I can’t find evidence of anti-communism in the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Curious11
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Fair enough.

Another question for clarification. I am assuming that any theory of communism that we are contending with should be internally consistent. Inconsistent forms shouldn’t really be considered here (because why hold to an inconsistent theory). There may not be a direct contradiction with your definition, but there could be a contradiction with the implications.

When it comes to a communist state being completely classless, we are talking about all people having equal access to the goods from the commonly shared productive property, right? You might have associations that are voluntarily formed by all the parties involved (like the Church, for example). Then any sort of division with economic effect that is not based on one’s own merit or free will should be removed. No one should be born or involuntarily placed into a less advantageous state than another. Yet, there is currently precisely such an institution that puts every person into differing levels of advantage and disadvantage, and that is the institution of the family.

We don’t choose our parents and family members when we are born. Even if economically we are classless, our access to these advantages in early stages are influenced by the competence of our parents. In turn, our parents would have the interests of their own children over those of others. This is why Marx saw the natural family as a root of class structures and even private property itself. Now you say that Marx’s communism is not the only form, but, from what I can tell, if he is right that the logical implications of maintaining a classless society where everyone has the same economic and social advantage would involve an abolition of the natural family and typical family relations, presumably in favor of children raised en masse by societies, then his insight would apply to all internally consistent forms of communism. It would also imply a destruction of any social distinctions of the sexes. Otherwise, you will not be able to root out inborn class differences. Any form of communism that would be in favor of maintaining natural family structures where children are raised primarily by their own parents would seem to ultimately go against the aims of communism as you defined it. Obviously, then, we could see how this would contradict certain biblical ideas.

Where is my reasoning off here? How does one retain true classlessness without destroying the natural family and basically replacing it with mass “children farms” where children are publicly raised?
 
Last edited:
Of course, “society” is not actually an entity capable of owning things or making decisions. So “everyone owns a little bit” might wind up being more fair and equal in practice than “we have to trust some dude(s) acting in the name of society to actually share out the fruits equally.”
 
Of course, by all means I am not a communist, it likely doesn’t work well in large scale society. This is all just theory.
 
@Curious11

May I ask how old you are? Because, those of use old enough to know what things were like before the fall of the Berlin Wall do not want to see communism return.

Ask anyone from Poland how terrible it was. Communism might work in a small, rural village; but it doesn’t work on a national scale.

The only way communism would ever possibly work on a grand scale is if robots are able to take care of all the tasks people don’t want to do.

One of biggest issues with communism is that people are forced into jobs that they don’t want to do. So they are essentially become slaves to society. Only in a world like Star Trek, where there are food & tool replicators, transporters, etc; technology that allows people to do whatever their heart desires, would communism be remotely possible.

However, as long as the world needs ditch diggers, garbage men, etc; then communism will always be a slave society.
 
Last edited:
On communism’s ideas on the family, or on how to achieve classlessness without destroying it?
 
You find anti communism in Bible’s doctrine.

And you find anti christianism in communism.
 
Curious11 said:
The church, in a communist society, would be an organization voluntarily created by individuals who choose to organize around a church with certain set of beliefs based on theology. Just like it is today.
Click to expand...
And what then happens if the teachings of that church contradict the teachings of the Communist state? What if the people chose to give their allegiance to the church as being their prime and overiding allegiance, over and above their allegiance to the Communist state? What if that church did not accept that the Communist state as being the source of authority over it?

The problem with Communism is that it requires almost complete control. The state must be supreme and all things within the state are subservient.
 
What happens if people give allegiance to the church rather than the state in modern say society?

Nobody even asks that question. It’s just not an issue.

By the way, communism doesn’t necessariy imply the existence of a state. Marx advocated a stateless society
 
Last edited:
Ah ok… yeah, this is Marx/ Engels 101.

I dunno bro… If this argument can be established (and I see no reason why it isn’t already so), I think we will have already answered your specific question, though the answer is not on the usual grounds of economics.
 
Last edited:
Curious11 said:
By the way, communism doesn’t necessariy imply the existence of a state. Marx advocated a stateless society
Click to expand...
Not initially though. You cannot move straight to a stateless society, and getting there involves coersion and oppressive state control. In Communism, dissent is not permitted, as all in the society must be pulling in the same direction. In Communism the individual is subservient to the collective. Individual rights are not inviolable, they can be dispensed with if it is deemed to be beneficial for the progression of the system.
 
Communists killed well over 100,000,000 people during the 20th century. That fact alone, even without referring to the church or the bible, ought to convince people not to engage in it.

Arguing with somebody about the morality of communism is like arguing with somebody over whether it’s right or wrong to commit murder or be a rapist. It’s like arguing over whether or not it’s OK to be a pedophile.

Somebody who doesn’t get the drift is literally morally insane.
 
While I agree, the question the OP is asking is of a narrow focus and of a theoretical nature, and he has already stated he is not a communist. Specifically, he is looking at a particular definition of “communism” and asking whether there is anything in theory in the bible itself that would contradict the idea of communism in itself, rather than certain forms of it that have been practised.

As the child of Venezuelans who still has family members living there, I abhor it. But if you want to destroy it, you have to get down to the theory itself and be able to know what communists think they are promoting. The reason it’s powerful is because it has some actual insights, but they are mixed with subtle problems that logically and practically imply the horrors you see today. You have to show specifically why “communism” in itself, and not just Marxist/ Leninist/ Maoist etc. variants of it, which are all distinct ultimately fail. Even this is a broader issue than finding parts of scripture that would contradict the theory though.
 
Not necessarily. In a communist society other things are given precedence. Rather than protecting property rights and freedom to do business, equality is emphasized with the goal of achieving social harmony and justice
 
Curious11 said:
equality is emphasized with the goal of achieving social harmony and justice
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t. It is not about equality of individuals it is about the collectuve as a whole. Individuals do not matter other than what they can contribute to the collective. Social justice for individuals does not matter.

Under Stalin, 5 million peasants were starved to death in order to force the peasant farmers to give up their land to collective farms. Then again how are you going to take the land and make it ‘collective’ if people refuse to give it up? You are going to have to force them. This is justifiable according to Communist ‘morality’, where the end goal of a Communist society justifies the means and the value of individuals is purely as a material resource to fulfil the goals of the collective.

Social justice and equality? Communism has been around for over 100 years now. Give me just one example of a Communist state that values social justice and equality. Give me an example of a peaceful, harmonious Communism state which had to use brutal, oppressive violence to create and maintain its system of government.
 
Kibbutz. They didn’t use violence. This isn’t about how communism has played out in the 20th century, but the theoretical compatibility between Catholicism and communism
 
Curious11 said:
Kibbutz. They didn’t use violence. This isn’t about how communism has played out in the 20th century, but the theoretical compatibility between Catholicism and communism
Click to expand...
And in a society without a democratic government to protect it, do you really think a small kibbutz could survive? People had small collective groups in thw Stone Age. The problem was that small collective groups attacked, killed and from other small collective groups to get resources. The problem was tjeu didn’t have the laws and security forces of the state of Israel to protect them and guarantee their rights under law.

But I see you aren’t able to name one Communist state that hasn’t had to use brutal oppression of its people to instigate and maintain a Communism state. In over 100 years, not one. Do you not think that says something about Communism?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top