the limits of fascism

[Skepdick]

Matthew 12:36. Jesus said,

"But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken."

In kindness, I can only advise you to be careful what you say...for your own sake.

You warn of danger, but if your your lord is fair, wise and loving, and has any sense of reason then I shall have nothing to worry about.

I shall be able to hold him to account for the empty words he has spoken and he shall recognise his own hypocrisy, capriciousness and error and he shall repent for his own failings.

I can make my case in any fair trial. And if the trial is unfair, then what is there to fear but a bully in a kangaroo court?

[tillingborn]

You just mentioned the "Davos" Group as conspiratorial.

I don't think I used that word. A "conspiracy" usually involves some secrecy. These are open megalomaniac lunatics.

What do they want that God doesn't have?
You say:

But nothing we own is ours. It's all a "stewardship," if you're familiar with that term.

And yet you espouse capitalism, which is predicated on private ownership. Should there be limits on what people own? If

...every single thing we get is a gift.

on what grounds do you criticise people who have been gifted a huge amount of wealth and power?

[Immanuel Can]

Matthew 12:36. Jesus said,

"But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken."

In kindness, I can only advise you to be careful what you say...for your own sake.

You warn of danger, but if your your lord is fair, wise and loving, and has any sense of reason then I shall have nothing to worry about.

"Fair and loving." Yes. But equally both, not one to the exclusion of the other.

And "fair" is that you don't get to speak casual lies and insults against the Source of Truth and walk away from that without giving account, just as Jesus Himself so clearly told us.

Are you really sure, then, that you want "fair"? Do you want what you have earned? Because if you do, the Jesus Christ promises you personally, you'll get it. And God will be totally fair when you do. He is, after all, the God of ultimate justice. You won't get more, or less, or other than exactly what you have merited.

Your choice. But if I were you, I wouldn't. And that's the kindest advice I can offer you.

[Immanuel Can]

You just mentioned the "Davos" Group as conspiratorial.

I don't think I used that word. A "conspiracy" usually involves some secrecy. These are open megalomaniac lunatics.

What do they want that God doesn't have?

Worldwide Socialism, for one thing.

...on what grounds do you criticise people who have been gifted a huge amount of wealth and power?

Not on what they have been gifted, but on what they are doing with it.

The Bible is full of warnings to the wealthy...not telling them that it is wrong they became wealthy in the first place, but that what they have done with it condemns them. Take, for example, James 5:1-3.

"Come now, you rich people, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have corroded, and their corrosion will serve as a testimony against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure!"

So hogging wealth is Biblically condemned...as is oppressing the poor, another thing that some of the rich have done.

Some have not. I have met some extraordinarily kind and generous wealthy people. To be fair to them, they seem to have been gifted much so that they could be very merciful and generous. And I don't suspect they are being condemned by the above.

In contrast, using your wealth to impose Socialism on others, as the Davos Group hopes to, and guaranteeing their poverty, dependency and misery, while holding onto your own power, independence and luxury, well, you be the judge of what that adds up to.

[Skepdick]

Matthew 12:36. Jesus said,

"But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken."

In kindness, I can only advise you to be careful what you say...for your own sake.

You warn of danger, but if your your lord is fair, wise and loving, and has any sense of reason then I shall have nothing to worry about.

"Fair and loving." Yes. But equally both, not one to the exclusion of the other.

And "fair" is that you don't get to speak casual lies and insults against the Source of Truth and walk away from that without giving account, just as Jesus Himself so clearly told us.

Are you really sure, then, that you want "fair"? Do you want what you have earned? Because if you do, the Jesus Christ promises you personally, you'll get it. And God will be totally fair when you do. He is, after all, the God of ultimate justice. You won't get more, or less, or other than exactly what you have merited.

Your choice. But if I were you, I wouldn't. And that's the kindest advice I can offer you.

I have no problem with the Source of Truth.

[Immanuel Can]

I have no problem with the Source of Truth.

I wonder if He thinks the same.

But enough said. You have been told. And one way or another, this conversation will be coming back to you one day.

[Skepdick]

I wonder if He thinks the same.

As long as your God is open to being convinced that he may be wrong, I fear nothing.

But if you fear that your God is a capricious and unreasonable p****, then maybe say that.

[Immanuel Can]

I wonder if He thinks the same.

As long as your God is open to being convinced that he may be wrong, I fear nothing.

The Supreme Being? Wrong? Because you have knowledge He doesn't? Or is it because you are "fairer" than He is? You actually suggested you will sit in judgement on the Judge, earlier, I note. You may have meant it to be funny, but I would think that it certainly fits the bill for a "careless word that men shall speak."

I don't want to make your situation worse for you, and speaking to you is apparently causing you to continue to say rash things. Acts 18:5-7 says, "...Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood is on your own heads! I am clean..." and he went away.

Again, in Acts 13: 36, Paul says, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first. Since you repudiate it and consider yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to [others]."

So my Biblical duty is not to provoke you any further, so you will not bring judgment on your own head. So if you are determined to speak ill of God, then it would not be kind for me to speak to you anymore.

Do you wish me to stop speaking to you?

[Skepdick]

I wonder if He thinks the same.

As long as your God is open to being convinced that he may be wrong, I fear nothing.

The Supreme Being? Wrong? Because you have knowledge He doesn't? Or is it because you are "fairer" than He is? You actually suggested you will sit in judgement on the Judge, earlier, I note. You may have meant it to be funny, but I would think that it certainly fits the bill for a "careless word that men shall speak."

I don't want to make your situation worse for you, and speaking to you is apparently causing you to continue to say rash things. Acts 18:5-7 says, "...Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ. But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, “Your blood is on your own heads! I am clean..." and he went away.

Again, in Acts 13: 36, Paul says, “It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first. Since you repudiate it and consider yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to [others]."

So my Biblical duty is not to provoke you any further, so you will not bring judgment on your own head. So if you are determined to speak ill of God, then it would not be kind for me to speak to you anymore.

Do you wish me to stop speaking to you?

You can do as you please. You have free will.

As do I, and I freely speak up when I say that your God is immoral.

[Immanuel Can]

I freely speak up when I say that your God is immoral.

Then you condemn yourself. And I am free of responsibility, since I have told you what you are doing to yourself.

I will speak to others. I will not speak to you again, lest I should make your situation worse for you.

[Advocate]

[quote=Skepdick post_id=505250 time=1617197703 user_id=17350]
You can do as you please. You have free will.

As do I, and I freely speak up when I say that your God is immoral.
[/quote]

Nope, there is no free will.
All gods are immoral because believing an imaginary entity should guide your decisions is immoral and all gods produce that effect in those who believe in them.

[Immanuel Can]

...believing an imaginary entity should guide your decisions is immoral...

I agree.

[tillingborn]

These are open megalomaniac lunatics.

What do they want that God doesn't have?

Worldwide Socialism, for one thing.

Dictators demand absolute loyalty and unquestioning belief. The few people who give it to them are handsomely rewarded. Everyone else can rot in Hell. Why is God different?

[Immanuel Can]

These are open megalomaniac lunatics.

What do they want that God doesn't have?

Worldwide Socialism, for one thing.

Dictators demand absolute loyalty and unquestioning belief. Why is God different?

Very easy. He doesn't "demand unquestioning belief." He gives people free will; and exactly whatever it is they choose to do with it, He honours. He has done everything He could possibly do, short of destroying that free will, to invite them to the right choice...but even God does not deny human beings their free will.

Socialists, on the other hand, always do. They are unapologetic in their use of force -- which is always necessary to pry people away from their property, or to subdue dissent. And unlike God, they compel people toward what the Socialists see as "the right choice," whether they will to go there or not. After all, it's "the common good" that's at stake, they tell you. You'll understand the necessity of the compulsion, and even of the re-education camps and gulags, when you see the result, they say.

That's not what God does.

[Advocate]

[quote="Immanuel Can" post_id=505281 time=1617200621 user_id=9431]
[quote=tillingborn post_id=505274 time=1617199974 user_id=7001]
[quote="Immanuel Can" post_id=505225 time=1617195227 user_id=9431] These are [i]open[/i] megalomaniac lunatics.Worldwide Socialism, for one thing.[/quote]Dictators demand absolute loyalty and unquestioning belief. Why is God different?
[/quote]
Very easy. He doesn't "demand unquestioning belief." He gives people free will; and exactly whatever it is they choose to do with it, He honours. He has done everything He could possibly do, short of destroying that free will, to invite them to the right choice...but even God does not deny human beings their free will.

Socialists, on the other hand, always do. They are unapologetic in their use of force -- which is always necessary to pry people away from their property, or to subdue dissent. And unlike God, they compel people toward what the Socialists see as "the right choice," whether they will to go there or not. After all, it's "the common good" that's at stake, they tell you. You'll understand the necessity of the compulsion, and even of the re-education camps and gulags, when you see the result, they say.

That's not what God does.
[/quote]

The primary difference between that god and that socialism is that both of them only exist in your mind, but one of them, rightly or wrongly, is based on actual evidence.