matty b (emocausescancer) wrote in punx4christ,
matty b

<<< not really a punk.... but

Thats right im not much of a punk, but i definetly am a hooligan if that counts for anything........ So im not really down with anarchy...... it doesnt really work so well with christianity, because anarchy is usually associated with nhilism(sp?) and that doesnt go with christianity at all....... i recall one time i was reading tony fuzz'z xanga ( a guy from dXc{its a semi-local punk band that might be broken up but i dont really know}) but he talked about his theory called Godarchy one time and it was the idea that there was anarchy through christ, and that we wouldnt need a goverment if everyone was a true beleiver

ok im done
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

nihilism: Philosophy.

1. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
2. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated

i thinkthat you're confusing anarchy as chaos, which isn't necessarily true, because anarchy can be a way toward peace and there can be organization without hierarchy

dxc is still together? me and tony fuzz used to roll together back in the day. i am familiar with his beliefs, but i dont necessarily agree with them all.

not everyone is a believer, however. so while we're here on earch, i dont think we need a necessary hierarchy of power.

but, yes, i believe in heaven itll be a god-archy.


yeah but how can you say anarchy wouldnt equal chaos? its total freedom from everything except yourself, right? i know some peoples ideas of anarchy differ, but i think the main idea is supposed to be you govern yourself so for thoes people without morals ( and i know a ton of them) could just kill, rape, and do whatever they want for their own gratification
whoops i forgot to add something...... Actually i dont think anarchy could really happen unless everyone lived in isolation, for example say all your friends were sitting around hungry because they were all out of food in this post-apocolyptic-anarchistic future, and you still had food and you shared it with them that would be a form of leadership that you would of just taken right so prove me wrong so we can keep talking
leadership, not government. people would still be equals [ie; no hierarchy] even though some people naturally tend to raise to leadership more than others. that doesnt nesscessarily have to creatre government.

anarchy could happen if everyone worked together and weren't bond together by fear that this capitalist society [assuming you live in america since you said you know tony fuzz] creates.

the thing is, although there would be no hierarchy of law, the people would interviene. if someone rapes someone they not only fear the people acting as the law, they also fear getting kicked out of the Co-op. there would still be consequences without government
hmm i see what your saying, but thats assumeing that all people would have the moral background to feel that someone raping or killing someone would be wrong
well, wether or not they would have the moral conviction they would have the social pressures to force them into this way of thinking. more than the law keeps us from doing these things, its the fear of rejection from our peers and mentors and the logical consequence that would come from any close community that wasn't threaded together by fear. because, honestly, its never the cops that keeps me from stealing, its the thought that people would look down on me and the thought that the "system" wouldnt be getting hurt, just the lower associates paychecks.

assuming you were half witted i would imagine you were completely disregarding the roman emperors ( Constantine ) role in eradicating all but the most "popular" teachings of christ in a bitch-slap to the face of a dignified understanding in christs unpopular teachings which harmonizes destruction-love-chaos- and peace into a less compact but more fulfilling answer. now for all the idiots who think they "know" what christ was doing in reference to any modern day bible are the same poeple who are too ignorant and uneducated to murmur a fucken word. here is one for you though Gnostic. not agnostic.or maybe this might be easier for you, christian fundamentalist ., then you will understand that you are talking about a religion stemming from on mans quest to belittle a philosophical pov that cleared 216 digit patterns you couldnt fathom. the very depth of that kind of concept must be too difficult to grasp for you i know, breathe deep, relax, then get a clue.

fascist pigs.
I had to read your arguement three times to understand your arguement so here are some little tips:

1) When making an arguement; CAPITALIZE. It really helps so you dont have to read things over and decipher where things end and begin.

2) Sentences shouldnt be so dang long. Say what the fuck you mean and say it with the most powerful words possible. Don't beat around the bush

3) Don't assume anything. Not only am I NOT a "Christian Fundementalist", I am a Bible University drop out who knows a thing or two about this shit, so dont say "its too difficult for all you dumb christians to grasp." Blanket statements are not only Un-P.C., but they hurt feelings too!

Anyway, in response to what you have said, I don't think you need to look at Christianity from a Gnostic perspective to see Anarchy. I don't see anything contradictory in the Canon Gospel we have now.