Is Jesus Christ a Socialist?

[alang1216]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

 

[ding]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

What’s that list then?

look, you claimed that whenever Christians could create a theocracy they did. By your own admission they had the power to depose Kings whenever they wanted so they could create a theocracy whenever they wanted and they didn’t.

don’t you believe it is possible that your anti Christian bias is affecting your judge?

 

[ding]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

The other problem you have is that the church had a long standing position that owning property was a natural right. This was totally counter to monarchies who owned all of the land.

in actuality the Church tempered the rule of monarchies. But you will no doubt look for exceptions before admitting that it was Christianity which led to freedom and liberty by establishing the belief that it is a natural right to own land. A position which informed Locke’s position.

 

[alang1216]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

What’s that list then?

look, you claimed that whenever Christians could create a theocracy they did. By your own admission they had the power to depose Kings whenever they wanted so they could create a theocracy whenever they wanted and they didn’t.

don’t you believe it is possible that your anti Christian bias is affecting your judge?

If the Pope was more powerful than the monarch, that essentially made that country a theocracy. An oversimplification maybe, but accurate. It wasn't something unique to Christianity or even specifically a religion, it was more of an ideology thing. Every ideology wants to be recognized as supreme in the land, Muslims, Communists, etc.

 

[ding]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

What’s that list then?

look, you claimed that whenever Christians could create a theocracy they did. By your own admission they had the power to depose Kings whenever they wanted so they could create a theocracy whenever they wanted and they didn’t.

don’t you believe it is possible that your anti Christian bias is affecting your judge?

If the Pope was more powerful than the monarch, that essentially made that country a theocracy. An oversimplification maybe, but accurate. It wasn't something unique to Christianity or even specifically a religion, it was more of an ideology thing. Every ideology wants to be recognized as supreme in the land, Muslims, Communists, etc.

And how many theocracies did the popes create with that power? You did say Christians would create a theocracy whenever they could, right?

 

[BreezeWood]

You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.

• Jews arrested Jesus.
• Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
  
• The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
• The Puritans created their own theocracy here
• Spain and England expelled Jews
• The Inquisition

The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.

Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.

Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.

The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.

Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.

again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.

your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.

make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.

You don't want to know your history.

When is a monarch more than a monarch?

The Church of England (C of E) is the established church of England.[4][5][6] The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior cleric, although the monarch is the supreme governor.​

Popes could remove monarchs: The papal deposing power was the most powerful tool of the political authority claimed by and on behalf of the Roman Pontiff, in medieval and early modern thought, amounting to the assertion of the Pope's power to declare a Christian monarch heretical and powerless to rule.

.

You don't want to know your history.

Because I believe you are confusing things to arrive at this position that it has or is occurring.

I do know my history.

they deliberately misdirect ...

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the very reason for the forgery was to place the monarchy beneath and beholden to the clergy in importance ... of course sicko ran away again just the same as the denier, bing.

their version of the 1st century religious itinerant would have been to have visited all the continents on earth had they made such a statement - jesus never ventured 50 miles from his residence remaining exclusively rural.

they never made the statement the christians forged into their book for their own purposes to deceive and misdirect. to subjugate the innocent.

the religion of antiquity is the bedrock to challenge all three desert religions and their false propaganda.

 

[ding]

• Jews arrested Jesus.
• Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
  
• The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
• The Puritans created their own theocracy here
• Spain and England expelled Jews
• The Inquisition

Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.

Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.

The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.

Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.

again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.

your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.

make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.

You don't want to know your history.

When is a monarch more than a monarch?

The Church of England (C of E) is the established church of England.[4][5][6] The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior cleric, although the monarch is the supreme governor.​

Popes could remove monarchs: The papal deposing power was the most powerful tool of the political authority claimed by and on behalf of the Roman Pontiff, in medieval and early modern thought, amounting to the assertion of the Pope's power to declare a Christian monarch heretical and powerless to rule.

.

You don't want to know your history.

Because I believe you are confusing things to arrive at this position that it has or is occurring.

I do know my history.

they deliberately misdirect ...

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the very reason for the forgery was to place the monarchy beneath and beholden to the clergy in importance ... of course sicko ran away again just the same as the denier, bing.

their version of the 1st century religious itinerant would have been to have visited all the continents on earth had they made such a statement - jesus never ventured 50 miles from his residence remaining exclusively rural.

they never made the statement the christians forged into their book for their own purposes to deceive and misdirect. to subjugate the innocent.

the religion of antiquity is the bedrock to challenge all three desert religions and their false propaganda.

Is your religion of antiquity communism per chance?

 

[ding]

• Jews arrested Jesus.
• Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
  
• The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
• The Puritans created their own theocracy here
• Spain and England expelled Jews
• The Inquisition

Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.

Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.

The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.

Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.

again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.

your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.

make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.

You don't want to know your history.

When is a monarch more than a monarch?

The Church of England (C of E) is the established church of England.[4][5][6] The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior cleric, although the monarch is the supreme governor.​

Popes could remove monarchs: The papal deposing power was the most powerful tool of the political authority claimed by and on behalf of the Roman Pontiff, in medieval and early modern thought, amounting to the assertion of the Pope's power to declare a Christian monarch heretical and powerless to rule.

.

You don't want to know your history.

Because I believe you are confusing things to arrive at this position that it has or is occurring.

I do know my history.

they deliberately misdirect ...

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

the very reason for the forgery was to place the monarchy beneath and beholden to the clergy in importance ... of course sicko ran away again just the same as the denier, bing.

their version of the 1st century religious itinerant would have been to have visited all the continents on earth had they made such a statement - jesus never ventured 50 miles from his residence remaining exclusively rural.

they never made the statement the christians forged into their book for their own purposes to deceive and misdirect. to subjugate the innocent.

the religion of antiquity is the bedrock to challenge all three desert religions and their false propaganda.

That’s some massive conspiracy theory you have there?

 

[alang1216]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

The other problem you have is that the church had a long standing position that owning property was a natural right. This was totally counter to monarchies who owned all of the land.

in actuality the Church tempered the rule of monarchies. But you will no doubt look for exceptions before admitting that it was Christianity which led to freedom and liberty by establishing the belief that it is a natural right to own land. A position which informed Locke’s position.

I never said the Church did no good, only that it exercised temporal power in its own interest like everyone else.

 

[ding]

How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?

we can do a little thought experiment if you like?

I'm sure the number was much smaller than the number who caved in the Pope so they wouldn't get excommunicated. Face it, the Pope had and exercised political power.

The other problem you have is that the church had a long standing position that owning property was a natural right. This was totally counter to monarchies who owned all of the land.

in actuality the Church tempered the rule of monarchies. But you will no doubt look for exceptions before admitting that it was Christianity which led to freedom and liberty by establishing the belief that it is a natural right to own land. A position which informed Locke’s position.

I never said the Church did no good, only that it exercised temporal power in its own interest like everyone else.

Yes and no. Some did and some didn’t. It’s not that simple. Overall though the direction was positive as it did lead to the end of monarchies.

Belief in natural law was crucial to that development as it established authority to do so.

the problem is not with natural law. The problem is with men. Of which every organization has a distribution and trends and cycles.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

 

[ding]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

Early Christians wrote about Jesus. Jewish historians wrote about Jesus. Secular historians wrote about Jesus and there are 24,000 written manuscripts that chronicle his life. So I can totally see why you question if Jesus really existed.

but putting that aside John Locke and all of the founding fathers believed in natural law given to us by Nature’s God. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. Additionally they believed those rights were conditional upon us satisfying our obligations and duties to God. Specifically that governments and people behave morally.

 

[alang1216]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

Early Christians wrote about Jesus. Jewish historians wrote about Jesus. Secular historians wrote about Jesus and there are 24,000 written manuscripts that chronicle his life. So I can totally see why you question if Jesus really existed.

but putting that aside John Locke and all of the founding fathers believed in natural law given to us by Nature’s God. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. Additionally they believed those rights were conditional upon us satisfying our obligations and duties to God. Specifically that governments and people behave morally.

Personally, I have no doubt that Jesus lived. What I don't believe is that, though they talked about Jesus, any Christian who actually knew the living Jesus, wrote anything about him. As for Jewish and secular historians, I don't think he is ever mentioned in any authentic texts of his day.

 

[ding]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

Early Christians wrote about Jesus. Jewish historians wrote about Jesus. Secular historians wrote about Jesus and there are 24,000 written manuscripts that chronicle his life. So I can totally see why you question if Jesus really existed.

but putting that aside John Locke and all of the founding fathers believed in natural law given to us by Nature’s God. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. Additionally they believed those rights were conditional upon us satisfying our obligations and duties to God. Specifically that governments and people behave morally.

Personally, I have no doubt that Jesus lived. What I don't believe is that, though they talked about Jesus, any Christian who actually knew the living Jesus, wrote anything about him. As for Jewish and secular historians, I don't think he is ever mentioned in any authentic texts of his day.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

 

[BreezeWood]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

Early Christians wrote about Jesus. Jewish historians wrote about Jesus. Secular historians wrote about Jesus and there are 24,000 written manuscripts that chronicle his life. So I can totally see why you question if Jesus really existed.

but putting that aside John Locke and all of the founding fathers believed in natural law given to us by Nature’s God. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. Additionally they believed those rights were conditional upon us satisfying our obligations and duties to God. Specifically that governments and people behave morally.

Personally, I have no doubt that Jesus lived. What I don't believe is that, though they talked about Jesus, any Christian who actually knew the living Jesus, wrote anything about him. As for Jewish and secular historians, I don't think he is ever mentioned in any authentic texts of his day.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is in unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is in unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

the christian bible was written 4 centuries after the events of the 1st and was written during the duration of that entire century. jesus was a manifestation of the religion of antiquity and surly played that role. not that of christianity.


Christianity in the 4th century was dominated in its early stage by Constantine the great and the First Council of Nicaea of 325, which was the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787), and in its late stage by the Edict of Thessalonica of 380, which made Nicene Christianity the state church of the Roman Empire.

there are no original documents for the first two desert religions what documents that do exist were sanitized in the 4th century or destroyed.

 

[ding]

I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?

Assuming the dude named Jesus even existed (there are compelling arguments that Jesus was a sick figment of John's diseased imagination, which he developed and co-wrote with his big brother, James), nothing about Jesus' message advocated for government to take from one, at the point of a sword, and give to another. NOTHING!!! In fact, it could be argued that Jesus was rebelling against the Roman Empire over TAXES!!!!

Regardless, the whole point of charity is that it is done WILLFULLY, not by force.

This seems to be a concept that commies cannot grasp. I guess that's why they have no problem with forced philanthropy. They cannot imagine being philanthropic by choice, so why would anyone else, right?

.

Early Christians wrote about Jesus. Jewish historians wrote about Jesus. Secular historians wrote about Jesus and there are 24,000 written manuscripts that chronicle his life. So I can totally see why you question if Jesus really existed.

but putting that aside John Locke and all of the founding fathers believed in natural law given to us by Nature’s God. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. Additionally they believed those rights were conditional upon us satisfying our obligations and duties to God. Specifically that governments and people behave morally.

Personally, I have no doubt that Jesus lived. What I don't believe is that, though they talked about Jesus, any Christian who actually knew the living Jesus, wrote anything about him. As for Jewish and secular historians, I don't think he is ever mentioned in any authentic texts of his day.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is in unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is in unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

the christian bible was written 4 centuries after the events of the 1st and was written during the duration of that entire century. jesus was a manifestation of the religion of antiquity and surly played that role. not that of christianity.


Christianity in the 4th century was dominated in its early stage by Constantine the great and the First Council of Nicaea of 325, which was the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787), and in its late stage by the Edict of Thessalonica of 380, which made Nicene Christianity the state church of the Roman Empire.

there are no original documents for the first two desert religions what documents that do exist were sanitized in the 4th century or destroyed.

From the manuscripts which weren’t written in the 4th century.

Biblical manuscript - Wikipedia

 

[alang1216]

Personally, I have no doubt that Jesus lived. What I don't believe is that, though they talked about Jesus, any Christian who actually knew the living Jesus, wrote anything about him. As for Jewish and secular historians, I don't think he is ever mentioned in any authentic texts of his day.

The first manuscript was written within 25 years after he suffered death, so I don’t know if I would bet against it if I were you. But putting that aside the number, timing and accuracy between copies is unparalleled in antiquity. Nothing comes close.

The oldest manuscripts we have are Paul's letters and Paul never met Jesus and didn't seem to know much about him. The first Gospel we have is Mark's, written 25 or so years after Jesus' death. It is very different from the later Gospels, Luke and Matthew, even though it was a source for both. The Gospel writers were very educated, Greek-speaking Christians. It seems unlikely they were Palestinians and probably not even Jews. There are plenty of partial texts of the ancient NT but none are originals or even copies of the originals and all contain errors, minor ones mostly but some big ones too.

 

[Polishprince]

No. He doesn't exist on earth today, so how could he be?

But do you think His views were socialist when he lived, assuming the Bible has an accurate depiction of what He said?

Absolutely not. Jesus Christ never advocated for food stamps or socialized healthcare at all. He never opined how tremendous it would be to institute a Tiberiuscare Program where all Roman subjects would be forced to purchase medical insurance or be subject to sanctions by the Roman government.