The Instigator
Sidex
Pro (for)
The Contender
HepEbolAids
Con (against)

Jesus wanted a socialistic economy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Argument Due
We are waiting for HepEbolAids to post argument for round #2. If you are HepEbolAids, login to see your options.
Time Remaining
00days03hours47minutes08seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/1/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 days ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 156 times Debate No: 97541
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (22)
Votes (0)

 

Sidex

Pro

My argument is that Jesus Christ was a socialist at heart. To debate me on this, you need to know the differences in the economic classifications and a knowledge of the Christ. I chose to classify this as Philosophy because ultimately I am always trying to find the truth. One of the key differences to know is that socialism is an economic class and communism is a government class. You should not assume that they are the same thing. Argue to whatever extent you would like, however, I am putting forth a theorem that has not been proven wrong, thus implies truth. If you can rebuke the theorem with reason and logic, then I am completely wrong. I will speak in pseudo occasionally, but it is still your responsibility to find meaning and create appropriate counter arguments. Be warn, if you interpret the Christ's words incorrectly, I will make note of it and attribute it to your ego which causes your bias. You either can this as an attack or you can assume that I'm doing this because I honestly want to change your way of thinking. Know yourself, do not be arrogant. I will not stand for arrogance.

Assumption: Christ words are from the Gospel, or the books, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the bible. You must concede to this.

In addition, understand there is a difference between reason and assumption. I do take people's bias into account of my reason. However, if you can prove my reason to be wrong, then I have made an assumption in which I will admit when I am mistaken or wrong. I can be mistaken about how I identified a constant or variable, but that does not mean my logic and reason is wrong.

I reserve the right to change my mind when presented with new information or evidence based on reason and logic. May the truth be revealed.

My theorem: The Objectivity of Morality

What is right and wrong is what one should or should not do.
"The sole meaning of life is serving Humanity." -Leo Tolstoy
It is right to follow the sole meaning of life.
The only way to serve Humanity is maintaining its existence.
Therefore, it is right for Humanity to survive.
Thus it is wrong for Humanity to become extinct.
You should not maliciously or apathetically end Humanity.

This theorem has been debated, so I recommend not wasting your time on now futile arguments. Read the comments as well.

http://www.debate.org...
HepEbolAids

Con

Yes you are right socialism isn"t a government it is an economic class, yes socialism can be a political stand point and the government can enforce socialism but at the core of the term socialism is an economic conduct. Economics is the social science that describes the factors that determine the production, distribution and consumption of goods and services. Yes, OUR society and government are related however not all of them have a government and all of them have an economy so socialism isn"t inherently a government or political standpoint.

Yes, morality is a principle concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behavior, and yes it is right to fallow the sole meaning of life; however not everyone has the same outlook on life and in other countries and in different times, people have had very different views on what is moral and what is not. And yes, to you and me and probably most of the world, it would be great for humanity to survive; however, sometimes to ensure the survival of those you care about, you must eliminate the those who intend to do them harm, that is why we have war. We do the things that are morally wrong because we want to stop others from doing those things to us. So is it bad to do wrong to your fellow man? Morality is a little more complicated than write and wrong, there is also "more right" and "more wrong" there are good and bad things you can do and there are god and bad reasons for doing them, there are good and bad things to have and there are good and bad ways of getting those things.

And yes in order for us to debate this, we will go ahead and assume that god is real and that Jesus is real, but since there are many interpretations of the bible we can"t just go with one. So I would suggest that you refrain from using bible reference since what it teaches us is completely subjective to your own beliefs, religion, study method, or translation.
As for the actual theory of Jesus being a socialist, if god had intended for the world to be a socialist society he would not have given man greed, the reason socialism doesn"t work is because everyone wants to have more that someone else, the way people judge the quality of their lives is largely based on the stuff they have, and the judge the stuff they have by comparing it to the stuff their friends have. Humans are greedy and will always want more of something whether it is control, money, power, property, anything if god had intended for us to be socialists why did he make us so greedy.
My reasoning is up for debate, but I would like to also hear your reasoning behind your opinion.
Debate Round No. 1
Sidex

Pro

Two problems, I need to use gospel verses to explain why I think Jesus wanted a socialistic economy. Secondly, as you click on the link and read why I say man's ego gets the way of interpreting what Jesus really wanted, maybe you can begin to realize that mankind doesn't have everything figured out. However, in order prove me wrong, then you essentially have to first prove my theorem wrong. Go ahead, by all means, prove it wrong.

I argued this point anyway in another debate so just read it there, it'll save me time and effort. This whole sources thing really backfired on you guys. Everything that I say from my theorem's point of logic can't be proven wrong because my theorem needs to be proven wrong first. (Jesus might have said something like this too when he was talking to the Pharisees.) It's like i have an unlimited amount or words to express my point of view. You are basing every assumption you ever made on the predilection that Mankind has it right. Well if Mankind was right, then why do we have so many wars, why are we so divided? Are we not one species on this planet with a finite amount of resources? Are you telling me that we should give most of those resources to people who literally does not care about saving humanity? I am using money to represent all the resources one individual is capable of possessing. Did you know that they are sociopaths in which they are not morally obligated to share any of those resources? Should we then have an economic system to cap someone from obtaining most of the resources Humanity needs to survive?
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
jon if you have any questions just message me, you do seem interested in what I have to say
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
this argument is that "Jesus wanted a socialistic economy" I did this argument for any Christian that wants a capitalistic economy. I grow weary of people misinterpreting his words to fit a bad economy, now if guys want to my last few sentences f the argument, please go ahead, there wasn't any religious aspect to it.
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
there is no implication with that theorem, but the implication comes later the argument
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
read the comments as well
Posted by Jonbonbon 2 days ago
Jonbonbon
I clicked on the link, but your analysis of objective morality was jumbled and didn't make sense. I couldn't tell what your point was.
Posted by HepEbolAids 2 days ago
HepEbolAids
EXACTLY! that's what I've been trying to get at, does Odin want capitalism or is he into pizza?
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
I think the "real" question is. And an answer that "would matter". Is..Does Odin want capitalism ?
Posted by canis 2 days ago
canis
It does not matter what you think anybody wants. What anybody wants does not matter..I want to winn 1000.000 $...I could be jesus.
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
Oh your trying to speak pseudo, yeah dude, only autistics can do that
Posted by Sidex 2 days ago
Sidex
Canis i don't what your implying right now, why don't you give me the whole sentence so I can clear it up for you. If I mispoke by the way, Then I would love the opportunity to correct myself. Believe or not, despite how confident I am, I am aware that my lack of education prohibits me from articulating in a perfect clear manner. But as you already should know, even the most physically unattractive people can have the biggest hearts. I will always choose them over you.
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.