Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">anyone who knows anything knows dat the Catholic church diverted the direction of the &quot;Catholic' church...

Torquenado and his brutal tests for witchcraft etc notwithstanding, the Catholic Church is not Catholic </div></div>


Evan,
Then what is it that the Pope is the head of?
Where is the true church of Christ; a church that does not wrap itself in mumbo-jumbo repetitive ritual to the exclusion of the teachings of Christ ?

[evanovitch]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

the Catholic Church use of the word Catholic makes it a pronoun for dat denomination

the original use of the word catholic goes beyond just denominations....

u disappointing me wid u myopic thinking...fi real..i always gave u the benefit of the doubt given ur posting history n ur capacity to apparently see outside the box...but it seems that this issue of faith vs ideology, i.e.ur communism, have u in a blind box


the church of Christ is worldwide, catholic, in the hearts of those who accept HIS LORDSHIP ....God looks to the heart not the actions

when those who believe reveal the wrongdoing of those who say they serve n will be disappointed wen He says , not me, they do so inkeeping with the dictates of calling out the wrongdoing



in ur zeal to condemn the Faith u highlight ongle the wrongdoing wid glee but blind uself to the reality dat can be n is

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

&quot;.......The church of Christ is worldwide, catholic,
IN THE HEARTS OF THOSE WHO ACCEPT HIS LORDSHIP
Evan,
If this means what I think it means, that the church of christ is composed of people who need only accept his deity but not necessarily his teachings, then that is where the hypocrisy comes in.e

&quot;....God looks to the heart not the actions&quot;

Evan,
And Christ was not known so much for what was inside him but for his kindnesses and acts in helping the disadvantaged. It is indeed the actions that make a Christian a christian. You can sit there all day and think nice things but if you're not DOING what Christ wanted us to do, you are not a christian.
George Bush said that you need only believe in Christ's deity to get to heaven. Billy Graham in disagreeing, said it is one's actions that gets you into heaven; doing Christ's will.

E:
when those who believe reveal the wrongdoing of those who say they serve n will be disappointed wen He says , not me, they do so in keeping with the dictates of calling out the wrongdoing

Evan,
I don't understand what you are saying here.



E: in ur zeal to condemn the Faith u highlight ongle the wrongdoing wid glee but blind uself to the reality dat can be n is.

Evan,
I do not at all condemn the faithful when that faith takes the form of doing as Christ would have us do. I condemn those who preach love and practice hate.
During the 70's and 80's certain orders of Catholics in Central America practiced what is called &quot; Liberation Theology&quot; and those orders worked with revolutionaries and against the evil governments to aid the poor in their fight against those evil governments.
Those were true Christians and they were killed, raped by U.S trained forces and silenced by the new anti-communist Pope who forbade them from helping the poor.

Those Christians who died in the service of the poor are true Christians and my heroes.. Those &quot;Christians&quot; who killed and silenced them and those Christians who by their silence and cooperation with the evil governments and the Pope are the people I have a problem with.

When faith and belief in Christ amounts to only attending church regularly and all the while doing nothing constructive to help the poor and going along with things like the silencing of activist priests by the Pope, that is not christian.
It is following Satan.

[evanovitch]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

Simply put , all Christ did radiated outward from the love within His heart....see how simple is His reasoning against all weh u had to write to not disprove

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

Evanovitch,
There is no one who agrees more with the help-the-poor teachings of Christ than me.
It is why I think the revolution in Cuba which lifted all the poor is God's/ Christ's work under another similar but godless philosophy.

It is the Golden Rule in practice and is done out of love for ALL God's creations as Christ would have it.

You must feel it in your heart and then make it practice; make it real.

It's the same teachings under another name but the revolution made it possible to put those teachings to actual day-today use in Cuba while it is very difficult in our greed-driven society to do the same.

In godless Cuba anyone lying in the street would be given help immediately. In Christian Jamaica, in Judeo-Christian New York, that person would lie there for hours, days.

Which is the more Christian society?

[evanovitch]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

Since communism eschews religion it would be the innate dwelling of God in all His creations that makes the Cuban do good n the percentage who would pass by is probably the same percentage who would pass by in Jamaica ...it is fallacy to believe that every Cuban is driven by the milk of human kindness given the criminal element who came in the boatlift of the 80s n who have visited their criminal mindset on the American society

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: evanovitch</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since communism eschews religion it would be the innate dwelling of God in all His creations that makes the Cuban do good n the percentage who would pass by is probably the same percentage who would pass by in Jamaica ...it is fallacy to believe that every Cuban is driven by the milk of human kindness given the criminal element who came in the boatlift of the 80s n who have visited their criminal mindset on the American society </div></div>


Evanovitch,
Some interesting points.
Communism/ socialism has as a central tenet the belief that the Golden Rule should and can apply to our everyday lives; that we should uplift the poor and needy as if they were our brothers and sisters (which they are).

It is the belief of all communists that humanity is intrinsically good but that humanity is also corruptible and has ben badly corrupted by capitalism/profit motive/ love of money/ worship of mammon; a greed driven system that is self enforcing.

Take away the drive for wealth and in its place put the welfare of all our brothers and sisters and we communists believe the race can just about eradicate much of the misery and evil in the world.

Imperfect as Cuban socialism society is under the U.S imposed state of siege , there is no doubt that socialism has eliminated starvation, illiteracy, most crime (lowest crime rate in the hemisphere) and raised the living standards of all Cubans (except the very rich who left) far beyond what any similarly poor once colonial Third World country has ever done.

That the Mariel boatlift brought common criminals to the United States and that common criminals exist in Cuba is also not surprising given the hundreds of years of corruption enforced upon once colonial Cuba.
As an aside and since you seem to have forgotten this:
The Mariel boatlift came about when the United States claimed that the Cubans were holding thousands of POLITICAL prisoners in jail because of their political views; anti-socialist/ anti-Castro/ counter -revolutionary speech and actions.
The Cubans said that the overwhelming majority were common criminals.
The United States insisted that they were political prisoners and waged an international propaganda war to make the Cubans look bad for holding these &quot;political&quot; prisoners.

So the Cubans said that they would release all these prisoners IF the United States would take them.
The U.S agreed, Cuba released them and then the United States reneged on the deal and refused to take them.

The Cubans made radio broadcasts to Florida and said that anyone with a boat who wanted to come to the port of Mariel and pick up their relatives were welcome to come.

When the flotilla of yachts arrived, the Cubans rounded up the released &quot;political&quot; prisoners who were creating a crime wave in Cuba and put them on the boats before they would allow the relative to go.
The rest is history. When they got to the States, we were all SHOCKED, SHOCKED! to find that almost everyone was a COMMON CRIMINAL.

The fact is that that Cuban socialism in 50 years has created more of a Christian society where the poor are provided for than any so-called Christian capitalist (an oxymoron) country has done in thousands of years.

Socialism is christianity without the rituals, the churches, the mumbo-jumbo repetitive nonsensical prayers like the Rosary, the costumes of the priests.

It is direct love of fellow man in ways that are concrete and bring us closer to the brotherhood of man in ways not possible under the centuries old divisive operations of the churches whether they be Judeo-Christian or Islamic.

Whether you call it God-driven or not, what Cuba is doing in spite of all the forces arrayed against it, sets the example for true christian actions which we, in capitalist societies, are forced away from by the need and greed for money.

Do you really think that were Jesus to return that he would say that the United States or Jamaica are more of what he would want than what Cuba has done in lifting all the poor?

Don't make me quote the Apostles.

[evanovitch]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

USSR didn't do a good job n u cant say it was stymied by the US

Britain has always been a socialist state wich is now acknowledging it cannot afford the ideology nor the lessons it has left in its population...the ones who have been on the dole fi generations....n we cannot say Britain is egalitarian....

Communist China continues to displace generational farmers in its bid to build factories to supply cheap n cheapening products in wat is nutten short of a major capitalist thrust

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

E:
USSR didn't do a good job n u cant say it was stymied by the US

Evan:
The U.S and several European nations invaded the nascent Soviet Union back around 1920. The U.S had some 50,000 troops there trying to overthrow the revolution/ socialism.
In WWII when the Nazis invaded the USSR , Harry Truman was quoted as saying &quot;Let the bastards kill each other and the Nazis killed some 20 million Soviets and destroyed their economic infrastructure. The U.S was the country that pursued the arms race and forced the much poorer Soviets to spend too much money to avoid suffering through a possible U.S invasion up until they collapsed in 1990.
How you can say they were not stymied by the U.S defies logic and the historical record.
That said, the USSR so corrupted the world's concept of socialism by running it in totalitarian manner that all true socialists/ communists are thankful for it's demise.
Under capitalism the poverty rate has shot up to Third World levels in Russia and the people, for all the political cruelty were better off under that form of corrupted socialism and polls all show that to be their thinking.
There was a famous graffiti exchange in (I believe) Hungary after Hungary also went to capitalism in which someone wrote on a wall:
&quot;Bring back communism&quot;
to which someone else responded
&quot;We never had Communism&quot;
to which someone else responded
&quot;Then bring back whatever it was that we had.

E:
Britain has always been a socialist state wich is now acknowledging it cannot afford the ideology nor the lessons it has left in its population...the ones who have been on the dole fi generations....n we cannot say Britain is egalitarian....


Evanovitch,
You are incorrect. Britain is and always has been a capitalist state. The government does not control the private British corporations. It has SOCIAL programs to alleviate the poverty and misery caused by having the wealth of the nation concentrated in too few hands. Massive and prolonged unemployment that is endemic in most capitalist countries and in Britain is a sure sign of a capitalist economy.
You are correct in saying that Britain is not egalitarian but not because it is socialist but because it is NOT.

E:
Communist China continues to displace generational farmers in its bid to build factories to supply cheap n cheapening products in wat is nutten short of a major capitalist thrust.

Evanovitch,
Communist China is called that ONLY because it is run by the Communist Party of China. That party is no more communist in practice than the Democrat Party of the U.S is democratic. China does have it's large industries controlled by the government and that is considered SOCIALIST by many but a lot of private corporations operate much as corporations do in the United States in a typical capitalist fashion. Call it a mixed economy if you'd like.
All that displacement of farmers comes from the de-socialization of the society; the cutting of subsidies to farmers who need financial aid to continue in difficult times and areas of the country .Add to that the privatization (capitalist measures) and you have what is now going on the impoverishment of hundreds of millions of Chinese who were doing okay under the previous corrupt socialist state run economy.
The Chinese are not in business for the purpose of manufacturing cheap goods. The owners of the Chinese companies which is not the Chinese government, but private people, are in business to make MONEY and having near slave wages they can make stuff cheaper than anyone else and do.
What has happened in Russia, a huge increase in poverty is now happening in China.
As in Russia thare are also a few hundred millionaires and billionaires being created to go along with the hundreds of millions now forced into poverty by the ending of their once strict socialist economies

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

Evanovitch,
Cuba is the only strictly socialist economy in the world outside of North Korea but unlike North Korea, Cuba has a democratic electoral system.

Communism is at this time in humanity's development is only a likely utopian FUTURE state. No communist state has ever existed. What did exist were political parties and movements which had a communist philosophy and were supposed to be working towards that utopian state of being and which included the word &quot;communist&quot; in their title for that reason alone. I don't think you could talk to a knowledgable citizen of any of the ex&quot;communist&quot; states and have them tell you that what they had was communism.


(see my signature)


As most people are not Marxist scholars and only know what they have been hearing from anti-communist governments and media as to what communism is or isn't, there is a massive misunderstanding of what communism is, what socialism is and for that matter what capitalism/neo-liberal capitalism is .
This makes it very difficult for people like you and me to talk apples for apples as our understanding of the terms is different as well as is our understanding of much of the history of the last 100 years or so.

I'll be glad to discuss any or all of this with you.

[evanovitch]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

u know i have to applaud ur claim dat 50k US troops supposedly had impact on the USSR....did they spend the time watching the Soviets do was was intrinsic to their makeup...i.e. perfect corruption....USSR continued a spiral that started wid di Tsars n was continued by the various Dictators


Britain has allowed privatization over the years yes BUTTTT...where u tink we in Ja get our penchant for government ownership of everyting wich is later sold off fi raise money


Mao spinning in his grave to hear u seh China not communist ..as r dose whose blood helped put di red in Red 'Tiananman Square' China...albeit involuntarily...they died trying to [uncommunist' CHina



the common thread in all three nations is the inability of the ideology to live up to the stated ideals.....human nature is a b aint it...


so we bak to the Bible...all is vanity n will fail...God knows n looks to the heart of men.....outside of God all else will fail....

[johnnycakes]

Re: Mired in controversy ... but Universal Church of t

E:
u know i have to applaud ur claim dat 50k US troops supposedly had impact on the USSR....did they spend the time watching the Soviets do was was intrinsic to their makeup...i.e. perfect corruption....USSR continued a spiral that started wid di Tsars n was continued by the various Dictators


Evanovitch,
Were you a student of U.S foreign policy you'd both know and understand that from its inception in 1917 the United States along with various other capitalist allies waged a long fight against the success of socialism in the USSR.
You can Google
U.S. intervention in Soviet Union &quot; if you really were interested in the truth of things It IS historic fact. It is just something that no high schools in the United States will teach.
Here is just one of hundreds of links:

http://www.answers.com/topic/u-s-military-intervention-in-russia-1917-20

The only people that did more to end the Soviet Union were the Nazis who hated the communists as much as they hated Jews.
That the Soviets were a corrupt socialist society was of no matter to the United States which supported and installed corrupt dictatorships throughout the century just past.
The Soviets were no more corrupt than is U.S democracy or the Jamaican government at present.
Further, the Russians were ruled by the czars before the revolution. After that Russia welded many SSR's together to create the Soviet Union which was a much larger country, far different from Mother Russia .

E:
Britain has allowed privatization over the years yes BUTTTT...where u tink we in Ja get our penchant for government ownership of everyting wich is later sold off fi raise money.


Evanovitch,
Although I understand what you wrote, I cannot believe that you actually believe Britain has a socialist economy. Where did you learn this? Can you provide some sources?
Were Britain socialist it would have been friendly with the Soviets, with the Cubans and in opposition to the policies of the United States throughout the 20th century but they were allies BECAUSE they were both capitalist and imperialist.
Did Britain object when the United States invaded Grenada, a commonwealth nation, because it was leaning socialist? NO.
Jamaica does not own, control nor run private industry. If it did it would be a socialist country and the U.S would have invaded it long ago. The fact alone that the U.S destabilized Jamaica when Manley only flirted with Cuba and socialism should be proof enough to anyone that Jamaica was never going to be allowed to be socialist. It would not be permitted. Were Jamaica socialist it would not have provided assistance to the U.S. in invading Grenada.

E:
Mao spinning in his grave to hear u seh China not communist ..as r dose whose blood helped put di red in Red 'Tiananman Square' China...albeit involuntarily...they died trying to [uncommunist' CHina.

Evanovitch,

In the first place, those students who died at Tiananmen Square died fighting for DEMOCRACY and not against &quot;communism&quot; or actually the socialist economic system. You are confusing communism/socialism which is an ECONOMIC system with totalitarianism which is a POLITICAL system.


I tried to explain to you just what communism is but since you choose to ignore what I wrote and think you know what it is and that China was actually communist, I just don't know what else I can say to disabuse you of what you think communism is and it is not what we've seen in theUSSR, in China, In North Korea or even in Cuba..

You really need a basic understanding of what capitalism is and isn't, what socialism is and isn't and especially what communism is and isn't for us to have any sort of rational argument and it is more than clear that you do not.

But what the hell...

here is the clarification you need;

Capitalism is the ownership and running of production in private hands for the profit of those who own and run those companies.

Historical socialism is the ownership and operation of the means of production by a government with the proceeds going for the goods and services needed by the people . In classic socialism the workers themselves have control of those means of production in a democratic fashion.

Communism is a THEORETICAL FUTURE state of society. Communism has never existed. It is an ideal towards which Communist Parties were supposed to be working.

Social programs such as welfare for the poor are programs that are socialist in nature and which CAPITALIST states such as Britain, Sweden, the U.S France and others have had to adopt to prevent people from dying in the streets in CAPITALIST economies which always have a certain percentage of poor which can reach as high as 80% in the poorer countries of Africa and Latin America.
Adopting socialist programs does not make a country socialist if the means of production, the factories, the corporations are in largely in private hands

Totalitarianism is a form of government that is from the top without any serious input from those governed.

Democracy literally means &quot;rule by the people&quot;. Representative democracy (republic) is what the U.S and Jamaica are SUPPOSED to be.

You can have totalitarian capitalism. (Zimbabwe, United States Jamaica, most multiparty countries )
You can't really have democratic capitalism since how could you get a majority of any people to vote for a system where 5% of the people control 80% of the wealth of a country?
You can have totalitarian socialism (Soviets, old China, North Korea)
You can have democratic socialism (Cuba)

Is this any help?



E:
the common thread in all three nations is the inability of the ideology to live up to the stated ideals.....human nature is a b aint it...

Evanovitch,
You think that humans are intrinsically greedy and evil.
I believe they are both good, moral but corrupted by greed-driven system that is forced upon them from birth.
Maybe you are able to think the omniscient God would be capable or willing to create beings as faulty as that. I wouldn't think a believer could hold such thoughts.


E:
so we bak to the Bible...all is vanity n will fail...God knows n looks to the heart of men.....outside of God all else will fail....

Evanovitch,
So the men who wrote the Bible said.
&quot;all is vanity and will fail&quot; means what in plain English?
&quot;God knows what? and looks to the heart of (hu) man (ity) ( you should include women) for what or to do what? Why so cryptic?.
&quot;outside of God all else will fail&quot; means what in plain English?

_________________________
11yrs ..love u boo forever n a day

I think I have lived to my best and I have no regret as I am near the end for the goal that I have marked and possessed.&quot;