Jesus Was A Capitalist

[Andylusion]

Let's check:

“How about Jesus's Parable of the Talents (talents were a form of money in Jesus's day)? A man entrusted three of his workers with his wealth. The two who invested the money and made a profit were praised and the one who buried his share so he wouldn't lose any of it was reprimanded. Sounds a lot more like an endorsement for capitalism than socialism, doesn't it?

You are confused in this part.

Jesus used the parable as an analogy.

In other words, if you become a religious person and you keep it to yourself and make no other people to become followers of God, then you have buried the treasure of the word of God and make it non worthy.

The one who received the same word of God and he spread it on others, then he has increased it like profit.

Remember that parables are not to be understood literally.

….Jesus offers his Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. In it, a landowner hires some laborers to pick grapes. Near the end of the day, he realizes he needs more workers to get the job done.

To recruit them, he agrees to pay a full day's wage for just one hour of work. When one of the laborers who had worked an entire day complains, the landowner answers, "I am not being unfair to you, friend. Didn't you agree to work for a denarius? Don't I have the right to do what I want with my own money?" That's a testament to the principles of supply and demand, of private property, and of voluntary contracts, not socialism.” Was Jesus a Socialist?

Can I get an "AMEN!!!"

You still can't understand what parables mean.

In this case, the Hews were mad at Jesus, they hated this parable.

This parable is about Jews always keeping the law since birth or age of reasoning, and will receive their reward. But it happens that the gentile, after being a depraved man, idolater, eating pork and rats and roaches, he changed and started to obey the word of God same as the Jews. And this gentile will receive the same reward.

Oh, this was reaching the limit, the Jews didn't agree with that.

But this is what the parable was about, and the mention of the salary and workers is just the analogy, not the literal interpretation.

You are wrong sir. Political chick, as per usual, is dead on right.

It was both literal, and an analogy.

 

[Andylusion]

being on welfare is WORK too-------stand in line and make the application -----PURE HELL

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

 

[Andylusion]

18. So.....is socialism endorsed in the Bible????

Not hardly.

An accurate understanding of the Bible requires the distinction between 'redistribution' and 'generosity.'…the Bible advocates generosity.



These are two very different concepts.
Generosity springs from free will....not force, coercion, or threats.

With socialism, it is the opposite.
Redistribution of wealth is always by force of government. The government simply uses its overwhelming power to take what it thinks is “fair” from the “givers.”

Generosity is based on choice....on free will....the cornerstone of Judeo-Christian tradition.
Not so with any of these six: Socialism, Liberalism, Communism, Liberalism, Progressivism, or Nazism.





And this is the face of government coercion.....

Under the Bolsheviks, the dynasty with which Franklin Roosevelt felt comradeship, slaughter was so omnipresent that corpse-disposal actually became a problem.

There was resistance to the Lefts mandate of collectivism, especially in the Ukraine.
September 11, 1932, Stalin wrote to his assistant, 'We must take steps so we do not lose the Ukraine.' So, 1932-1933, all food supplies in the Ukraine were confiscated."


Those who tried to leave were shot, those who remained, starved to death. Men, women, children. They died tortuously slowly.
NKVD squads collected the dead. They received 200 grams of bread for every dead body they delivered; often they didn't wait until the victim was dead.



Yet the same political view is embraced by the major political party, the same political party that once put American citizens in concentration camps.

You do understand the difference between political and economic systems don't you? Totalitarianism is not an economic system.

You might want to try actually studying the bible.

Would you care to explain that to the hundred million plus that socialism/communism slaughtered, you dunce.

Capitalism has slaughtered just as many. And that's just in the Congo. We won't talk about the Raj in India.

So you admit you were lying when you said "Because you have butchered the words of Jesus ...."

....and every quote I provided was correct and accurate?


Excellent.

ROFLMAO "correct and accurate"..quotations of the words of Jesus-----written
by men who never met him and, in some cases, did not even speak Aramaic or Hebrew

That's your opinion. We disagree.

Since you, by your own statement, have now admitted that you yourself have no more valid position.... then the difference between us is about 2,000 years of church doctrine and history.

I think we are more credible than you on this basis.

 

[Andylusion]

your sunday school teacher perverted your mind. ------uhm....with what did
DO JOOOOOS not agree?

They didn't agree that others who lived their lives in fornication, far away from the Law of God, later on in their lives they "just repented" and started to live according to the Law of God, and receive the same benefits as if they were God's obedient people all their life.

You see, the parable shows that analogy.

Workers who cleaned the building at pure elbow grease the entire working day, now watching how new hired employees coming before closing and doing the same work for only two hours and receiving the same salary.

Of course the Jews were piss off when they heard such a "justice from God".

Regardless of all that, G-d establishes a truth. He says that by putting himself in the place of a business owner, who establishes a contract with the people he employs, and says very directly that he has the right to do with his money has he pleases. That if you the employee agrees with him the owner, in a contract that exchanges labor for pay, that he has done nothing wrong in agreeing with that contract.

You are correct that he is rightly connecting the agreement of salvation is being compared to an agreement for a wage.

That is true.

However our point, the point that Political Chick is rightly making, is that this analogy is only true and accurate because G-d himself is upholding the fact that the owner has a right as owner of the property, to determine what he does with his own money.

In short, G-d is upholding capitalism. The owner of the business has the right to do with his own property, as he sees fit.

You rightly point out that the Jews were not happy that G-d was not giving them more money, while being an employee of the Lord for a longer time. You are right the Jews did not like that the Gentiles were being saved, and gaining salvation, while the Jews had been following the Mosaic law for generations.

All of that is correct. But the point G-d was making, is that his salvation, is his to give to whom he pleases, for whatever sacrifice he determines worthy. He is the vineyard owner, and just like the business owner of today, it's his property to do with as he pleases.

And just like G-d was the Vineyard owner of Matthew 21, G-d had the right to kill the tenants, and replace them with people who decides.

The reason why that "analogy" works, is because he is upholding capitalism in real life. That the owner of a vineyard had a right to the goods produced by the Vineyard. That's Capitalism.

And look at verse 38:

"But when the tenants saw the son, they said to each other, 'This is the heir. Come, let's kill him and take his inheritance.'
​

And what happened to such people?

They said to him, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their seasons.”
​

And who does that sound like? The Lenninists in Russia killed all the business owners, and confiscated their inheritance for themselves. In the end, after 60 Million starved to death, the people of Russia were reduced to eating each other in cannibalism to survive.

Same with Cuba. Same with Venezuela today. And we hear the same from left-wing socialists in this country. Let's take over health care. Let's tax the rich more. Let's raise the inheritance tax. Billionaires should not exist.

What side of the analogy is that on? The side of the tenants that were slaughtered, and replaced by people more worthy.

My point is, we are seeing the story Jesus laid out, played out in real life, even to this present day.

The evil, trying to take from the rich, only to destroy themselves. You can deny that is what the parable is about, but you can't deny that the parable has played out.

 

[irosie91]

being on welfare is WORK too-------stand in line and make the application -----PURE HELL

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

also true-----they are a significant subgroup. Whole cadres of persons simply
ascribe to welfare as a "way of life"......... I find them to be DEMORALIZED
PEOPLE----

 

[Andylusion]

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

also true-----they are a significant subgroup. Whole cadres of persons simply
ascribe to welfare as a "way of life"......... I find them to be DEMORALIZED
PEOPLE----

I would agree with that too. Being on welfare.... just being on welfare, destroys your self respect, takes away your dignity, and leaves you demoralized.

Being told by the left-wing for example, that you can't make it, that you have no hope, that the corporations are holding you down, that society is racists, sexist, and so on....

All of those lies, will leave you demoralized.

So I agree with you! The solution is to end welfare, and start teaching people the protestant work ethic, and that they can make it. They can build their own future.

I've heard from counselors for years, that when they meet with someone with depression, one of the first things they find out is, are you working? And if you are not, then they strongly encourage them, get a job. Get to work. Because there is a real level of dignity that comes from working, even if it's flipping whoppers at the whopper flopper store.

There is something about getting your butt to work, and seeing a paycheck that you earned with your own effort, that gives you dignity, that no stolen money from tax payers handed to you for nothing, can ever achieve.

In fact, in other countries, people have a better grasp of this. That's why almost none of the nordic countries have welfare. I don't think any of them do. Denmark and Sweden for sure don't. You don't work.... you don't eat. That's how it is.

They have unemployment compensation, that is very limited. You have one year. If you don't find a job in under a year, then you don't get anything. It's on you to get a job, and feed your own butt.

Years ago after the Haiti earth quake, a rich business owner went over there, and gave a ton of money to charities, and was busy helping out hands on. In his own words, he said it just felt like no one was all that happy. He was giving out money, donating his time, and the people didn't seem like they were really improving.

So he caught one of the ladies who had gotten money from the charity, and asked her directly if she wasn't happy, what did she really want. She said, they didn't want his money, they wanted a job. So he opened a business in Haiti, and employed hundreds of these people.

The sad part was, he was ridiculed as evil, and exploitative, while he was giving these people jobs, careers, and dignity, and enabling them to better their own lives, by providing employment where it was desperately needed.

This is the reality. Welfare is the biggest evil against the poor, that the left-wing has ever created.

 

[irosie91]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

 

[irosie91]

another issue is-------excuse the expression THE SYSTEM------special jobs for
disabled people ------rather than the jungle type competitive system that everyone
faces in the US---------would be good

 

[PoliticalChic]

being on welfare is WORK too-------stand in line and make the application -----PURE HELL

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

And Democrat governance makes certain they never have to.


That Green New Deal actually says 'economic security for those who don't care to work.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

What a stupid post.

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

also true-----they are a significant subgroup. Whole cadres of persons simply
ascribe to welfare as a "way of life"......... I find them to be DEMORALIZED
PEOPLE----

They may just be smarter than those of us who work.

Welfare provided more spendable cash than a worker who earns the median income.

 

[PoliticalChic]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

 

[irosie91]

actually ------it is a post of GREAT INSIGHT. Have you ever known people
"on welfare" ?

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

also true-----they are a significant subgroup. Whole cadres of persons simply
ascribe to welfare as a "way of life"......... I find them to be DEMORALIZED
PEOPLE----

They may just be smarter than those of us who work.

Welfare provided more spendable cash than a worker who earns the median income.

only in very few cases-------those who REALLY KNOW HOW TO MANIPULATE.
Most people on welfare are just a mess. Try not to be so cynical

 

[irosie91]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

 

[PoliticalChic]

Being on welfare requires the skill and 'work' of being able to open one's mailbox.

The good news about the hole you’re digging for yourself is that your grave is already halfway done!

how do you know? Have you ever worked with people on welfare? Been in their homes? Understood their problems?-----or even tried to understand their
positions?

As a matter of fact, I have. And the bottom line is, what I found was a number of people who simply didn't want to work.

!!!also true-----they are a significant subgroup. Whole cadres of persons simply
ascribe to welfare as a "way of life"......... I find them to be DEMORALIZED
PEOPLE----

They may just be smarter than those of us who work.

Welfare provided more spendable cash than a worker who earns the median income.

only in very few cases-------those who REALLY KNOW HOW TO MANIPULATE.
Most people on welfare are just a mess. Try not to be so cynical

Bogus!!!

"only in very few cases" applies to those who actually require government welfare.


Welfare was taken care of privately before FDR....and should be today.

Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.



November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.



The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p. 29.



And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work, and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.

 

[PoliticalChic]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

Reach into your pocket and pay for them.

 

[irosie91]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

Reach into your pocket and pay for them.

try convincing Charles Dickens of your glorious benevolent utopia. Do you remember----WAY BACK----there was actually a movement to "let the churches
take care of da poor..." ------was that during the Carter era?

 

[PoliticalChic]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

Reach into your pocket and pay for them.

try convincing Charles Dickens of your glorious benevolent utopia. Do you remember----WAY BACK----there was actually a movement to "let the churches
take care of da poor..." ------was that during the Carter era?

No such movement.


Dickensian poverty does not exist....it is the image intended to motivate the weak minded....you.

 

[irosie91]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

Reach into your pocket and pay for them.

try convincing Charles Dickens of your glorious benevolent utopia. Do you remember----WAY BACK----there was actually a movement to "let the churches
take care of da poor..." ------was that during the Carter era?

No such movement.


Dickensian poverty does not exist....it is the image intended to motivate the weak minded....you.

DICKENSIAN poverty, CERTAINLY, did exist------both in the USA and
in Merry Old England. Ask Steinbeck (another "radical" you despise?)
There was a "the churches can do it" thing------way back in the 20th century---you
must be younger than I.

 

[irosie91]

all good-----but some people cannot work------REALLY--they cannot

Very few fit that description.

lots

Reach into your pocket and pay for them.

try convincing Charles Dickens of your glorious benevolent utopia. Do you remember----WAY BACK----there was actually a movement to "let the churches
take care of da poor..." ------was that during the Carter era?

No such movement.


Dickensian poverty does not exist....it is the image intended to motivate the weak minded....you.

yeah----now I remember------it was RONALD REAGAN-------He wanted social
welfare to be the purview of "NON-PROFIT" organizations------like churches and
other community do-good groups. You got something against The Salvation Army?

 

[edthecynic]

That Green New Deal actually says 'economic security for those who don't care to work.'

That LIE has already been debunked, but there is no surprise you are still mindlessly spewing the lie!!!!
Please cite the exact place where your LIE exists in the ACTUAL bill presented to Congress, or admit you are worthless homeschooled lying scum!
https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hres109/BILLS-116hres109ih.pdf