3 votes

Is Statism a Threat to Christianity?

I recall hearing once that pastors and Christians in America did not advocate positions on political issues until the neocons convinced them that communism was a threat to their religion, therefore it must be stopped worldwide. This created the base of Christians supporting the neocons we see today. However, I think it is clear to some Christians, that the neocons have manipulated the teachings of Christ for their own benefit and will dispose of it when they are done using it to blind voters. Just like communism would wipe out religion, don't you think statism will do the same? If so how do we get this message to all Christians? I have heard of pastors speaking out against the Fed and big government, however, just like us they are labeled fringe. And just like us they should be the mainstream.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Religion and State: Peas in a POd

"Religions" are manmade, hierarchical, bureaucratic guild structures just like any other political system. It makes perfect sense for religious institutions to join forces with the state to use each other to promote their totalitarian agendas. Religions never side with individual freedom. Never.

Remember, Jesus' entire mission was to undermine the corrupt religious guild system of his day and thus promote man's personal relationship with God. He was a liberator of individuals.

The 'state' wants to be god

The 'state' wants to be god so the answer seems to be AMEN. State worship is no different than any other idolatry. There is something about commandment #1 that western churchianity just does not understand.

Trust in God, but tie your camel tight.

"Socialism needs two legs on which to stand; a right and a left. While appearing to be in complete opposition to one another,they both march in the same direction." - Paul Proctor

Of course it is.

Remember, Communists are statists, because the state is their atheistic religion. Any totalitarian dictatorship is statist in nature. Persecution of Christians is only natural under such a government.

It looks like we are all in

It looks like we are all in agreement that it's a threat. So why doesn't Christian America realize this?

"Christian" America ?

You posted 2 sentences. 1st about agreement, that is right.
2nd, a question, it is based on an assumption. Christian is one who believes in /follows Christianity, a religion, faith or belief system. America is a country in which people of many faiths /or No faith live, also many fair Christians like Dr.Ron Paul. It is held together or governed by (to an extent) by the Constitution. The Constitution does Not impose any particular belief on the people, - there is freedom of religion or belief, as long as not does not coerce or force others to follow it.

Christians are those believe in Christ, an un-necessary translation of the fair title "Maseah", of the son of Maryam.
We hope the world will revert to that which is authentic, original & fair, = honored in the Heavens & on Earth.

Statism is a threat to

Statism is a threat to anything that is not the state.

deceived hypocritic neocon christians

any form of authoritarianism (left or right) is a huge threat to all freedoms, including the freedom of religion. the neocons (republicans) have no idea just how much they have in common with the socialists (democrats). these 2 groups of sheeple have different talking points, but when one is in power, it's virtually the same as if the other were in power. at the time of the american revolution, pastor and churches were very active in politics. more recently, freedom of speech in american churches was stolen by the LBJ law that denies tax exempt statist to churches that mention anything political. ron paul friend chuck baldwin speaks about this a lot.


Is this question a joke? The

Is this question a joke? The Vatican just called for a World Bank, so that kind of confirms that mainstream Chritianity is in bed with the New World Order statists. So NO, statism is not the slightest bit a threat to "Christianity"

Turn off the TV Propaganda.
Find out what's really going on!
"Your portal to reality!"

Also, this came from a committee in the Vatican, not the Pope

I think there is internal division within the Catholic Church. A real battle is going on between the libertarian-minded and the global socialists.

Ann in Florida

All in due time. Creating the NWO is a long-term, multi-step


Ann in Florida

Protestant reformation? srsly

Ever heard of the Protestant reformation? NEWSFLASH: There is a whole group of Christians that do not follow the Pope "the efforts of the self-described "reformers", who objected to ("protested") the doctrines, rituals and ecclesiastical structure of the Roman Catholic Church, led to the creation of new national Protestant churches." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation
These Churches are all independent of the Pope, and everyone should know that these are the Churches that were energized by the neocons.

It seems to me that all the

It seems to me that all the people that have chosen to add the omega symbol to their names are all very new. That makes me very leery of their agendas.

Formerly rprevolutionist

We already addressed this

We already addressed this, and I can easily remove it if I wanted to (in case you didn't realize that function on the website). I am seriously starting to question you since you are always calling to divide Ron Paul's support . My post history speaks for itself, pro-Paul.

Role of Money.

When you study the role of money then you will understand a lot about state and religion. Both of them are corrupted & controlled because "Interest" (u$ury) is inserted in transactions. If & when usury is banished you will find many religions and states will collapse. U$ury is the energy (evil force) that runs /controls the oppressive system.

The Moneychangers Exposed at Last!!

Communism was oppressive & unjust, no doubt. The socialist program was hijacked and taken to extremes, - the russian communist revolutionaries killed many christian & muslim clergy, confiscated property.
There were two lines /statements from Karl Marx that really disturbed the PTB, the banksters.
1. Interest is an un-earned income.
2. Bank is the citadel of the capitalist system.

Mankind is by nature religious, no state can make it vanish.
Actually many states prop-up (corrupted) religion-s.
Sound govt & fair religions can survive without usury.

You have to pay to rent a

You have to pay to rent a car. You have to pay to rent a movie. You have to pay to rent a steam-vac. You have to pay to rent money. That's interest.

Money is Spent /Consumed /Lost.

all the items you list remain with the borrower and he can /is able to return it, except money. Money is borrowed for a need, then it is spent, consumed, given away or lost, - like food or fuel. After that, to repay the loan he has to earn /arrange/re'create /generate the amount. In the mean-time the loan amount increases with time, - as much time he takes to repay the loan the burden becomes heavier. That is why all religions & social philosophies have condemned it, forbid it.

Your assertion is incorrect.

Your assertion is incorrect. When you rent something, NOT ALL ITEMS remain with the borrower. What is lost? The rental fee. You seem to be very confused between renting something (fee) and, for instance, a neighbor letting you use his hammer (for free).

There are obvious advantage to those who rent money. You need transportation to your job, where you make money. You don't have $15,000 to buy a modest car, or even $5000 to buy a used one, but you can easily pay it off within a year or two if you can rent money.

All goods or services come at a price in the free market. If you have a bicycle, you can loan it to to users for a fee. If you have money, you can do the same.

Your ideas are contrary to freedom, liberty and free markets.

I've never understood this problem you have with interest?!?

If you got a problem with interest then don't borrow money. It's pretty simple.

Without interest what incentive would there be for a lender to loan to a borrower?

Interest is basically just the service cost of borrowing. Same as any other service. Do you have a problem with a mechanic fixing your car charging you for labor? What's the difference?

Intere$t = Consequent Diffi'Culty.

It is well known that intere$t creates difficulty for the borrower - eventually. Folks borrow because of need, greed or ignorance of effects, but only fools pay interest. Paying interest is against Self-worth.
You comparison /example is faulty. Wage for labor is different from interest on loan. One is earned and legit, the other is un-earned and immoral. I am not saying this for personal reasons, I am Not under any obligation of interest bearing loans, - have abstained.
The Maseah showed strong dislike for money-lenders /usurers, he called them "robbers". See "Righteous Indignation" on Wiki, when he overturned the bank.

If the interest is on a loan of actual money, then it is

legitimate. But when it is paid on counterfeit money, there is a big difference. When banks have a government granted monopoly to create money out of thin air and loan it into existence, interest becomes the mechanism of enslavement. Even if one does not himself borrow, others do, and this gets built into the cost of products. Plus government is more than willing to borrow this newly created funny money and then tax the public to pay the interest. Interest is a huge transfer of wealth from the public to banks.

In 1932 the M2 money supply (currency, checking account balances and savings account balances) was $50 billion. Today it is $9,507 billion. All this new money was created out of thin air by banks and loaned out. Not only does the interest fleece the public, but the creation of this immense amount of new money devalues its purchasing power, stealing from savers and people on fixed incomes. And the system is unstable, because of the boom, bust effect on economic activity, and the simple fact that only enough money is created to pay back loan principle but not interest, so new money must be borrowed to pay interest on old loans resulting in eventual collapse of the system.

So you bet I have a big problem with interest, and I do not borrow myself as a matter of fact. Your understanding of a service to be paid for leaves a lot to be desired.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

Double Whammy =

you are right about fiat /fake money loaded with interest.
Interest is at the root of this fraudulent game. Interest is the incentive /motivation to lend to the maximum. Its the greed of the bankster$ to extract/extort greater amount of interest that motivates them to print/ issue (more, fake) money.
When interest is abolished /or when interest bearing loan contracts are Not upheld in court - then the incentive to print /issue more 'money' is taken away. If the bankster will not lend, he can stick it. Coinage should not be in private hands, they are bound to create a cartel, e.g. FED Reserve.

Sounds to me like your

Sounds to me like your problem isn't with interest but with fiat currency backed by legal tender laws. I 100% agree with you on that which is one of the many reasons why I'm voting Ron Paul.