Jesus was a commie...

[Shogun]

I'm sorry -- were you going to actually address my post to you, or were you going to stick with your usual drive-by posting style?

You of all people probably SHOULD be the one asking if Jillian will address your post. Indeed, every flip and flop necessary to avoid quoting the bible probably DOESNT make you the laughing stock of this thread.

 

[Ravi]

And, of course, if the welfare state is a product of Christian teachings, designed to enforce same, how does this not violate the Establishment clause?

Who said it was a product of Christian teaching? Oh, I get it. Now that we've proven Jesus never came out against welfare you want to make it illegal because it is something Jesus might have done.

 

[mattskramer]

You asked:
Jesus didn't say give because you want to. He said give because G-d wants you to and give because it's our OBLIGATION to. What's the difference if it's religious or governmental coercion?

I responded:
Free will. You do not have to obey God, you have to choose to obey God.

It is the same thing. It is as if Jesus were saying “Give or face God’s wrath” and a government saying “Give or face the government’s wrath”. Just like I would have free will to not give as Jesus instructs, I have free will to not give as the IRS instructs.

 

[AllieBaba]

how in gods green earth does that address m14's claim that jebus would be against welfare? If anything, it only reinforces my point. See, THIS is why I give you pathetic ass wannabe christians a hard time. You suckers are about as much christian and I am a fucking martian.

What it does do is establish a difference between the two entities. Giving to welfare via taxes can't be counted as a Christian act of charity, because it's something you are required to do.

I think I may have misunderstood the argument. I thought the argument was over whether or not welfare could be considered Christian charity. I think additionally, if it's not, that Jesus would probably not care one way or the other about it.

 

[Diuretic]

It is deducted by the government out of each paycheck.

Ah, thanks RT.

 

[Diuretic]

Federal Insurance Contributions Act.
It funds the two largest federal welfare programs we have, Social Security and Medicare.

Got it, thanks for that.

 

[Diuretic]

I should stop reading this thread, I'm not keen on blood sports

 

[AllieBaba]

Which may explain why you don't understand what constitutes the letting of blood.

I think this thread is a mess all around.

 

[Diuretic]

Which may explain why you don't understand what constitutes the letting of blood.

I think this thread is a mess all around.

Tell me about the letting of blood, done a bit of it myself over the years, but with people, not animals. Sometimes it was my blood too, that wasn't good.

Anyway a thread is what we make it. It can be testy, interesting, shocking, revealing, surprising (feel free to add you own "-ing") but it goes where we take it.

 

[jillian]

I'm sorry -- were you going to actually address my post to you, or were you going to stick with your usual drive-by posting style?

That's kind of funny given the great amounts of time I actually take to address people who have something to say.

You don't... so you don't get my time.

Others do...

funny how that works.

 

[frazzledgear]

...or at least his teachings seem to be considerably more consistent with socialist ideology than capitalist ideology.

So how come there aren't more Christian socialists?

After all the side-tracking -the answer should be obvious to anyone who really understands the teachings of Jesus. Since it is the individual who will be judged by God -and not what system of government he happens to live under -His teachings apply ONLY to the individual and not a non-human entity. His teachings urge the individual to voluntarily do the right thing by each other and by God. If a government removes that choice and does it for him -it has absolutely no meaning to God. So what's the point?

That is not the individual who has done it. It is a faceless, non-human entity that removed choice from the individual -and let's be honest here. Communist governments have a long brutal history of NOT doing the right thing by their own people anyway -more than 70 million died in the last half of the last century alone as a direct result of communism -and some estimate it is actually closer to 250 million. So it isn't as if it has this admirable warm and fuzzy record. Communism has a history that has repeatedly proven it simply cannot succeed and invariably fails. And proven that any future attempt to create one will also only result in failure. It has its own built-in fatal flaw that insures it will fail -every single time. It is doomed even before a new communist government is in place.

No one is going to get communism "right" if they are just given one more chance because it is the very premise of communism that insures its own failure. Any system that is based on the ridiculous notion that people actually believe the sole purpose of their existence is to serve the faceless masses over their own welfare cannnot succeed. People don't function that way in life and cannot be FORCED to do so indefinitely. They also can't have that basic trait of mankind eliminated by being sent to "re-education camps". Being concerned with one's own welfare and the welfare of their loved ones is an inherent part of the survival instinct of man -and every living creature has a survival instinct.

So where in the teachings of Jesus does He ever ONCE teach it is the right thing for the individual to be stripped of the CHOICE to do the right thing and to try and exist under a system only fit for an ant colony? Communism and socialism are antithetical to Christianity BECAUSE Christianity emphasizes the personal responsibility of the individual. Communism doctrine flat out says the individual doesn't matter at all and only exists to serve the greater good. But find me ANY person who actually believes the only purpose for his existence is to serve the greater good of the faceless masses -and not to have a purposeful life of his own -as HE defines it, not a faceless government. Even Mother Theresa believed her work would be rewarded in heaven and it only had value to God because she CHOSE to do it.

Jesus never ONCE taught that people only exist to serve the greater good and that is not the reason God created them either. We are not here to serve man's purposes, the will of the masses or any other such notion. Communism doctrine says individualism is to be discouraged and considered a social ill, just like prostitution and alcoholism -and that just is NOT consistent with Christianity and several other religions as well. Which is undoubtedly why communist governments invariably try to squelch the religious beliefs of its own citizens.

The individual will never be judged on the grounds of what system of government he lived. And since I know for a fact that I am not going to be judged by whether I lived under communism, socialism or capitalism -I prefer living under a system that has actually acknowledged the inherent traits of people -while figuring out how best to exploit those traits for the greater good.

I'm not quite as hardcore about capitalism as Ayn Rand, who experienced firsthand what life was like under communism -but I have to give her some credit for helping me understand the real value of the system I live under. Her book The Virtue of Selfishness explains why altruism is NOT the ultimate moral value (which is the assumption of communism and socialism) and why it never can be, why any system that premises its own existence on that can only fail and is most likely to only produce a higher level of misery for its own citizens. She explains the inherent failure that dooms such a system to collapse and that it is because it REJECTS the REAL traits of mankind. She explains why she believed that the real ultimate moral value that truly DOES exist and cannot be "re-educated" out of mankind, the one that actually produces the most for the greater good - is the individual being concerned with his own well-being first. Which may help you understand why it was a Christian who first said "God helps those who help themselves." -a statement that is consistent with Christianity. Rand explains why systems that understand this and exploit it, are not only preferable, but the ones that produce the most benefit for the greater good.

 

[Diuretic]

Was Capitalism obeying the teachings of Jesus when if forced children into factories and down mines? Was it obeying the teachings of Jesus when it raped the environments of whole countries? Was it obeying the teachings of Jesus when the bosses turned thugs on unionists? I don't think so. Capitalism doesn't give a toss about Jesus' teachings except where it can take them and use them to justify its rapaciousness. The Christian church values beneficence. Capitalism values it only as a tax deduction.


.

 

[Ravi]

Frazzled, "God helps those who help themselves," is a quote from Ben Franklin, who was a diest. Too funny.

Can you show me a quote from Jesus that leads you to believe he preached, "is the individual being concerned with his own well-being first."?

Thanks.

 

[manifold]

His [Jesus] teachings urge the individual to voluntarily do the right thing by each other and by God. If a government removes that choice and does it for him -it has absolutely no meaning to God. So what's the point?

So you agree with Allie and M14 that Jesus advocates lawlessness. Ok, I get it. I just happen to disagree. I think Jesus would find laws against violent acts such as murder and rape to be perfectly acceptable, even if, in your own words, it "removes the choice and does it for him."

 

[M14 Shooter]

So you agree with Allie and M14 that Jesus advocates lawlessness.

Wow. Talk about strawmen...

 

[manifold]

Wow. Talk about strawmen...

Strawmen my ass!

I'm sorry if your perverted view of reality has once again been razed by logic. Don't hate on the messenger.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Strawmen my ass!

Please quote me saying that Jesus advocated lawlessness.

 

[manifold]

Please quote me saying that Jesus advocated lawlessness.

Do you know what "not in so many words" means?

You expended enormous amounts of effort 'proving' that Jesus would oppose welfare, remember? The central point of your thesis was freewill, specifically that Jesus would oppose anything that circumvents an individual's freewill. Remember? Given that laws of any kind circumvent freewill by definition, then it follows logically that if you are correct, Jesus opposes man-made laws. Or to put in another way, Jesus advocates lawlessness. Your own argument, not mine.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Do you know what "not in so many words" means?

So, rather than me actually saying it, you took what I said and interpeted it to suit your purposes. I'll take that as an admission of your error and an apology for same.

You expended enormous amounts of effort 'proving' that Jesus would oppose welfare, remember?

No... I expended enormous amounts of effort proving that the welfare State does not equate to Christian charity. Please do try to understand my position before mis-stating it.

The central point of your thesis was freewill, specifically that Jesus would oppose anything that circumvents an individual's freewill.

You think this due to your failure to comprehend what I actually wrote.

Or to put in another way, Jesus advocates lawlessness. Your own argument, not mine.

Obviously not.

But please, continue to argue your strawman.

 

[manifold]

Fine.

Then you agree that Jesus would support welfare.

I agree. And I do apologize for having misunderstood your position. I hope you can find it in your charitable Christian heart to forgive me.