf0cj5bp1...@4ax.com>
# Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2009 02:46:34 -0700
#
# We kill theists and shit down their throats
#
# Warlord Steve
# BAAWA
> Why Sudan seperated into two countries, the Muslim
> north, and the Christian south?
>
>> (1 Corinthians)
>>
>> 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace,
>>
>>> But then, who controls the controllers?
>>
>> The controllers are all dust. Their Empires are defunct.
>>
>> Atheism, Nazism, Imperialism, Colonialism, Racism, are ALL
>> FAILED IDEOLOGIES.
>
> Nazism and racism go together.
You make assertions without evidence,
I provide proof by quoting the most prominent
atheists of the past century:
"Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism."
-Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
"Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism."
- Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
> Imperialism and Colonialism go
Which leaves the atheists with only one thing left to do;
> commence spewing
B^]
Nathan Levesque
> NathanLevesqueargues from ignorance:
I didn't write this. f. barnes did.
> Atheist's naturally think of CONTROLS, it is the FIRST impulse of
> totalitarians and dogmatists.
>
> The maxim, as presented by Jesus, is a FREE CHOICE..
>
> as the Qur'an clearly states:
>
> "Let there be no compulsion in Religion."
> - Sura 2 Verse 256
Is that why Sharia law as derived from the Qu'ran and the Hadith
demands death for apostates?
> >> There are two possible approaches.
>
> >> The first, which you have suggested, is 'controls' and that is
> >> precisely what atheistic communism attempted, and in doing so
> >> created the most abysmal tyrannies in human history:
>
> > Atheistic communism eh?
>
> You haven't heard of it?
I have heard of it. It's just a meaningless title. A government if
it does not affirm a belief in god is atheistic by default, a rock is
atheistic by default. If the absurdity is obviousness enough to you,
I hope you can recognize this is why I think it's meaningless to refer
to a government as atheistic, or a political ideology because one
cannot derive any politics or ideology from atheism.
> Your ignorance is appalling:
You're ignorance of my rhetorical question is appalling but expected.
> "atheistic communism - About 594,000 results (0.19 seconds) Google"
>
> > And how were any of the policies derived from atheism?
>
> Ask the avowedly atheist leaders of those avowedly atheist states,
> you ignorant fucktard, I have no time to educate fools;
That's propaganda. I could say chocolate is an integral part of
bacon, but that would not make it so. You cannot show using logic or
reason that these ideologies were derived from communism.
Propaganda snipped.
>
> > If you have no answer,
>
> The atheists IN CHARGE OF THOSE ATHEIST TYRANNIES HAVE ANSWERED
> YOUR IDIOTIC DENIAL OF HISTORICAL FACT...! B^D
They have made a baseless assertion, unsubstantiated by logic or
reason. Their answers are hollow and without value.
> Suck it UP, sonny Jim! SUCK IT UP! B^D
>
> > as history would indicate,
>
> Lenin Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot, the most prominent atheist
> public figures of the 20th century all implemented the
> forced indoctrination of children with atheism.
Ok. What's your point. How is this derived from atheism, or
representative of it. I could forcibly indoctrinate people with
Robert Frost poetry, would that then indicate anything about his
poetry? No.
> Tell us how that wasn't a policy, you gutless, lying apologist
> for atheist TYRANNY.
Surely it was a policy, and surely it was not derived from atheism.
> > than it is erroneous to refer to them as atheistic.
>
> Only by ignoring the historical reality could you be that stupid;
Only by blindly accepting communist propaganda and refusing to
understand what atheism means could you be so stupid as to insist on
referring to them as atheistic regimes.
> http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/9642/atheistperspective.jpg
403 Forbidden
> Pull your head out of your arse, you stupid, self deluding fuckwit,
> the evidence that the atheist states were REAL is overwhelming;
Surely they were real, they existed. This is true. But they were not
caused by atheism or derived from it.
> “We do not fight against believers and not even clergymen.
> WE FIGHT AGAINST GOD to snatch believers from Him.”
> -Vechernaia Moskva, a Soviet newspaper
This only makes it sound as if they actually believed in a god. So,
good job picking this quote.
> “Let us drive out the Capitalists from the earth,
> and God from Heaven!” (early Soviet slogan)
Nice pick, how can one drive god from heaven if one does not believe
in either?
> "the state established atheism as the only scientific truth."
> - Daniel Peris,
> "Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless"
> Cornell University Press 1998 ISBN 9780801434853
I could establish the cosmic teapot as the only scientific truth,
would this say anything about it? No.
> "Criticism of atheism was strictly forbidden"
You really don't understand what an actual argument is do you?
> "Between 1917 and 1940, 130,000 Orthodox priests were arrested.
> In 1918, the Cheka under Felix Dzerzhinsky executed over
> 3000 Orthodox clergymen of all ranks.
> Some were drowned in ice-holes or poured over with cold water
> in winter until they turned to ice-pillars."
>
> - John Shelton Curtis, The Russian Church and the Soviet State
> (Boston: Little Brown, 1953)
>
> >>> Human nature would suggest that tight totalitarian,
>
> >>> police-state, controls are necessary.
I didn't write that either btw.
> >> That certainly was the atheist view, and Lenin, Stalin, Mao
> >> and Pol Pot led atheist regimes which put it into practice.
>
> > How is that the atheist view?
>
> >> As a result over 70,000,000 people were terrorised, tortured and killed.
How where they the result of atheism and not the actions of despicable
people following a particular communist ideology, who were influenced
by world wars, civil war, poverty, famine, aristocracy, and religion.
Do recall they all had religious upbringings. Save for Pol Pot I
think, although he was a self avowed Buddhist, I do not think anyone
can derive his actions from it.
> > No, that was a result of numerous factors.
>
> "How can you make a revolution without firing squads?"
> - Lenin
>
> Grow the fuck up, you stupid atheist apologist for atheist TYRANNY!
How am I an apologist for their Tyranny? Particularly when I'm the
one who isn't spouting their propaganda as fact, and isn't denying the
actual factors involved.
> > World wars, civil war, poverty, famine,
>
> > class warfare, aristocracy, the list goes on.
>
> Your list has NO FACTS, NO EVIDENCE, WHATSOEVER.. here's what they look like
So you're denying that world war had anything to do with the USSR?
That they did not replace an aristocracy with communism? You
ahistorical twat.
> In 1935 Stalin intensified the suppression of the Church in
> the Ukraine and the forced collectivisation of farms,
> which resulted in famine and the deaths of over 5 million.
What does the first act have to do with the second one. And 5 million
is a really conservative estimate if you're referring to the
holodomor.
> ANY DEATH IN HISTORY IS CITED BY YOU HYPOCRITICAL ATHEIST FUCKS
> AS THE DIRECT FAULT OF RELIGION if ANYONE CLAIMING TO BE 'RELIGIOUS'
> HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE TIME
When I have done this?
>.. and yet with
> Lenin Stalin Mao and Pol Pot all EXPLICITLY ADVOCATING THEIR ATHEISM
> and IMPLEMENTING VIOLENT SUPPRESSION OF RELIGION, SLAUGHTER OF BELIEVERS
> AND THE FORCED INDOCTRINATION OF CHILDREN WITH ATHEISM..
What does this have to do with not believing in god?
> you pathetic
> hypocritical apologists for atheist tyranny stuff your heads up your
> arses and claim you 'can't see anything linking the deaths of 70,000,000
> in EXPLICITLY ATHEIST states to atheism!!!!!!!!!!!"
Because it makes 0 sense. You can't derive an action from not
believing in something. And you are the one denying the reason for
those deaths, you wish to place all the blame on not believing in
something, because you are, and you can't admit it, a god apologist.
> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH!
>
> You're FUCKED! B^]
>
> >> The second approach is far more subtle.
>
> >> It claims to be derived from the Manufacturer's manual and it
> >> exhorts HUMANS WITH FREE WILL to consciously CHOOSE to share,
> >> to 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you.'
Didn't write this either.
> >> Religion, with this single, revolutionary message, has inspired
> >> and built the greatest and most enduring civilisations.
>
> > Explain how these great civilizations were derived from religion, and
> > from this maxim.
>
> What makes you think I'm talking to YOU, you stupid atheist tool!
What makes you think I need you to be talking to me. If you can't
respond than you can't respond. It's that simple. You are a
dishonest hack.
> You are my teaching aid. Others see you unable to mount a SINGLE fact
> in support of your lies and evasions;
>
> http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/9642/atheistperspective.jpg
403 Forbidden
> The more you assume the atheist orthodox position whenever any of
> you are confronted with the facts ..the STRONGER my dominance of your
> pathetic little sheltered workshop in alt.atheism becomes. B^]
What is atheist orthodoxy?
> >> Why does the maxim plus theism work, and the maxim without it FAIL
> >> IN EVERY CASE?
Weird, I don't recall theism being integral to secular democracy. IN
fact secular democracy works without theism, that's what it means to
be secular.
> Atheists can never answer the important questions.
>
> They run away screeching their scripted slogans.
Is that why I post replies without copy and pasting multiple times?
> >> The answer lies in the CORE MESSAGE of religion;
>
> >> Here it is in the Christian formulation:
>
> >> Matthew 22
> >> 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"
>
> >> 37 Jesus replied: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with
> >> all your soul and with all your mind."
> >> 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
> >> 39 And the second is like it: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
> >> 40 "All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
>
> Upon such, with a spirit of sincerity, are great civilisations built.
Which is why theocracy has built great enduring civilizations. Oh
right it was when theocracy was ousted and secularism came in that
great enduring civilizations were formed.
> And, because they DO NOT UNDERSTAND THIS, atheists have NEVER managed
> even a tiny little democratic state.. let alone a great and enduring
> civilisation.
Because you deny that a country that is majority atheist, with the
majority of political seats counts as managing a democracy. It only
matters if the pop was majority religious at the onset of a
historically recognizable origin, apparently.
> >> The psychological dynamic is simple; Humans who believe in a being
> >> GREATER than themselves are inspired to strive to become more like it..
>
> > Thus genocide, barbaric torture, and ritual sacrifice was born.
>
> Oh, give it a rest.
Don't be a hypocrite.
> You infants carry on as if you are the only ones who know
> there have been crusades and inquisitions
Not even close.
> but what you NEVER
> acknowledge, wehat makes you such UNBALANCED FANATICS
I'd love to hear what it is.
> and thus
> despised rejected and IMPOTENT is that you cannot acknowledge
> that those things occurred while a great theist civilisation
Secular democracy is theistic? Oh wait it's anything but. Try again
god apologist.
> was dragging mankind out of barbarity... something NEVER DONE
> BY ATHEISTS, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME.
Is that why religious theocracy vehemently opposed societal
progression for centuries, and ensured that until only recently women
had 0 rights as dictated by various scriptures?
> Your petty jealousy and mindless CARPING is ridiculous.
> Your feigned victimhood just a joke...
And how large of a chunk of history were atheists availed equal
rights?
> Because, UNLIKE RELIGION, atheism has NO REDEEMING MERIT,
> no ACCOMPLISHMENTS.. no art, music, hospitals, soaring
> architecture, sublime sculpture, or even the free open
> tolerant and progressive SECULAR DEMOCRACIES built, in EVERY CASE,
> by MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES...
Because it makes no sense for 'not believing in god' to have
something.
Also religion stifled art as much as it produced it.
Not to mention vehemently opposed secularism.
Also you attempt to negate the participation of people who 'don't
believe in god' in free open tolerant progressive secular democracies,
even though they are gradually becoming majority atheist.
> Atheism is a ple of useless SHITE! B^D
>
> And YOU are the reeking stink from it. B^p
>
> > Or was that not what you were talking about?
>
> You have NEVER understood what I am talking about and you likely
> never will.. I talk PAST YOU, not to you, so that no innocent
> adolescent stumbling into your cults nest of vipers might be seduced
> by your facile nonsense! B^D
Riiiight.
> >> they model on something SUPERIOR to themselves, and over thousands of
> >> years successive generations asymptote toward perfection.
>
> > No, what we have is a long period of absolute failure
>
> the seventy years of atheist tyrannies in the 20th century is not a long
> period.. it was a mere abberration..
You're persistent insistence on misunderstanding is pathetic.
> All the atheist states crumbled... there will be no more of them. B^]
Because there were none in the first place. It's nonsensical as I
have explained before, to call them atheist.
> > followed by the
> > collapse of aristocracy and the advent of secular democracy.
>
> Secular democracy?? NOT IN ANY ATHEIST REGIME IN HISTORY, you moron..
Cut what I write out of context, and it will be confusing. Good job.
> EVERY SECULAR DEMOCRACY WAS BUILT BY A MAJORITY RELIGIOUS SOCIETY!!!!
So was every "atheist shithole". Or are we now denying that they were
majority religious?
> You can't name a single ATHEIST STATE that has ever delivered a
> democracy.. they were ALL .. TYRANNIES!
Because it is my position that no state can be atheist in a sense more
meaningful than a rock can be.
> That is your endgame, you are FUCKED, Sonny Jim!!
>
> >> Per ardua ad astra
>
> or for the atheists,
>
> "to the dustbin of history, with universal cheering!"
>
> BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAAA
>
> >> We can observe this in the historical progress from primitive
> >> barbarism to the free, open, progressive, scientifically and
> >> technologically advanced, secular democracies built IN EVERY CASE
> >> by majority religious societies! 8^o
>
> > In every case the communist regimes were built by majority religious.
>
> Don't be ridiculous, Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot,
> Beria Trotsky, Malenkov.. EVERY ATHEIST LEADER of EVERY ATHEIST
> STATE... **AND** all the Party Members of the Politburo and Central
> Committees... was an ATHEIST..
All of them huh? And how many is that. Let's say it's a million
people. Is that a majority? Not even close.
> You are the dumbest atheist I have ever met.
The fact that you have to sink to insults short of actually explaining
how these regimes were derived from atheism is telling.
> Your lies are so DESPERATE you just look deranged telling them. B^D
Name a single lie.
> >> But how does one ACT to show love for God? God is invisible,
> >> needs nothing from us, ... we need only listen.. and CHOOSE..
>
> > Most conceptions of god claim that he requires worship, sacrifice, and
> > adherence to rituals.
>
> Yawn, you are clueless enough about the DOCUMENTED HISTORY of atheism,
> don't make an even bigger fool of yourself by revealing your
> infantile delusions about religion. B^D
Red herring.
Tired of your nonsense.
I'll make it simple.
Go from
Atheism -> The death of 70 million people
In a logical fashion.
I'll give you an example.
Theism -> Christianity -> Verse condoning slavery -> enslavement of
Africans by Christians, who cite the verse condoning slavery.
Don Kresch
scrawled in blood:
>On Mar 28, 11:36 pm, Don Kresch <spamca...@spamcatch.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:18:58 -0700 (PDT),WR<wrya...@gmail.com>
>> scrawled in blood:
>>
>> >You're reading too much into what I just said. I was playing a bit
>> >with the old Marxist phrase, claiming it could be applied to
>> >capitalism as well. Capitalism is far from perfect. In fact, pure
>> >capitalism is a mirage, a myth. The Supply and Demand curves graphed
>> >by Ricardo had to do with fungible commodities bought and sold at
>> >auction on markets that had a large number of suppliers and buyers.
>> >Most buying and selling in capitalist countries has to do with
>> >fragmented demand curves, items that are not fungible, value that is
>> >imputed and at the whim of taste and fashion. In addition, capitalist
>> >businesses do everything they can to limit competition and claim a
>> >monopoly or at least an oligopoly.
>>
>> No, only cronyist, mercantilist, and other sundry nonsense
>> tries that.
>>
>> Oh--anti-trust is anticompetition.
>Perhaps in your strange world, Don,
No, in reality.
> but for the rest of us market
>leaders ardently try to put rivals our of business and, if there were
>no antitrust laws, there wouldn't even been niche markets.
Nonsense.
Don
aa#51, Knight of BAAWA, Jedi Slackmaster
Praise "Bob" or burn in Slacklessness trying not to.
Mike Painter
So when Wal-mart or Home Depot rolls into town and small businesses that had
just been able to hang on in the past go out of business, the intent is not
to put them out of business?
If so why didn't they reduce their margin slightly and keep their prices
level with what the small business could make a profit on?
Beter yet they could have passed on their ecomomy of scale in pricing and
transport to those small businesses. Those small businesses could lower
their prices and everybosy would be ahead.
Wexford
Yo compound the tragedy, if Walmart decides the market isn't
profitable enough, it closes the store, leaving the local community
gutted, without retail services and depressed. That's part of their
usual performance.
Don Kresch
<md.pa...@sbcglobal.net> scrawled in blood:
No. The intent was to provide products.
avh...@me.com
> Marx and Christ - From each according to his ability, to each
> according to his need
>
> Some scholars trace the origin of the phrase to the New Testament. In
> the parable of the Kingdom of Heaven, Jesus spoke of what we are
> given, according to our abilities; to test the commitment of the
> steward to his master. In Acts the Apostles' lifestyle is described as
> communal (without individual possession), and uses the phrase
> "distribution was made unto every man according as he had need:
>
> Matthew 25:15 And to one he gave five talents, to another two, and to
> another one; to each according to his ability. And he went abroad at
> once.
>
> Acts 2:45 And they sold their possessions and goods and distributed
> them to all, according as anyone had need.
>
> Acts 4:32-35 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. And
> with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the
> Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 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,
> and laid them down at the apostles' feet: and distribution was made
> unto every man according as he had need.
>
So much for Separation of Church and State.
