How can anyone honestly oppose the American Judeo-Christian Capitalist model?

Cesare Borgia? Really? elaborate

Ancient semetic peoples like to braid their hair, that doesn't mean they were black. as for jewsih curls:

The Torah says, "You shall not round off the peyos of your head" (Leviticus 19:27). The word peyos refers to sideburns -- i.e. the hair in front of the ears that extends to underneath the cheekbone which is level with the nose (Talmud - Makkot 20a). The Talmud explains that this law only applies to men, not to women.

 

Perhaps. I still prefer an NHS over this proposal.

 

Better compared to some of their contemporaries, perhaps, although I doubt anyone would want to return to that style of "justice" today.

 

You would never know. But in an anarchy, this would be a perfectly legitamite response.

- - - Updated - - -

You know life id more complicated than that. Especially in this economy, and even more especially among people of limited means.

 

Go to 4:10 for the translation for Cynical Secular Dummies. Listen. Learn. Weep.

[video=youtube;GIZml10S1hk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIZml10S1hk[/video]

By the way, I've met your god. Have you met mine? Yours is a silly little pretentious man who doesn't realize he's a cliché. And he thinks his followers are idiots. Just something you might want to consider before he passes the collection plate around again. And he does expect you to give. Because if you're torrenting his stuff, he hates you even more.

 

I know you weren't talking to me...but did you ever come accross those new testament verses that espouse capitalism?.....

I asked my friend in southern Cal who is a Presbyterian Minister, and has his Masters in Divinites, and he doesn't know of any new T verses that would support the modern economic positions of American conservatives...and he also went on to point out how much of a no no it was to do business on the Sabbath back in the days of the founders.

If not, no biggie.

 

I think that's a bit much. Christianity was invented by Diaspora Jews for the most part. Saul was a Jew, and if you read what he's saying, he's very clearly writing to Jews in all of his churches. He doesn't quote anything pagan, he quotes Torah like a Rabbi, but never pagan sources, which is fairly odd because quoting pagan roman poets was fairly common among pagan writers. Also, hate to break it to you, but the NT of your Bible comes directly from church councils held by the Catholic church before it split from the Orthodox Church. All of the common Christian creeds are Catholic creeds. If Europe was Pagan at the time, you can't even trust the new testement because it would have been chosen from among other books by pagans. So I guess that makes you Jewish.

 

I say anarchy is worth that risk.

I would have a much easier time dealing with you as a threat, than i would a bloated police state.

 

The American model was great until the Jews showed up.

 

Not really. At least in the state, you have rights. I could just hold you without due process, torture you, and use you as a stud for my harem of women that I could keep forcibly locked up to be my slaves if I so chose.

I imagine horses will be in short supply, so it would be much easier to just use your children to plow my fields with.


Ya. Anarchy doesnt sound to good to me. No thanks.

 

You inability to address the verse is anything but surprising.

 

Oh, I'm sorry. Could you not figure out how to work the video? It was all in there. Surely you haven't just chosen to ignore it because it ruins your argument. That would be kind of pathetic, wouldn't it? Maynard having to admit that Jesus was right? Ouch!

 

I can find at least 20 factual errors in that video. His problem seems to be with political ideology rather than reality. Which is the problem with both parties these days and why I furiously hate that people continue to support either of them. Trading one kind of misinformation source for another still leaves you at disadvantage.

 

I was on about american christians. The NT wasnt written by the councils, it was categorized and translated. That doesnt make the bible pagan. Europe wasnt always pagan throughout christianity's formative years, only through steady pagan doctrines did it become more so, up until today where it is barely recognizable as anything but pagan.

 

You're wanting biblical verses that espouse capitalism as such?!

That matter goes to the sociopolitical imperatives of the Golden Rule (free will, individual liberty) and the consequent necessity of laissez-faire economics.

 

the golden rule isnt the foundation of capitalism. that rule is do onto other as you would like others to do onto you.

 

lol!!

The Golden Rule has nothing to do with gold, Sherlock.

 

As I suspected...there ain't none.

 

Yeah. I know. Right? It's just blows your mind.

The ignorance is yours, Sherlock.

Stayed tuned. I'm finishing a post in response to another poster.

 

You suspect wrong.

 

The European Judeo-Christian Capitalist model, of which the American Judeo-Christian Capitalist model is a variant, is doing pretty well.

I know. That needs an understanding of history. You have to know that capitalism basically originated in Britain and that the American Constitution is a development of the British Constitution and ideas for reform that originated in Britain, France and Germany.

Then you need an understanding of geography at least sufficient to realise that Britain, France and Germany are in Europe, not America.

The American education system does not always supply these things!

How hard do we need to try? Well, being lazy and not thinking about it too much let me just throw out: Germany. It's doing pretty well. It's a pretty viable alternative to American liberal democracy and capitalism.

Germans are not spying on us as we post. They drive pretty nice cars that can go round corners and are much better for the environment (let's face it German cars are much better than the heaps of crap produced in America! For a nation supposedly in love with the automobile Americans produce some pretty dire vehicles). As Americans work till they're eighty (this is supposed to be some sort of virtue!) and have virtually no vacation, Germans retire at sixty and often before and get six weeks vacation a year which they spend broadening their cultural horizons by travelling (sometimes to the United States!). German health care is the best in the world and everyone can get it.

Germans have far more social mobility than Americans - it is much easier, according to statistics, for a German to die in a higher socio-economic class than he was born in, than an American. The American dream is now more than a myth - it is a barefaced lie. If you want the American dream you will have much more of a chance if you are born poor in Munich than in Michigan.

Germans do not put millions of people in prison and don't judicially murder children and insane people. And Germans seem to be about the only nationality right now - perhaps understandably given the serious mistakes they have made in the past - that care about the fact that their allies in the UK and the USA are developing into super totalitarian states that are increasingly showing as little regard for individual liberty as communist or theocratic states do today or have done in the past.

What is this drivel? Does the author ever read what he writes? I suppose its the trend of dumbed down reasoning (I am being kind here with that last word) that people are mistaking for politics in the United States right now. Just throw out an abusive word, say something is "Marxist" even if you are not clear what that something is and you show not the slightest trace of insight into anything that Karl Marx ever wrote or said. "You're a commie". Clever. Or "not", as they say in America.

It's simple. "Disagree with me (ie be a critic) and you are a hater". "Whatever you say, you are wrong". It's a crude "if I say it, it must be so" kind of argument. Formulaic pap. Politics through slogans and mantras. Yew Ess Aye. Yew Ess Aye. It's the land of the free where anyone who doesn't agree with me is a communist traitor.

You see how an OP that is supposed to champion a system of liberty closes with a statement (in awful English) that through a crude apposition equates "criticism" with "hatred". The argument...grunt...is over before it's begun. That's the whole nature of the extremism that now passes for "conservativism" in the USA now. They hung Mary Dyer in Boston in their land of religious tolerance. They still think like that in some places.

 

*Shakes head and rolls his eyes at the atheist who previously acknowledged the practicality of holding that fundamental human rights are derived from God, not the State, whether God, objectively speaking, exists or not . . . but concludes that theists, like myself, are stupid and ignorant.*

Given the fact that you dismiss theism as casually as a dog licks its genitals, as if the supposed reality of the atheistic worldview held by a comparatively infinitesimal fraction of the world's population were self-evident, it should be quite easy to explain or prove . . . even to someone as stupid and ignorant as me.

You're blind. The theological assertions of Judeo-Christianity and its sociopolitical and -economic ramifications, most perfectly realized in America, are the epitome of "social evolution". Indeed, they are the ultimate realization of it. There's no other alternative worth following. There's no other truth.

The historical success of the great American experiment is glaringly obvious! Couldn't possibly be an actual transcendental reality behind these assertions and ramifications, eh?

Hmmm.

Jefferson's paraphrase of Locke's triadic construct—life, liberty, private property, extrapolated from the unique theological/doctrinal trappings of Judeo-Christianity's rendition of the Golden Rule, particularly as it's summarized by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount—constitutes the beginning of a nation that would be the first in history to actually apply the political theory of natural law as derived from scripture by the likes of Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin and, most importantly and perfectly, Locke.

(For the members of the peanut gallery utterly unaware of the philosophical roots of their nation’s founding, John Locke is the father of classical liberalism and was a proponent of laissez-faire economics; in his Two Treatises of Civil Government, he extrapolated his political theory from the sociopolitical ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's moral system of thought.)

Hence, the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition, not to be confused with the democratic political theory of Continental Europe. The latter is statist and collectivistic in nature, harks back to Plato's Republic, finds a democratic expression of sorts in Rousseau's silly Discourse on the Origin of Inequality and On the Social Contract and its most totalitarian expression in Marx's numerous works.

The classical liberals of England and America were not the secular, pitchfork-wielding Jacobins of the French revolution, the effeminate, yet vicious little pricks—uh, citizens—of the Reign of Terror. Today's self-anointed priests and priestesses of political correctness and multiculturalism—the effeminate, yet vicious little pricks of the political left—are the latter's "intellectual" heirs; mostly tiresome, unwashed nincompoops all hopped up on the depraved and tyrannical blather of Rousseau and Marx. They're the Noble Savages among us whose wont is to empower the state and demonize individualism.

Locke's triadic construct is bottomed on the Judeo-Christian notion that the essence of real freedom is to love God with all one's heart and to love one's neighbor as oneself. Statism is idolatrous and tyrannical. God is the Source and Guarantor of human rights, not the State; hence, the fundamental rights of life, liberty (ideological free-association and self-determination) and private property are inalienable. The freedom of religion, the freedom of expression (a free press), the freedom of assembly and petition, the franchise and the like, backed by the ultimate check against tyranny, the right of revolt of an armed citizenry: these constitute the necessities that go to the realization and sustenance of the triadic construct. Similarly, the tangible foundation of liberty is private property, the first principles of which, in terms of natural law, are the sanctity of human life and the inviolability of nature's biological family.

As for why and how these things are self-evident see the following article, which emphasizes the moral side of the equation: http://michaeldavidrawlings1.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-golden-rule-of-imago-dei.html

Also, for those who mistakenly believe that Christianity espouses collectivistic economics: that hogwash goes back to the propaganda campaign perpetrated by early, Twentieth-Century Marxists in a conscious attempt to co-opt Christianity for obvious, politically strategic reasons in the face of resistance, particularly that in England and America at the time. Continental Europe, and Central and South America have always been more susceptible to the corruption of socialism. This line of "scholarship" is heretical nonsense, the claptrap of secular humanists who utterly despise everything Bible-believing Christians stand for. The thuggish political left in this nation is coming at us hard right now via education policy and the gay rights movement. Make no mistake about it, Christians will be sheep for the slaughter in this country, just as we are right now in communist and Islamic countries, once America succumbs to "progressivism," that ancient idolatry. . . .

More emphatically: the early Christian settlers of North America were mostly Calvinists who took what was in fact nothing more than the sporadic and circumstantial arrangement of a fledgling and widely persecuted religious movement for a fundamental doctrine. The preeminent reason the early Church communally gathered and shared its resources was because its numbers were incessantly harassed throughout Rome by its civil and religious authorities (both Jewish and pagan). This was the inefficient economics of chaos and persecution, not a doctrinal principle of the Christian faith. LOL! The doctrinal principle of the Christian faith in terms of essential morality is the Golden Rule.

In the face of the utter disaster their experiment proved to be relative to any widespread or sustained effort, the early Christian settlers of America readily came to recognize their hermeneutical error for what it was and abandoned their ruinous economic practice. Hence, the reinstatement of Protestantism's biblical principle of private property and what became known as the Puritan work ethic.

_____________________

America is not doomed because the theological, political and economic assertions of Judeo-Christianity are not true. America is not doomed because God is not real. The abandonment of the sociopolitical and -economic ramifications of Judeo-Christianity's moral system of thought is the decline and fall of America. True theology and its imperatives aren't the problem; human nature is the problem. See my signature.

Further reading. . . .

http://michaeldavidrawlings1.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-new-math-of-american-history-and.html
http://michaeldavidrawlings1.blogspot.com/2012/10/abortion-on-demand-homosexual-marriage.html

 

This sentence I quote here is just a piece of "because I say so" drivel. There were no people more progressive than Tom Paine and Thomas Jefferson. Reactionaries (ie Tories, in the old fashioned eighteenth century sense of the word) are the only ones who feel the nature to continuously slander their own straw man "progressive".

If you don't like progress then feel free to live in a cave. I believe Papua New Gunea still has undiscovered tribes free of the ancient idolatry.

 

Live in a cave? There’s no room. All the caves are crammed full of backward, nose-picking progressives, all those unwashed Nobel Savages humping rocks.

Utter tripe. Paine was an imbecile, and Jefferson was appalled by the Reign of Terror. Bottom line: the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition most emphatically was not the collectivist claptrap of Continental Europe. Lockean natural law most emphatically was not the collectivist claptrap of Rousseau.

 

More emphatically, John Locke, the father of revolutionary theory premised on natural law was a reactionist?!

Doh!

Progressivism is statism. Judeo-Christianity is radical. The Lockeans of the world, including the bulk of America's Founders, are radicals. Progressives are bootlick conformists.