Does Socialism align with Scripture?

[simplicio]

No, it's a Kingdom.

No, it is a Monarchy. With no physical needs...

A kingdom without private ownership.

[Watermelon]

A kingdom without private ownership.

Do we still have to eat kosher?

[seer]

But the New Jerusalem will be a physical place since we will be drinking wine with Jesus (and hopefully by that point I actually will like the taste of wine).

I didn't say there isn't anything physical - just no needs...

[seer]

A kingdom without private ownership.

Well, owned by God.

[simplicio]

Do we still have to eat kosher?

Naw, but we could put the vowel in G-d, so everyone will be comfortable.

I suspect every year will be a good vintage wine, but I think the Trappist monks will brew beer in heaven (an obvious division of labor, the beer meister as a privileged class of heaven)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4IletJ7-Tw

[lilpixieofterror]

St Jude operates similar to any other hospital, their model depends on an enormous endowment raised through very successful fund raising. Danny Thomas had ties to some of the richest individuals in society.

The old charity hospital has largely disappeared, they do not exist in any numbers anymore. The ones which do exist, such as on Indian reservations are underfunded, understaffed, and depend on government programs to survive. If there is any today, I would be interested.

Yes, churches do have many good programs. However the churches do not have nearly enough to meet demand. Child care is one of the biggest challenges facing the working poor

go back a century and publicly funded schooling was religious education, until the Supreme Court got involved. They decided that the child was not a creature of the state (a quote from the famous Pierce v Sisters), and private schools were allowed to exist. Public schooling changed shortly after, becoming a secular endeavor.

Did they? The government moved into those areas precisely because the churches could not meet the needs. Some churches attempted to provide the charitable services, other churches did not. Because it was voluntary, some churches chose not to provide services. And in almost every city, the churches were not able to meet the needs of people in the area.

They moved into areas because of the progressive movement, with mixed success. Just look at how colleges need to offer so many catch up classes, to teach students what they should had learned in high school. Why does a recent high school grad need to attend remedial English and math classes? Because our public schools are failing to educate.

[simplicio]

The Catholic Church has effectively ceded control of the hospitals, modern hospitals are more than a diocese or an order cam operate. The charity hospitals are a thing of the past. The closest thing to an old charity hospital is the Catholic long term care which has a floor devoted to elderly religious, biut that is outside of the hospital, not overseen by the state health department.

The family safety net on child care has too many holes in it to be effective. Child care is an important issue for the working poor.

Maybe the comment on education did answer your post.

The progressive movement (why not the conservative movement? <= a question few conservatives will dare address) highlighted problems in society which needed to be addressed. Education was taken as a public function before the progressive movement.

[lilpixieofterror]

The Catholic Church has effectively ceded control of the hospitals, modern hospitals are more than a diocese or an order cam operate. The charity hospitals are a thing of the past. The closest thing to an old charity hospital is the Catholic long term care which has a floor devoted to elderly religious, biut that is outside of the hospital, not overseen by the state health department.

Interesting, since last time I was at a Catholic hospital, they did have charity for those needing it. Has that changed, in the past year?

The family safety net on child care has too many holes in it to be effective. Child care is an important issue for the working poor.

Must have a crappy family since I grew up in a low income house and parents managed to find sitters.

Maybe the comment on education did answer your post.

The progressive movement (why not the conservative movement? <= a question few conservatives will dare address) highlighted problems in society which needed to be addressed. Education was taken as a public function before the progressive movement.

[Sparko]

So, according to you god owns everything here as well, including us. Why is it I wonder, that if you believe in this god of yours, he doesn't take care of your needs here on earth, like you believe he will do in your heaven?

He does. But the world is fallen and we have to live with some of the consequences of that fact, including that human nature is also corrupted and uses their free will to sin. That is why socialism never works. People have a sin nature and rather than cooperate and help each other, they are selfish and want what others have.

[JimL]

He does. But the world is fallen and we have to live with some of the consequences of that fact, including that human nature is also corrupted and uses their free will to sin. That is why socialism never works. People have a sin nature and rather than cooperate and help each other, they are selfish and want what others have.

Well, if man has a sin nature, then you will continue to have a sin nature in heaven unless god takes away your free will. If that's your argument, then god could have done that in the first place and created heaven on earth. No?

[Sparko]

Well, if man has a sin nature, then you will continue to have a sin nature in heaven unless god takes away your free will.

No. Unless he takes away our sin nature. Which he will do. But if I have to give up my free will to sin, I would gladly do that. The reason we won't sin is because 1- We don't have a sin nature any longer and 2- We have experienced what sin has done in the world and our lives and don't want to repeat it.

If that's your argument, then god could have done that in the first place and created heaven on earth. No?

He gave man the free will to choose. They didn't have the benefit of knowing what sin was, or experiencing it. They chose to sin. Of course, God being God knew they would, so he already had a plan to redeem mankind and his creation. And now that we do have experience of sin, when we have a perfect nature, we will not want to sin.

[JimL]

No. Unless he takes away our sin nature. Which he will do. But if I have to give up my free will to sin, I would gladly do that. The reason we won't sin is because 1- We don't have a sin nature any longer and 2- We have experienced what sin has done in the world and our lives and don't want to repeat it.


He gave man the free will to choose. They didn't have the benefit of knowing what sin was, or experiencing it. They chose to sin. Of course, God being God knew they would, so he already had a plan to redeem mankind and his creation. And now that we do have experience of sin, when we have a perfect nature, we will not want to sin.

A perfect nature alone would have done the trick in the first place, so what was the point of the crucible?

[Cow Poke]

Whereas when a conservative quotes scripture, you can already know he's off the rails else he wouldn't be a conservative?

Wow, that was ... brilliant.

[Sparko]

A perfect nature alone would have done the trick in the first place, so what was the point of the crucible?

No, it wouldn't. Read what I said.

[lilpixieofterror]

Whereas when a conservative quotes scripture, you can already know he's off the rails else he wouldn't be a conservative?