God and Communism

Justice, like beauty, is in the mind of the beholder. What may be just to you may not be just to others. Ask the looser in any civil or criminal court case if they thought justice was served.

.

 

Everybody has a sense of "justice." "Justice" can be explained in many ways, (equality, purity, simplicity, love, etc.) Everybody's view of justice must be considered equal for there to be justice, but the view of injustice should be rejected. Therefore, everybody wants "justice," and this is done by rejecting injustice.

I hope I'm being more clear, please be specific.

 

Totally different topics. Nothing to do with justice.

Preposterous. Again, Justice is a concept; You can't see it, touch it, feel it or smell it, it exists in your mind only, like love. Here's a challenge, post a picture of justice so we can see it. The very best you could ever do is a picture of what you think is a just act, outcome or decision.

The Bible speaks of justice as "an eye for an eye," but, is it? It sounds more like revenge to me, another concept. American law speaks of Justice in terms of equity, fines, prison and death. And of course, my favorite, the Buddhists:

http://www.urbandharma.org/bcdialog/bcd2/justice.html

What everyone wants is revenge and equity, not to be confused with equality.

You are.

When I look at your chosen screen name, it's no surprise that you would tend to bring philosophical concepts into reality. I've been there, from Plato to Sartre and from the Bible to the Buddha, all of which are nothing more than concepts by which one may attempt to regulate his personal life.

All too often, one man's justice is another's peril. Justice is an illusion that plays out in the minds of men; and attempts to bring it into reality only create injustice in those same minds. True Justice can only be given, can never be taken or imposed, and only exists in reality when one man demonstrates his respect for another.

.

 

Maybe I'm not clear.

Justice has absolute authority over "justice."
And none of us are justice itself.

As I said,
All views of justice are equally just,
Only if they are just, not unjust.
And we seem to agree.

Concepts aren't useful?
Scientific concepts are useless?

 

This reminds me of a dog chasing it's tail, The second time I read it I got dizzy and fell on the floor.

Shared concepts can be, personal concepts only serve to guide an individual. Forcing individual concepts on society is Totalitarianism, or in the case of where I think you're going with this, a Theocracy.

A contradiction in terms, scientists deal with facts.


You keep avoiding my question, which requires a simple yes or no. Are you now, or have you ever been a Christian Apologist?

I think we need a definition of the term:

 

Religion is just another form of government.

 

I just looked out the window and a pig flew by.

We agree on something.

.

 

Maybe this is better...

Each of the following are equally just views of justice:

To view justice as injustice is unjust.
To view injustice as justice is unjust.

To view justice as justice is just.
To view injustice as injustice is just.

All views of justice (as justice) are just.
All views of justice (as injustice) are unjust.

All views of injustice (as justice) are unjust.
All views of injustice (as injustice) are just.

Any view that contradicts these is unjust, and should be rejected.

Justice is a shared concept as an ideal (perfection) or value.
Catholicism describes what it believes perfect justice is.
Civil laws can only be imperfectly just at best.
Therefore, Catholicism can never be civil law,
Even though both pursue justice.

I'm not suggesting totalitarianism nor a theocracy.

So, there is no such a thing as "scientific concepts?"

I don't remember you asking.

If "scientific concepts" don't exist,
What do you mean by "Christian Apologist?"

A theocracy is equal to any other form of government?

 

All you've said here is, "justice is just because it's justice." It's still circular reasoning.

Justice is not a shared concept because we all do not define justice in the same way.

I can agree with that. The Catholic church put it's "perfect justice" into action with the "Inquisition" and it's sanction of the Spanish genocide in the Americas.

But it was for hundreds of years, the darkest years of human history.

The terms "concept" and "theory" have completely different meannings when applied to science. For example, anybody can have a theory about anything, but a "scientific theory" is considered as a fact.

See http://carm.org/

Only if you are a member of the religion in control, all other individuals are marginalized.

.

 

dammit jack, i'm about a half a second away from bad-repping you for wasting your own time

:bobby:

 

If that is what you have to say about the Roman Catholic ascendency, what is there left to say about the Third Reich?

 

to be fair, neither the holy roman empire nor the third reich ever encompassed the entire world

but in their limited sphere of influence, the catholic hierarchy at various times did attempt such that would rival the nazis, though without the sheer efficiency of the latter

 

I guess you aren't aware that the Catholic Church supported the Führer:
http://atheism.about.com/od/adolfhitlernazigermany/tp/NaziChristiansGermany.01.htm

or that the Office of the Inquisition at the Vatican didn't officially close until late in the 20th century.

.

 

Those are individual Catholics. They did not speak for the entire church.

Hitler's Table Talk consists of remarks Adolf Hitler made in private to friends and associates. These comments were copied with his permission. The edition I have was translated by Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens, with an introduction by H.R. Trevor-Roper. It was published by enigma books, with a copyright of 2000.

In private Hitler had a number of things to say about Christianity. I will copy several comments, along with the page number.

"The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew." page 7

"The man of today, who is formed by the disciplines of science, has likewise ceased taking the teachings of religion very seriously. What is in opposition to the laws of nature cannot come from God. Moreover, thunderbolts do not spare churches. A system of metaphysics that is drawn from Christianity and founded on outmoded notions does not correspond to the level of modern knowledge." page 123

"When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunized against the disease." page 145

"Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity." page 343

"The Church of today is nothing more than a hereditary joint stock company for the exploitation of human stupidity." page 607

 

the office of the inquisition?

 

http://atheism.about.com/od/adolfhitlernazigermany/tp/NaziChristiansGermany.htm

​

All of the inquisitions were sanctioned by and led by THE CHURCH, as were THE CRUSADES. The Catholic Church, and the Protestants, saw Hitler's war as another crusade designed to kill off the competition.

The quotes that you posted are private, Hitler publicly catered to the Christian community to gain their support, just like American politicians have kissed Billy Graham's ass since Eisenhower.

And, let's not forget the suppression of Science led by the Catholic church.

Have you studied any history at all?

.

 

The entire document here:
http://www.concordatwatch.eu/showkb.php?org_id=858&kb_header_id=752&kb_id=1211

.

 

A Concordat is a diplomatic agreement between the Vatican and a country with a large Roman Catholic population. It is not a statement of approval any more than American diplomatic recognition of the Third Reich prior to the bombing of Pearl harbor was.

The Vatican has signed Concordats with many countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concordat

The Nazi movement was less overtly atheistic than Communism, but the Third Reich was thoroughly non Christian.

I haven't been able to find it on the internet, but I believe it was an Arch Bishop of Canterbury who during the 1930s explained the theological difference between Communism and Nazism, "Communism is a Christian heresy. Nazism is anti-Christian paganism."

 

Ratified 10 September 1933][Concordat]

His Holiness Pope Pius XI and the President of the German Reich

Another point worth making is that in September 1933 the President of the German Reich was Paul von Hindenburg. He had defeated Hitler in the election of 1932 twice, first in the general election, and then in the run off election. Unlike Hitler, von Hindenburg was a devout Roman Catholic.

This was not an agreement between the Vatican and the Nazi dictatorship, but between the Vatican and the democratically elected government of Germany.

 

"German Catholics And Hitler's Wars"
a book by Gordon Zahn

The rest of the review here:
http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/isr/vol25/no02/weisman.html

.