Christ was a Socialist

[Baruch Menachem]

The whole deal with the man was not Take from those that have, but give to those who need. If you are over involved with getting rich, you are not doing what is needful for a rich and productive life.

But if the story of the talents is anything to go by, he had nothing against exorbitant profits. He did disapprove of wasted opportunity.

 

[txlonghorn]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

Now your catching on Flopper...Socialism doesn't give to the have-nots out of desire to help...but out of obligation. More often than we care to admit, the have-nots simply don't want to provide for themselves. And socialism TAKES from the want-nots to achieve it's goal of carrying the have-nots.

Charity is a giving thing. People who have what they need willingly give to those who don't. Nobody tells them they have to...nobody takes what they have and give it away to whoever they want to...NOBODY chooses who the charity goes to.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Truthfully?

For us to come and know Him, and love him freely in return. And for that to happen truly, there has to be the choice and ability to reject Him too. At least that's my best understanding of His real purpose and ultimate desire for us.

So.........it's for us to come and know God.

Cool.

And, because there's a choice, that means we have free will.

Also cool.

But what makes you sure that your way is right for all people? Remember......what works for survival in the Gobi Desert will not keep you alive in the Arctic, and vice versa.

So what makes you think that Christianity is the only way? By insisting on that, you destroy free will and choice.

And.......again.........what about the people who died BEFORE Yeshua came to Earth?

By the way...........Yeshua wasn't a capitalist..........if He was, He would have spent time with the rich people rather than the poor, and He wouldn't have turned over the money changer's tables.

He was a socialist. He went to where the COMMUNITY had the most problems and solved the ills of those who were there.

Socialists take care of the entire community. Capitalists only take care of themselves.

 

[txlonghorn]

It would be great if there was enough charity to feed the poor and care for sick but the fact is there just isn't enough and there never will be.

Social problems such poverty, poor education, and lack of healthcare are the most difficult problems to solve. Apparently the Republicans decided long ago, that these problems were not worth addressing. Cut taxes because tax payers vote. Cut social programs because poor people don't vote. And of course reduce the size of government because we know that government is evil.

You seem to be blaming Republicans for the problems of society. And it leaves me wondering if you're one of those who feel that the poor or lazy are "entitled" to things they don't necessarily deserve.

It WOULD be great if there were enough charitable people to provide for every poor, sick or lazy person out there. Keep in mind that the really disadvantaged people in our society are further hindered in getting the help they need by those who are just too damned lazy to take care of themselves. That was an issue when there were lots of jobs. And when they lose one, they are content to sit back and ride the coat of the government. Charitable dollars AND social assistance dollars would go further to help the truly needful people without the slackers.

 

[Flopper]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

Now your catching on Flopper...Socialism doesn't give to the have-nots out of desire to help...but out of obligation. More often than we care to admit, the have-nots simply don't want to provide for themselves. And socialism TAKES from the want-nots to achieve it's goal of carrying the have-nots.

Charity is a giving thing. People who have what they need willingly give to those who don't. Nobody tells them they have to...nobody takes what they have and give it away to whoever they want to...NOBODY chooses who the charity goes to.

I think you missed my point.
I am in favor of the healthcare law because universal healthcare will make our country healthier and more productive. Sick people spread disease, are less projective on job, and drive up healthcare premiums.

Healthcare maybe a give away program but in the end we all benefit.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It would be great if there was enough charity to feed the poor and care for sick but the fact is there just isn't enough and there never will be.

How about more people feed and care for themselves?

Social problems such poverty, poor education, and lack of healthcare are the most difficult problems to solve. Apparently the Republicans decided long ago, that these problems were not worth addressing. Cut taxes because tax payers vote. Cut social programs because poor people don't vote. And of course reduce the size of government because we know that government is evil.

Most people who are poor are poor because of their own life choices they've made. More times than not it's due to shear irresponsibility and people like you have made it clear that nobody needs to be held accountable for their actions anymore so the cycle will naturally continue.

 

[txlonghorn]

Truthfully?

For us to come and know Him, and love him freely in return. And for that to happen truly, there has to be the choice and ability to reject Him too. At least that's my best understanding of His real purpose and ultimate desire for us.

So.........it's for us to come and know God.

Cool.

And, because there's a choice, that means we have free will.

Also cool.

But what makes you sure that your way is right for all people? Remember......what works for survival in the Gobi Desert will not keep you alive in the Arctic, and vice versa.

So what makes you think that Christianity is the only way? By insisting on that, you destroy free will and choice.

And.......again.........what about the people who died BEFORE Yeshua came to Earth?

By the way...........Yeshua wasn't a capitalist..........if He was, He would have spent time with the rich people rather than the poor, and He wouldn't have turned over the money changer's tables.

He was a socialist. He went to where the COMMUNITY had the most problems and solved the ills of those who were there.

Socialists take care of the entire community. Capitalists only take care of themselves.

Not so much a socialist...because that would require him TAKING from others to give to whoever he chose. Christ encouraged others to give of their own free will to those in need. To share what they had when they saw someone in need. There's a big difference in giving and having something taken from you and then distributed to others who may not necessarily represent the most needful people.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Looking at the scriptures it appears to me that Christ would be described as a socialist today and a flaming liberal. Look at Mathew 25:34:

"Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me."

It is hard to imagine that Christ would not be pleased with providing healthcare and jobs to million in need or laws that would punish the greedy.

Christians and Capitalist have always made rather strange bedfellows. How the GOP has managed to unite these two groups with such contradictory philosophies is beyond me.

ROFLMNAO...

Socialism is a lie... You idiots don't feed anyone... you're LIARS, FRAUDS AND THEIVES...

You're advocates of debauchery, hedonism... you reject any sense of personal responsibility; you reject the very EXISTENCE of CHRIST'S DIVINE ESSENCE...

AND YOU WANT TO COME TO THIS BOARD AND DEMAND THAT CHRIST, WHO STOOD WHOLLY IN CONTEST OF ALL OF THAT...

Is just like YOU!





Great show Satan...





Now get your dark ass behind me, in the name of Jesus Christ.

And brace your ass for November... it's gonna be a tough one.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Looking at the scriptures it appears to me that Christ would be described as a socialist today and a flaming liberal. Look at Mathew 25:34:

"Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. For I was hungry, and you fed me. I was thirsty, and you gave me a drink. I was a stranger, and you invited me into your home. I was naked, and you gave me clothing. I was sick, and you cared for me. I was in prison, and you visited me."

It is hard to imagine that Christ would not be pleased with providing healthcare and jobs to million in need or laws that would punish the greedy.

Christians and Capitalist have always made rather strange bedfellows. How the GOP has managed to unite these two groups with such contradictory philosophies is beyond me.

It's hard to imagine that Christ wasn't a socialist, huh? Funny, but I don't see that quote saying, "For I was hungry, and you gave me Food Stamps. I was a stranger, and you gave me a bed in a government shelter. I was naked, and you gave me a voucher for a Community Clothing Bank. I was sick, and you gave me a Medicare card."

How many freaking times do you mouthbreathing flatliner leftists have to have the difference between personal charity and government giveaways explained to you before it sinks into your thick, Neanderthal skulls?

. . . Not that this pigheaded oblivion irritates me, or anything.

 

[txlonghorn]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

Now your catching on Flopper...Socialism doesn't give to the have-nots out of desire to help...but out of obligation. More often than we care to admit, the have-nots simply don't want to provide for themselves. And socialism TAKES from the want-nots to achieve it's goal of carrying the have-nots.

Charity is a giving thing. People who have what they need willingly give to those who don't. Nobody tells them they have to...nobody takes what they have and give it away to whoever they want to...NOBODY chooses who the charity goes to.

I think you missed my point.
I am in favor of the healthcare law because universal healthcare will make our country healthier and more productive. Sick people spread disease, are less projective on job, and drive up healthcare premiums.

Healthcare maybe a give away program but in the end we all benefit.

I don't think I missed your point at all. At least not from your initial post. It's all warm and fuzzy that you want the world to be healthier and more productive, but until you figure out how to keep healthcare costs down and get more people to live healthier, you're not gonna get the result you're after by just giving it away.

 

[Big Fitz]

Truthfully?

For us to come and know Him, and love him freely in return. And for that to happen truly, there has to be the choice and ability to reject Him too. At least that's my best understanding of His real purpose and ultimate desire for us.

So.........it's for us to come and know God.

Cool.

And, because there's a choice, that means we have free will.

Also cool.

Right, God is not a spiritual rapist. He will not force salvation on you. You must choose it for yourself, and He says the only way to Him is through Jesus. You don't have to choose Him, but he's the only way.

But what makes you sure that your way is right for all people? Remember......what works for survival in the Gobi Desert will not keep you alive in the Arctic, and vice versa.

This is not an applicable analogy. The world is what it is.

So what makes you think that Christianity is the only way? By insisting on that, you destroy free will and choice.

No, I don't. You still have the free will to deny God and choose other than the way He has set for you to follow. The fact that you don't like the choice does not change the fact that you have a choice to make freely with no coersion; only consequences. You can even deny the fact the choice exists or the consequences are true. That is your choice and free will to make.

And.......again.........what about the people who died BEFORE Yeshua came to Earth?

That is between God and them. He is the ultimate judge of who is saved and who isn't. This should have no bearing on your relationship with Him.

By the way...........Yeshua wasn't a capitalist..........if He was, He would have spent time with the rich people rather than the poor, and He wouldn't have turned over the money changer's tables.

Incredibly assumptive. Christ came for all people. The rich and the poor. The sick and the healthy. The powerful and the meek. The righteous and the sinful. He spent time with those who would listen and welcome Him into their hearts and homes. Many times Jesus dined with the rich and powerful. Most often he was a thorn to them though, for they wanted Him to be an affirmation of their status and power and glorify themselves, and not learn. The Pharisees wanted Him to justify their hypocritical lives and later to entrap him in a sin but always failed.

Christ has told us to be fruitful in multiply (which can be taken many ways), to be generous with what we have, and has warned us to not be controlled by what we own. Rather, to use what we have to enrich ourselves as well as others. Never has he said we are to not have wealth, except for when it becomes a stumbling block in our walk with Him. Had not God blessed many key figures in the Bible with fabulous wealth thanks to their faith and devotion to Him?

Wealth has it's proper place, and Christ never denied that once.

He was a socialist. He went to where the COMMUNITY had the most problems and solved the ills of those who were there.

No. He went to where individuals had problems. He did not heal communities,
he healed a blind man,
a leper,
a bleeding woman,
a crippled child
a possessed man
and raised a dead friend.

All individuals whom he cared for and loved as single people, not as a group or a class. Jesus also states flatly that we will ALWAYS have poor people. He did not come to solve the world's ills, but rather save the world's souls from eternal death and damnation. The flesh is temporary and will fall away. Ashes to ashes and all that.

Socialists take care of the entire community. Capitalists only take care of themselves.

No, they don't. Socialists are more like the pharisees. They claim to have the soft heart and caring intentions. Yet they often do not take from their own purse, but rather steal from others and force them to give because they believe their intentions are so good, they supersede the evil of theft from those not touched by the same desire.

Capitalists care for others just as much as socialists do. Where they differ is often in HOW they care for them. Instead of begging others for money to feed the poor for a day, they would rather teach the poor to work, so they can feed themselves. Instead of demanding everyone give money to a cause, they see how much of their own money they can put into the cause they believe in. They do not assume they are so possessed with authority that they have the rights to other's work, property and wealth to take as they see fit to give to another against their will.

Socialists generally believe the ends justify the means, capitalists generally do not. Socialists commit many evils in the name of someone else, and call it good. (Won't somebody please think of the children!) They state that intentions are superior to those of others in reach, and cannot be judged by the results of their actual acts, if their beliefs and heart were in 'the right place'. Morality is relative to fit the desires of the day and the current state of their own hearts and minds. They deny others the free will to follow their own heart and desires, for they feel they are the more enlightened and those who do not follow their desires must be somehow... foolish... and need to be controlled. They steal from individuals the very dignity of their humanity by reducing them to groups and easily labeled populations like races, or sexes or creeds.

Jesus did none of that. He treated all who came to Him as what they were, children of God. Men, women, boys, girls, elderly and newly born. And through Him, salvation was brought. The man who never sinned, not once... the Son of God... gave His life for all of our sins for He had none of His own to pay for. Once and for all time, His sacrifice for our salvation. He didn't do this for the Jews, or the Middianites, or the Romans, or the Men, or the Farmers or the Carpenters, or the Prisoners, or the Nobility. He did it for me and you and everyone else, as individuals... so God may have a personal relationship with you.

This is why you are precious to Him. Not only is He your creator, but because He sacrificed so much to save you from the wages of sin and to never be apart from Him again. But He will not force you to accept Him. What love could ever be true if He did? It would always be coerced. All He can do in this is show you the way to Him. After that, it is up to you to pick up your own cross and follow Him.

Maybe that will help you understand more.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

I wasn't aware that the purpose of charity was to employ millions of people to provide it. I was always taught that the truest measure of charity was when people no longer need it, but it seems to me that if one is looking to charitable giving to employ people, there's not much motivation to help them not need it anymore.

This is aside from the fact that expanding government = increased taxes = shrinking economy = loss of private sector jobs, so adding a bunch of new government workers is just going to result in an overall loss of jobs.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well, that would explain the "eye for an eye" thang!!!

Wasn't that the Old Testament? I notice right wing christians prefer that to the words of Jesus.

I notice that left-wing Christian haters prefer to misquote the Bible in order to try to teach others how to practice a religion they themselves don't profess. Not that you in any way deserve the instruction - that whole "pearls before swine" thing - but the actual quote is Matthew 5:38-39:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Interestingly, the Old Testament mention of reciprocity involves official punishment for crimes meted out by the community, not personal behavior. So the Bible shows us the GOVERNMENT being harsh, and PERSONAL behavior being benevolent. Hmmm.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It would be great if there was enough charity to feed the poor and care for sick but the fact is there just isn't enough and there never will be.

Social problems such poverty, poor education, and lack of healthcare are the most difficult problems to solve. Apparently the Republicans decided long ago, that these problems were not worth addressing. Cut taxes because tax payers vote. Cut social programs because poor people don't vote. And of course reduce the size of government because we know that government is evil.

And apparently Democrats decided long ago that the solution was to sit on their lazy dead asses and wait for the government to help people, because they can't be bothered to deal with those dirty poor folks themselves, as demonstrated by the fact that those "evil" Republicans actually go out and give THEIR OWN money and time to help others, while the "saintly" Democrats pat themselves on the back for "compassionately" voting money out of other people's pockets and shifting the problem off onto a bureaucracy.

 

[Christopher]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

Now your catching on Flopper...Socialism doesn't give to the have-nots out of desire to help...but out of obligation. More often than we care to admit, the have-nots simply don't want to provide for themselves. And socialism TAKES from the want-nots to achieve it's goal of carrying the have-nots.

Charity is a giving thing. People who have what they need willingly give to those who don't. Nobody tells them they have to...nobody takes what they have and give it away to whoever they want to...NOBODY chooses who the charity goes to.

I think you missed my point.
I am in favor of the healthcare law because universal healthcare will make our country healthier and more productive. Sick people spread disease, are less projective on job, and drive up healthcare premiums.

Healthcare maybe a give away program but in the end we all benefit.

How does the health care reform passed address unhealthy lifestyle choices? That is one of our biggest problems. At least one of the root causes of our health care problems.

Where did Christ ever teach, either through example or in His words, that people should be forced to give charity? It should never even be called "charity" if someone is forced to give. That is what the government does, force others to give to the "needy".

 

[DiamondDave]

I doubt that charity is going produce jobs for millions who can't find work or healthcare for millions that are sick and can't afford a doctor.

Now your catching on Flopper...Socialism doesn't give to the have-nots out of desire to help...but out of obligation. More often than we care to admit, the have-nots simply don't want to provide for themselves. And socialism TAKES from the want-nots to achieve it's goal of carrying the have-nots.

Charity is a giving thing. People who have what they need willingly give to those who don't. Nobody tells them they have to...nobody takes what they have and give it away to whoever they want to...NOBODY chooses who the charity goes to.

I think you missed my point.
I am in favor of the healthcare law because universal healthcare will make our country healthier and more productive. Sick people spread disease, are less projective on job, and drive up healthcare premiums.

Healthcare maybe a give away program but in the end we all benefit.

And you are free to give away as much healthcare as you desire from your own pocket..... you have no right to take the private property of others in a redistribution scheme for the personal upkeep and responsibility of other individuals who contribute nothing for their entitlement or benefit

You want to try and form a company or service or charity that provides free care to those you deem as needy, knock your self out there cupcake

 

[Douger]

Well, that would explain the "eye for an eye" thang!!!

Ya reckon ?

 

[Big Fitz]

It's not the government's business if I want to smoke a pack of unfiltered Camels while having pate de fois gras before a rack of spare ribs and a side of gravy fries with a gallon of soda so sugary just having it in the room gives you pre-diabetes.

It's our responsibility as an individual to get health insurance to prevent us from becoming destitute thanks to sudden calamitous illness or injury, not the governments. Nor is it anyone else's duty to pay for it.

we don't have a health care crisis in this nation...
we have a DEADBEAT crisis.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

Truthfully?

For us to come and know Him, and love him freely in return. And for that to happen truly, there has to be the choice and ability to reject Him too. At least that's my best understanding of His real purpose and ultimate desire for us.

So.........it's for us to come and know God.

Cool.

And, because there's a choice, that means we have free will.

Also cool.

Right, God is not a spiritual rapist. He will not force salvation on you. You must choose it for yourself, and He says the only way to Him is through Jesus. You don't have to choose Him, but he's the only way.




This is not an applicable analogy. The world is what it is.


No, I don't. You still have the free will to deny God and choose other than the way He has set for you to follow. The fact that you don't like the choice does not change the fact that you have a choice to make freely with no coersion; only consequences. You can even deny the fact the choice exists or the consequences are true. That is your choice and free will to make.



That is between God and them. He is the ultimate judge of who is saved and who isn't. This should have no bearing on your relationship with Him.



Incredibly assumptive. Christ came for all people. The rich and the poor. The sick and the healthy. The powerful and the meek. The righteous and the sinful. He spent time with those who would listen and welcome Him into their hearts and homes. Many times Jesus dined with the rich and powerful. Most often he was a thorn to them though, for they wanted Him to be an affirmation of their status and power and glorify themselves, and not learn. The Pharisees wanted Him to justify their hypocritical lives and later to entrap him in a sin but always failed.

Christ has told us to be fruitful in multiply (which can be taken many ways), to be generous with what we have, and has warned us to not be controlled by what we own. Rather, to use what we have to enrich ourselves as well as others. Never has he said we are to not have wealth, except for when it becomes a stumbling block in our walk with Him. Had not God blessed many key figures in the Bible with fabulous wealth thanks to their faith and devotion to Him?

Wealth has it's proper place, and Christ never denied that once.

He was a socialist. He went to where the COMMUNITY had the most problems and solved the ills of those who were there.

No. He went to where individuals had problems. He did not heal communities,
he healed a blind man,
a leper,
a bleeding woman,
a crippled child
a possessed man
and raised a dead friend.

All individuals whom he cared for and loved as single people, not as a group or a class. Jesus also states flatly that we will ALWAYS have poor people. He did not come to solve the world's ills, but rather save the world's souls from eternal death and damnation. The flesh is temporary and will fall away. Ashes to ashes and all that.

Socialists take care of the entire community. Capitalists only take care of themselves.

No, they don't. Socialists are more like the pharisees. They claim to have the soft heart and caring intentions. Yet they often do not take from their own purse, but rather steal from others and force them to give because they believe their intentions are so good, they supersede the evil of theft from those not touched by the same desire.

Capitalists care for others just as much as socialists do. Where they differ is often in HOW they care for them. Instead of begging others for money to feed the poor for a day, they would rather teach the poor to work, so they can feed themselves. Instead of demanding everyone give money to a cause, they see how much of their own money they can put into the cause they believe in. They do not assume they are so possessed with authority that they have the rights to other's work, property and wealth to take as they see fit to give to another against their will.

Socialists generally believe the ends justify the means, capitalists generally do not. Socialists commit many evils in the name of someone else, and call it good. (Won't somebody please think of the children!) They state that intentions are superior to those of others in reach, and cannot be judged by the results of their actual acts, if their beliefs and heart were in 'the right place'. Morality is relative to fit the desires of the day and the current state of their own hearts and minds. They deny others the free will to follow their own heart and desires, for they feel they are the more enlightened and those who do not follow their desires must be somehow... foolish... and need to be controlled. They steal from individuals the very dignity of their humanity by reducing them to groups and easily labeled populations like races, or sexes or creeds.

Jesus did none of that. He treated all who came to Him as what they were, children of God. Men, women, boys, girls, elderly and newly born. And through Him, salvation was brought. The man who never sinned, not once... the Son of God... gave His life for all of our sins for He had none of His own to pay for. Once and for all time, His sacrifice for our salvation. He didn't do this for the Jews, or the Middianites, or the Romans, or the Men, or the Farmers or the Carpenters, or the Prisoners, or the Nobility. He did it for me and you and everyone else, as individuals... so God may have a personal relationship with you.

This is why you are precious to Him. Not only is He your creator, but because He sacrificed so much to save you from the wages of sin and to never be apart from Him again. But He will not force you to accept Him. What love could ever be true if He did? It would always be coerced. All He can do in this is show you the way to Him. After that, it is up to you to pick up your own cross and follow Him.

Maybe that will help you understand more.

Now THAT'S A SCHOOLIN'!

 

[Oscar Wao]

2 Thess 3:10.

I guess Christ isn't totally socialist after all...