Have you heard the left attempt to say Jesus IS a socialist?

[sparky]

Of course, the term 'socialism' did not exist in the time of Jesus and he was not involved in political movements. Social programs have always been around, however. Rome provided bread to the poor very regularly, for example.
If Christianity were practiced as Jesus personified it, there would be very little, if any, need for social programs in America.

The poor traditionally ended up at the church, or poor farm .....~S~

 

[sparky]

Are you unfamiliar with the Beatitudes?

~S~

 

[SweetSue92]

Inform us on how many times you have read the Bible entire, and then how many times you have read the Gospels, and let's compare and contrast

Jesus was only in the New Testament. We were talking about the teachings of Jesus

Did you not know that?

Are you unfamiliar with the Beatitudes?

I am familiar with the Beatitudes. Do you know why Jesus came to earth--and what is taught about Jesus from the prophets on?

Not to teach us to give our wealth to the poor. That's good living. That's not why He had to die on a cross.

 

[irosie91]

People come to Jesus in "nations" (earthly groups) but they leave the Judgment Throne in only two groups: Sheeps and Goats--believers and unbelievers.

On that I have to disagree.... He specifically did not separate them by who believed in Him and who did not... That was NOT Jesus's lesson in this Scripture?

If you noticed, BOTH GROUPS called him LORD? Both of those groups knew Jesus as Lord, both of those groups asked of Jesus, "but when did we do this for/to you?" And He said, basically, however you treated those that He mentioned, (the sick, poor, stranger, imprisoned) you treated Him...???

Sweet Sue is right, I think. Only believers inherit the kingdom of God. Calling someone "lord" matters not a whit to people who could care less about that someone, unless they think that doing so might reward them somehow.

I can see that point of view, based on other readings of Scripture regarding who is saved, and how some churches have interpreted such over the centuries of Christianity.

But they did not just call Him Lord, they knew Him in the sense that they are asking Christ basically, ''...when in the world did we deny you food to eat or water to drink etc...?'' It gave a sense in the passage reading, that they knew him more than just at that moment of the Hour of Judgement.

Also, not one single peep from Jesus, on Judgement Day, to all the people in all the Nations of the world itself that He is judging, about whether whom ever so 'Believeth in Him'' or not....? Why Not? IF that is one of the most important parts of Christianity... again, why not mention it or even hint of it, at the Last Judgement?

I just think, there is much more to this Scripture, than we understand on the surface, if we contemplate on it, in depth... piece by piece of what is going on in this scene of the last judgement of Christ...

Jesus spoke of the judgment day. Thoroughly.

He said the temple would be destroyed; it was. He said armies would surround Jerusalem; they did. He warned believers to flee to the wilderness; they did, for the 3 ½ years of the First Revolt. Etc.

Everything he said in the Olivet Discourse that would happen did happen. The apocalypse confirms it. What more would he have said?

it's what all the Pharisees were saying and they were right. They tried to fight it
off -------despite the fact that the effort was hopeless. Learn some history

 

[irosie91]

No, because unlike the bible's account of Jesus, socialists themselves live extremely wealthy, pampered lives. What socialists want is for everyone else in society to be equally poverty-stricken while these socialists themselves live it up large. Socialism is the sneakiest scam among greedy, money-hording pigs ever invented.

To Republicans there's just Capitalism, and Communism, no middle ground.
Talk about ignorance.
The middle ground is where people are in less poverty, duh.

it is clear that torah law includes LOTS of socialist concepts of economy----
Jesus was an ardent proponent thereof. You is confusing current day socialists,
like Alexandra Cortez, and Willie-joe stalin Diblasio and other contemporary
"socialists" like Joseph Stalin with Jesus (no comparison)

 

[Flash]

The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, church and family.

Nothing about a bloated debt ridden corrupt government using taxes to steal money from working people to distribute to welfare queens and Illegals that provides a voter base for the filthy Liberal politicians.

 

[anynameyouwish]

I didn't know they believed in Jesus. They were screaming at God during the last DNC.

"They were screaming at God during the last DNC"


A lie.

The type of lie murderous conservative fascists repeat hoping to get people murdered.

 

[anynameyouwish]

Yes, I have seen the left wing losers claim that. I am sure you have too.

I'm sure you have never read the bible but as an atheist who HAS read it I can assure you jesus was much more liberal and tolerant than conservatives are.


jesus said "feed people"

NOT "let them eat cake"

jesus said help the homeless, NOT "use them as target practice"

you cons are fkn deranged. You run around all day saying "kill libs!" "kill dems" "kill gays" "kill atheists" then you claim "we are NICE and LOVING like JESUS!"


what a bunch of fukin loons.

 

[eagle1462010]

Not quite sure why Jesus matters to some of our USMB conservatives.

What the heck? That is pretty low. I'm sure you can disagree with posters without attacking their faith.

I don't believe many of them are actually people of faith. I believe they use religion as a political tool, as a cynical rhetorical device.

These are people who are pretty clearly filled with hate for their fellow man, not with love for Jesus or his teachings. Assuming he existed.
.

 

[irosie91]

The Bible teaches that charity should come from the heart, church and family.

Nothing about a bloated debt ridden corrupt government using taxes to steal money from working people to distribute to welfare queens and Illegals that provides a voter base for the filthy Liberal politicians.

to what "bible" do you refer?

 

[irosie91]

Of course, the term 'socialism' did not exist in the time of Jesus and he was not involved in political movements. Social programs have always been around, however. Rome provided bread to the poor very regularly, for example.
If Christianity were practiced as Jesus personified it, there would be very little, if any, need for social programs in America.

Jesus was very MUCH involved in political movements------which is why he was
crucified for sedition. His move on the "money changers" in the Temple
Courtyard was 1000 % a POLITICAL ACT

 

[eagle1462010]

Riddle me this..............Name the one word that has done more damage, and killed more people than any War we ever had.......................

One word only.

 

[irosie91]

Riddle me this..............Name the one word that has done more damage, and killed more people than any War we ever had.......................

One word only.

well-----my mom would say SUGAR

 

[eagle1462010]

Riddle me this..............Name the one word that has done more damage, and killed more people than any War we ever had.......................

One word only.

well-----my mom would say SUGAR

 

[eagle1462010]

 

[eagle1462010]

Maybe this is a better hint.

 

[Dragonlady]

This thread is a perfect illustration.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

John Kenneth Galbraith​

Selfishness and self respect are two different things. That people should look after themselves when able is far from selfish. It is actually a key part of people having a meaningful life. A person being successful is in no way a moral flaw, or harmful to other people. You can be successful, encourage others to be successful, without harming anyone.

You have utterly missed the point of Galbraith's statement. First off, there's the assumption that liberals don't want people to be successful and self-sufficient, or that they consider it immoral to expect people to to take care of themselves. That's an utterly fallacy.

Conservatives are constantly telling us that the poor are lazy, unmotivated, and don't want to work, and yet the people in Canada, Norway, Germany, and other countries with cradle to the grave social programs have some of the most productive and hard working people in the world. They also claim that constantly providing the poor with "free stuff" will kill their motivation, and encourage dependency. If that's true, why aren't all Canadians, Europeans, Australians and New Zealanders lazy bums?

This year, the Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to a couple to who did research on the effect of social programs and income supports for the poor on their productivity and and motivation. What they found overwhelmingly, is that social programs do NOT stifle productivity or encourage sloth. As conservatives have claimed. Rather, they encourage and aid people in getting their acts together and back on their feet.

Conservative denigrate social programs as "free shit", and claim it increases poverty and sloth, so as to give themselves an excuse to cut assistance programs for the poor so they can cut the programs and the taxes that support them. But studies have shown, the opposite is true. Social programs give people the support to get back on their feet. They supplement incomes for low wage workers to improve their lives, and reduce poverty.

The age of Ayn Randian "cruel to be kind" conservatism, while appealing to the greed of conservatives and their desire to punish the "lazy", creates generational poverty with no way out. When Reagan was elected, you had a 20% chance of working yourself out of poverty. After 40 years of cutting socialist programs and education for the poor, you have a 2% chance of working your way out of poverty.

Republican policies are creating whole new classes of poor people.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, I have seen the left wing losers claim that. I am sure you have too.

You have to be morally worthy not capitally worthy of a divine Commune of Heaven.

 

[eagle1462010]

This thread is a perfect illustration.

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

John Kenneth Galbraith​

Selfishness and self respect are two different things. That people should look after themselves when able is far from selfish. It is actually a key part of people having a meaningful life. A person being successful is in no way a moral flaw, or harmful to other people. You can be successful, encourage others to be successful, without harming anyone.

You have utterly missed the point of Galbraith's statement. First off, there's the assumption that liberals don't want people to be successful and self-sufficient, or that they consider it immoral to expect people to to take care of themselves. That's an utterly fallacy.

Conservatives are constantly telling us that the poor are lazy, unmotivated, and don't want to work, and yet the people in Canada, Norway, Germany, and other countries with cradle to the grave social programs have some of the most productive and hard working people in the world. They also claim that constantly providing the poor with "free stuff" will kill their motivation, and encourage dependency. If that's true, why aren't all Canadians, Europeans, Australians and New Zealanders lazy bums?

This year, the Nobel Prize in economics was awarded to a couple to who did research on the effect of social programs and income supports for the poor on their productivity and and motivation. What they found overwhelmingly, is that social programs do NOT stifle productivity or encourage sloth. As conservatives have claimed. Rather, they encourage and aid people in getting their acts together and back on their feet.

Conservative denigrate social programs as "free shit", and claim it increases poverty and sloth, so as to give themselves an excuse to cut assistance programs for the poor so they can cut the programs and the taxes that support them. But studies have shown, the opposite is true. Social programs give people the support to get back on their feet. They supplement incomes for low wage workers to improve their lives, and reduce poverty.

The age of Ayn Randian "cruel to be kind" conservatism, while appealing to the greed of conservatives and their desire to punish the "lazy", creates generational poverty with no way out. When Reagan was elected, you had a 20% chance of working yourself out of poverty. After 40 years of cutting socialist programs and education for the poor, you have a 2% chance of working your way out of poverty.

Republican policies are creating whole new classes of poor people.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Dear SassyIrishLass
They believe in PEACE AND JUSTICE
which is the same as Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

But they believe it will imposed through Govt as the central Authority.
they somehow see that Institution as the central filter for
establishing collective will of the people.

But instead of seeking a consensus by free will
they keep wanting to use PARTY and MEDIA to force it by coercive bullying tactics
while complaining about the same tactics for ESTABLISHING POLITICAL RELIGION.

This is, of course, problematic on several levels
1. first it violates Constitutional principles, laws and process
on equal protection from establishment and discrimination by creed
2. it CONTRADICTS itself by violating party principles of
prochoice without govt imposition on private individual liberty
and separation of religious beliefs from govt establishment
3. it promotes equal bullying, exclusion and oppression
instead of solving the real problems preventing equal justice under law
that are really necessary to resolve for true Peace and Justice

So it violates all three: Constitutional laws, Party principles,
and the real process of achieving true Justice and Peace.

=======================================================
The SADDEST thing SassyIrishLass is these people
truly believe they are fighting evil and are working on the
side of Peace and Justice.

When you realize this, that's when you fully comprehend
the TRAGEDY that befalls the human race. It more heartbreaking
than maddening. When you feel SORROW that exceeds the rage,
that's when we can finally understand where this has gone wrong.

When your sadness is greater than your anger.

What you say is exactly what conservatives are doing. But you have been radicalized and cannot see how the conservative desire to use government to pack the courts is against everything you say the right is for.

Which party is doing the most Nationwide Injunctions using the courts............hmmmm

We are seeing conservative judges rushed into courts by McConnell while he stalled nominations by Obama. Disingenuous arguments don't work with me son.

Elections have consequences, deal with it.

Obama election didn't seem to matter to McConnell. So I won't be hearing your hypocritical bullshit.

LOL, Obama lost the Senate AND the House. THOSE election have consequences.