Here it is, folks: This is the place for all things KCDad. Here you can discuss communism, KCDad-style. Or you can discuss the teachings of Jesus as interpreted by KCDad. Perhaps you want to just sit and soak in the profound teaching of KCDad himself. This is the place. Now is the time.
But from now on, if the conversation on any other post strays away from the post’s original topic into KCDad-Land (which will be determined at my sole discretion), the comments will be moved to this post for that discussion to continue (hence the “repository” moniker). I’ll leave a little note in the comments section of future posts if the discussion is redirected here.
That doesn’t mean that all of KCDad’s comments (or responses to KCDad’s comments) will be moved here. He isn’t being quarantined. This is simply an attempt to keep posts on topic. As long as the comments are related to the original topic, they’re fine. It’s only when they veer into the “communism vs. capitalism” or “The Gospel According to KCDad” or similarly-recurring motifs that they’ll be moved to this thread for further argument and development.
Jon: I agree that Kcdad didn’t originally define his terms and did go for shock value–because so many were so easily shocked. I argued against him for a long time because I didn’t get it. But he did make me think. So now that we’re beginning to understand what he’s really about, can we drop all the name-calling and discuss from a less emotional place. Oh, look at me! I’m been drawn back into this discussion–and, Jon, it was you, not Kcdad, that drew me back in. I’ve come to terms with Kcdad’s arguments–it’s yours that have been driving me crazy.
Jon: Meant only for picky English teacher humor: Your “As for “communistic principals”–please don’t scare people more than they are already scared of 150. Which of 150’s principals are c(C)ommunist?
Sharon, this is where we simply disagree. I don’t think I am “name-calling” about any of kcdad’s ideas. I am “name-calling” on his actions to express those ideas. Please read again the recent interaction with kcdad and George. George made a simple heartfelt comment about losing half his family to a communist regime. Kcdad felt compelled to essentially mock him and tell HIS story of his dad losing his house and job. For what purpose? It certainly wasn’t empathy. What was he trying to “teach” George? Did he try and explain that what he means by communism is different than what the so-called communists, the ones who murdered half his family, think it means?
Anyone who comments here is subject to kcdad’s scorn and ridicule. I only ridicule and have scorn for him for what he does to other people who never asked for it (and I didn’t start doing this from day 1).
Behold, ladies and gentlemen, the futility of attempting to reason with kcdad. He starts by saying:
Apparently, Cuba’s self-definition as “Socialist” is acceptable. Then I point out that the State Department and the Oxford American Dictionary — to name only two sources — recognize Cuba as communist, and kcdad retorts:
So, an American assessment of Cuba’s political system is evidently tainted somehow. In keeping with kcdad’s original embrace of Cuban self-definition, I offered the fact that the Cuban Communist Party defines itself as communist. But kcdad rejects that definition also. Furthermore, he rejects a paper that argues that Cuba isn’t Socialist either based on “the” definition of socialism.
As a last resort, he quotes a definition from Encarta — a Microsoft (read: American) dictionary — just the sort of dictionary he dismissed before as untrustworthy. And he says they’re not communist based on “the” definition of communism — just the sort of argument he panned when employed by others.
He impugns the character of anyone with whom he disagrees (ad hominem attack), whether countries, organizations, or individuals. Yet his motives are presumed to be pure and unadulterated.
This is not “teaching.” It’s not “making people think.” It’s nothing more than being obnoxious and deliberately obtuse for his own entertainment.
I’m done talking to him.
Jon: I admit I don’t understand any of the George versus Kcdad argument; I am bewildered by both of their comments.
C.J.–I’m sorry, but I don’t get it. If you notice the Encarta article (that admittedly I read hurriedly) uses the labels “in theory” and “in practice.” That is the crux of all of Kcdad’s arguments. What is obtuse about Kcdad’s “I am not defending Cuba or its political government or policies…”
Isn’t Kcdad simply saying that Cuba is not practicing communism in its purist form–in fact, misses the mark entirely. I think he is asking us to look at the principles of communism in its original intent, not the way it has been practiced in the U.S.S.R. or Cuba. Certainly, we believe that not everyone labeling themselves or their views as Christian agree with our definition of Christian. Therefore, why can’t Kcdad make these same distinctions about communism? I have never met a person whose motives are pure and unadulterated–certainly, not Kcdad or any of the rest of us. I do agree that Kcdad tends to bait people–I didn’t accept the bait and started just to read what he was saying–his arguments became clear, even when I don’t agree with them.
@ CJ: And the peanut gallery erupts into thunderous applause!
@ Sharon: It is past time for an intervention – just stop.
Sharon, you’re a saint. You’ve cast yourself as the resident kcdad apologist, and I can’t imagine a more untenable role.
Sharon, plain and simple communism/Communism killed George’s family and KC attempts to “one up him” by talking about how his dad lost his job in some kind of backward attempt to defend communism/Communism. To kcdad, its all about him and communism nothing else matters.
11bravo: I wasn’t sure–George presented the information in such a way that I wasn’t sure what he meant the first time–when he said he lost his family to communism. The word “lost” could have meant all sorts of things. It was later that he said murdered, etc. Yes, Kcdad was insensitive then but that was a very recent post and people have disagreed with him vehemently long before that. I know that it is no excuse for insensitivity about such a serious thing, but Kcdad’s point, of course, is that the Communist Party government did the killing–that they are actually subverting the philosophy and using it for their own purposes. Communism didn’t kill anyone–the people in power who “use” communism for their own purposes did the killing. Communism as a theory or philosophy does not advocate killing people. Christians could “hyjack” communism, so to speak, and it could be a Christian system. Why doesn’t that make sense to anyone? Maybe the Democrats should change their name to the Christian Democratic Party–then perhaps the Republicans would understand a bit better that a name doesn’t necessarily make it so. 🙂 I am no longer defending Kcdad–I am defending my own views that help me to understand Kcdad’s views. Christians should understand because there are many sects or individuals that claim to be Christian yet have done some very evil things and committed unspeakable crimes against people. Non-Christians lump us all together–they see no distinction. Christian is Christian just as many here are saying Communism is communism. Doesn’t anyone else get that? As a Christian, I see all that is good in capitalism–but I see the possibility for evil, also. Madhoff is a perfect example–although his cruelty involved theft, not murder–but his crimes were possible within the capitalist system. Capitalism in the hands of non-Christians is not a Christian system. In the hands of Christians, capitalism can be used as a tool for spreading Christianity and helping people, etc. I guess I’m beating a dead horse, but I just don’t understand why this is so difficult to understand. Kcdad just keeps saying that we shouldn’t trust capitalism because he has the potential to be an evil system–and we should be on guard, not apologetic for a system that has that potential.
“but Kcdad’s point, of course, is that the Communist Party government did the killing–that they are actually subverting the philosophy and using it for their own purposes. Communism didn’t kill anyone–the people in power who “use” communism for their own purposes did the killing. Communism as a theory or philosophy does not advocate killing people.”
Not true at all, communism (note the little c) thrives on the idea of conflict between classes leading to an eventual revolution. So to say that communism does not advocate killing is not completely accurate.
I also seriously question your rationale behind the idea of Christian capitalism. I am Christian, but just because others may not be does not mean they are excluded from being able to act moral or ethical. People who are not Christians can be just as moral and ethical as those who are, capitalism is not better or worse if it is infused with Christianity.
And in conclusion, EVERY system can be used for good or evil. So using your line of thought we should all be on guard for Christianity as well and shouldn’t make any apology for it since it has that potential to be evil as well.
11Bravo: I agree with you about non-Christians acting morally and ethically–I didn’t mean to imply otherwise but I left myself open for that criticism. I was presenting an argument mostly for “Christian” consumption. I certainly agree with most of your last paragraph about most systems. However, if Christianity is authentic it should not be open to evil–but if it’s a sham, yes. Also, I would hope that any system would be better if infused with authentic Christianity. Is there any system that doesn’t leave itself open for class warfare? Wasn’t the American Revolution a grand example of class warfare? I believe that as the gap between the haves and have-nots grows wider in America, capitalism will lend itself to class warfare. Human nature being what it is, I don’t believe any system is free from the threat of conflict. In the U.S.S.R. and Cuba, any killing or persecution that was done was done by the government leaders, the ones with the political power. Those who suffer or suffered weren’t involved in class warfare–they were just the victims of the powerful.
In theory, before communism could be established, the conflict would have had to occur to give power to the people, right–“authentic” communism couldn’t take effect until the power was in the hands of the people (and that has never happened). In order for America to become a democracy, didn’t the conflict have to come first–the colonies had to get rid of British control before we could begin our great experiment with democracy. So what’s the difference? 11Bravo–I appreciate your manner of presenting your argument.
The whole problem can be summed up with “(and that has never happened)”. It never will either, communism is a fraud of a theory.
red kcdad wrote:
“…. “What kind of man doesn’t relinquish a vacation if he knows his job is in jeopardy?” A man whose family is more important than his job. You don’t know anyone like that? “You should contact the ACLU or a good lawyer.” Ha ha! For what? To get a money settlement?????? THAT’S the whole problem!”
Concerning “A man whose family is more important than his job.”
I’m sorry, comrade, but it seems to me that a man losing the means of providing for his family’s welfare over a vacation may be more indicative of a probable hot-headed egomaniac than a man who puts his family first. A job is necessary, a vacation in not. Such adverse action would put a man’s family at risk. Most men would sacrifice for their family. But they wouldn’t sacrifice their job over a vacation.
‘“You should contact the ACLU or a good lawyer.” Ha ha! For what? To get a money settlement??????”.
No, Trotsky, not for money. I never mentioned money. Rather to clear your fathers name, recover what was allegedly illegally taken from your family and to expose illegal, unconstitutional government actions. You know. All the legal recourse one has freedom and liberty to undertake in America but cannot undertake in countries such as Cuba or China.
But I think what you wrote about your father is all a lie. I don’t believe any of it is true and was written and used only as a device. Typical.
11bravo, you are right about murder being endemic within communist philosophy. It has been about 20 years since I last read any communist literature, but in one book by a communist author (don’t recall which) the killing of opponents, intellectuals, etc., was advocated and justified. I’m sure red kcdad knows which book I am referring to.
I can only hope that kcdad moves to Cuba so he can report back to all of us on how wonderful the opportunities are there for those so fortunate to live in a communist society.
11bravo: “Not true at all, communism (note the little c) thrives on the idea of conflict between classes leading to an eventual revolution.”
Communism is CLASSLESS and STATELESS. Period end of story. EGALITARIAN.
George :”A job is necessary” …………. sigh
Guess what, George, Capitalists kill, too. They hire police and private security firms to kill workers who dare question company policies. Some of have even boasted of it. I bet you have no idea what I am referring to, do you? Sometimes they even coerce their government to go to war for them… REMEMBER THE MAINE? REMEMBER THE ALAMO? REMEMBER VIETNAM? REMEMBER IRAQ?
“I think what you wrote about your father is all a lie. I don’t believe any of it is true ”
Actually, this should have been written that you believe” what I wrote about my father was a lie, because you “believe” none of it is true. There is no thought in that statement at all… it is unfounded and presumptive belief… the hall mark of the average person I am afraid to say. I particularly like the presumptive jump from something not “any of it being true” to “all a lie”. I suppose that black and white distinction is important for some people…
CJ… don’t get bent out of shape… this isn’t personal at all. Just ask yourself, what advantage would America have over Cuba if it recognized it as a Socialist State? It has to call Cuba Communist… WHY? We used to be very happy calling the Soviet Union, China and other such governments “Socialist”, but not anymore… they have to be “Communist”. HINT: It is the same reason we call leftists “Liberals” in stead of “Progressives”. It is the same reason Bush’s administration was called “NEO-Cons” instead of just conservatives. It is the same reason BOTH sides of the aisle in our government are calling each other “fascists” and “nazis” and “racists”.
“recognize Cuba as communist” this doesn’t make any sense when the same sources define communism as a classless, stateless economic and political theory. If you take the time to muddle through Marx and Engels (and I don’t recommend it for the sleepy) you will find that Socialism is the state controlled guiding of a society towards this classless stateless way of life. It is the recognition that human beings are sheep and need leaders to organize and point them in a common direction. That is what the history of civilization is… the history of leaders pointing their people in common directions.. whether it was Martin Luther King, Jr., John Kennedy, FDR, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington or anyone else in our history… “the people” don’t do anything on their own… leaders must become the beacons of light behind which the people flock and follow… or not. People don’t follow ideas or ideals, they follow leaders. (Even many Christians can’t admit they would follow the teachings of Jesus without declaring him their “shepherd” and having him as their living Messiah to follow.)
mdd! if only to escape small minds and thoughtless judgments like yours… you tell me what does the US have or not have that makes it better than Cuba? Sure some people take boats and run away to Florida… how many run away from the US every year? How many corporations flee this country every year? Will you still be touting the holiness of capitalism when Caterpillar leaves Peoria? Or will you pack up and leave this “community” and go where the money is?
If you want to see Capitalism at work, go to Appalachia or better still Memphis. Take a look at Las Vegas… a close look… behind the lights. Look at Wall Street, not at the dazzling spectacle of numbers, but at what those numbers represent. What “value” does a mutual fund, stock or futures contract really hold? Taker a look a The Federal Reserve and who it is that is setting both domestic and foreign policy for this country.
America is a beautiful dream of some enlightened deists 240 years ago… it, like everything else greedy people get their hands on, was exploited, and perverted in to a massive power and wealth grab successfully accomplished by an elite majority of about 1/2 to 1% of the population.
LOL! Semantics. Only some sort of Klingon or meglomaniacal communist goes out of his way to make such stupid references to such negligible points as you have.
Actually, what I wrote “should have been written” just as it was written. You can take the words you’re supposedly having trouble with along with the belittlement and stick it, but the statement “I don’t believe any of it is true” is equally and as easily understood as your corrective bullshit adjunct, I “believe none of it is true”. Only an idiot communist or old scarecrow of an english teacher could care enough to make an issue of such insignificant subtleties and distinctions.
To write that I think what you wrote concerning your father as being lies is not unfounded. It may be presumptive, but to have “thought” that you were lying isn’t without foundation. One thing almost all communists have in common is an inherent element or mechanism to not just lie or dispense truth with economy but to obfuscate, detract and bewilder. One curious thing I’ve noticed is that most of you don’t refute this. You simply continued to obfuscate, distract, detract and lie. Many of your ilk seem proud of this. How perverse.
Your post to CJ and mdd…complete nonsense…another LOL moment!! What planet are you really from?
“To write that I think what you wrote concerning your father as being lies is not unfounded.”
Ok… on what is it founded?
Words don’t mean things… ok… I understand that. We agree that words have particular meaning in culture. Since you and I obviously disagree as to the meaning of words, I thought we might come to an understanding of what the words mean by looking at how the originator of the terms meant them.
Communist can mean All Beef Hotdog if you like. Believe can mean think, or know or even Tomato Soup if you wish.
“old scarecrow of an english teacher”
I think he talking to you, Sharon. (I’ve only subbed in English)
kcdad, no one who reads your second to last post is ever going to take you seriously again. You honestly think that Cuba its government, quality of life, etc… is comparable to the US. I am astonished that anyone as ignorant as you actually exists in the world, especially considering the way you constantly attack the intelligence of others.
That’s the wonderful thing about having been a teacher–I developed “a thick skin” and answered to many names–scarecrow was probably among them. George, am I to assume that you know me? I remember one time–in the old days when kids were afraid of the deans–a student called me an ugly “B…” I told him to take a second look to see if he wanted to change his mind. His reply was, “You’re looking better and better all the time.” He escaped the dean’s office. But I am offended that George didn’t capitalize English–lowercase communism is one thing–but english!
11Bravo: “is comparable to the US.”
Yes, I believe you can compare almost any two things…
I even think you can compare apples and oranges. They are both fruit, round, come in various sizes, colors and varieties, ripen on trees in a predictable amount of time, contain high levels of acid and sugars.
I am ignorant. The difference between me and you, apparently, is that you think you aren’t.
Sharon… please note, for the record, I capitalized English.
Kcdad: Already noted–you were just quoting. While I’m back on, let me stick my neck out once more. 11Bravo, darn it, I was giving you more credit, but regarding your last critique of Kcdad’s comments. You, like others, pick up on the 10% of what he says–the parts that are meant for shock value, meant to get the reaction that he knows he will get. Can’t you, at least, read carefully enough to get to the heart of what he is really saying–the 90% of what just has to make sense to anyone with an ounce of intelligence. What is so difficult to understand about his comments that ask Shakespeare’s question, “What’s in a name?” Words like “communist,” “liberal,” “conservative,”–the names that countries give themselves, the names that we give the groups to which we belong, the names we give to our enemies–do not always accurately define who we or our enemies really are. I for one am sick to death of hearing Glen Beck and his followers calling Obama a racist, a socialist, and a communist–a perfect example of the point Kcdad made above. Those of us who really love America do want to hold its faults (sins) up to the light–God will–so maybe we should before his judgment comes down hard on us (now Kcdad won’t agree with that bit of theology but we have to part company somewhere; however, I think we can do so without attacking each other at the personal level–just our ideas). I am always upset by the “America right or wrong mentality.”
Don’t any of you get what Kcdad is saying with his “shocking” statements about Cuba versus America? Do any of you deny that there are people in America who live in conditions that are just as bad as those in Cuba? He gives Appalachia as an example. A minister from my church was raised in Appalachia–he took people from Peoria there so that they could see that life for some in this country isn’t that wonderful. Maybe you all need to take some mission trips to places in the United States.
Let me second guess some of you. You will talk about this being the land of opportunity and that these people live in these conditions because of lack of motivation, laziness, and on and on. However, you will look at people in Cuba who may be living in the same conditions and will you blame those people? No, you will blame the government under which they live. Please, please, don’t you see the hypocrisy in that thinking? That kind of thinking certainly gives you an excuse for not doing anything to help the less fortunate in this country–for not wanting your government to do anything to help them. You will all talk about how all the “entitlements” have to end–about how you and yours pulled yourselves up by your own bootstraps. I do notice that most of the attacks on Kcdad seldom include any logic–just personal, emotional attacks. He always backs up his arguments with information that shows how well-read he is–I’m not getting that from many of you. Calling Kcdad ignorant and stupid–way off the mark. I don’t doubt that there is some information out there that some of you could use to disagree with him–but the personal attacks get the applause, so why bother with facts.
“Let me second guess some of you. You will talk about this being the land of opportunity and that these people live in these conditions because of lack of motivation, laziness, and on and on. However, you will look at people in Cuba who may be living in the same conditions and will you blame those people? No, you will blame the government under which they live. Please, please, don’t you see the hypocrisy in that thinking? That kind of thinking certainly gives you an excuse for not doing anything to help the less fortunate in this country–for not wanting your government to do anything to help them. You will all talk about how all the “entitlements” have to end–about how you and yours pulled yourselves up by your own bootstraps.”
Sorry for being a little short about this part of your post, but were you trying to make a point in there because I do not see one.
And with regards to the original argument, communism or Communism whatever you choose to refer to it, has when applied been a force for oppression, subjugation, and terror EVERY TIME it has been tried. Now if you want to make the argument that it is because of those in charge and they somehow perverted the “theory” fine, you are certainly entitled to. However at some point rational people have to assume that no matter the theoretical application a system that has been proven only to oppress people is evil regardless of the aims of the theory.
As to what is different between the US and Cuba Sharon, one word – opportunity. You talk about how we might make the “bootstrap” argument of course, because it happens every day in this country not in Cuba. Sure there are wide gaps between the highest of the upper class and the lowest of the lowest class in America, but once again no matter where your position along that spectrum is, you still have opportunity.
Finally, almost every single argument against kcdad begins with logic, however because he himself usually ignores it to make up history and facts the argument usually devolves.
11bravo: I give up–no hope–he that ears to hear let him hear–Something Biblical about what you do to the least of them you do to me–something about trying to make this a better country rather than by making excuses for its failures–obviously, if you don’t get my point, maybe this isn’t the way you think–then I would be sorry for misjudging. All I’m saying is that capitalism (or any other economic, political, or social system, for that matter) and the American way are not necessarily God’s way–and that we Christians should be very sure that we know the difference. I react to hearing “God Bless America,” in that I believe there are people who believe that America is special in God’s sight–almost a modern-day “chosen people.” Isn’t it Abraham Lincoln who said something to the effect that we shouldn’t ask if God is on our side; we said ask if we are on God’s side? My point in the above comment is simply that there are people in America that are no better off than people in Cuba–that whatever rights we enjoy are either not available to these people or that their state in life is such that the “inalienable” rights really are irrelevant to them. People who live in abject poverty don’t feel like they have rights. At the moment, I am thinking primarily of the health care issue–and wondering if there aren’t people in this country who have no better access to health care than do the people in Cuba.
“My point in the above comment is simply that there are people in America that are no better off than people in Cuba” So you are arguing that citizens of equal situation in each country are no better off even though the American has an infinitely greater availability of opportunity?
And I agree, the American way is not necessarily God’s way. It was never meant to be nor should it ever be. It does however allow for you to live by your God’s way as it does for others who don’t believe in the same god(s) as you. As for the feeling you get when someone says “God bless America”, almost every country’s citizens ask at one point or another for the blessing of their god on their country. Well, that is except for those communist countries where religious people, particularly Christians, are persecuted. So yeah I guess if you want to compare countries like Cuba, the former USSR, or China where practicing Christians like yourself would be taken away in the night for nothing more than practicing your beliefs, yeah I guess the USA is a lot like that.
No other country has sent more of its young men and women to fight and die to preserve the freedom of people not of its citizenry than the United States, please keep that in mind when you complain that we don’t do enough to help those less fortunate.
11Bravo: I agree with all of what you just said. I know all about persecuted Christians–and that persecution is increasing throughout the world. All of what I’ve said previously is just the other side of the coin–it doesn’t negate all the good things about America (and, of course, there’s no place I’d rather live, etc.) However, the good doesn’t negate the bad or make up for it. I was with you until you said, “keep that in mind when you complain that we don’t do enough to help those less fortunate.” I’m well aware that America and Christians do much to help people here and all over the world–I guess I’m just saying that all we believe about God would say that we shouldn’t ever feel we’ve done enough–or feel justified by comparing our government to Cuba’s government, etc. Am I wrong in believing that the message of Christianity never allows us as individuals or collectlively to look at others and pray the prayer of the Pharisees, “Thank God I am not as other men.” Can’t we substitue “Communists” or any other group as a synonym for “other men”? The truth of the matter is that the Christians in the countries where they are persecuted probably practice Christianity in a way that we can’t even imagine–and we wouldn’t know until our faith is tried that way if we are up to the challenge. And there is also the command about love your enemies–does that include communists or dare I say people that get on our nerves. 🙂
A proposal for KCDad (and Sharon):
Remember when Sharon, bam and Karrie wanted us all to play nice? Let’s you and I formally accept the entreaty.
I’ll stop being condescending, sarcastic or egotistical in all my comments on this blog and you can do the same. We’re not limiting the topics we speak about (we can still talk about communism, religion, D150 or anything else), and that will likely still cause some people to be condescending, sarcastic or egotistical to us. But we won’t return the insults.
However, I think we need some way to ensure that we honor this pledge – and consequences if we don’t. I don’t think you and I should get into arguments over what we might perceive as each others transgressions. I propose Sharon be the sole referee, so to speak.
As for consequences, if Sharon calls a foul on one of us, that person will agree to not comment on this blog for a week.
Do you (and Sharon) accept? Will you make that commitment with me?
Jon, no, I don’t accept–but you can feel free to chide me when I transgress–I am only responsible for my own sins. Besides you know full well that Kcdad would not agree to such a ridiculous pact–and, Jon, you are counting on that–whom do you think you’re kidding. 🙂 I have enough to do, trying to be sure three children play nicely together, sharing, etc. In fact, come to think of it they do a much better job of getting along than do the adults on this blog. Goodness, I can’t even keep my own promise to myself to keep from responding to comments on my favorite topics. Jon, I almost expected an altar call at the end of your comment–and I could hear “Just As I Am Without One Plea” in the background–not meant to be disrepectful because I always get emotional during altar calls.
“I do not see one.”
WOW. There’s a surprise.
“it happens every day in this country” What’s that? Suicide? Drug addiction? Violent crime citizen on citizen? Sexual Assault? someone “steals” a million dollars frmo consumers? What is it that happens every day in this country that youa re so proud of?
“begins with logic”
If that is true, you have failed to include in your written responses. (Platitudes and aphorisms are not logic) or maybe I just “do not see” it!
“Besides you know full well that Kcdad would not agree to such a ridiculous pact”
I wouldn’t agree only because there is no way to enforce it without CJ getting into the ISP addresses and determining if someone is using a pseudonym for their pseudonym…
and stop capitalizing kcdad!
Sharon… I do have to commend you on your “Thank God I am not like that sinner” interpretation.
That story comes from Luke 18 :10-
The two characters are the Pharisee and the tax collector.
Who are they? The socially accepted, prominent religious leader, and the tax collector, a traitor, a snake in the grass collecting money for Rome from his fellow Jews.
The pharisee boasts … I am not like OTHER men, I am special! Look at that guy over there!
The tax collector says simply… O God, have mercy on me, a sinner.
Which is it that Jesus praises and says go off acquitted of his sin?
For Jesus there is no self and other. There is only US. (and by that, I certainly do not mean U.S.)
For the trap (or the trick) of this story is very clever…
If we condemn the Pharisee, aren’t we in effect saying, “Thank God I am not like that Pharisee over there”? Doesn’t that make us JUST LIKE the Pharisee? OUCH!
So, then we step back and say “Thank God I am not like that guy over there who says ‘Thank God I am not like the Pharisee’.” OUCH OUCH!
THERE IS NO ESCAPING THIS PARABLE. (remember when I suggested the book “Listening to the Parables of Jesus”? The parable doesn’t teach us so much as it haunts us.)
“I wouldn’t agree ONLY (emphasis mine) because there is no way to enforce it without CJ getting into the ISP addresses and determining if someone is using a pseudonym for their pseudonym…”
Ok, we really don’t need CJ or Sharon to enforce it, do we?. I’ll simply give you the benefit of the doubt, and you do the same for me.
We just agree to not do it. To not be condescending, sarcastic or egotistical.
I’m saying here and again that I’m willing to do that. Are you, kcdad?
kcdad: Believe it or not, I have already considered the truth of what you say–that the reverse is also true that I cannot say “Thank God I am not like the Pharisee.” Actually, it is quite obvious that Biblical teaching doesn’t allow me to be excused of my sins if I can find someone that’s “more” of a sinner than I am. Notice I didn’t capitalize the k.
Jon, why can’t you lead by example?
;^) Just gotta love you, Sharon.
Makes me wonder…. why does The Lord’s Prayer literally say (in Greek): “forgive us our DEBTS, as we forgive our DEBTORS”?
Why did the Protestants change it to read “trespasses” (relating to property) or “sins”?
Sharon, I didn’t mean to give the impression that I would not lead by example.
kcdad, can you tell me if there is faulty logic in my previous post? You said there was only one reason you wouldn’t do it – I believe that reason is now removed. If you don’t want to do it, that’s fine. If you think it’s stupid, that’s fine. Would you do me the favor of explaining your thoughts on this?
Your word against my word? I wouldn’t offer an anonymous oath. It isn’t worth anything. When we meet, someday, Ill give you my word in person.
Humanitarian kcdad, explains in his posted text copied below, the communist rationalization for the just oppression of people. In it “human beings are sheep” and are led to become an ideal society by leaders who supposedly are not sheep but who presumably are human beings of a nature superior to the sheep, i.e., communists.
Of course the new communists in kcdad’s idealism won’t be anything like the old communists. The new and improved communists will be like MLK, JFK, FDR, Abe Lincoln, George Washington or “anyone else in OUR history”. No, the new communist won’t be anything like the rat Uncle Joe Stalin or Papa “4-Villa” Mao Zedong, Smiling Joey Broz Tito, Knuckleheaded Nicky Ceausescu or Cognac “the people’s person” Kim Jong-il. He implies the new communists will be more like a Jesus Christ. A shepherd. Maybe kcdad himself.
kcdad also states below that “the people” don’t do anything on their own” and “people don’t follow ideas or ideals, they follow leaders”. Given that, it must be interpreted that the leaders (Supreme?) are either Klingons like kcdad or people who also don’t follow ideas or ideals but rather pull their supreme leadership skills out of their as*es. I’m pretty sure that MLK, JFK and the rest did adhere to and were inspired by ideas or ideals as were countless other people. After all they were “human beings” like the rest of us. Except for kcdad. It is above us all (include U.S.).
Another lie of Kcdad’s — “We used to be very happy calling the Soviet Union, China and other such governments “Socialist”, but not anymore… they have to be “Communist”.
Maybe Kcdad called them “Socialist” but most people reading this blog probably have been around as long as commie kcdad to witness the communist era in full swing. The communist regimes were always called “communist”, er, I’m sorry, “Communist” (as though capitalization makes a freaking difference unless you’re a writer, an*l teacher, editor or publisher). The only exception would be Russia which was mostly called the Soviet Union but at times was called Communist Russia. We had communist Poland, Communist Bulgaria, communist Yugoslavia, communist Hungry, always Communist Cuba and the rest. Very, very seldom was any communist state or organisation ever, ever called “Socialist”. Yes, socialist East Bloc, socialist Czechoslovakia, LOL! Didn’t happen. Media, state department, White House, as well as 100’s of other nations and organisations…all called a spade a spade. Communist. The “pure” garbage that they were and the “pure” garbage some still are.
Kcdad says – – “It is the recognition that human beings are sheep and need leaders to organize and point them in a common direction…..the people” don’t do anything on their own… leaders must become the beacons of light behind which the people flock and follow… or not. People don’t follow ideas or ideals, they follow leaders. (Even many Christians can’t admit they would follow the teachings of Jesus without declaring him their “shepherd” and having him as their living Messiah to follow.)”
Humanitarian kcdad, explains in his posted text copied below, the communist rationalization for the just oppression of people. In it “human beings are sheep” and are led to become an ideal society by leaders who supposedly are not sheep but who presumably are human beings of a nature superior to the sheep, i.e., communists.
Of course the new communists in kcdad’s idealism won’t be anything like the old communists. The new and improved communists will be like MLK, JFK, FDR, Abe Lincoln, George Washington or “anyone else in OUR history”. No, the new communist won’t be anything like the rat Uncle Joe Stalin or Papa “4-Villa” Mao Zedong, Smiling Joey Broz Tito, Knuckleheaded Nicky Ceausescu or Cognac “the people’s person” Kim Jong-il. He implies the new communists will be more like a Jesus Christ. A shepherd. Maybe kcdad himself.
kcdad also states below that “the people” don’t do anything on their own” and “people don’t follow ideas or ideals, they follow leaders”. Given that, it must be interpreted that the leaders (Supreme?) are either Klingons like kcdad or people who also don’t follow ideas or ideals but rather pull their supreme leadership skills out of their as*es. I’m pretty sure that MLK, JFK and the rest did adhere to and were inspired by ideas or ideals as were countless other people. After all they were “human beings” like the rest of us. Except for kcdad. It is above us all (include U.S.).
Another lie of Kcdad’s — “We used to be very happy calling the Soviet Union, China and other such governments “Socialist”, but not anymore… they have to be “Communist”.
Maybe Kcdad called them “Socialist” but most people reading this blog probably have been around as long as commie kcdad to witness the communist era in full swing. The communist regimes were always called “communist”, er, I’m sorry, “Communist” (as though capitalization makes a freaking difference unless you’re a writer, an*l teacher, editor or publisher). The only exception would be Russia which was mostly called the Soviet Union but at times was called Communist Russia. We had communist Poland, Communist Bulgaria, communist Yugoslavia, communist Hungry, always Communist Cuba and the rest. Very, very seldom was any communist state or organisation ever, ever called “Socialist”. Yes, socialist East Bloc, socialist Czechoslovakia, LOL! Didn’t happen. Media, state department, White House, as well as 100’s of other nations and organisations…all called a spade a spade. Communist. The “pure” garbage that they were and the “pure” garbage some still are.
Kcdad says – – “It is the recognition that human beings are sheep and need leaders to organize and point them in a common direction…..the people” don’t do anything on their own… leaders must become the beacons of light behind which the people flock and follow… or not. People don’t follow ideas or ideals, they follow leaders. (Even many Christians can’t admit they would follow the teachings of Jesus without declaring him their “shepherd” and having him as their living Messiah to follow.)”
georgia:
Thanks for rewriting me entire post. Perhaps others will chance to see it now.
Was there a criticism somewhere you were trying to express? It seems rather than addressing the post, you rewrote it so you could knock down your own straw man.
“The communist regimes were always called “communist”,”
Which communist regimes were called communist? The Union of Soviet Socialists Republics? The People’s Republic of China? Sure there have always been Joseph McCarthys around to call people names. Of course people have been called Reds, Commies, Pinkos.. all kinds of things… But Political Scientists, educated and intelligent people recognized the difference then and now.
Of course we can’t expect Rush and Sean and Glenn and the other minions of Rupert Murdock to know the difference.. they don’t have 1 year of college between them (I am pretty sure). But no one dared called an American Administration or their policies communist until they came along. In the past we reserved the word socialist or in the 80s and 90s, the L word: liberal. Theses names were never meant to be accurate, or informational, simply inflammatory. The thing is, “communist” is only an insult to the ignorant. To the educated Christian it is the highest ideal!
“He implies the new communists will be more like a Jesus Christ” I implied no such thing, and you could not inferred that from what I wrote. YOU JUST MADE THAT UP FOR ITS INFLAMMATORY VALUE. How creative!
“human beings are sheep” You have a problem with this analogy? You think societies can exist without some leadership? Can a society be government-less?
Put more than 3 people in a room and just watch. A leader will be “chosen” within minutes, or, the three will either all sit in corners and ignore each other or fight.
Why do you think so many companies are taking polls? Because they care what you think? Or because you want to know what EVERYONE ELSE THINKS? As a people we know more about Survivior, Desperate Housewives and WWE then we do about Afghanistan, Pakistan, Homeland Security or The Securities and Exchange Commission. We know what Oprah and Tom Cruise believes, we know what our preachers believe, but we don’t even know what we believe. What do you believe, we are asked. and we respond: “BAAAAAAAAAA, my mother told me, BAAAAAAAAA my teacher told me, BAAAAAAAAAA my preacher told me, BAAAAAAAAAA the History book says, BAAAAAAAA said Rush Limbaugh.”
Don’t get angry with me because you are being challenged to think for the first time in your adult life.
“leaders who supposedly are not sheep but who presumably are human beings of a nature superior to the sheep”
I see you are familiar with Orwell’s Animal Farm… very good. But don’t confuse it Animal House. You may even understand that it is a story about animals, but is really about people. He uses the a literary device known as metaphor. ALL of the animals are people. ALL of the people are animals.
With me so far?
OK… if people are sheep, ALL people are sheep. All are looking for a leadership… sometimes the sheep in the front of the herd is selected simply because he/she happens to be there. As long as he/she is moving, (or any creature, including a dog, or human) the rest of the sheep will follow.
If the critics of Bush would just have shut up, we would happily have to gone to war in Iran, North Korea and anywhere else Bush had led us. If the critics would shut up about Obama, we would gladly follow him into national health care (NATIONAL, not universal) or any thing else. Critics re necessary or we as human beings, just another flock animal like sheep… (LIKE sheep, is that better than we ARE sheep)… would follow whoever led us wherever they happened to go.
I know. You don’t believe this. You think you have free will and liberty and choice and all that good stuff. So how do you explain the holocaust in Germany? The rape of Nanking in 1937, the crusades, Ku Klux Klan, The Rodney King Riots in 1992, The Nation of Islam, David Duke, Televangelists, Shopping Network, etc etc
The sad truth is you only have a choice if someone offers you a choice. We prefer not to choose… we might choose poorly.
The only difference between kcdad’s communism and Soviet/PRC/N. Korean communism is that kcdad isn’t in power.
Actually, again, you are wrong. My communism is in power all over the world, in families, in churches, in groups of people living as God intended.
Your communism doesn’t exist anywhere… “Communist Government”… talk about your oxymorons.
I rest my case.
Thank God. What took you so long? I think you will have to admit that I have NEVER mentioned a communist government before. (If I am wrong please quote and reference where I did.) You and the others have been talking about “communist” Cuba, Russia, China, and Stalin, Chavez and everyone and everything else that you don’t like.
Kcdad: It took me a long time to realize that you weren’t talking about a Communist “government,” but once I figured it out your arguments made much more sense to me. The problem, I believe, is that so many bring their own connotation of Communism to the discussion–those from my era that went through all of the fear of the United States being taken over by the Soviet Union.
If you two are going to “intellectually” fawn over each other, please take it somewhere else so the rest of us don’t become ill. Really. This used to be a more engaging blog before you two hijacked it.
Get A room: Clearly, as an anonymous blogger you can take advantage of the opportunity to be a total jerk. Why is it that people who agree are more offensive to you than are people who disagree. Also, please be more original by using your own words–I am the one who spoke of myself as having hijacked the blog. At least, I’m trying not to take up as much blog space.
Sharon you can’t escape a communist/Communist government when having any discussion about the topic. If people choose to live under a Communist or communist system it is still a government. It is the rules under which people choose (or in real communist governments) or are forced to live.