| This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only". In order to get the most out of these forums, please become a member and read this guide - http://z3.invisionfree.com/nationstates/index.php?showtopic=3060 If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The God Thread, Version 2.0 | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 26 2006, 06:52 PM (1,080 Views) | |
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 09:00 AM Post #76 |
|
Spammer
|
Well, let me know when we are even a centimetre close to that utopia. |
![]() |
|
| East Anarx | Jul 2 2006, 09:20 AM Post #77 |
|
Anarchitect
![]()
|
Capitalism the only system that has been proven to create wealth, which is a surplus of goods, in other words, capitalism is the only system that is even on the road to that utopia.
And we are a hell of a lot closer than the middle ages, or even just a couple years ago, thanks to capitalism. [Nag Edit] Double posts merged. Double posting is bad. |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 09:38 AM Post #78 |
|
Spammer
|
:rolleyes: Well, if people favour money and their own personal wealth over helping other people than I might as well commit suicide. I've not wanted to be the red-man, because I'm not that, but I can enver support a system which will result in exploitation of the poor and the welathy elite taking all the money - which is what laissez-faire capitalism is. |
![]() |
|
| Kiensland | Jul 2 2006, 09:50 AM Post #79 |
|
Apathetic Lizardman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Here's a razorblade, CE. Remember, it's not across the road, it's down the street. Maybe I'm just too cynical for my own good, since I reckon to a lesser or greater extent you've just described everyone on this mudball. |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 09:54 AM Post #80 |
|
Spammer
|
What as selfish and greedy? |
![]() |
|
| Nag Ehgoeg | Jul 2 2006, 10:38 AM Post #81 |
|
The Devil's Advocate
![]()
|
Not so. And not by a long shot. Capitalism is motivated by profit and the exchange of goods. Capitalism is, in fact, against the very nature of the utopia I have described. Capitalism is the force which stifles creativity with the necessity of "earning a living". Compare, if you will, the capitalist future of Asimov's Spacers with the Communist Utopia of Bank's Culture. To each according to their need, from each according to ability. That is the essence of the perfect world I have described. The "wealth" of Capitalism is illusionary - it is not open to all and freely accessable to those who need it. The "surplus of goods" again are rationed to only the select few. A person cannot rise and fall on their own merit to find their own level, but rather they must battle the tide that causes them to be born into poverity, or be bouyed to the grandest heights of being birthed into wealth and luxury. But what other choice is there? Communism? Certainly not! Communism is a system of equalising and normalising - it too is against the very essence of the true freedom of leting water find it's own level. Comminism stiffles production and also cannot bring about utopia - though once we have the means to create a perfect world, we will be communist. In essence, we need both Communism and Capitalism. We need both the motivator of a free market, and the facilitator of government support and funding. We need a government to take a stand and buy the patents for ever lasting lightbulbs and start churning them out! |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 10:52 AM Post #82 |
|
Spammer
|
We need the third way. We need Corporatism maybe! |
![]() |
|
| East Anarx | Jul 2 2006, 12:12 PM Post #83 |
|
Anarchitect
![]()
|
I love your enthusiasm... |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Jul 2 2006, 12:48 PM Post #84 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
True or false: The poor can be civil. I say true. Communism assumes false, and, therefore, as a social benefit to protect the well-to-do, insists on a redistribution of wealth artificially, which creates beurocracies which only act to drain the wealth. Capitalism, in its purist form, which is currently practiced NOWHERE on the planet (even the USA is a socialist-leaning capitalist system) is the only system to provide society with all the benefits necessary to have a peaceful society CE, your "Christ" model is a fantasy. If you look at the Church as a personafication of that model, you can see that the poorest, most retched countries tend to be catholic. The "Christ" model works worst of all, for a social plan, just because we do not have a "Christ" in charge. |
![]() |
|
| Filo | Jul 2 2006, 12:55 PM Post #85 |
|
General
|
Again No. To be Roman Christian i mus follow the Pope words or bibble interpretation Tradition, that i like much, is not foundant in cristian Theology. Only Kerigma is; and Kerigma teach that Jesus Christ, the only son of God(No Heresy disputated this, adopted, as Arians says, or God himself as say Monophisites, always son of god he is) is dead and resurrected for us. This is the minimal Knowledge to be Christian. Paul, Peter, Philpp etc...when Baptized roman people(who were Pagans) teach this many of them never know the Bibble(Ebraic one). Only Kerigma identify you has christian...sorry bu so is...you need only to belive in Jesus Christ dead and ressurrected for you...end of the story |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 12:57 PM Post #86 |
|
Spammer
|
That's not true. Those countries are actually Muslim or an eastern religion (or indeed Protestant Christian). |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Jul 2 2006, 01:20 PM Post #87 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
Wrong. Mexico, almost all of South America. Phillipines. These are hotbeds of poverty. India, Banglidesh, etc. have problems with povery also, but mostly from overpopulation and lack of natural resources. Mexico, on the other hand, should be a wealthy country, based on oil revenue and tourism revenue alone. |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 01:34 PM Post #88 |
|
Spammer
|
What about Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Indonesia, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Mauritania, Comoros Islands....need I go on? All Muslim....all very poor. |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Jul 2 2006, 01:37 PM Post #89 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
OK, the muslim model of communism doesn't work very well either, and it is all based on "The Church" if you will. Same reason as why the catholic model doesn't work. Also, few natural resources in any of these. I mean, Afghanistan?? What resources do they have? Poppies and rocks!! |
![]() |
|
| Catholic Europe | Jul 2 2006, 01:41 PM Post #90 |
|
Spammer
|
So you are saying the poorest and worst countries in the world are predominantly Catholic? I just don't accept that as true. We should consult the HDI Index. |
![]() |
|
| New Harumf | Jul 2 2006, 03:41 PM Post #91 |
![]()
Bloodthirsty Unicorn
|
No, I am not saying they are all catholic. I am saying that the "Christ" based model of communism doesn't work. |
![]() |
|
| Quaon | Jul 2 2006, 04:00 PM Post #92 |
![]()
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
|
Ughh...why does religion have to enter into every damned subject? Religion has nothing to do with capitalism VS. communism. Well, I think Jesus was a communist, but still... |
![]() |
|
| Nag Ehgoeg | Jul 2 2006, 04:16 PM Post #93 |
|
The Devil's Advocate
![]()
|
Again, no. First off your concept of Kerigma is fundamentally flawed. While such a belief may have been possible two thousand years ago, the entire concept of that belief system is impossible to follow now. Why? Because you've never met Jesus. Jesus has never come to you to say he is the son of god. All you know of Jesus is what has been passed down to his followers. All the teachings of Christianity are second hand. Thus you cannot, repeat cannot pick and choose what you want to hear. Letters written by the disciples form the basis of the bible. Those same letters and records of Jesus's teachings form the basis of your Kerigma. In those records, Jesus states unequivically that he has not come to take away from the teachings of his forefathers. To accept the message of Kerigma, you must accept the validity of it's source - the apostles. If you accept the validity of the apostles you must accept what they say Jesus taught in the Bible - that it is hard to enter heaven, that it is hard for a rich man to enter heaven, that one must try to follow the old religious laws and seek forgiveness when you transgress, that you must continue to accept the teachings of Peter and his successors. Kerigma is a system of core beliefs. It is not a belief system. (Nor does it seem to translate accurately to English from Spanish). |
![]() |
|
| Filo | Jul 3 2006, 06:50 PM Post #94 |
|
General
|
I can resfuse Gospels and accept Kerigma. I can refuse Letters pf Apostles and accept Kerigma. Kerigma is the base rock of our christian faith. Many heretic(but for who?) churches accept Kerigma and refuse old testament or accept only part of the new but this not transform them in non Christians Churches only in not Catholic ones. Kerigma is most ancient of all Gospels(because it was pronunced some years after Christ is dead and many of who have see him were still living) Kerigma is the only part of Chiristian faith common to ALL christian denomination. You can say what you please but you cannot change trhe facts and neither the words of Apostles. Pausl is clear; he said "If you belive that Jesus Christ is dead by crux, and after three day resurrected, you are safe" not "If you belive in the Apostles and the bibble"(i think is the Efesines or Corinthes letter). Apostles give Baptization also to Pagans that don't know nothing about israel and Bibble but accept to belive in Jesus; in only one word the accept Kerigma |
![]() |
|
| East Anarx | Jul 3 2006, 11:46 PM Post #95 |
|
Anarchitect
![]()
|
Did you just call Jesus a c☭mmie!?!? Jesus did not want to force everyone into giving their money to poor people, therefore he was not a c☭mmunist. He was a Christian... I mean, he was Jesus Christ, he was God in the flesh. He gave people the choice, the opportunity, to give their money to the poor, and offered them riches in heaven if they did. In this respect, that's rather capitalist of Him, seeing as how everything you do to "the least of these" you're really doing to Him, and, presumably, he loves us and wants us to go to heaven and be happy, he would profit from this exchange. Now, Jesus was not a capitalist, but he sure as hell wasn't a c☭mmie... C☭mmies don't give their own money to the poor, they steal money from other people and then give that away. That doesn't sound like Jesus to me. |
![]() |
|
| Quaon | Jul 4 2006, 06:51 AM Post #96 |
![]()
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
|
No, that's Russian socialists. |
![]() |
|
| Filo | Jul 4 2006, 12:57 PM Post #97 |
|
General
|
Never hear talk about Social-Christianism? Jesus was not Comunist? perhaps but sure he was not a capitalist. Christianity have a strong component of socialism in its political and economic doctrines. The original Church because considere the second coming of JC near, the to day church because mammon(the richness) is oppose to christian life |
![]() |
|
| Nag Ehgoeg | Jul 4 2006, 03:03 PM Post #98 |
|
The Devil's Advocate
![]()
|
Jesus is clear. He said "I have not come to take away from the teachings of the Torah", he said "the road to heaven is narrow and thorny, while the path to hell is wide", he said "whoever follows me should be ready to carry their own cross". Belief is not a passive thing. It is an active thing. It requires commitment, dedication and action. If you're willing to accept the statement of Paul (in the bible) then why not accept the other teachings of that same book? Posted Image |
![]() |
|
| Rhadamanthus | Jul 4 2006, 03:25 PM Post #99 |
|
Legitimist
![]()
|
Bingo. I'm not going to weigh in on anything else in this topic, but this statement is something I agree with 100%. My respect for a given Christian denomination has everything to do with how much dedication and comitment it asks from its members. |
![]() |
|
| Quaon | Jul 4 2006, 03:39 PM Post #100 |
![]()
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
|
Nag, let's examine why you are trying to say we have to believe the Old Testement if we believe the New Testement: Hmm...you're trying to categorize all religious people as anti-science nuts. Is that it? |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Off-Topic · Next Topic » |












9:09 AM Jul 11