Christian socialism

[Nadjeschda]

Christian socialism is thanks to Marx an outsider position. Marx in turn took thanks to Luther a very anti-religious stance. Luthers error (and it was a serious error he later regretted strongly) was that he did not support the revolt of the poor peasants creating a large gap between Jesus teachings and the ways the poor where in reality exploited by church and nobleman. Luther had propably not much choice besides supporting the noble and the powerfull if he wanted to counter the  teachings of the catholic church.

I hence only recite this history to point you to the fact that the seperation between christianism and socialism is a historic process of gradual escalation that has very complex political roots. It is not something that stems from both beeing fundamentally incompatible at first. Many early Christians for example shared their wealth with each others. There is only one thing that is incompatible in pure socialism and believe, and it is the exact same thing that makes pure capitalism incompatible with believe: setting the priorities of what should be achieved to favour material progress instead on saving souls. I don't care how big material progress of a society is, if it is only serves monsters. Capitalism and socialism in the shape that history gave them are both capable of rising (nearly) soulfree monsters because they are highly materialistic in their goals. They both ask you to literally sell your soul for the progress of the system.

This is as well the reason why they are both so lethal (the lethality of capitalism is more difficult to see because it is the textbook example of how distributed responsibility creates violence).

Christian socialism (for example in the form of democratic socialism and strong wealth redistribution) is possible and desirable. But only if saving souls is the priority.

 

[Equippers]

2 hours ago, Nadjeschda said:

Christian socialism is thanks to Marx an outsider position. Marx in turn took thanks to Luther a very anti-religious stance. Luthers error (and it was a serious error he later regretted strongly) was that he did not support the revolt of the poor peasants creating a large gap between Jesus teachings and the ways the poor where in reality exploited by church and nobleman. Luther had propably not much choice besides supporting the noble and the powerfull if he wanted to counter the  teachings of the catholic church.

I hence only recite this history to point you to the fact that the seperation between christianism and socialism is a historic process of gradual escalation that has very complex political roots. It is not something that stems from both beeing fundamentally incompatible at first. Many early Christians for example shared their wealth with each others. There is only one thing that is incompatible in pure socialism and believe, and it is the exact same thing that makes pure capitalism incompatible with believe: setting the priorities of what should be achieved to favour material progress instead on saving souls. I don't care how big material progress of a society is, if it is only serves monsters. Capitalism and socialism in the shape that history gave them are both capable of rising (nearly) soulfree monsters because they are highly materialistic in their goals. They both ask you to literally sell your soul for the progress of the system.

This is as well the reason why they are both so lethal (the lethality of capitalism is more difficult to see because it is the textbook example of how distributed responsibility creates violence).

Christian socialism (for example in the form of democratic socialism and strong wealth redistribution) is possible and desirable. But only if saving souls is the priority.

 

i agree saving souls should be our number one priority but like you pointed, it does not mean we Christians should not get involved in making our society a more just place for those who are downtrodden.

in NT, Jesus talked about our responsibility towards those who are marginalized in our society i believe.

Edited September 15, 2019 by Equippers

[Repose]

The thing with politics and political ideas is that none acknowledge the inherent nature of man, and that nature is "ME, ME, AND ONLY ME". Capitalism wouldn't be so bad, but because of man's greed and inconsideration, price of living is high and income (for the average person) is low, on top of what's normally lifelong debt. Communism sounds like a dandy deal, but yet again, man's greed interferes time and time again. In one, man screws over man, and in the other, it's the other way around.

Until the new earth comes, all that can be done is to try to spread the faith. Until such a time, all the swindlers and dregs will find their way, one way or another.

[Nadjeschda]

9 minutes ago, Repose said:

The thing with politics and political ideas is that none acknowledge the inherent nature of man, and that nature is "ME, ME, AND ONLY ME". Capitalism wouldn't be so bad, but because of man's greed and inconsideration, price of living is high and income (for the average person) is low, on top of what's normally lifelong debt. Communism sounds like a dandy deal, but yet again, man's greed interferes time and time again. In one, man screws over man, and in the other, it's the other way around.

Until the new earth comes, all that can be done is to try to spread the faith. Until such a time, all the swindlers and dregs will find their way, one way or another.

I to fear that until the new earth comes we will be stuck with the greed problem in both system. But as long as one knows one's enemy one can fight it.

[johnthebaptist]

3 hours ago, Nadjeschda said:

Christian socialism is thanks to Marx an outsider position. Marx in turn took thanks to Luther a very anti-religious stance. Luthers error (and it was a serious error he later regretted strongly) was that he did not support the revolt of the poor peasants creating a large gap between Jesus teachings and the ways the poor where in reality exploited by church and nobleman. Luther had propably not much choice besides supporting the noble and the powerfull if he wanted to counter the  teachings of the catholic church.

I hence only recite this history to point you to the fact that the seperation between christianism and socialism is a historic process of gradual escalation that has very complex political roots. It is not something that stems from both beeing fundamentally incompatible at first. Many early Christians for example shared their wealth with each others. There is only one thing that is incompatible in pure socialism and believe, and it is the exact same thing that makes pure capitalism incompatible with believe: setting the priorities of what should be achieved to favour material progress instead on saving souls. I don't care how big material progress of a society is, if it is only serves monsters. Capitalism and socialism in the shape that history gave them are both capable of rising (nearly) soulfree monsters because they are highly materialistic in their goals. They both ask you to literally sell your soul for the progress of the system.

This is as well the reason why they are both so lethal (the lethality of capitalism is more difficult to see because it is the textbook example of how distributed responsibility creates violence).

Christian socialism (for example in the form of democratic socialism and strong wealth redistribution) is possible and desirable. But only if saving souls is the priority.

 

The way it is now in the USA, you work hard, save your money, and retire someday.

Under socialism, nobody has to work, and if you do work, the government takes your money and gives it to able-bodied people who aren't willing to work.

People who are willing to work favor our present system. People who don't want to work favor socialism. Right?

[Dennis1209]

Communism and socialism never applies to the rulers and politicians. It's believed Vladimir Putin is the richest man on the planet. History is riddled with such examples of the division between socialism and capitalism. In Heaven we will not be all equal; some will be rewarded more with crowns, rewards, positions and responsibilities based on what they stored where moth, thief and rust can not take away. Based on what the believer did for the Kingdom of God and their faith.

Socialism takes away the incentive for production by removing ambition for working for the state, instead of ones self to accumulate and store the fruit of ones labor. They pretend to pay me and I pretend to work. Forced charity takes away and diminishes my ability to provide for myself and my family. Charity is just that, charity. The government has and is taking over the role of the church and community by force of law; welfare, stealing from the productive by force of law, and redistributing it to the politicians choice of beneficiaries who did not labor for it, for votes; creating a dependent and non productive society.

Yeah I know; we just need a better form of socialism for it to work. But when in the history of man has socialism ever worked?

[Neighbor]

5 hours ago, Nadjeschda said:

Christian socialism (for example in the form of democratic socialism and strong wealth redistribution) is possible and desirable.

No. And that has nothing at all to do with having souls.

Jesus stated it is not sacrifice that is wanted but compassion. Compassion cannot be dictated by governors. Equal distribution schemes are not Christian. They are expedience of governments  in their efforts to kill the individual spirit  that tries to run the race as though to win it and instead encourages settling for half effort at best in  exchange for small portions delivered at the whim of rulers of the masses.

No one saves another, that is the work of the agency of the Holy Spirit alone in revealing Christ Jesus  to individuals that have been foreknown and predestined,  chosen by God alone. Many are called so there is no excuse for any person, but few are chosen,- by God.

[Nadjeschda]

2 hours ago, Equippers said:

 

in NT, Jesus talked about our responsibility towards those who are marginalized in our society i believe.

That is a good point because one has to clarify that wanting to change the political system to HELP others is something else than wanting to change it for oneself. The former is non-materialist because one try’s to save one‘s soul by helping. The later is purely materialist and will very probably lead to mayhem again.

[unworthyservant]

2 hours ago, johnthebaptist said:

The way it is now in the USA, you work hard, save your money, and retire someday.

Under socialism, nobody has to work, and if you do work, the government takes your money and gives it to able-bodied people who aren't willing to work.

People who are willing to work favor our present system. People who don't want to work favor socialism. Right?

It sounds like you have a common Capitalist misunderstanding of socialism and may be drawing conclusions based on that. You say that "Under socialism, nobody has to work". That is inherently untrue. In socialism, as with any economic system, the working class must work to support the system and in every instance I've looked at, you are required to work if able. Willing isn't a consideration(although unwilling could land one in really hot water). At any rate, I believe that Christians should spend our time doing God's will and while it is good to have a say in the political social or economic system, it's not anything that Christ told us to worry about. When He said, "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" He was not only referring to the tax in question but teaching us that whoever is in power is not our worry and we should give to them whatever they require (as long as they don't require something that would keep you from worshiping God). He then follows with "And unto God that which is God's". With that as our example, we should spend our time converting sinners to Christ and not Socialists to Capitalists(or vice versa). I believe that when we spend our time on Political or systemic economic issues we're wasting the time we could be using for His will. Personally I don't believe that either Capitalism or Socialism is inherently better than the other and as someone has stated, it's because human nature has and always will corrupt every system. Either system would be fine as a Christian if everyone involved had Christian values and lived by them but since that's never going to be the case, as Christians, don't we have more pressing issues? "The harvest is great and the laborers few", so let's get to work on the harvest regardless of which economic system you (or they) prefer.  

Edited September 15, 2019 by unworthyservant

[Seasoned by Grace]

WHAT ???  Actually folks, there is no such thing as "Christian Socialism". 2nd Thessalonians 3:10 says, " If anyone will not work, neither let him eat".

There is socialism and supporters of socialism, but it has nothing to do with our walk with Christ, or Christianity, and is to me the devils way of distracting and destroying mankind,  and his ability to have the freedom we need to walk with Christ in the way we are called to. WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL of these kind of "SUBVERSIVE IDEA'S that will continually CREEP into our culture and our churches to try and destroy this country and our freedom to worship and share Christ openly and live freely. The life of socialism comes with all types of control over all who are under it. STUDY YOUR HISTORY BOOKS - YOU'LL BE SHOCKED .
I don't know where this idea of putting these 2 words together and then saying "it could be a good idea" has come from other than being another attack by satan to salicioushly crawl in here and fool people and draw them away to a place of lost souls .

WATCH OUT FOR THESE KIND OF IDEA'S THAT ARE NOT FROM GOD !!!!