I think its for both. Stealing is crime and all people does not want to be straling their property because we work hard for it. And for those people who like to steal or its a disease to them and they felt no mercy by doing that.
And its much better to secure our personal property and trust no one.
Topic: Thou shall not steal (Read 529 times)
In your view, was this commandment created by someone poor or rich?
We have seven deadly sins right, I think we can say that it is for the poor because of the fact that on the seven sins is the envy, because of the envy unto the person materialistically aspect, they will tend to steal to somehow satisfied or to have that object which they can't have.
But then again it is a rule a commandment to be obeyed, it should be followed and then again we have equall rights and God see us equally so i think its not used by or created by poor and rich.
Quote
But I think it does not really require much explanation... religion is used to justify the social order since thousands of years ago.
So we are assuming that "Social order" is a result of "Religion" or can you substantiate it?
Please simply re-read and apply logic correctly.
Quote
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
Care to explain how? An example would be great...
I would say is quite obvious... one of the main ideas behind most is that there is a God, ergo if someone is rich is God´s will and should not be challenged. But I think it does not really require much explanation... religion is used to justify the social order since thousands of years ago.
This is why Karl Max opined that religion is the opium of the masses. It makes the people feel lackadaisical about the affairs of governance and decisions that could better their lives, community and society.
They leave so much to the clergy to decide for them which at many times could be selfish outcome and not for the general good. The masses are so blind to certain reality because of religion.
In your view, was this commandment created by someone poor or rich?
It is regardless. It would probably created with neutrality without basing if someone is rich or poor but depends on one's own virtue and dignity. If it is not a religious one that is the most logical reason.
Quote
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
Care to explain how? An example would be great...Certainly in the past it was that way. Look at the size of the average church/cathedral compared to the shacks the peasants were living in.
Thought we were talking about "Religions" not "Religion".
Quote
But I think it does not really require much explanation... religion is used to justify the social order since thousands of years ago.
So we are assuming that "Social order" is a result of "Religion" or can you substantiate it?
Quote
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
Care to explain how? An example would be great...
I would say is quite obvious... one of the main ideas behind most is that there is a God, ergo if someone is rich is God´s will and should not be challenged. But I think it does not really require much explanation... religion is used to justify the social order since thousands of years ago.
I feel like this verse has a much deeper meaning... This can totally apply to things like climate change, We are stealing from future generations their habitable environment. It's not like that the Rich don't steal from poor, We have countless examples where this has happened.
There is not a simple answer to your question TBH. One can argue it was written by a rich person to ensure his Power/Wealth remains in his control, but we didn't have a democratic system back then. It was a literal "Free" world. One could kill you and take your stuff. So the word "stealing" doesn't make much sense. The verse could have been something like Do not "kill" others for your gains. Stealing is a lighter word in this scenario.
The only issue I have with People nowadays is that they believe the capitalist society is the only answer to the modern world. They aren't open to new ideas and if you suggest an alternative, those in power come crashing down on you along with their zombies which have been mass-produced under their "System".
Care to explain how? An example would be great...
There is not a simple answer to your question TBH. One can argue it was written by a rich person to ensure his Power/Wealth remains in his control, but we didn't have a democratic system back then. It was a literal "Free" world. One could kill you and take your stuff. So the word "stealing" doesn't make much sense. The verse could have been something like Do not "kill" others for your gains. Stealing is a lighter word in this scenario.
Quote
"There is a big difference here, and most rich people get where they are by stealing profit from their employees. Profit is really just unpaid value that workers created so they are taking back what was taken from them."
The only issue I have with People nowadays is that they believe the capitalist society is the only answer to the modern world. They aren't open to new ideas and if you suggest an alternative, those in power come crashing down on you along with their zombies which have been mass-produced under their "System".
Quote
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
Care to explain how? An example would be great...
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
I totally agree. Religion is a method of social control. A very effective one too, particularly in early societies. You don't even need a police force if you have a simple rule sheet and an omniscient celestial overseer who can condemn you to hell for any infraction.
Thou shall not steal is one of the commandments that makes up the ten commandments. I don't think it was made by the rich against the poor or vice versa. It is made to work in our conscience not to take what does not belong to us. So, even the rich take what belongs to the poor. For instance, banks do fraud customers who are usually poor people off their money in different ways like illicit and unexplainable changes etc.
I think it could be either of the two, for they could both possibly have their reason why they came up with such. It's probably because they care about their properties. Whether it was earned through the easy way or the hard way, they surely both exerted sufficient efforts to gain such.
The bottom line is, regardless of the social status, and regardless of who created that commandment, it shall always be kept in mind by all of us that "thou shall not steal."
The bottom line is, regardless of the social status, and regardless of who created that commandment, it shall always be kept in mind by all of us that "thou shall not steal."
If you look carefully, religions have put a greater burden and responsibilities on the neck of riches.
If you look carefully, religions make sure that the poor stay poor.
You can't live harmoniously in a town if a neighbor is stealing your stuff, trying to kill you, or tool your wife.
Actually, the earliest human groups did not have the concept of mine or yours, particularly the concept of "your wife" as something owned, and they did live harmoniously.
Stealing is perfectly fine as long as it is done big banks and big corporations. 
Banks keep stealing the value of our currency in the name of inflation but no one got aware of what is happening. 
Fuck bankers especially FED.
Stealing is perfectly fine as long as it is done big banks and big corporations.
There is a big difference here, and most rich people get where they are by stealing profit from their employees. Profit is really just unpaid value that workers created so they are taking back what was taken from them.
Both. Huge businessmen and corrupt officials steal for their personal gratifications which is driven by their own greed. On the other hand, poor people tend to steal in order to survive. Scarcity of basic necessities is the usual reason behind this, it pushes them into their limits to commit stealing even though they knew from the very beginning that it was not a good thing. They are like facing a "no choice" situation so I can't blame them.
If you will ask me if they're the same, I say YES. It doesn't matter whether you only stole a piece of apple or millions of money, stealing is stealing — it was a sin. However, I believe that sometimes in life the end justifies the means so I'll be more compassionate for the poor ones if proven guilty.
If you will ask me if they're the same, I say YES. It doesn't matter whether you only stole a piece of apple or millions of money, stealing is stealing — it was a sin. However, I believe that sometimes in life the end justifies the means so I'll be more compassionate for the poor ones if proven guilty
. There is a big difference here, and most rich people get where they are by stealing profit from their employees. Profit is really just unpaid value that workers created so they are taking back what was taken from them.
Both.
Exactly.
Rich people afford to hire others to protect their goods. So not stealing only saves them some money, no biggy.
Poor(er) people don't afford that. If somebody steals their crops they are f***ed.
I guess that at some point it has become obvious to everybody that works that stealing is bad.
Both. Huge businessmen and corrupt officials steal for their personal gratifications which is driven by their own greed. On the other hand, poor people tend to steal in order to survive. Scarcity of basic necessities is the usual reason behind this, it pushes them into their limits to commit stealing even though they knew from the very beginning that it was not a good thing. They are like facing a "no choice" situation so I can't blame them.
If you will ask me if they're the same, I say YES. It doesn't matter whether you only stole a piece of apple or millions of money, stealing is stealing — it was a sin. However, I believe that sometimes in life the end justifies the means so I'll be more compassionate for the poor ones if proven guilty.
If you will ask me if they're the same, I say YES. It doesn't matter whether you only stole a piece of apple or millions of money, stealing is stealing — it was a sin. However, I believe that sometimes in life the end justifies the means so I'll be more compassionate for the poor ones if proven guilty
.
Not a religious scholar.
But when there are verses like this, it shouldn't be referred to automatically to the rich protecting their properties lmao.
Then there are verses specific to rich (those who can afford) to give compulsory charity. There are verses that says they shouldn't ignore a needy.
When someone has enough wealth, chances of their sinning is more. If they spend a cent on gambling, it's a sin. If they spend it on immoral luxury (having affairs beside their wives) it's a sin. To buy slaves and torture them is also a great sin.
If you look carefully, religions have put a greater burden and responsibilities on the neck of riches. The poor? They don't have the responsibility of chatity. Whatever they earn, they eat and survive only.
Assuming God and afterlife is real, poor people are at an advantage than the rich who posses "earthly" wealth
But when there are verses like this, it shouldn't be referred to automatically to the rich protecting their properties lmao.
Then there are verses specific to rich (those who can afford) to give compulsory charity. There are verses that says they shouldn't ignore a needy.
When someone has enough wealth, chances of their sinning is more. If they spend a cent on gambling, it's a sin. If they spend it on immoral luxury (having affairs beside their wives) it's a sin. To buy slaves and torture them is also a great sin.
If you look carefully, religions have put a greater burden and responsibilities on the neck of riches. The poor? They don't have the responsibility of chatity. Whatever they earn, they eat and survive only.
Assuming God and afterlife is real, poor people are at an advantage than the rich who posses "earthly" wealth
"Thou shall not steal" dates back a few thousand years before any biblical reference. I'm sure I'm not pointing anything new out to anyone, but nearly all religious laws established were common sense rules for allowing civilizations to occur. You can't live harmoniously in a town if a neighbor is stealing your stuff, trying to kill you, or tool your wife. Kosher eating helped avoid unsanitary food conditions, telling people not to be gay helped to keep the population from declining amidst wars and a 30 year life expectancy etc etc.
I don't think telling people that stealing is a sin was perpetrated by rich or poor people. It just established moral threat of law in a time where there wasn't a whole lot of law enforcement capability.
I don't think telling people that stealing is a sin was perpetrated by rich or poor people. It just established moral threat of law in a time where there wasn't a whole lot of law enforcement capability.
In your view, was this commandment created by someone poor or rich?
It was created by a religion, so of course it was created by the rich.
It was created by someone who knew the 1 rule of law, that will give you a good after life.
Treat others the way you would like to be treated.
Treat others the way you would like to be treated.
That is a belief, not a fact. I like facts.
It was created by bankers, and they defined stealing at the same time. They also created the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery". The original meaning was that one should not have sex with adults outside wedlock.
legendary
Activity: 2450
Merit: 4295
eXch.cx - Automatic crypto Swap Exchange.
Hope you do know, it's more painful when you're poor and the things you can call yours get stolen. The rich can always make more wealth or buy more properties. To my understanding (from a biblical background) the law was made by someone who has the best interest of both the rich and poor at hand. The law "Thou shall not steal" is beneficiary to both parties (rich and poor).
To the poor, they avoid punishment by obeying the law while to the rich, it prevents greediness, assuming the poor that, the little they have won't be taken away from them and in general keeping the world at peace & balance.
To the poor, they avoid punishment by obeying the law while to the rich, it prevents greediness, assuming the poor that, the little they have won't be taken away from them and in general keeping the world at peace & balance.
... If you're talking (property) rights, richness and poverty are irrelevant concepts.
It is irrelevant if you have food on the table.
It was created by someone who knew the 1 rule of law, that will give you a good after life.
Treat others the way you would like to be treated.
Treat others the way you would like to be treated.
Not sure if they were poor or rich, but surely they were statists. Forbidding someone to steal does not automatically imply you're protecting someone else's right to property. No offence paxmao but I believe that discussion is more essential than the one about rich or poor. If you're talking (property) rights, richness and poverty are irrelevant concepts.
but I believe that discussion is more essential than the one about rich or poor. If you're talking (property) rights, richness and poverty are irrelevant concepts.
Possibly by rich because if they didn't made that commandment then poor people will steal money from rich and they will justify their action.
In your view, was this commandment created by someone poor or rich?
Jump to: