Socialism is contrary to faith.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Eschatologist

Active Member
Apr 25, 2023
125
44
44
North Carolina
✟9,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Socialism punishes workers with high taxes so others can be lazy and not work.

The Bible talks bad about laziness.
Depends on the system. Communism is a form of socialism, and many of those systems forced everyone to work or starve. Granted, many starved regardless of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

Eschatologist

Active Member
Apr 25, 2023
125
44
44
North Carolina
✟9,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
And you will notice the elites remain untouched either way ... as if the workers and the 'others' were a different breed of people.
The most elitist systems that exist are either Communist or State Capitalist. A system that is closer to a free market capitalism offers the least elitism and the most economic mobility.

State Capitalism is just a statist corruption of capitalism that only vaguely operates with a "market." China is the best example of this, although the US has been trending in this direction as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

Eschatologist

Active Member
Apr 25, 2023
125
44
44
North Carolina
✟9,729.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Most CEO's would collapse if they had to work one day on the floors of the factories they run.

Most states have laws to protect young teens (under 16) from working long hours. They restrict the number of hours they can work during the school year. They restrict how late in the evening they can work. This is for their own protection during their formative, educational years.

We are not talking about teens coming home and having chores on a family farm.
Most line workers would be terrible at running a major company as well, so everyone has their purpose and capabilities. It's why division of labor works. Humans are not one-size-fits-all.

It's also why some people are rich and some are poor. Many become rich through a combination of ambition, intelligence, skill, and luck. Obviously, the last one of those is not meritocratic, but the fact remains that not all roles in society are of equal monetary value.

Most "child labor" laws were not put into place to protect children. They were put there to make sure they didn't undercut wages of adult workers. Plenty of jobs that teens can do are often filled by adults. So, this isn't "for the children." It's for protecting wages of adult workers.

Of course, many of these laws are a moot point when a business can always undercut wages of legal citizens by hiring illegals.
 
Upvote 0

Postvieww

Believer
Sep 29, 2014
4,630
1,335
South
✟108,336.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Socialism today as promoted by the left has nothing in common with what Jesus taught and was not the MO of the Acts churches.

Corrupt politicians will never do Gods will or follow His teachings. The command in scripture to feed the poor and help the sick is in no way carried out by Godless politicians.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: timothyu
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,112
1,696
✟202,059.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Exploitation is evil. Capitalism without guardrails and safety nets is pure evil.
I am not a socialist but I do support trade unions, universal health care, the Fair Labor Srandards Act, Social Security, etc.
My conservative state decided to deregulate work for 14 year olds.
Why? So the chicken plants can exploit immigrant children? For shame! WWHC? What would Jesus condemn?
As you said, you are no socialist. So why are you talking about safegards against bad behavior, calling that capitalism? Socialism can and does have bad actors as well.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,131
13,198
✟1,090,732.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
For the majority of this country's existence, Social Security didn't exist. Neither did the welfare state. Charity and churches did just fine with handling poverty.

When people voluntarily share resources, that's great. When it's coerced by government, it's tyranny.
Your posts are tremendously articulate and I can tell that you are very well versed in the economic model you believe is best.

You are, however, apparently willing to accept a certain level of dire, life-threatening poverty which I, and I believe most people of good will, Christian and non-Christian, would be unwilling to accept.

Is it not naive to say "charity and churches did just fine with handling poverty" when 700 million people in the world live on less than $1.90 a day?

Is it not naive to say that even in the U.S. when:

34 million, including 9 million children, are food insecure, and 54% of Americans visited a food pantry for assistance last year? Hunger in America | Feeding America

Almost 600,000 are homeless, and the problem is growing. Homeless in America

19% of Americans have been contacted by collection agencies due to inability to pay medical bills, and 50% of bankruptcies are due to medical bills.

What church do you attend? We have a "society of downtown churches" that are organized to help people. In the case of utilities, for example, they run out of cash by the first week of the month.

Do you know why churches and charities "did just fine" in previous centuries?

Because ignorance is bliss! We lacked the sophisticated communications we have today, so we just didn't know!

For the first 70 or 80 years of our nation's history, for example, we had slavery. Where were the churches and charities in the South then?

I am old enough to remember my parents' stories about the depression. My mother always told a story about how she was accepted into a free NYC university and went because she couldn't get a job. When she graduated, she and her family walked to the graduation ceremony to save the nickel the subway would have cost so that they could buy ice cream cones--for the first time in years.

My grandpa was an immigrant who married late in life. His successful brother (until he lost it all in the depression) gave him a small railroad apartment house he managed, and he had three tenants. During the depression, none could pay rent, but he let them stay because they were his friends and he said, "no one else could be a paying renter either." There was a huge Catholic church across the street, and they were faithful parishioners, but they weren't "helping" because too many people needed help, and too few people had enough money to contribute.

Now it is virtually impossible not to see the poverty all around us. The world is crying for help, and immigrants and refugees are beating down doors in every prosperous nation in the world.

Your economic model doesn't work.
Your idea that charities and churches were sufficient is untrue.

The 1% wealthiest own 50% of the world's wealth. Shrugging your shoulders and turning your back isn't enough.


You are not convincing most of us (thank God!), however articulate you may be.

Color me "too kind to be convinced and too aware to turn my back."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,162
7,519
✟347,296.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
For the majority of this country's existence, Social Security didn't exist. Neither did the welfare state. Charity and churches did just fine with handling poverty.
Do you have any thing to back this claim up about charity and churches "doing just fine with handling poverty." I'm asking because there are plenty of people in poverty even with government assistance now, and the number would vastly increase if it was eliminated.
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
God also says love all as self.. which means care for them in time of need as you would like to be cared for in a similar situation. That is God's concept of a social gospel
Not a social gospel, but the simple idea of Christian charity.

Even though the word 'social' is in the political term 'Socialism', they are not the same thing.
 
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In other words, it is our duty as Christians to do Jesus' work--to establish a just society in which every person on earth has what he needs to live.

Former Senator Al Franken, when he was a satirist, told of "Supply Side Jesus." Supply Side Jesus is an invention of the Religious Right in their attempts to remake him in their image. As many times as I've shared it, I still SMH at how warped the concept of capitalist Jesus is.
That is NOT Christian Doctrine, but Communist doctrine.


Apostle Paul made NO COMMAND for Christians to tithe (tenth) which was required under the old covenant. Paul also said it was NOT his aim to cause the giver to SUFFER, as what one gives is now from one's heart, and is between the giver and God.

2 Cor 8:11-14
11 Now therefore perform the doing of it; that as there was a readiness to will, so there may be a performance also out of that which ye have.
12 For if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.
13 For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:
14 But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:
KJV



Socialism is different, which we already have examples as applied by Communist countries.

They preach Socialism as if it means equality, but in reality they steal the people's wealth they worked for and they choose who to give it to (most of the time to themselves or their Communist Party members, since they are in control of the state apparatus. The Communist leadership have access to everything, and live in excess, while the poor starve and die. Joseph Stalin actually tried to hide this fact when he allowed hundreds of thousands to starve in Ukraine).

Even in early America with the Jamestown settlement, they tried at first to use socialist principles; no matter how hard you worked, everyone received the same. Many starved that first year because if everyone receives the same, whether they worked or not, that ruins people's incentive to produce.

After that, they changed the policy at Jamestown, and instead used The Biblical Principle, that if you don't work, you don't eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10). That next year no one starved, and there was an abundance.

Therefore, it has already been proven that POLITICAL SOCIALISM does not work, and that it is against God's Principles in His Word. It is against 'social' justice for the people. And this is why in Russia since Communism, the men have had such a problem with alcoholism. It's because they know the harder they work, their hard labor is going to be taken away from them and given to someone else. Thus there is no 'incentive' to work hard and produce. And that is why the USSR allowed the Berlin Wall to come down and invite CAPITALIST BUISNESS from the West in order to help prop up their economy! The Capitalist West did the same thing for Communist China too!

2 Thess 3:12
12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
KJV
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,550
8,436
up there
✟307,381.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Not a social gospel, but the simple idea of Christian charity.

Even though the word 'social' is in the political term 'Socialism', they are not the same thing.
Make it as you will to suit your own politics
 
  • Agree
Reactions: ralliann
Upvote 0

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Make it as you will to suit your own politics
There is no such thing as 'politics' with God's Word. If you think there is, then you have debased God's Word down to the 'secularist' type carnal thinking of the flesh, and of this world.

That is why men's political ideas of SOCIALISM cannot apply to God's Word and Christ's Church. Men's Socialist politics doesn't believe in PROPERTY RIGHTS, but GOD's WORD does, so there's one major difference. There are many more.

Now if a believer on Christ Jesus heard ideas from Socialism being preached by some preacher in the pulpit, then that preacher is not staying in God's Word nor in God's principles. It's important to understand the subject of giving and charity has nothing to do with Communist thought.


A Communist Goal from the Soviet's 1958 long-range strategy against the West:

"27.
Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with 'social' religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity, which does not need a 'religious crutch.'"
 
Upvote 0

timothyu

Well-Known Member
Dec 31, 2018
22,550
8,436
up there
✟307,381.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
There is no such thing as 'politics' with God's Word
Of course not. God's Kingdom is the only government and has no relation to ours. As a matter of fact He is coming back to take away governing of man from mankind, no and, ifs or buts.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,131
13,198
✟1,090,732.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
When "socialism" is discussed by Americans, we are at a disadvantage, because so many Americans have no idea what socialism means. The word has been weaponized by many Republicans and conservatives who call programs that have helped hundreds of millions of Americans, like Social Security (1937) and Medicare (1965), "socialism."

In my state, we went through a gubernatorial campaign where the victor had continuous commercials complaining about Biden's "socialist" policies. (Since she was running against a Rocket Scientist, a PhD formerly employed by NASA with degrees from MIT and Harvard, she didn't even want to mention his name, instead focusing on Biden and using the weaponized word "socialism.")

We aren't even a soupcon Socialist enough to give people who interpret the Bible conservatively to be worried.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Davy

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nov 25, 2017
4,861
1,022
USA
✟267,597.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Of course not. God's Kingdom is the only government and has no relation to ours. As a matter of fact He is coming back to take away governing of man from mankind, no and, ifs or buts.
And I will be so glad... when He does return to reign as our KING.

Didn't The Father warn the children of Israel long ago when they desired a flesh king like the pagan nations around them had?
 
Upvote 0

PsaltiChrysostom

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2018
1,047
1,003
Virginia
✟70,166.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
When "socialism" is discussed by Americans, we are at a disadvantage, because so many Americans have no idea what socialism means. The word has been weaponized by many Republicans and conservatives who call programs that have helped hundreds of millions of Americans, like Social Security (1937) and Medicare (1965), "socialism."

In my state, we went through a gubernatorial campaign where the victor had continuous commercials complaining about Biden's "socialist" policies. (Since she was running against a Rocket Scientist, a PhD formerly employed by NASA with degrees from MIT and Harvard, she didn't even want to mention his name, instead focusing on Biden and using the weaponized word "socialism.")

We aren't even a soupcon Socialist enough to give people who interpret the Bible conservatively to be worried.
And even back when Social Security was proposed, Republicans opposed it (my apologies as Forbes limits viewed articles but the history of social security can be googled if you want more info)

Historian Arthur Schlesinger (page 311) notes that the Republicans echoed corporate opposition to Social Security. A representative of the Illinois manufacturers testified that if Social Security was passed it would undermine America by “destroying initiative, discouraging thrift, and stifling individual responsibility.” In 1935, Republican congressman John Taber said Social Security “is designed to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers, and to prevent any possibility of the employers providing work for the people.”

 
Upvote 0

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,112
1,696
✟202,059.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
And even back when Social Security was proposed, Republicans opposed it (my apologies as Forbes limits viewed articles but the history of social security can be googled if you want more info)

Historian Arthur Schlesinger (page 311) notes that the Republicans echoed corporate opposition to Social Security. A representative of the Illinois manufacturers testified that if Social Security was passed it would undermine America by “destroying initiative, discouraging thrift, and stifling individual responsibility.” In 1935, Republican congressman John Taber said Social Security “is designed to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers, and to prevent any possibility of the employers providing work for the people.”

Let's then go back to socialists in history. It would only be appropriate?
It is simply a "power shift". Who has more/all power and control in a society, is all it is. We in America are supposed to have government by the people, for the people. Who do you think should have power and control?
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,131
13,198
✟1,090,732.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Let's then go back to socialists in history. It would only be appropriate?
It is simply a "power shift". Who has more power and control in a society, is all it is. We in America are supposed to have government by the people, for the people. Who do you want in power and control?
I want government by the compassionate people, just people, inclusive people, ethical people.

Our votes count. Sometimes it seems like the bad guys win.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
6,112
1,696
✟202,059.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
I want government by the compassionate people, just people, inclusive people, ethical people.

Our votes count. Sometimes it seems like the bad guys win.
We each get to decide who meets those qualities of our own free will. Socialism destroys that power and choice. Historically which socialist, communists met this criteria you like to have in full [power?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.