Jesus was a Liberal Hippie

Just learned of this site. Sorry the response is a little late.Anyway, a great deal of ignorance and resulting straw men here. Faith did a pretty good job but there is more to the story.Jesus was not a liberal hippie but a neo-con. He and the apostles were correcting the corrupt teachings and perversions of the Old Testament by the pharisees and sadducees. They were restoring the peoples understanding back to the original intent which is returning to the original status quo...the definition of conservatism.1) Taxes: Taxes are regarded as bad consequence of deviating from the Mosaic law which included civic and religious law. The Jews wanted a king like the rest of the nations and God warned that a king would result in taxes. The jews persisted to God gave them a king...and taxes. We are supposed to take care of the poor with tithing and offerings. Taxes on top of that are a burden. The Jews had violated God's law and had their sovereignty taken away by Rome before they were scattered throughout the world according to God's Law (Deut 28). This was ordained by God hence Romans 13, even evil rulers are put their by God for his reasons like this one and therefore we render unto Caesar his taxes.2) Government. Faith had it right. We are supposed to do things like provide for the poor w/o an inefficient bureaucracy that takes 75% of the money for the administration; but rather, do it through other avenues that even with corruption yield 75% to 90% to the people who need it with only 25%-10% for administration.
a) Efficiency: Government is always the least efficient means to accomplish something. Unless it is in the national interest like defense then it is to be done privately which is always more efficient because of competition. When the Government has a monopoly there is no reason to be efficient. Plus the Government only consumes, it is not a producer making it even more of a drain on productivity. One only needs to learn econ 101 the national income equation to see this. When a producer buys things it needs to produce it employs more people who spend money purchasing things they need to survive employing more people who work for another producer and so on. That's why growth is possible and productivity is important. The government stifles growth and productivity. If government took over health-care in america it would be socializing 1/7th of the economy which would stifle growth and productivity. Those who always talk of 'greed' and the 'rich' seem to think that growth, productivity and prosperity are limited...the 'zero-sum theory' that has been shown to be false. They believe there is only a limited amount to go around and if one has more then they do so at the expense of another who therefore can only have less. False. Growth and productivity has no limit neither does prosperity. Anyone can work hard, invent something and be prosperous and by doing so they employ others and increase the prosperity overall. It is socialism that prevents this and always lowers productivity, prosperity and growth to the lowest common denominator...poverty. How many real-world examples do you need to see this?3)Prosperity is not inherently wicked: Because of growth and productivity the standard of living for everyone is increased. The history of American, The most productive, prosperous nation on earth is an example. Anyone can work hard and become prosperous. It is when one lives for wealth accumulation that it becomes evil. That is the story of the Rich man Jesus told to sell all...the passage in Matthew 19 "Now behold, one came and said to Him, Good Teacher, what good things shall I do that I may have eternal life?...Jesus said...keep the commandments...The young man said, "All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?" Jesus said, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come and follow Me. But when the young man heard that saying he went away sorrowful for he had great posessions." you guys who ignorantly want to try to make Jesus into a socialist always quote one part but leave out the important parts that refute you. In the verses immediately preceding the man claimed to be righteous by obeying the ten commmandments. Jesus is refuting his claim by exposing his heart...and commanding him to follow Him. Another part you guys leave out. If he was really righteous in his heart the man would have followed Jesus including his admonition to sell all. It is not a cookie cutter formula advocating socialism and it did not involve government but private property and charity. It applies only to greedy selfish individuals who think they are righteous w/o God by following rituals and formulas. It is not an admonition by Jesus against wealth. In fact in Matthew 25, the parable of the talents, investing for growth is a parable commending investing and increasing wealth.
Those of you who really want to help the poor will disavow socialism and Jesus was clearly in favor of work and prosperity.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

I ran out of room. But I wanted to address more fallacy advocated here.Thomas Jefferson: When he wrote the Declaration of Independence understood quite clearly the need for private property and a severly limited government. He originally wrote that we are endowed by our creator with life libery and the pursuit of PRIVATE PROPERTY. He changed it the night before delivering it. All the founding fathers involved in the Consitution (Jefferson wasnt he was in France) understood the importance of private property hence the Bill of Rights which was unilateral protection of private property and citizens from the government.Socialism: Again anyone who does any study at all will know that socialism is the roadmap to turn a capitalist society into a communist one. Just read the communist manifesto by Marx and one finds 10 planks for doing so including 1)No private property 2)The state controls the means of production and 3)A state controlled bank. The goal is communism which is unattainable. Israel is not communist nor are the private communes there. In socialism/communism private property is outlawed and the state takes control of all property including the means of production. That means no private businesses. In the Bible and the teachings of Jesus private property is never outlawed nor is letting the state take over any property. In fact when the state does take over it is a punishment of God (Deut 38) and taxes are the result of monarchy which is a system of rule not sanctioned by God.Again Jesus and the Apostles were correcting the corrupt teachings of the establishment of their day...to return to original intent. Ignorance leads one to conclude that makes Jesus a liberal who was changing the status quo but in reality he was returning to original intent, the original status quo which makes Him and the Apostles neo-cons of their day.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Silly.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Silly Ringo? Why?1) It's right out of the Communist Manifesto which is exactly that, A plan to turn capitalist nations into socialist ones. Read the end of Chapter 2 which has a 10 plank plan to change captilist countries to communism.2) "Silly" is a ad hoc/ad hominem conclusion not a proper argument

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Yer thinkin' backwards."Communism comes from socialism" is not the same as "socialism leads to communism". You're saying, in effect, that because donuts are made from wheat, wheat inevitably becomes donuts. No, it's an informal way of saying non sequitur. I used the more dramatic term to get your attention.
It worked. But the topic here is not your misconceptions about socialism. It's "Jesus was a liberal hippie".Since this is the Bible Study forum, let's see what the Bible says, shall we?

quote:

---

Mat 19:21 Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

---

Hmm... sounds more socialist than neo-con to me.As for taxes:

quote:

---

Luk 20:25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's and unto God the things which be God's.

---

Jesus didn't seem to agree with your right-wing rhetoric.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I already dispensed with the ignorant misuse of those two quotes in my post immediately before the one you responded to titled "Study a little will ya?" I ran out of room and continued in "A little more" Hence the title.I recommend you read it before you respond.Ignorant liberals always quote those two verses out of context to support their ingorant conclusions that "Jesus was a liberal hippie""I await your next syllable with great Eeeeagerness" (Name the movie!)

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Sorry, in the Bible Study forum, I look for Bible quotes and I didn't see any any your post(s).On reviewing your supposed "dispensation", I still see nothing that remotely contradicts what Jesus said. Kindly deal with the questions more directly: How is "Sell everything you have and give it to the poor" not socialism? And how is "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's" not condoning taxation? What does that mean?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Read post #77 where I deal with your two quotes more in depth. But in shortThe jews in rebellion against God's system of rule wanted a king like the gentile nations. God warned them that they would have to pay taxes to a King. God promised in Deut 38 that one of the punishments for failure to follow Him would be a foreign nation taking over which was the case with the Romans. The Jews were rebellios and taken over and must submit to rendering taxes unto Caesar. Taxes are/were a punishment or negative consequence of actions. Doesnt make taxes good.Socialism outlaws private property which is not outlawed in Christianity. The Rich man selling all he had and giving to the poor is not socialism it is charity. When the govt takes your money to give to the poor it is socialism. The rich man in Matthew claimed he was righteous and Jesus was pointing out he wasnt because he wouldnt follow him and that his claim to righteousness that he followed the Mosiac law was false. So sell all you have and give to the poor is not a formula for government but a condmenation of a greedy man's false righteousness.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Irrelevant. Jesus said "Pay your taxes", not "Whine about taxes". We're not talking about the right or wrong of taxation here. We're talking about Jesus' attitude toward taxation. Nonsense, but still off topic. The rich man asked Jesus:

quote:

---

Mat 19:16 ... Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?

---

He said he had kept the commandments:

quote:

---

Mat 19:20 ... All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?

---

And then Jesus said:

quote:

---

Mat 19:21 ... If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

---

Jesus said that the rich man had to divest himself of his riches in order to be righteous, in order to have eternal life. Who said it was?It's a formula for Christianity, for eternal life. It's not about "false claims of righteousness" at all. It's about what righteousness is.
In the rich man's case, righteousness meant giving up the excess goods that he had and redistributing it to the poor.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Read my post #77 like I said. It clears all this up.The conversation with the Rich man was specific to him and his false righteousness which he claimed by keeping the commandments. Jesus was pointing out he wasnt righteous read the last part...the man went away sad because he had many posessions. Read the entire conversation. It is not a formula for everyone to follow but again exposing the mans false righteousness because he valued money more than Jesus because he wouldnt follow him. Rich people who value their posessions more than God will have a hard time getting into heaven unless they repent which is the point of the conversation. That's why it says it is easier for a camel to get through the eye of the needle than a rich man to get into heave...the 'the eye of the needle' was a gate into the temple which if a camel was unburdened of anything on it coud get through. It is a parable of repentence of greed.The entire New Testament is a correction of the false understanding of the Old Testament taught by the Pharisees and Sadducess to the people in order to return to the original teachings which makes Jesus a Neo-con not a Liberal Hippie. The topic of this thread.Again read my original post "Study a little will ya!" which details why Jesus was a conservative and the proper function of economics and govt which was a general response to many previous posts about socialism & Jesus.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

Where do you get that? Why is it not applicable to all rich men? Exactly. His problem was with possessions.He thought he had been righteous by keeping the commandments but Jesus told him that righteousness includes not hogging more than your share of worldly goods. The only additional thing he had to do to inherit eternal life was to sell his excess goods. Again, where do you get that? And that repentence involves selling their worldly goods and giving to the poor.Jesus didn't say "Bring your riches and follow me." He wanted the man without the riches. A return to the original teachings would only spell "neo-con" if the original teachings were neo-con. Let's just look at what Jesus said, what His policies actually were and see if they really are "neo-con". Instead of repeating that mantra over and over, why not repeat the pertinent points as they come up?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

You keep leaving out the main point of the passage about the rich young man, jesus said to follow him which he wouldnt do because his riches were more important. Jesus didnt just say sell all you have and give to the poor and you will be saved..he said sell and follow me. The most important part obviously is to follow Jesus which the young rich man wouldnt do which means Jesus exposed his false righteousness using his love of his riches and not his love of God to do so.And it isnt a formula for all the rich because when Nicodemus, the rich man in the Sanhedrin, asked Jesus the same question...what must I do to be saved Jesus did not tell him to give all he had to the poor...instead he told him that he must be born again.

---

"...but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables"

The most important part was to follow Jesus without his riches, which the young rich man wouldn't do. The story does not imply that he was unwilling to follow Jesus if he could keep his riches. It was poverty he balked at, not following Jesus. Otherwise, there is no reason for him to be described as a "rich man". Nitpick: Where does it say Nicodemus was rich?Presumably, Jesus had "audited the books", as it were, of the rich man and of Nicodemus. Maybe Nicodemus didn't pass the "means test".One was told to sell his goods and the other was not. If Nicodemus didn't have excess goods that needed selling, how does that change Jesus' words to the man who did?By the way, the phrase, "ye must be born again", is interesting. Not many newborns are rich, are they? (And if they are, they don't have power of attorney.) One interpretation of "ye must be born again" could be "ye must go back to when you had no material goods".Jesus told Nicodemus that he should already know about being born again:

quote:

---

Joh 3:10 ... Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

---

Maybe the "old school" that Jesus was trying to revive was not as money-grubbing as you make it out to be.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

The fact of Nicodemus being a rich man is common knowledge. You are just arguing to argue. Jewish history records Nicodemus as being rich and the Bible says 1) He was a ruler of the Jews, John 3:1) and that he was a member of the Sanhedrin who were all rich.Saying that born again can be interpreted as going back to a time when he had no riches is just foolishness, in fact the rest of the passage on Nicodemus refutes exactly that, saying being born again is being "born of the spirit". It is spiritual regeneration. Duh!I am done arguing the obvious while you argue against the obvious with ridiculous assertions to reinforce your apriori presuppostions. Good nite and God Bless

This is Bible Study. Back it up scripturally. Yet Jesus said:

quote:

---

Joh 3:12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

---

He did speak of "earthly things" too, like it or not.You still haven't answered the question: Why did Jesus tell the rich man to sell everything?Why didn't He say, "Bring all your stuff with you and we'll pass it out to whoever needs it"? Or, why didn't He say, "Put your brother-in-law in charge of your business and follow me"?Why did He specify that the rich man sell his goods before following? Scary when you have to peek outside the box, ain't it? Well, I'm the one who has quoted scripture. It seems to me the assertions and a priori presuppositions are on the other foot.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC