Is communism evil? Eminent domain? Socialism?

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Indeed, it was written over 2000 years, and men have worked hard to ensure God's word remains accurate and unorrupted by rooting out errors placed in there by mistranslation. Remember, though - mistranslations exist on purpose as well - think about the Queen James Bible, which is a direct blasphemy against God's true word. We insult God by changing his word, and must never mess with it. We must protect and preserve it and ensure that future generations have access to it, so they can know about Christ and the God-given rights they have not earned nor deserved, but still have been blessed with.

You are off by a century, and half.

In fact, it may have been written from the time of Adam and Eve on, because they may have recorded many of the events of their time as well. God ensured everything was compiled and set good men to put the creation of the Bible in place. The entire Bible was canonized around 300 AD.

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Please, be quiet if your going to say your infallible, because your fallacies are HUGE.

They conflict with your opinions; and are therefore fallacies in your eyes. Regardless; in what way are my opinions fallacies?

If you can call your facts opinions now, I guess that settles that you're anti-theistic.

Regardless, Those are not opinions that you were there.

[Communist Volkstrad]

How can you say that your "truth" is above the "secular and pagan nonsense"? As you said yourself "Were you there?". Can you yourself say that this is correct and true? Can your PROVE it?

It really depends, go with the oldest churches in the world, they actually document their history and roots well.
BTW GET BACK ON TOPIC!

Agreed, we are going off the rails quite a bit.

[Scomagia]

Being unable to prove your position does not absolve your burden of proof.

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

Were you there when the concept of the Burden of Proof was invented? How do you know it was made by man?

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Being unable to prove your position does not absolve your burden of proof.

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

So basically they're right? Thank you.

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

What about the 5% of inaccuracy. Like Parting the Sears instead of the Seas.

That's a joke you made up; that's not in the Bible. Strawman.

[Arkolon]

Being unable to prove your position does not absolve your burden of proof.

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

Just, wow.

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

Were you there when the concept of the Burden of Proof was invented? How do you know it was made by man?

Dude, this is really scary. Were you there when these forums were invented? How do we know these forums even exist! Oh my goodness!

[Atlanticatia]

I mean, if we do want to talk about religion and the 'God-given right to property', let's remember these things Jesus supposedly said:

I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.

[Kelinfort]

I recently read an interesting piece somewhere that explained (in only one sentence) why communism/socialism was evil. I forgot where it was (you'll have to take my word for it that I didn't just now make this up ), but it certainly stuck with me, and my family agrees that the quote is quite useful.

The quote went something like this:

Communism is evil because it denies a man his God-given rights to property.

Do you think that a man has a God-given right to land, property, family, a home, etc? Do you think Communism takes away those rights?

My opinion: Communism...hm. Yes. It takes away the rights a man has to property, seizes it, and holds it for the state. Socialism is less severe than communism, but it is more about taking away your rights to wealth, and distributing it to others. I think that communism has been proven a failure, and ought to not be pursued by any nation in the future. As a Christian I think that God has given everyone blessings to enjoy, and the state has no right to take them away or give them to others without your permission. I think eminent domain is socialism as well.

What does everyone think?

Eminent domain is necessary if you want to build any public works project.

And you do think the State should have power to enforce the "Will of God."

[The Sons of Adam]

Indeed, it was written over 2000 years, and men have worked hard to ensure God's word remains accurate and unorrupted by rooting out errors placed in there by mistranslation. Remember, though - mistranslations exist on purpose as well - think about the Queen James Bible, which is a direct blasphemy against God's true word. We insult God by changing his word, and must never mess with it. We must protect and preserve it and ensure that future generations have access to it, so they can know about Christ and the God-given rights they have not earned nor deserved, but still have been blessed with.

You are off by a century, and half.

The bible was written aproximately 4000-5000 years actually. Remember the pentatuch

[Washington Resistance Army]

Were you there when the concept of the Burden of Proof was invented? How do you know it was made by man?

Dude, this is really scary. Were you there when these forums were invented? How do we know these forums even exist! Oh my goodness!

Now you see how stupid your trademark question is

[Furry Alairia and Algeria]

Were you there when the concept of the Burden of Proof was invented? How do you know it was made by man?

Dude, this is really scary. Were you there when these forums were invented? How do we know these forums even exist! Oh my goodness!

How does this relate to god and socialism/communism?
Oh wait, your bullshit question came here. I guess that answers it.

[Scomagia]

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

Just, wow.

His commitment to not debating is.....astounding.

[Kelinfort]

Were you there when the concept of the Burden of Proof was invented? How do you know it was made by man?

Dude, this is really scary. Were you there when these forums were invented? How do we know these forums even exist! Oh my goodness!

The irony is even more delicious when you can't recognise it.

[Jetan]

Being unable to prove your position does not absolve your burden of proof.

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

Please, oh please spare us from any more of your insights if this is the level they'll be at.

[Benuty]

You are off by a century, and half.

The bible was written aproximately 4000-5000 years actually. Remember the pentatuch

I was talking specifically about the New Testament.

Besides it we want to do the history of the Torah I suggest you read this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Documentary_hypothesis

[Rushtar]

If God is almighty and good at the same time, why are bad things here?
If you say freewill, I ask you, and why has God created the bad things?
If you say Satan, I will say, if he's almighty, why can't He beat him?
If you say that humans were corrupted by Eva through sin, I would say, and why God has created us with a chance of corruption?
So, God can't be almighty and good at the same time.

[Scomagia]

Dude, this is really scary. Were you there when these forums were invented? How do we know these forums even exist! Oh my goodness!

The irony is even more delicious when you can't recognise it.

Unintentional irony is the most delicious kind.

[Benuty]

If God is almighty and good at the same time, why are bad things here?
If you say freewill, I ask you, and why has God created the bad things?
If you say Satan, I will say, if he's almighty, why can't He beat him?
If you say that humans were corrupted by Eva through sin, I would say, and why God has created us with a chance of corruption?
So, God can't be almighty and good at the same time.

Why are you quoting a quote that is in a book of a Christian apologist who was actually attacking Epicurus?

[Archeuland and Baughistan]

Burden of proof in itself is a concept invented by men; and is therefore fallible. Burden of proof rests with those who made up burden of proof.

So basically they're right? Thank you.

That's an inconclusive deduction; I do not concede anything. However, I cannot prove that the Bible was written by God. This does not mean that God did not write the Bible and give it to men. There are, after all, many eyewitness accounts that the words of the Bible were given to men (those who wrote the Bible experienced divine encounters constantly).

The same logic applies towards the age of the Earth. We cannot prove the earth is six thousand years old, but that doesn't mean that millions of years is true.

The same logic applies towards natural rights vs. God-given rights. Because secularism and naturalism relies only on things we can see (nothing supernatural, invisible, or divine), it deducts that, because we cannot see God, there is no such thing as God-given rights. It denies something that quite possibly exists because it cannot see it. It's just like the people who did not believe in bacteria. They could not see it, therefore it didn't exist in their eyes!

[Kraannei]

I recently read an interesting piece somewhere that explained (in only one sentence) why communism/socialism was evil. I forgot where it was (you'll have to take my word for it that I didn't just now make this up ), but it certainly stuck with me, and my family agrees that the quote is quite useful.

The quote went something like this:

Communism is evil because it denies a man his God-given rights to property.

Do you think that a man has a God-given right to land, property, family, a home, etc? Do you think Communism takes away those rights?

My opinion: Communism...hm. Yes. It takes away the rights a man has to property, seizes it, and holds it for the state. Socialism is less severe than communism, but it is more about taking away your rights to wealth, and distributing it to others. I think that communism has been proven a failure, and ought to not be pursued by any nation in the future. As a Christian I think that God has given everyone blessings to enjoy, and the state has no right to take them away or give them to others without your permission. I think eminent domain is socialism as well.

What does everyone think?

So have you read any of Marx's work? Lenin's? Mao's?

[Kelinfort]

So basically they're right? Thank you.

That's an inconclusive deduction; I do not concede anything. However, I cannot prove that the Bible was written by God. This does not mean that God did not write the Bible and give it to men. There are, after all, many eyewitness accounts that the words of the Bible were given to men (those who wrote the Bible experienced divine encounters constantly).

The same logic applies towards the age of the Earth. We cannot prove the earth is six thousand years old, but that doesn't mean that millions of years is true.

The same logic applies towards natural rights vs. God-given rights. Because secularism and naturalism relies only on things we can see (nothing supernatural, invisible, or divine), it deducts that, because we cannot see God, there is no such thing as God-given rights. It denies something that quite possibly exists because it cannot see it. It's just like the people who did not believe in bacteria. They could not see it, therefore it didn't exist in their eyes!

We cannot see gluons and atoms either, yet secularists believe they exist. Why?

Hint, it's because of evidence.

[Benuty]

So basically they're right? Thank you.

That's an inconclusive deduction; I do not concede anything. However, I cannot prove that the Bible was written by God. This does not mean that God did not write the Bible and give it to men. There are, after all, many eyewitness accounts that the words of the Bible were given to men (those who wrote the Bible experienced divine encounters constantly).

The same logic applies towards the age of the Earth. We cannot prove the earth is six thousand years old, but that doesn't mean that millions of years is true.

The same logic applies towards natural rights vs. God-given rights. Because secularism and naturalism relies only on things we can see (nothing supernatural, invisible, or divine), it deducts that, because we cannot see God, there is no such thing as God-given rights. It denies something that quite possibly exists because it cannot see it. It's just like the people who did not believe in bacteria. They could not see it, therefore it didn't exist in their eyes!

.

I forgot for a bit you were a YEC...oh dear.

[Arkolon]

Just, wow.

His commitment to not debating is.....astounding.

Debating, that's man-made, is it not? Ergo, it's bad, I won't do it.