Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 51

Thread: Ron Paul's Anti-Fed Crusade is Rooted in a Theocratic Reading of the Bible

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    My Parents' Basement
    Posts
    14,097

    Default Ron Paul's Anti-Fed Crusade is Rooted in a Theocratic Reading of the Bible

    In the Tea Partyís short life, the Federal Reserve has been a target of its oppositional rage, spurred by Tea Party godfather Rep. Ron Paulís persistent calls to eliminate it.

    While Paulís anti-Fed crusade is widely thought of as economic libertarianism, the roots of this combat lie in a theocratic reading of the Bible, arising out of the nexus between Paul (and now his son, Senator-elect Rand Paul), Howard Phillips and his Constitution Party, and Gary North and the Christian Reconstructionists.

    For decades, the elder Paul, Phillips, and North have shared the libertarian economic philosophy of the Austrian School, which advocates a strict free market approach to an economy they portray in terms of individual choices and agreements rather than systemic forces. With respect to the Federal Reserve System in particular, they have argued against its fractional reserve banking, and its manipulation of interest rates to control economic ups and downs.

    http://www.religiondispatches.org/ar...%E2%80%99_fed/



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    BUMP



    10000000000% true. Most people here probably don't even know how influential the theonomic movement was in bringing sound money to the forefront.


    Sound money is Biblical. There are so many warnings about debasement and theft in the Scripture it would be hard to list them all.

  4. #3

    Default If We Want to Kill the Fed, We Must Obey God

    I agree with that article. Many of the principles underlying the criticisms of the Federal Reserve come from Scripture, such as:
    • "Thou shalt not steal... Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's." (Exodus 20:15, 17)
    • "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in mete-yard, in weight, or in measure. Just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have: I am the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt." (Leviticus 19:35, 36)
    • "A false balance is abomination to the LORD, but a just weight is his delight." (Proverbs 11:1)
    • "And there was a great cry of the people and of their wives against their brethren the Jews. For there were that said, We, our sons, and our daughters, are many: therefore we take up corn for them, that we may eat, and live. Some also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth. There were also that said, We have borrowed money for the king's tribute, and that upon our lands and vineyards. Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and, lo, we bring into bondage our sons and our daughters to be servants, and some of our daughters are brought unto bondage already: neither is it in our power to redeem them; for other men have our lands and vineyards." (Nehemiah 5:1-5)
    "And they cast dust on their heads and cried, weeping and wailing, saying, 'Alas, alas, that great city, wherein were made rich all that had ships in the sea by reason of her costliness! For in one hour is she made desolate.'" - Revelation 18:19

    "News that China is soon to surpass the United States as the largest economy in the world is a stark reminder of how the American people are harmed by the welfare-warfare state, crony capitalism, and fiat currency." - Dr. Ron Paul

  5. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    My Parents' Basement
    Posts
    14,097

    Default

    It is an interesting piece that should be read by all interested in ending the Fed

  6. #5
    Untimely ripped fisharmor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Location! Location!
    Posts
    7,358

    Default

    I don't know how comfortable I am making a strictly Christian judgment against the Fed... obviously it has its utility, but I think it's ultimately more useful to point out that Christianity doesn't have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking.
    Fact is, Judaism and Islam both look quite unfavorably on this nonsense, too.

    As a Christian, I sure do wish more of my brothers and sisters in Christ would take a second to review this - but perhaps a double-edged attack is more appropriate.
    People should know not only that their particular religion forbids this, but also that ultimately the only religion on earth which comes out in favor of it is statism.

    Unfortunately, since most nominal Christians are really just statists with Jesus overtones, I don't think a direct religion-based argument would work very well. When your religion demands that you sacrifice your children to the state, and your religion handles the whole funeral (together with your local complicit clergyman to add the Jesus flavor), and creates shrines to their mortal remains so that their deaths can have meaning - I somehow suspect that a strictly biblical argument against the mechanism that finances it all will stick in their heads. Such people require conversion to an entirely different religion first.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fisharmor View Post
    I don't know how comfortable I am making a strictly Christian judgment against the Fed... obviously it has its utility, but I think it's ultimately more useful to point out that Christianity doesn't have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking.
    Why doesn't Christianity have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking???

    What non-arbitrary standard from an atheistic worldview is going to tell us that debasement and theft is wrong?

  8. #7

    Default

    Do we really need religion to tell us the Fed isn't serving us economically?

  9. #8

    Default

    thanks for introducing me to this religious dispatches website. all sorts of interesting reading there.

    though I agree with some of the analysis surrounding the subject of the article, it had some hit-piece aspects (newletters, really?) to it that will keep me from sharing it widely.

    though true enough that sound money and honest weights & measures are indeed biblical, they're also logical economically, and implementing these politically does not equal reinventing our republic as a theocracy. Ron Paul does not advocate a theocracy.
    "Freedom is Popular!" - Ron Paul
    "...if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed" - Jesus Christ
    "Time to nut up, or shut up" - Tallahassee
    "Your heart is free; have the courage to follow it." - Malcolm Wallace

    Quote Originally Posted by supermario21 View Post
    Raul Labrador just threw the hammer down..."said we need to stop acting like moderates and talking like conservatives" and start "talking like moderates and acting like conservatives".
    looking for a second major political party

  10. #9

    Default

    From the article:
    Reconstructionist theocracy, based on the Reconstructionists’ reading of the Bible, gives coercive authority to families and churches to organize other aspects of life.
    Of course... Ron Paul talks about coercion all the time.

    Ron Paul talks about the Non Aggression Principle and libertarian philosophy.

    Reconstructionism is a theology that arose out of conservative Presbyterianism (Reformed and Orthodox), which proposes that contemporary application of the laws of Old Testament Israel, or “Biblical Law,” is the basis for reconstructing society toward the Kingdom of God on earth.

    Reconstructionism is a theology that arose out of conservative Presbyterianism (Reformed and Orthodox), which proposes that contemporary application of the laws of Old Testament Israel, or “Biblical Law,” is the basis for reconstructing society toward the Kingdom of God on earth.
    According to Gary North, women who have abortions should be publicly executed, “along with those who advised them to abort their children.” Rushdoony concludes: “God’s government prevails, and His alternatives are clear-cut: either men and nations obey His laws, or God invokes the death penalty against them.”
    Ron Paul is against the death penalty, does not advocate resurrecting Witch Trials, does not advocate supplanting the Constitution with the Old Testament, and has not stated his goal is heaven on earth.

    This bullshit should be moved to the religion subforum. Ron Paul is not a bat shit crazy, non-believer murderer.
    Last edited by Live_Free_Or_Die; 11-15-2010 at 10:12 AM.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Why doesn't Christianity have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking???
    well islam has similar views, in fact usury is forbidden in it. Just as it used to be by most christians, which is why jewish people tended to run/own banks.
    Last edited by specsaregood; 11-15-2010 at 10:36 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Edward Snowden;
    So its, I would say; illustrative that the president would choose to say, "someone should face the music" when he knows the music is a show trial.

  12. #11

    Default

    Horse shit.

    This is another attempt to either glom onto Ron Paul and thereby legitimize religious buffoonery or deligitimize Paul by association with religious buffoons.

    The founding fathers were very clear about the terrible consequences of central banking, the constitution is clear the money should be gold and silver, and those arguments are sufficient to explain Ron Paul's opposition to the Fed (that and a host of sound Austrian economics principles).

    Bringing religion into it is unnecessary and divisive.

  13. #12

    Default

    Uh, what the heck?

    Nothing against Christianity, but some of that stuff is just as disturbing as the authoritarian left's insanity.

  14. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bobbyw24 View Post
    In the Tea Partyís short life, the Federal Reserve has been a target of its oppositional rage, spurred by Tea Party godfather Rep. Ron Paulís persistent calls to eliminate it.

    While Paulís anti-Fed crusade is widely thought of as economic libertarianism, the roots of this combat lie in a theocratic reading of the Bible, arising out of the nexus between Paul (and now his son, Senator-elect Rand Paul), Howard Phillips and his Constitution Party, and Gary North and the Christian Reconstructionists.

    For decades, the elder Paul, Phillips, and North have shared the libertarian economic philosophy of the Austrian School, which advocates a strict free market approach to an economy they portray in terms of individual choices and agreements rather than systemic forces. With respect to the Federal Reserve System in particular, they have argued against its fractional reserve banking, and its manipulation of interest rates to control economic ups and downs.

    http://www.religiondispatches.org/ar...%E2%80%99_fed/
    Just out of couriousity, is this some "theocratic reading" as stated by Ron Paul, or is it some religious organization attempting to make the claim and assign it's own values to this?

  15. #14

    Default

    What an utter pile of horse shit. Absolutely outrageous.

    Arguments for sound money have absolutely zero to do with god or religion. It is about the right to own private property without it being debased (stolen from). This is a legal contention. Plain and simple.

    Even Huerta de Soto, pious as any modern Austrian economist, rarely if ever evokes religion in his treatise on sound money, "Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles."

    Seriously folks, I am warning you: if you give any credence to free market ideology being "faith based" rather than rooted in a careful scientific understanding of human action (which it is), you will destroy its legitimacy in the minds of millions of potential converts.

    I am completely okay with sharing the movement toward individual liberty with those of faith. And I will always defend the rights of people to say and believe as they wish. But shall individual liberty become conflated with religion in a manner that is anything but secular, it will surely whither and die.

    Invoking religion in place of Hayek's capital structure, or Mises' calculation argument completely de-emphasizes the latter, which undoes the work modern day Austrians have been doing to bring these ideas to the forefront of academia.

    Can we please keep these ideas separate?

  16. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StilesBC View Post
    What an utter pile of horse shit. Absolutely outrageous.

    Arguments for sound money have absolutely zero to do with god or religion. It is about the right to own private property without it being debased (stolen from). This is a legal contention. Plain and simple.

    Even Huerta de Soto, pious as any modern Austrian economist, rarely if ever evokes religion in his treatise on sound money, "Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles."

    Seriously folks, I am warning you: if you give any credence to free market ideology being "faith based" rather than rooted in a careful scientific understanding of human action (which it is), you will destroy its legitimacy in the minds of millions of potential converts.

    I am completely okay with sharing the movement toward individual liberty with those of faith. And I will always defend the rights of people to say and believe as they wish. But shall individual liberty become conflated with religion in a manner that is anything but secular, it will surely whither and die.

    Invoking religion in place of Hayek's capital structure, or Mises' calculation argument completely de-emphasizes the latter, which undoes the work modern day Austrians have been doing to bring these ideas to the forefront of academia.

    Can we please keep these ideas separate?
    Agreed, but also it is difficult to keep religion out of RP's run for office. The fact that RP is a Christian is just as dividing to the movement as if he were an atheist. On the positive side, RP is not Huckabee and running around talking about how we are a "Christian nation" and this kind of nonsense, but the fact that RP questions the theory of evolution no doubt turns of millions of people to his more solid ideas (like ending the fed, ending the income tax), and it becomes easy for those on the left to throw pot shots like this one to discredit him.

  17. #16

    Default

    Good to know ending theft and corruption is at the core of beliefs held by Dr. Paul...

    AUDIT THE FED!
    END THE FED!
    President Paul 2012...

    ...The Real Change Obama Promised

  18. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by StilesBC View Post
    What an utter pile of horse shit. Absolutely outrageous.

    Arguments for sound money have absolutely zero to do with god or religion. It is about the right to own private property without it being debased (stolen from). This is a legal contention. Plain and simple.

    Even Huerta de Soto, pious as any modern Austrian economist, rarely if ever evokes religion in his treatise on sound money, "Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles."

    Seriously folks, I am warning you: if you give any credence to free market ideology being "faith based" rather than rooted in a careful scientific understanding of human action (which it is), you will destroy its legitimacy in the minds of millions of potential converts.

    I am completely okay with sharing the movement toward individual liberty with those of faith. And I will always defend the rights of people to say and believe as they wish. But shall individual liberty become conflated with religion in a manner that is anything but secular, it will surely whither and die.

    Invoking religion in place of Hayek's capital structure, or Mises' calculation argument completely de-emphasizes the latter, which undoes the work modern day Austrians have been doing to bring these ideas to the forefront of academia.

    Can we please keep these ideas separate?
    Excellent post. I'm in complete agreement with you.
    "One of the great victories of the state, is that the word "Anarchy" terrifies people but, the word "State" does not" - Tom Woods

  19. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by txaslftist View Post
    Horse shit.

    This is another attempt to either glom onto Ron Paul and thereby legitimize religious buffoonery or deligitimize Paul by association with religious buffoons.

    The founding fathers were very clear about the terrible consequences of central banking, the constitution is clear the money should be gold and silver, and those arguments are sufficient to explain Ron Paul's opposition to the Fed (that and a host of sound Austrian economics principles).

    Bringing religion into it is unnecessary and divisive.
    Talk about an overreaction......

    The article isn't saying that you have to be religious to be anti fed. It is suggesting that Ron Paul's religious views may be part of his reasoning on attacking the fed. There is precedent for that view. Ron Paul is anti war based on the religious "just war theory". That doesn't mean you have to be religious to be anti war. I wouldn't call the just war theory "religious buffoonery". Would you?

    Same thing with the fed. Lately I've been thinking about fiat currency in terms of the quote from Jesus to "render unto Ceaser that which is Ceaser's and unto God that which is God's". Some use this to justify taxes. But another way to look at it is that as long as you are dependent on "Ceaser" for your money, taxes are unavoidable. But if there were competing currencies (something that Ron Paul supports) the current borrow-tax-and-spend regime is much less certain.
    9/11 Thermate experiments

    Eze 22:25 There's a conspiracy of prophets within her....

    "I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

    "We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

  20. #19
    Member farrar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    278
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Why doesn't Christianity have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking???

    What non-arbitrary standard from an atheistic worldview is going to tell us that debasement and theft is wrong?
    I am an atheist. I believe In natural rights. That we derive our rights from our nature as perceptive beings. And beings that are self aware. To have rights is to have ownership. To own one's self is to be self aware. If we own ourselves then we have the final say in what happens to ourselves as individuals. To not own ourselves means to be immoral by simply existing, because breathing, standing, moving, living or dying would be acting on something that's not yours. If we own ourselves, then we ought to own what we produce, save that it have originally belonged to another. Because we must use our bodies to produce, the unowned to create, and our productions to trade and sustain our lives, than to infringe on the ownership of others is an attempt on their life. Assuming that it is not immoral for to objects without self awareness to collide into one another, and as such morality is an attribute concerned solely with life, than I believe this is a rational basis for morality outside of Christianity.

    Likewise Islam, the Jewish faith, arguably have a share in whatever christianity claims, and therefore it has no monopoly.

    In other words, I have a moral basis founded on property rights.

    However others want to rationalize the immorality of the fed is up to them as far as i am concerned. I hate it too.
    When you know Its name, you know pride.
    It is our nature, It is man.
    Yet It is ripped from our souls, so
    When you know Its meaning, you feel pain.
    [ama-gi]
    Don't despair MAN:
    It is our nature, It will return to you.
    It will keep your heart beating, and soon It will overcome.

  21. #20
    Member farrar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    278
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmdrake View Post
    Talk about an overreaction......

    The article isn't saying that you have to be religious to be anti fed. It is suggesting that Ron Paul's religious views may be part of his reasoning on attacking the fed. There is precedent for that view. Ron Paul is anti war based on the religious "just war theory". That doesn't mean you have to be religious to be anti war. I wouldn't call the just war theory "religious buffoonery". Would you?

    Same thing with the fed. Lately I've been thinking about fiat currency in terms of the quote from Jesus to "render unto Ceaser that which is Ceaser's and unto God that which is God's". Some use this to justify taxes. But another way to look at it is that as long as you are dependent on "Ceaser" for your money, taxes are unavoidable. But if there were competing currencies (something that Ron Paul supports) the current borrow-tax-and-spend regime is much less certain.
    Well, I can see how the left would feel uncomfortable with him or the right would feel more comfortable with him, if they thought he rationalized everything with religion. Most of us here don't care one way or the other, and if we do it certainly doesn't drag us over to the Marco rubio camp. But liberals and conservatives often times put more weight on that sort of thing than we do (at least politically). I could be a political ploy targeted at raising or diminishing support on one of the two sides, but I wouldn't bet my bottom dollar on it.
    When you know Its name, you know pride.
    It is our nature, It is man.
    Yet It is ripped from our souls, so
    When you know Its meaning, you feel pain.
    [ama-gi]
    Don't despair MAN:
    It is our nature, It will return to you.
    It will keep your heart beating, and soon It will overcome.

  22. #21

  23. #22

    Default

    Dear God!

    This is utterly ridiculous. I don't know what Ron Paul is thinking, but I highly doubt he is supporting sound money and ending the fed because of the bible or religion.
    Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

  24. #23
    Moderator Kotin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    10,649

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by libertybrewcity View Post
    Dear God!

    This is utterly ridiculous. I don't know what Ron Paul is thinking, but I highly doubt he is supporting sound money and ending the fed because of the bible or religion.
    Maybe, maybe not.. But what's going on here is someone trying to attatch this to Ron Paul to legitimize their own beliefs.


    9/11 truthers do it, so do christians..



    Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. - Thomas Jefferson
    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.

    - Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear

  25. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AquaBuddha2010 View Post
    Why doesn't Christianity have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking???

    What non-arbitrary standard from an atheistic worldview is going to tell us that debasement and theft is wrong?
    Christianity does not have a monopoly pronouncement on the immorality of central banking.

    However, the options are not Christianity on one side, and Atheism on the other.

    It is Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and Hinduism on one side.

    It was stated that it is Biblical to be against central banking and for sound monetary policy. That would cover Judaism and Christianity. A recent thread pointed out that Sharia has sound monetary policy just the same. In Hinduism, under the system of karma which God has made implicit in nature as a system of rules and laws to govern our moral behavior, everyone is entitled to the fruits of their labor. In order to have the fruits of your labor, you need to have a sound monetary policy of valued commodity-backed exchange and not have a central bank which debases the currency.

    So in conclusion, it is not only a Christian moral value to have a sound monetary policy with no central bankers debasing the currency -- it is a Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and Hindu moral value.

    It is more easily summed up by saying that it is a religious moral value to have a sound monetary policy with no central bankers debasing the currency.

    There is no need for artificial divisions of people of one religion claiming divisive superiority over their brothers who share the sacred value of worship towards God, when our goals and morals are largely the same. We are religious moral people and we all wish to please God, to the best of our understanding.

  26. #25
    Untimely ripped fisharmor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Location! Location!
    Posts
    7,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by farrar View Post
    However others want to rationalize the immorality of the fed is up to them as far as i am concerned. I hate it too.
    This has got to be the most respectful atheist response to a religious topic I have ever seen on the internet. I shall strive to reciprocate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Yieu View Post
    There is no need for artificial divisions of people of one religion claiming divisive superiority over their brothers who share the sacred value of worship towards God, when our goals and morals are largely the same. We are religious moral people and we all wish to please God, to the best of our understanding.
    Well, I hope to be as respectful when responding to this.

    Historical Christian thought doesn't have any room for these sentiments. This isn't meant to be divisive or superior or in your face. It simply is.

    It's a gigantic machine with a thousand cogwheels that all work together. Part of Christian growth is recognizing the gears when you see them, and how they interlock.

    Relativism is a gear that doesn't fit in the machine, no matter how much you try. Moreover, when you try to fit it into the machine, one of the first things that happens is the huge, obvious Christ cogwheel gets thrown out of the machine. And without that Christ gear, nothing turns right. The machine doesn't make any sense. It's just a pile of old, worn out junk.

    When a non-Christian sees one of the gears and recognizes it as the same moral or goal as one of his, that's wonderful. We'd probably rejoice. But we wouldn't be drawing a lot of other ties. A lot of us would then quote some scripture, maybe getting into Romans 2, which states that God has written His law on the hearts of unbelievers, and that their consciences bear witness to it.

    The point is, Christianity makes an exclusive truth claim. Without that exclusive truth claim, it falls apart. So it has to do it.

    The reason why libertarian Christians react positively to this story is because it introduces the immorality of the Fed into that same exclusive truth claim. So here we have a bunch of people who have no problem telling other religions that they're wrong, and not just factually wrong, but going-to-hell wrong.
    And the thing they're basing that apparently dickish attitude on is generally a single book, which contains the nuts-and-bolts of the exclusive truth claim.
    And here we have an argument that that same book, that same truth claim, decries the Fed.
    Forget Ron Paul for a second, and think about all those jerk Christians who might be persuaded to seek this and other liberty minded goals based only on this.

    Christianity is what it is, and attempts to soften some of its harder elements only serve to destroy it, so it tends to defend itself against those attempts. But hopefully atheists can see also a friendly approach toward Christians which might have some effect - one that makes appeals from inside, and not just in opposition.
    There are no crimes against people.
    There are only crimes against the state.
    And the state will never, ever choose to hold accountable its agents, because a thing can not commit a crime against itself.

  27. #26

    Default

    Ahh the Bible, the Socialist paradise... If Jesus existed today he would be called a Socialist and a communist that is a fact. Here are some quotes from the Bible...

    I am going to start with Mark Chapter 10:21-25 21Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.Ē 22At this the man's face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth. 23Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, "How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!Ē 24The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! 25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
    1My brothers, as believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ, don't show favoritism. 2Suppose a man comes into your meeting wearing a gold ring and fine clothes, and a poor man in shabby clothes also comes in. 3If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, "Here's a good seat for you," but say to the poor man, "You stand there" or "Sit on the floor by my feet," 4have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts? 5Listen, my dear brothers: Has not God chosen those who are poor in the eyes of the world to be rich in faith and to inherit the kingdom he promised those who love him? 6But you have insulted the poor. Is it not the rich who are exploiting you? Are they not the ones who are dragging you into court? 7Are they not the ones who are slandering the noble name of him to whom you belong?
    Acts 2:42-47
    "They devoted themselves to the apostles teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Everyone was filled with awe, and many wonders and miraculous signs were done by the apostles. All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved".

    The Believers Share Their Possessions
    Acts 4:32-35

    All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

    James 1:27

    "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world".

    Hebrews 13}5

    "Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you".

    Matthew 23:25

    ""Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence".

    Luke 12:15

    "Then he said to them, 'Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions' ".
    I mean literally, all over the bible is straight up Socialism. Then my favorite, I cant find the quote, but it says something about planting crops for six years and keeping for yourself and then the seventh year give your food to the poor, or something like that...... Jesus was not a capitalist....

  28. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kotin View Post
    Maybe, maybe not.. But what's going on here is someone trying to attatch this to Ron Paul to legitimize their own beliefs.


    9/11 truthers do it, so do christians..
    Paul got no where last time from disassociating himself from important issues or views widely held by the liberty movement. 9/11 truth and Christianity does not need Paul to be legitimized. It's the opposite---opponents of getting the truth out keep associating Paul with their demeaning approach to those issues, in order to legitimize their non-belief.
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    2014 LP Candidate for Comptroller, NY
    Political Director, Libertarian Party of NY

  29. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tjeffersonsghost View Post

    I mean literally, all over the bible is straight up Socialism. Then my favorite, I cant find the quote, but it says something about planting crops for six years and keeping for yourself and then the seventh year give your food to the poor, or something like that...... Jesus was not a capitalist....
    Here is a more persuasive antidote, a case that Jesus was an anarchist:

    http://www.anti-state.com/redford/redford4.html

    Jesus Is an Anarchist
    (A free-market/libertarian anarchist, that is--otherwise what is called an anarcho-capitalist.)

    by James Redford
    The above title may seem like strong words, for surely that can't be correct? Jesus an anarchist? One must be joking, right?

    But you read correctly, and I will demonstrate exactly that. At this point you may be incredulous, but I assure you that I am quite serious. If you are a Christian and find the above title at all hard to believe then you of all people owe it to yourself to find out what the basis of this charge is, for if the above comes as news to you then you still have much to learn about Jesus and about the most vitally important struggle which has plagued mankind since the dawn of history: mankind's continuing struggle between freedom and slavery, between value producers and the violent parasitical elite, between peace and war, between truth and deception. This is the central struggle which defines mankind's history and, sadly, continues to do so. As Christians and as people in general, what we choose to believe and accept as the truth is equally as vitally important, for ultimately it is people's beliefs about the world that will shape and determine what outcomes transpire in the world. If the mass of people believe in political falsehoods and deceptions then mankind will continue to repeat the same gruesome mistakes, as it does presently, and the aforementioned struggle will continue to be no closer to a desirable resolution. Genuine change must first come by changing one's mind, and if what one had believed before was in error then one cannot expect good results to proceed forth from it. And all change starts with the individual. You can help change the world by simply changing your mind. All I ask of you is to believe in the truth--know the truth and the truth will make you free (John 8:32).

    It is the purpose of this document to demonstrate the above claim, and if you are a Christian then I submit that it should be your task to honestly consider what is presented here, for if the above claim comes as a surprise then I will show that what you thought you knew about Jesus was not the whole story: Jesus is far more radical than many would have you believe, and for good reason--it threatens the status quo. For the consequence of this truth becoming understood and accepted by even one-tenth of the population would be quite dramatic indeed: governments would topple like so many dominoes. For as the 16th century Frenchman …tienne de la Boťtie observed in The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude (http://www.blancmange.net/ tmh/articles/laboetie.html), all governments ultimately rest on the consent of the governed, even totalitarian dictatorships. Now this "consent" does not have to be in the form of active promotion and support of the State, it could simply be in the form of hopeless resignation, such as accepting the canard "nothing's as sure as death and taxes." All governments can only exist because the majority--in one form or another--accept them as at least being inevitable. They believe in the deception that even though government may be evil that it is nevertheless a necessary evil, and therefore cannot conceive of a better alternative. But if such were true then Jesus Christ's whole message is a fallacy. But such is not the truth, there is an alternative: liberty. And I will show that Jesus has called us to liberty, and that liberty and Christ's message are incompatible with government....
    -----Peace & Freedom, John Clifton-----
    2014 LP Candidate for Comptroller, NY
    Political Director, Libertarian Party of NY

  30. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tjeffersonsghost View Post
    Ahh the Bible, the Socialist paradise... If Jesus existed today he would be called a Socialist and a communist that is a fact. Here are some quotes from the Bible...
    I mean literally, all over the bible is straight up Socialism. Then my favorite, I cant find the quote, but it says something about planting crops for six years and keeping for yourself and then the seventh year give your food to the poor, or something like that...... Jesus was not a capitalist....
    It's actually in the eyes of the beholder. For example your first quote. Christ was not of this earth. His message in this verse is in teaching those around him to detach themselves of earthly goods. He knew the man valued his possessions and wealth more than he did in serving God.

    In the second verse, Christ is teaching about being charitable. Socialism is a state governed practice. Charity is done on an individual basis.

    The third verse is something families do all the time. They pull their resources and share everything. Again, there's nothing that involves statism in anything Christ taught. He never advocated that the state should disperse everything equally. He was preaching to individuals.
    Diversity finds unity in the message of freedom.

    Dilige et quod vis fac. ~ Saint Augustine

    Quote Originally Posted by HOLLYWOOD View Post
    If anything, this situation has proved the government is nothing but a dictatorship backed by deadly force... no different than the dictatorships in the banana republics, just more polished and cleverly propagandized.

  31. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Somewhere in the mountains of WV
    Posts
    2,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tjeffersonsghost View Post
    Ahh the Bible, the Socialist paradise... If Jesus existed today he would be called a Socialist and a communist that is a fact. Here are some quotes from the Bible...









    I mean literally, all over the bible is straight up Socialism. Then my favorite, I cant find the quote, but it says something about planting crops for six years and keeping for yourself and then the seventh year give your food to the poor, or something like that...... Jesus was not a capitalist....

    socialism:
    # a political theory advocating state ownership of industry
    # an economic system based on state ownership of capital

    Christ didn't advocate for either of these. Christ advocated charity which is what he was teaching in those passages. I'd agree with the poster above, it could be argued that Christ was in fact a libertarian. Show me anywhere in the New Testament where Christ "forces" anyone to take from 1 and give to another. He teaches that spiritually, we ought to do good by doing good works such as giving to the poor etc..

    By saying Christ is a socialist it gives those Christians on the left the impression that it is ok for the government to steal money from people and give to another group. That's stealing, something I believe Christ spoke against...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •