the Biblical Basis for Socialism Is Undeniable, my friends

Nice try at parsing the words. This shows (again) how, given enough centuries, trained minds can deform and detour even the clearest message.
Nothing to do with parsing words, but using the context to determine definition. Today, Webster's Dictionary has 22 definitions for father. There may not have been 22 definitions in Aramaic, but there was definitely more than one. We know the one Jesus used was in use. The one we know from Biblical use is Father Abraham. We know from the New Testament spiritual father-child relationships.

Non-Catholic Christians have booted at least two traditions in place from the time of Christ and the Apostles: The Sacraments and the idea of the spiritual father-child relationships.

Take a look at Martin Luther...he dropped being a father in the Catholic Church use of the word and became the Father of the Lutheran Church/Protestantism is the use Jesus was using. Protestants get around this by calling him Founder. ;)
This essentially says that Jesus lacked the sense and foresight to realized his simple words would not be understood.
He taught in parables, metaphor, in order that the greatest and most personal meaning could be appreciated by the least complex audiences. Efforts to re-enforce doctrinal percepts by twisting Jesus' words have largely destroyed the transcendent message that bore early Christians across the centuries before Rome was declared the center of the faith.

Not exactly .. Check out early Christian Writings.. Heresies abounded and everybody was fighting long before Rome every rose to prominence.

See Nag Hammadi .. also

Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha ...
earlychristianwritings.com
Early Christian Writings is the most complete collection of Christian texts before the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. The site provides translations and commentary for these sources, including the New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers, and some non-Christian references.
 
Where did Jesus or other biblical figures preach to redistribute wealth through the force of government?
That's not what Socialism is. Stop watching Fox.
Then tell us us exactly what socialism is.
.
Then tell us us exactly what socialism is.
.
doesn't matter, classical economics is determined by the economic model that attains full employment as the single criteria for success at least socialism has the correct objective irregardless how it is accomplished where full employment is antithetical to capitalism - the harbinger for christianity.

Full employment should never be the objective, because that requires force. You can't force people to get a job, if they refuse to do so.

Which again is why every single socialist system eventually results in force and violence. This is why Stalin had his gulags, Mao had his communes, North Korea has their forced labor, and so on.

Yes, any economic system can achieve full employment using violence and ruthless force.

To that end, yes full employment is antithetical to capitalism where people are free to make their own choices, and thus, they can choose to live on the streets, or choose to live on welfare if you are dumb enough to give that to them, or live on their own saved income as I am doing right now.

Full employment is a garbage goal. Freedom should be the goal, and Capitalism and Christianity both are completely in line with people being free to choose their own life.
.
doesn't matter, classical economics is determined by the economic model that attains full employment as the single criteria for success
Full employment should never be the objective, because that requires force. You can't force people to get a job, if they refuse to do so.
.
an extract, derived from the classical criteria for full employment -
.
Thus the problem of full employment is one of maintaining adequate effective demand. “When effective demand is deficient,” writes Keynes, “there is underemployment of labour in the sense that there are men unemployed who would be willing to work at less than existing real wage.
.
the success of any economic model is gauged by the resultant accomplishment of full employment - the snippet above is an example of the many deviousness's of capitalism in regards for those that do seek employment.

yours is a mindless argument used for centuries as a means of suppression for the personal gain of a few in the many facets of economic models and like yours have been endorsed by christianity throughout the centuries -

as devious as the quote in the christian bible.
 
Socialism is not government welfare or community volunteer welfare programs.
Socialism is when government confiscates private companies, private property, and entire industries...in essence government runs the economy. This is what happened in Cuba and Venezuela. Like when Maduro says go seize that General Motors plant, yes boss. Chavez had a TV show where he would walk around with his minions and say expropriate this, and that.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.

Conservatives have used Christianity to oppose freeing the slaves, letting women vote, gays getting married, and anything to do with trans people. So yes, Conservatives only invoke Christianity in order to oppress minorities.

And no, Republicans oppose every policy to help the poor. You would call Jesus a dirty brown Socialist if he lived today.
 
Socialism is not government welfare or community volunteer welfare programs.
Socialism is when government confiscates private companies, private property, and entire industries...in essence government runs the economy. This is what happened in Cuba and Venezuela. Like when Maduro says go seize that General Motors plant, yes boss. Chavez had a TV show where he would walk around with his minions and say expropriate this, and that.


LOLOL.. No one is going to confiscate or nationalize US companies. You are scaring yourself based on an hysterical lie.
 
Socialism is not government welfare or community volunteer welfare programs.
Socialism is when government confiscates private companies, private property, and entire industries...in essence government runs the economy. This is what happened in Cuba and Venezuela. Like when Maduro says go seize that General Motors plant, yes boss. Chavez had a TV show where he would walk around with his minions and say expropriate this, and that.


LOLOL.. No one is going to confiscate or nationalize US companies. You are scaring yourself based on an hysterical lie.

Where did I say that would happen, I didn't.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
Actually, what I did was true, and you're lying.

Conservatives care about the poor. And the rich. All lives matter to them.

Liberals only invoke Christianity when they think it will help them advance their ungodly agendas.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
Actually, what I did was true, and you're lying.

Conservatives care about the poor. And the rich. All lives matter to them.

Liberals only invoke Christianity when they think it will help them advance their ungodly agendas.

No.. Republicans are always trying to strip away safety nets for the poor and elderly. Whether that's birth control or women's healthcare or food stamps or WIC or welfare. Must be those Evangelicals who lie thru their teeth and slander others. Lashon Hara, Christian.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
Actually, what I did was true, and you're lying.

Conservatives care about the poor. And the rich. All lives matter to them.

Liberals only invoke Christianity when they think it will help them advance their ungodly agendas.

No.. Republicans are always trying to strip away safety nets for the poor and elderly. Whether that's birth control or women's healthcare or food stamps or WIC or welfare. Must be those Evangelicals who lie thru their teeth and slander others. Lashon Hara, Christian.
Nope. The left has created ongoing poverty via their War on Poverty. Government has replaced the family. That was always the plan.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.

Isn't it odd to you that a political party would invoke Christianity and then viciously lie and slander their opponent?
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
Actually, what I did was true, and you're lying.

Conservatives care about the poor. And the rich. All lives matter to them.

Liberals only invoke Christianity when they think it will help them advance their ungodly agendas.

So how come Conservatives only support policies that help the rich? How come they're only against "big government" when we're talking about regulations or policies that would help the poor? Yet when it comes to policies to help the rich, that's not big government. This hypocrisy is pretty clear.

Liberals invoke Christianity when they think it will help pass laws to help the poor and middle-class.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.

Isn't it odd to you that a political party would invoke Christianity and then viciously lie and slander their opponent?

Not really. Republicans are Fascists, they see religion as a political tool.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

That's not true, because they scream and yell when we oppress no one. Samaritan's purse setup a free clinic in NYC, that was open to everyone, and they tried to have it closed.

As for Republicans and Christianity, yes both care about the poor in the same way, which is good and moral.
I know it's not true. I just did what PrincessAwesome did.

You miss nuance.

But what I did was actually true, whereas you were lying.
Liberals care about helping the poor, Conservatives say that helping the poor is "big government."
Conservatives only invoke Christianity when it comes to oppressing minorities.
Actually, what I did was true, and you're lying.

Conservatives care about the poor. And the rich. All lives matter to them.

Liberals only invoke Christianity when they think it will help them advance their ungodly agendas.

No.. Republicans are always trying to strip away safety nets for the poor and elderly. Whether that's birth control or women's healthcare or food stamps or WIC or welfare. Must be those Evangelicals who lie thru their teeth and slander others. Lashon Hara, Christian.
Nope. The left has created ongoing poverty via their War on Poverty. Government has replaced the family. That was always the plan.

WTF? What left-wing "War on Poverty" are you talking about? We don't even have affordable health care for the poor like other rich countries have. Maybe if we had a real War on Poverty, we wouldn't have seen so many Americans go homeless last year.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

What you described, is simply... not Christianity.

Christianity is defined in the Bible. If you make up your own version... then it's just.... NOT Christianity.

You don't get to make it up. That's just you inventing your own G-d. You might as well carve some wood, and bow down to idols.
I know I didn't describe Christianity. I described liberal Christianity.

I agree, which "liberal" Christianity, is simply ... not christianity.
 
I do find it funny that Republican Christianity is so different from Biblical Christianity, that you guys have to condemn the pope. If Jesus was alive today, you'd hate that brown Socialist.
You should get a load of how different and whacked-out liberal "Christianity" is.

Liberal Christianity? You mean because they don't follow Hal Lindsey or believe in the Rapture?
No, that's the wackiness of mainstream and evangelical Christianity.

Liberal Christianity is voodoo Christianity; it incorporates Eastern spiritual practices. It teaches God as male and female and co-creator alongside humankind. It advocates for big government and disruptions in family cohesion. With their noses in the air, they accuse traditional Christians of moral superiority.

Most bizarre, I think, is that they deny the deity of Christ, which should make them not any kind of Christian. But then, as with everything else, they like to change definitions.

But so-called Liberal Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Conservatives only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.
On the contrary, so-called Republican Christianity is more similar to Biblical Christianity when it comes to their view of the poor.
Liberals only care about Christianity when it comes to oppressing certain groups of people.

Republican Evangelicals are in a culture war that rejects science and modernity and instead embraces the Scofield Heresy or Late Great Planet Earth.

I would disagree with that. There are some Christian groups that reject science, but far more Christians openly embrace science at every level.

Science and Christianity, are not in conflict. What is in conflict is lies and deceit that are dressed as science.

For example, you can pick your gender. That's anti-science at every level.

For example, wearing a mask stops Covid.

For example, antibiotic resistance is evidence of evolution.

In all there, there are hard scientific evidences and research showing they are all three, are false.

Yet the left-wing believes this nonsense, and mocks Christians who are more informed and educated than themselves.

By far, the most anti-science group in this country is left-wingers and Democrats, and this is true around the world.

This is why when John Hopkins published findings that Covid deaths were exceptionally low, and that hospitals were labeling other deaths, as Covid deaths, to inflate their numbers, instead of debating the data, or doing a peer review, or doing more research to verify the finding.... they simply deleted the research from their publication.

Because the science didn't fit with the left-wing narrative, so they just deleted the science.

Yes, there are a few pockets of Christians that reject science. There is an entire political party and movement of people that also reject science, while trying to mock others for rejecting science.
 
Nice try at parsing the words. This shows (again) how, given enough centuries, trained minds can deform and detour even the clearest message.
Nothing to do with parsing words, but using the context to determine definition. Today, Webster's Dictionary has 22 definitions for father. There may not have been 22 definitions in Aramaic, but there was definitely more than one. We know the one Jesus used was in use. The one we know from Biblical use is Father Abraham. We know from the New Testament spiritual father-child relationships.

Non-Catholic Christians have booted at least two traditions in place from the time of Christ and the Apostles: The Sacraments and the idea of the spiritual father-child relationships.

Take a look at Martin Luther...he dropped being a father in the Catholic Church use of the word and became the Father of the Lutheran Church/Protestantism is the use Jesus was using. Protestants get around this by calling him Founder. ;)
This essentially says that Jesus lacked the sense and foresight to realized his simple words would not be understood.
He taught in parables, metaphor, in order that the greatest and most personal meaning could be appreciated by the least complex audiences. Efforts to re-enforce doctrinal percepts by twisting Jesus' words have largely destroyed the transcendent message that bore early Christians across the centuries before Rome was declared the center of the faith.

Not exactly .. Check out early Christian Writings.. Heresies abounded and everybody was fighting long before Rome every rose to prominence.

See Nag Hammadi .. also

Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha ...
earlychristianwritings.com
Early Christian Writings is the most complete collection of Christian texts before the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. The site provides translations and commentary for these sources, including the New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers, and some non-Christian references.

I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. Yes there were tons of heresies in the early church. This isn't a news flash, nor a hidden secret..... because the Bible itself says there were heresies being spread during the time of the early church.

The whole point of most of the letters written by Paul and the other apostles, was to address those heresies. Again, we've known this for 2,000 years. Not a news flash. Not an argument.
 
Where did Jesus or other biblical figures preach to redistribute wealth through the force of government?
That's not what Socialism is. Stop watching Fox.
Then tell us us exactly what socialism is.
.
Then tell us us exactly what socialism is.
.
doesn't matter, classical economics is determined by the economic model that attains full employment as the single criteria for success at least socialism has the correct objective irregardless how it is accomplished where full employment is antithetical to capitalism - the harbinger for christianity.

Full employment should never be the objective, because that requires force. You can't force people to get a job, if they refuse to do so.

Which again is why every single socialist system eventually results in force and violence. This is why Stalin had his gulags, Mao had his communes, North Korea has their forced labor, and so on.

Yes, any economic system can achieve full employment using violence and ruthless force.

To that end, yes full employment is antithetical to capitalism where people are free to make their own choices, and thus, they can choose to live on the streets, or choose to live on welfare if you are dumb enough to give that to them, or live on their own saved income as I am doing right now.

Full employment is a garbage goal. Freedom should be the goal, and Capitalism and Christianity both are completely in line with people being free to choose their own life.
.
doesn't matter, classical economics is determined by the economic model that attains full employment as the single criteria for success
Full employment should never be the objective, because that requires force. You can't force people to get a job, if they refuse to do so.
.
an extract, derived from the classical criteria for full employment -
.
Thus the problem of full employment is one of maintaining adequate effective demand. “When effective demand is deficient,” writes Keynes, “there is underemployment of labour in the sense that there are men unemployed who would be willing to work at less than existing real wage.
.
the success of any economic model is gauged by the resultant accomplishment of full employment - the snippet above is an example of the many deviousness's of capitalism in regards for those that do seek employment.

yours is a mindless argument used for centuries as a means of suppression for the personal gain of a few in the many facets of economic models and like yours have been endorsed by christianity throughout the centuries -

as devious as the quote in the christian bible.

the success of any economic model is gauged by the resultant accomplishment of full employment

No, it's not. Key claim is false, thus entire argument is false. The end.
 

Forum List

Back
Top