You don’t have to live under Democracy if you don’t want to. You can leave.
ETA, if a majority of people in a Democracy want to socialize their health care system, who the hell are you to sya they must have a for-profit, capitalistic system imposed on them against their will?
So an Ebionite is not a Christian, as in a follower of Christ?
Pretty much everywhere.
How do you know? Are you sure? Are you willing to take that chance?
When Ananias didn’t cough up to Peter he was murdered on the spot. What make you more special than Ananias.
A community of homeless people who are commanded to “give to anyone who asks,” and not hold on to private possessions or wealth. Whatever you want to call that, I don’t see many Christians who practice it.
I consider the Gospels to be the basis for Christianity.
The Ebionites rejected Pauline Christology. They believed in Jesus as a mortal, Jewish prophet, not a salvic “Christ.” They did not think Jesus was God and did not worship him.
Pauline Christianity existed before th Gospels were ever written. The letters of Paul (the one which are accepted as authentic, anyway) are the oldest extant Christian writings and the Gospels are influenced by them. The Canonical Gospels were a product of an already established Pauline movement.
Then it won’t be hard for you to actually find some words of Jesus that support this.
Yes, I am sure.
Need I explain your error in interpretation one more time? Ananias wasn’t “murdered” for not giving his property to the church. He was killed by God for lying to God. Pretty big difference.
You are probably right that almost no Christians practice perfect Christianity. That’s something to work on.
I’m fine if people want to enter into some sort of socialistic arrangement to provide for their health care needs. I will not stop them from doing so. However, once they force me to go along with their plans, then I have a problem. Do what you want, but leave me to do what I want.
So you disagree with the democratic system then? What should it be replaced with?
As CJ Cregg would say, “Ya think?”. 
I don’t think anyone supports true democracy. Go read the Federalist Papers and see what our Founders had to say about democracies.
Like them, I support a system of limited government where we elect representatives. I also support limiting the things those representatives can do. The only proper role of government is to protect life, liberty, and property. Any other action taken by government is very questionable to me.
So the argument you were making in your original post to **Liberal **was a strawman? He was, afterall, talking about Socialism.
Well, if a “religious conservative” post thusly on this MB, you should bring up that argument.
True, not literally fed to lions, but after the Great Fire of Rome, Nero used them as scapegoats and many were killed. To the extent that they lived in communal societies, the nature of those “communes” were outside the civil government of the day, namely Rome.
socialized health care protects life.
And why should I have to pay the government to protect your property? I don’t care about your property. Why should I have my money confiscated to pay for a police force? If you want protection, hire your own private security.
Do you drive on public roads? Do you haul your own garbage? Do you deliver your own mail?
What the supposedly self-sufficient people who oppose centrally sponsored health care is that they are helping pay for a God-awful, inefficient system of health care for those who don’t have insurance. One way or another people get health care or they die and their dependents are taken care of somehow. It all gets paid for one way or another.
True enough. It was a moment of pique on my part. Maybe it wasn’t fair.
They were still quite under the thumb of Roman rule and they were expected to more or less abide by the laws of the larger communities they lived in (a lot of early Christians were slaves and even they were told to keep obeying their masters).
It’s true that (according to Tacitus) Nero scapegoated Christians in Rome after the fire but there is no evidence that the Romans particularly persecuted or targeted Christians before that, and fear of persecution was not the reason they lived in communes and living in communes did not protect them in any case. If anything, it might have been an aggravating factor in their unpopularity.
So does privately-run health care.
I like where you are headed. . .
I do drive on public roads and rely on the postal service for my mail, but I haul my own garbage. It’s not like I have a choice about whether to use the government roads or the USPS for my first class mail, is there?
Now that I’ve answered your questions, why don’t you get back to mine about your misinterpretation of the story of Ananias. I’m also still waiting for your quotes from Jesus about how communism is good.
Probably? In what world do you live in which adding government to the issue decreases administrative overhead?
Some propaganda can be enjoyed, it doesn’t change the fact that it is a disgusting art form. Political dialog is hurt by propaganda, never helped. “If you ride alone, you’re riding with Hitler” kind of stuff is not in fact, a good thing.
Providing medical care is the goal of people who run hospitals. Do you really think insurance is about providing medical care? Insurance is about distributing risk across a group of individuals to lessen the negatives when something bad happens, period.
Insurance companies would be failing to serve their customers if they paid out claims to people when the medical problem in question wasn’t covered. Insurance companies are in fact serving their customers by only paying out claims when they have to do so. If insurance companies are, however, engaged in fraudulent business practices, or denying claims when the medical problem is clearly covered by the policy, then those companies should be taken to task on a case-by-case basis.
Maybe pigs will fly some day too!
I never said that the suggestion of “making more money” would solve our “health care problem.” I simply said that the two options I presented were pretty much the only choice for poor people in the United States who aren’t eligible for any type of government assistance.
I’d say people may be appalled by specific cases, when said cases are presented in a very narrow manner. However I think it is clear from the actions of our elected representatives that our society does not in fact think we need to move to universal health care coverage. A lot of people might say, “sure, that’d be great” but when the subject is talked about with all of the issues involved and not just as a boiled down, simplistic talking point it becomes apparent the American people don’t want to buy into such a system.
Not universally it doesn’t, and it’s the government’s job to protect the physical welfare of all its citizens.
It’s not a misinterpretation. Ananias held out on Peter. God struck him dead and Peter said “let that be a lesson, motherfuckers.” The counter-argument that he was murdered (by God) for the “lying,” not the cash just sounds disingenuous to me. It’s like when Republicans pretended the impeachment of Clinton wasn’t really about a blow job. I’m also not aare of any other instance inthe Bible where anyone is instantly struck dead just for lying. All human beings lie constantly. Why aren’t they all dropping dead all the time? Do you have to lie specifically to an apostle? A lie is only as significant as what’s being lied about and Ananias made the mistake of lying about MONEY. He was whacked for handing in a light envelope. Who’s kidding who?
They’re scattered throughout this thread. “Give everything you own to the poor…have no thought for the morrow…give to anyone who asks…you can’t serve two masters…it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kindom of Heaven…”
Then, of course, there’s Acts 4:32:
And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul: and not one of them said that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. 4:33And with great power gave the apostles their witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. 4:34For neither was there among them any that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, 4:35and laid them at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto each, according as any one had need. 4:36And Joseph, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas (which is, being interpreted, Son of exhortation), a Levite, a man of Cyprus by race, 4:37having a field, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet..
you keep saying these apostolic communities lived that way “voluntarily” as if that has anything to do with whether they were communistic. It is not necessary for communism to be involuntary. In fact, Marxist communism is SUPPOSED to be voluntary.
That’s easy. Simply define “fly” to mean “wallow in mud”.