NATION

PASSWORD

Was Jesus a Communist?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 110622
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Farnhamia » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:51 am

Geniasis wrote:My Bible places Matthew somewhere around 85 CE.

Which only goes to show that we're not really sure. Anyway, "in the 40s" is certainly wrong, though some collection of stories about Jesus was probably circulating by then.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Geniasis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Sep 28, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Geniasis » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:51 am

Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Actually, there's a non-insignificant amount of luck involved in becoming rich in the modern world. Other than that, there's inheriting it from family.
Supporter of making [citation needed] the official NSG way to say "source?"

Myrensis wrote:I say turn it into a brothel, that way Muslims and Christians can be offended together.


DaWoad wrote:nah, she only fought because, as everyone knows, the brits can't make a decent purse to save their lives and she had a VERY important shopping trip coming up!


Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.


Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 110622
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Farnhamia » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:54 am

Geniasis wrote:
Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Actually, there's a non-insignificant amount of luck involved in becoming rich in the modern world. Other than that, there's inheriting it from family.

Just so. You can work hard and get rich or you can inherit it from family. True now, true 2,000 years ago. Perspicacious Lawyers' statement is simply wrong.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:58 am

Farnhamia wrote:
Geniasis wrote:
Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Actually, there's a non-insignificant amount of luck involved in becoming rich in the modern world. Other than that, there's inheriting it from family.

Just so. You can work hard and get rich or you can inherit it from family. True now, true 2,000 years ago. Perspicacious Lawyers' statement is simply wrong.


And, far more commonly, you can work hard and not get rich.

In other words, you're right - there's just no objective link between hard work and wealth.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Perspicacious Lawyers
Bureaucrat
 
Posts: 56
Founded: Jul 14, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Perspicacious Lawyers » Tue Jul 20, 2010 9:58 am

Geniasis wrote:
Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Actually, there's a non-insignificant amount of luck involved in becoming rich in the modern world. Other than that, there's inheriting it from family.


Thats a pretty low %. Are you really damaging the reputation of people who get rich by hard work because of a few "lottery winners" or inheritances?
A lawyer without history or literature is a mechanic, a mere working mason; if he possesses some knowledge of these, he may venture to call himself an architect. -Sir Walter Scott

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:00 am

Wilgrove wrote:
Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Probably the most honest statement in this thread.


Yes, I found it rather charming too. At least there's one thing PL knows, which is more than I'm sure of ;)

When you said that this very plain statement by Jesus which appears in three Gospels was him "implying" something, did you mean that Jesus wasn't a very good public speaker? Inclined to shoot his mouth off without thinking things through? Or perhaps he was just stupid?

Or perhaps you just want to read it that way because you don't want to give away everything you've got to the poor.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Farnhamia
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 110622
Founded: Jun 20, 2006
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Farnhamia » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:00 am

Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:
Geniasis wrote:
Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:The rich were different back then than they are now. Now they are hardworking, which is the only way to riches. Back in that day they got everything from family and were oppressive, most rich were--oh fuck it I dont know...


Actually, there's a non-insignificant amount of luck involved in becoming rich in the modern world. Other than that, there's inheriting it from family.


Thats a pretty low %. Are you really damaging the reputation of people who get rich by hard work because of a few "lottery winners" or inheritances?

You made some rather sweeping statements. When you do that, you stand to get whacked with the broom. Working hard is not the only way to get rich, and all rich people in ancient times did not inherit their wealth.
Make Earth Great Again: Stop Continental Drift!
And Jesus was a sailor when he walked upon the water ...
"Make yourself at home, Frank. Hit somebody." RIP Don Rickles
My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right. ~ Carl Schurz
<Sigh> NSG...where even the atheists are Augustinians. ~ The Archregimancy
Now the foot is on the other hand ~ Kannap
RIP Dyakovo ... Ashmoria (Freedom ... or cake)
This is the eighth line. If your signature is longer, it's too long.

User avatar
Geniasis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Sep 28, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Geniasis » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:08 am

Perspicacious Lawyers wrote:Thats a pretty low %. Are you really damaging the reputation of people who get rich by hard work because of a few "lottery winners" or inheritances?


It's not, but we're not thinking of luck the same way. In order to succeed financially, it is important to work hard, but that's not even close to the entire formula. Success also requires luck, that is, either having a sizable network of connections or being fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to stumble onto a window of opportunity.

The sad fact, is that not everyone ends up getting that. That's why a lot of people who work their assess off never get rich.
Supporter of making [citation needed] the official NSG way to say "source?"

Myrensis wrote:I say turn it into a brothel, that way Muslims and Christians can be offended together.


DaWoad wrote:nah, she only fought because, as everyone knows, the brits can't make a decent purse to save their lives and she had a VERY important shopping trip coming up!


Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.


Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:09 am

The difference in wealth between modern "tribes" (nationalities) is the most glaring objection to "the rich mostly earned it". You can stay alive (and by global terms, be quite comfortable) without doing a lick of work, without taking welfare or charity, just by scavenging what people throw away in an affluent country. You can starve to death working twelve hours a day in the least affluent countries, and with a lottery-winners chance of moving to the other situation. I consider that an outright refutation.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
The Tofu Islands
Minister
 
Posts: 2872
Founded: Mar 24, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby The Tofu Islands » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:10 am

Geniasis wrote:It's not, but we're not thinking of luck the same way. In order to succeed financially, it is important to work hard, but that's not even close to the entire formula. Success also requires luck, that is, either having a sizable network of connections or being fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to stumble onto a window of opportunity.

There's more luck to it than that. Being born in a developed country helps a lot. As does being the right race and sex.
In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

User avatar
Geniasis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Sep 28, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Geniasis » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:20 am

The Tofu Islands wrote:
Geniasis wrote:It's not, but we're not thinking of luck the same way. In order to succeed financially, it is important to work hard, but that's not even close to the entire formula. Success also requires luck, that is, either having a sizable network of connections or being fortunate to be in the right place at the right time to stumble onto a window of opportunity.

There's more luck to it than that. Being born in a developed country helps a lot. As does being the right race and sex.


Aye. That I was starting from the assumption of being born in a developed country tells you something.
Supporter of making [citation needed] the official NSG way to say "source?"

Myrensis wrote:I say turn it into a brothel, that way Muslims and Christians can be offended together.


DaWoad wrote:nah, she only fought because, as everyone knows, the brits can't make a decent purse to save their lives and she had a VERY important shopping trip coming up!


Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.


Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou

User avatar
Sanctus Angelus
Diplomat
 
Posts: 604
Founded: Jan 15, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Sanctus Angelus » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:20 am

Dododecapod wrote:No. The Jesus of the Bible was an ascetic - one who seeks to live simply, without the distractions of goods and ownership, that he may perfect himself spiritually. When asked how to be a good folower of him, he says to do likewise, to give away your worldly goods and follow the ascetic path.
A good communist wants everyone to have equal access to everything. Jesus wanted to have nothing.


Win. Next topic?

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:23 am

Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Grave_n_idle
Post Czar
 
Posts: 44837
Founded: Feb 11, 2004
Psychotic Dictatorship

Postby Grave_n_idle » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:25 am

Panzerjaeger wrote:Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*


In what way?

I mean, obviously, this was some kind of nonsensical flippant comment, but let's pretend it was supposed to make sense.
I identify as
a problem

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:27 am

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*


In what way?

I mean, obviously, this was some kind of nonsensical flippant comment, but let's pretend it was supposed to make sense.

When he performed his own Kristallnacht. Those poor money lenders and that poor temple.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Geniasis
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 7531
Founded: Sep 28, 2007
Ex-Nation

Postby Geniasis » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:27 am

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*


In what way?

I mean, obviously, this was some kind of nonsensical flippant comment, but let's pretend it was supposed to make sense.


He attacked the money lenders in the temple so... he hates... er... economic freedom?
Supporter of making [citation needed] the official NSG way to say "source?"

Myrensis wrote:I say turn it into a brothel, that way Muslims and Christians can be offended together.


DaWoad wrote:nah, she only fought because, as everyone knows, the brits can't make a decent purse to save their lives and she had a VERY important shopping trip coming up!


Reichskommissariat ost wrote:Women are as good as men , I dont know why they constantly whine about things.


Euronion wrote:because how dare me ever ever try to demand rights for myself, right men, we should just lie down and let the women trample over us, let them take awa our rights, our right to vote will be next just don't say I didn't warn ou

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:31 am

Sanctus Angelus wrote:
Dododecapod wrote:No. The Jesus of the Bible was an ascetic - one who seeks to live simply, without the distractions of goods and ownership, that he may perfect himself spiritually. When asked how to be a good folower of him, he says to do likewise, to give away your worldly goods and follow the ascetic path.
A good communist wants everyone to have equal access to everything. Jesus wanted to have nothing.


Win. Next topic?


It's not perfect. "Equal access to everything" isn't really ownership. By not having the 'competetitive" satisfaction of extensive private ownership, communism is an ascetic ideal too.

They are different ideals, but by no means diametrically opposed. A good communist could also be an ascetic.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Zeyad
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 413
Founded: Nov 16, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Zeyad » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:31 am

If I'm not mistaken (I probably am but regardless) that passage is often interpreted as a warning to concern about material things, lecturing as a spiritual adviser. If I recall in the passage regarding the camel going through the needle, did Jesus say anything like, "You -must- give up your money, furniture, ect. to the poor?". It's my understanding that overall, throughout the New Testament, the warning was how the concern of material things over spiritual things can lead you astray, not that having things was awful if someone else didn't.

If the above is true, the passage would be more of a test wouldn't you think? Can you let go of the things you typically care about for something you believe in?

And no, I don't believe it was Communist. Communism is a complex thing, but I believe that Jesus promoted a "live as you believe" sort of lifestyle. Sure he said a lot of what you ought to do and should do, and that if you were aiming for something spiritually then you should do this or not, but no one -had- to do anything.

If I'm not mistaken that is <.<;
KonataLand wrote:
Tergnitz wrote:OMG! The new Rebecca black song is almost as good as the death of Osama!

Seven in mornin', gotta get outta bed.
OSHITITSAMERICA *Shot in the head*

Tubbsalot wrote:
Folder Land wrote:In my opinion

And therein lies the problem, because your opinion is wrong.

Cannot think of a name wrote:You ever see a guy walking down the street, just swingin' his arms and yelling and you think, 'Man, is that guy getting swarmed by flies?' but you get up close to him and he's not. And you want to help out and go, 'Hey man, flies are pretty annoying and all, but...I don't see any flies,' but you know you're just as likely to take an elbow to your eyebone so you just keep walking?

User avatar
Class Warhair
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 406
Founded: May 18, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Class Warhair » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:33 am

Geniasis wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*


In what way?

I mean, obviously, this was some kind of nonsensical flippant comment, but let's pretend it was supposed to make sense.


He attacked the money lenders in the temple so... he hates... er... economic freedom?


Lending out money for interest. He hates banks.
"While you're at the bar, Correct Line, see if you can steal a drink for Categorical Imperative. He'll need one when he wakes up" -- CW, 1983, Manning Bar.

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:34 am

Zeyad wrote:If I'm not mistaken (I probably am but regardless) that passage is often interpreted as a warning to concern about material things, lecturing as a spiritual adviser. If I recall in the passage regarding the camel going through the needle, did Jesus say anything like, "You -must- give up your money, furniture, ect. to the poor?". It's my understanding that overall, throughout the New Testament, the warning was how the concern of material things over spiritual things can lead you astray, not that having things was awful if someone else didn't.

If the above is true, the passage would be more of a test wouldn't you think? Can you let go of the things you typically care about for something you believe in?

And no, I don't believe it was Communist. Communism is a complex thing, but I believe that Jesus promoted a "live as you believe" sort of lifestyle. Sure he said a lot of what you ought to do and should do, and that if you were aiming for something spiritually then you should do this or not, but no one -had- to do anything.

If I'm not mistaken that is <.<;

My thoughts as well. The trying to put a political spin on it is just silly and has been done by the Far Right, Far Left and everyone in between. It is just nonsensical to claim someone who was not around for those political systems somehow supported them even though Jesus was quite apolitical.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:34 am

Class Warhair wrote:
Geniasis wrote:
Grave_n_idle wrote:
Panzerjaeger wrote:Jesus was obviously a fascist. *nods*


In what way?

I mean, obviously, this was some kind of nonsensical flippant comment, but let's pretend it was supposed to make sense.


He attacked the money lenders in the temple so... he hates... er... economic freedom?


Lending out money for interest. He hates banks.

And who planned to ban usury? Nazis! Win.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

User avatar
Dododecapod
Minister
 
Posts: 2965
Founded: Nov 02, 2005
Ex-Nation

Postby Dododecapod » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:36 am

Class Warhair wrote:
Sanctus Angelus wrote:
Dododecapod wrote:No. The Jesus of the Bible was an ascetic - one who seeks to live simply, without the distractions of goods and ownership, that he may perfect himself spiritually. When asked how to be a good folower of him, he says to do likewise, to give away your worldly goods and follow the ascetic path.
A good communist wants everyone to have equal access to everything. Jesus wanted to have nothing.


Win. Next topic?


It's not perfect. "Equal access to everything" isn't really ownership. By not having the 'competetitive" satisfaction of extensive private ownership, communism is an ascetic ideal too.

They are different ideals, but by no means diametrically opposed. A good communist could also be an ascetic.


Quite so. However, while Jesus decried wealth, he also showed no class consciousness - and considering that his father's supposed trade (carpenter) was a skilled and valued position of some status, was, in the society of the time, from well-off beginnings. Many of the disciples were men of standing before joing his group. In short, while a Communist could be an Ascetic, this Ascetic was not a Communist.
GENERATION 28: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

User avatar
Conservative Alliances
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1323
Founded: Jul 27, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Conservative Alliances » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:37 am

No, he was not. His teachings had to do with a personal way of life, not an economic ideology. Simply donating money and possessions to the poor does not make one a communist. On the flip side, read Matthew 25:14-30 and try to explain how Jesus isn't a capitalist. I think that Jesus did not follow any specific ideology.
Last edited by Conservative Alliances on Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
I am the Ghost of Sparta
Member of the Ebul NSG Right-Wing Establishment
Economic Left/Right: 9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.92
Spectrum
Foriegn Affairs
Cultural
Political Spectrum Quiz
Essentially a mix of the American Dream and 1950s culture with futuristic technology.
Rhodmhire wrote:I love you.
Liuzzo wrote:Conversely Conservative Alliances, Vetalia, and others make terrific arguments that people may not agree with but you can discuss.
Glorious Homeland wrote:Although some individuals provided counter-points which tended to put to bed a few of my previous statements (conservative alliances, zoingo)

User avatar
Lunatic Goofballs
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 23629
Founded: Antiquity
Ex-Nation

Postby Lunatic Goofballs » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:38 am

Farnhamia wrote:
Geniasis wrote:
Bamabam wrote:
Dododecapod wrote:
Bamabam wrote:
Bafuria wrote:Assuming he existed?

Yes.

He obviously exsisted.Anyone with half a brain could figure that one out


Actually, there is considerable question, though this isn't the place for that discussion.

I am guessing your going to say the bible was written a couple hundred years later like most liberals like to tell me.But there is evidence outside the bible that some of the books could have been written around 40 A.D.Yes the bible its self wasnt put together since a long ways.But the scriptures are very factual,and timely in there writing by the actual people who claimed to write them.


Mark and Luke, the two earliest gospels, were written no earlier than 70 AD--about 30 years after the death after the death of Christ.

Matthew is the earliest, I believe, but there is so much material shared among Matthew, Mark and Luke that some scholars have postulated a separate collection of stories about Jesus that predates them all. The earliest date for Matthew is the 50s, but most favor a slightly later date, in the 60s.


Actually, the Gospel of Mark is the earliest. The Gospel of Matthew most likely used Mark and one or more other texts as it's sources.
Last edited by Lunatic Goofballs on Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:39 am, edited 2 times in total.
Life's Short. Munch Tacos.

“Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!”
Hunter S. Thompson

User avatar
Panzerjaeger
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9856
Founded: Sep 15, 2009
Ex-Nation

Postby Panzerjaeger » Tue Jul 20, 2010 10:39 am

Conservative Alliances wrote:No, he was not. His teachings had to do with a personal way of life, not an economic ideology. Simply donating money and possessions to the poor does not make one a communist. On the flip side, read Matthew 25:14-30 and try to explain how Jesus isn't a capitalist.

Easy Capitalism was not an Economic Theory then. Okay next stupid question.
Friendly Neighborhood Fascist™
ФАШИЗМ БЕЗГРАНИЧНЫЙ И КРАСНЫЙ
Caninope wrote:Toyota: Keep moving forward, even when you don't want to!

Christmahanikwanzikah wrote:Timothy McVeigh casts... Pyrotechnics!

Greater Americania wrote:lol "No Comrade Ivan! Don't stick your head in there! That's the wood chi...!"

New Kereptica wrote:Fascism: because people are too smart nowadays.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dumb Ideologies, Forever Indomitable, Nepleslia, Solnika, South Pacifican Kilendjj, The Jamesian Republic, The Salhia

Advertisement

Remove ads