NationStates Jolt Archive

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

That's absolute bollocks. What Jesus preached put heavy emphasis on voluntary good works, regardless of the economic policies of the current government.

That's absolute bollocks. What Jesus preached put heavy emphasis on voluntary good works, regardless of the economic policies of the current government.

Agreed. He preached giving of one's self. Whether that be time, wealth or ability. A Socialist system doesn't leave that up to the individual.

That's absolute bollocks. What Jesus preached put heavy emphasis on voluntary good works, regardless of the economic policies of the current government.
All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need.
Yeah, the early church didn't force others to share so they where not evil socialists/communists but they themselves did share voluntarily so they where not greedy capitalists either. I believe the right word for the economical policy Christians should align with is "charity".

In my opinion christianity shouldn't align with any political ideologi. Religion should not interfer in politics. But to answer your question, I don't think socialism and christanity should align, christianity doesn't say its all right to overtax the rich (in some ways discriminate the rich just because they are rich)....

Capitalism and socialism didn't exist in jesus' time, obviously it doesn't align with either, but it can be used to support both.

well, Capitalism is basically a system of greed. True capitalism opposes organized labor, minimum wages, and job security. In my opinion, I believe Christianity would supports socialism because socialism tries to make sure no one is without a home or food for the sake of the market.

Capitalism and socialism didn't exist in jesus' time, obviously it doesn't align with either, but it can be used to support both.

Which is incredibly sad, for both parties involved.

Capitalism sucks.
Jesus didn't suck.
The Church and the "apostles" (*cough*Paul*cough*) did suck.
Therefore, Christianity should align with Socialism, but it'll align with Capitalism.

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism.

That's Jesus' problem.

Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich.

"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Yes, I know, very silly.

It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

I'm a non-Christian capitalist. Yes, they contradict one another. But remember, Christ never said to force a socialist government. He said be generous yourself, but he never said a thing about forcing others.

That's Jesus' problem.



"It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Yes, I know, very silly.



I'm a non-Christian capitalist. Yes, they contradict one another. But remember, Christ never said to force a socialist government. He said be generous yourself, but he never said a thing about forcing others.

If anything, Christ seems to be inherently libertarian in belief...

1. Voluntary charity
2. If someone doesn't hold the same faith, let them be and move on.
3. Your actions speak louder than your words...

What kind of double-think is this rubbish about Jesus asking people to give to the poor but not forcing them? That's like saying commandments about not killing are advice, but you can't force people not to murder... It's a moral imperative.


"Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."
-Ezekiel 16:49

"The righteous care about justice for the poor, but the wicked have no such concern."
-Proverbs 29:7

"There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land."
-Deuteronomy 15:11

If anything, Christ seems to be inherently libertarian in belief...

1. Voluntary charity
2. If someone doesn't hold the same faith, let them be and move on.
3. Your actions speak louder than your words...

This is how Christianity should be. But along came Paul of Tarsus and nowadays the majority of Christians follow Paulianity and just give an occasional nod to Jesus.

I went to a Christian banquet once and they read ONLY from Paul - idolizing him as if he was a God. This reaffirmed by belief that Christianity shouldn't be called that since Christians don't even follow their own God but prefer a man over Him.

both. captalism will always be present. so will socialism. capitalism as long as you dont become a corporate stooge. socialism as long as you dont become a free wheelin franklin. hmmm i supose you could live in a captalist society but every action you make you must decide on what to choose on what way you lead your life.
im not a complicated man so will be using references or big words
just a few thoughts

What kind of double-think is this rubbish about Jesus asking people to give to the poor but not forcing them? That's like saying commandments about not killing are advice, but you can't force people not to murder... It's a moral imperative.

The difference is between coercion (force) and voluntarism (personal act out of love)... Christ never advocated coercion into acts...

The difference is between coercion (force) and voluntarism (personal act out of love)... Christ never advocated coercion into acts...
We're talking Christianity here, though, and you have a moral imperative to help the poor in Christianity. If you're not going to do that yourself, then the government makes you do it in the same way that if you violate the commandment not to murder the government stops you from doing it again.

This is how Christianity should be. But along came Paul of Tarsus and nowadays the majority of Christians follow Paulianity and just give an occasional nod to Jesus.

I went to a Christian banquet once and they read ONLY from Paul - idolizing him as if he was a God. This reaffirmed by belief that Christianity shouldn't be called that since Christians don't even follow their own God but prefer a man over Him.

I think that's more of a perversion of Paul's writings, as opposed to Paul teaching something contrary to Christ's doctrine... Most problems people have with Paul are misapplication of his writings... An example would be Paul's "saved by faith" words; which were written against legalists, who used the "works of the law" to show their superiority as the Pharisees did; or his writting not to feed/support a group of people, not because it was ok not to feed the poor but because he was writting about a group of people who gave up their jobs to hand around and mooch off of other church members while "waiting on the Christ's return".

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

The temple scene indicates nihilism. And the fact that he was executed indicates that he was a criminal. And it also indicates that he does not approve of the death penalty......







:D

We're talking Christianity here, though, and you have a moral imperative to help the poor in Christianity. If you're not going to do that yourself, then the government makes you do it in the same way that if you violate the commandment not to murder the government stops you from doing it again.

If it's an act made through government coercion, then you're still not following the moral imperative... And therefore still at odds with Christ... Not murdering someone because "I might get in trouble" is not the same thing as not murdering someone because you love them. Christians have the moral imperative not to hate someone in their heart; because it's the same as murder to Christ... How could government regulate the heart of man to ensure this "moral imperative"?

If it's an act made through government coercion, then you're still not following the moral imperative... And therefore still at odds with Christ... Not murdering someone because "I might get in trouble" is not the same thing as not murdering someone because you love them. Christians have the moral imperative not to hate someone in their heart; because it's the same as murder to Christ... How could government regulate the heart of man to ensure this "moral imperative"?
Let me take a different tack, then. The moral imperative to help the poor advocated in the Bible is sufficiently strong enough that a similar attitude as for any other sin should be taken. You are correct that it is done out of the love for man, but that doesn't affect that it needs to be done.

I believe it was said that christians should focus on things of heaven, not of this earth. So Christians shouldn't worry about capitalism or socialism, nor democracy or fascism, but rather doing what is right in the eyes of God, being both a servant to him, and to mankind.

Let me take a different tack, then. The moral imperative to help the poor advocated in the Bible is sufficiently strong enough that a similar attitude as for any other sin should be taken. You are correct that it is done out of the love for man, but that doesn't affect that it needs to be done.

And yet Christ never advocated this performance by coercion... And in fact shows that Christians should act independent from governmental power.

I believe it was said that christians should focus on things of heaven, not of this earth. So Christians shouldn't worry about capitalism or socialism, nor democracy or fascism, but rather doing what is right in the eyes of God, being both a servant to him, and to mankind.

Such a view had a seriously detrimental effect, especially in Europe, in the last millennium, as well.

Such a view had a seriously detrimental effect, especially in Europe, in the last millennium, as well.

I thought it was the view that Christianity should be pervasive in every aspect of life,especially government, that was cause of Europe's problems. You know, using religion as a political tool, instead of the moral up lifting tool for which is created to be.

I believe it was said that christians should focus on things of heaven, not of this earth. So Christians shouldn't worry about capitalism or socialism, nor democracy or fascism, but rather doing what is right in the eyes of God, being both a servant to him, and to mankind.
If this were true there would be no moral commandments in Christianity.

Also, Protestant Work Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism.

And yet Christ never advocated this performance by coercion... And in fact shows that Christians should act independent from governmental power.
Yet they don't act. The question is whether Christianity is closer to capitalism or socialism... and I say socialism. It's not a perfect fit, but it's certainly closer to representing the moral imperative on Christians to help the poor.

I thought it was the view that Christianity should be pervasive in every aspect of life,especially government, that was cause of Europe's problems. You know, using religion as a political tool, instead of the moral up lifting tool for which is created to be.

That too was a problem, but it could have been overcome if it weren't for this christian apathy:

"Life here in Europe is terrible, our king is a brutal autocrat!"

"Don't worry, life on this earth doesn't matter, it is merely preparation for life in heaven, we shouldn't worry about the oppressive regimes of the already doomed earth, so lets just worry about keeping to our doctrine etc..."

This view is what made it so easy for monarchs to rule in such a brutal way. There were revolts of course, but any attempt to actually overthrow the king was almost always for religious reasons only (we want people to obey our religion! not yours!), up until the 16th century.

Lets quickly compare Capitalism and true Socialism. When people think about socialism, they think of Stalin, which is not true socialism. ok, captialism is run on ppl's greed for the desire for profit. Socialism is about equality. With socialism, you can be whatever you want, it just has to be fair. With capitalism, you have ridiculous things like Paris Hilton making 400 thousand dollars to party while an average factory worker just gets by. Christianity should try its best to help everyone and socialism does that

Capitalism and socialism didn't exist in jesus' time, obviously it doesn't align with either, but it can be used to support both.

I disagree.

Jesus was a subject of the Roman Empire, a Government which, like most modern Governments, had elements of socialism in its makeup. The Roman Government provided infrastructure, including roads, aqueducts and city walls. Public baths were provided by the local provincial governments as were the arenas and theaters. Law Enforcement was provided by local Roman magistrates and, in the case of Judea, a Roman Garrison.

At the same time capitalism was also present. Jesus was raised by Joseph, a Carpenter who was self-employed. Some of the Apostles, most notably Simon Peter, were independent fishermen who owned their own fishing boats.

Just like in the United States today, there's elements of both. The Government provides the infrastructure and police/fire services, yet we also exist in a free market economy.

If anything, Christ seems to be inherently libertarian in belief...

1. Voluntary charity
2. If someone doesn't hold the same faith, let them be and move on.
3. Your actions speak louder than your words...

QFT

We're talking Christianity here, though, and you have a moral imperative to help the poor in Christianity. If you're not going to do that yourself, then the government makes you do it in the same way that if you violate the commandment not to murder the government stops you from doing it again.

At what point did Jesus grab a rich person and force him to drop money into the collection box?

At what point did Jesus grab a rich person and force him to drop money into the collection box?
Strawman.

Jesus did, however, suggest it was a moral imperative to do so. This puts Christian ethics on the matter far closer to socialism than to capitalism. It's not like socialism takes money from the rich for the sake of it - but rather out of the concern for the poor.

With regards to the gospel and communism: May I remind you all that the Pharisees are legal authority, tax collectors are among those who must repent, and it was the cops who executed Jesus. In other words, you can't have Socialism without human authority, and authority by man falls under the jurisdiction of "serving two masters." (Gospel of John)

"...when giving, do not let the Left-Hand know what the Right-Hand is doing..." (Gospel of John)*

"...unholy wealth should be used to build relationships..." (Gospel of Luke)*

When you give, you give as a sacrifice to God. Your giving must be secret and for no earthly benefit. When you follow laws, you are doing something very specifically for an earthly benefit (not going to jail for tax evasion.) You are also not building a personal relationship with the person you are giving to and are not helping to spread God's word and mercy. You are only helping to assist a vain earthly government that will probably use most of that money to buy arms or lock people up.

Further, it is the "meek shall inherit the earth," not "the army shall inherit the earth." God wants you to look to him, not a government composed of politicians who "speak his name in vain." (Violation of Ten Commandments.) Likewise he wants the meek to inherit the earth, not simply be pitied and thrown a few scraps from the table. He wants the meek to gain strength of a deeper nature, not just to gain a fish, but the abillity to fish for themselves and to learn to love their existence, rather then the slums of Paris where moslem men rot away in boredom.

And likewise, Socialism as a philosophy implies society being held accountable for individual actions, but in Chrisitians are to "take the narrow path" rather then the "wide gate of destruction," or act righteously despite societal pressure. May I remind you that the disciples collected no tax cut or government incentive for their years of service to Christ.

Then there's always the Parable of the Talents, in the Gospel of John, where 3 servants are given money ("talents") by their master and asked to invest it wisely. One servant builds a business, one servant buys land, but the third servant buries he's, being afraid he might lose it. The third servant is punished, for "he at least could've collected interest" from a good loan. The other two give most of their produce to their master, but are allowed to keep a small amount for themselves and their families. And if you are not a servant of Jesus, and are not willing to give of your own volition to experience others in your life, then I suggest you keep your money, and you keep on getting richer, so that when you finally do have that feeling in your heart, you will have a much greater bounty with which to not just feed and clothe, but genuinely touch peoples live. Like Mary Magdalene, whose personal fortune financed the disciples and made them far more able to do what they did.

So no, I do not believe Chrisitianity is Socialist, though it is charitable, and the difference here is that chartiy is something personal, something you do specifically for someone else who you know and let in to your home. Christianity doesn't want a nifty little poor house to shuffle all those "ugly" poor people in to, it wants people like you and me to treat them as what they are, human beings in distress, and show them personal kindness from our own heart, production, attention, volition, and unrelenting love, not government tyranny and stealing from the rich. After all, anyone who has met a homeless man knows it's more then money that they need.

NOTE: If you are wondering why I quoted so much from the Gospel of John, it is because the Gospel of John that deals in the most detail with this question, followed by Luke, while Matthew and Mark are more events oriented rather then prophecy oriented. It should also be noted that Luke can be very easilly taken out of context, so I suggest if you read either John or Luke on this matter you read the books all the way through to the end. Thank you.

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

You're wrong about Jesus supporting socialism. He preached charity, which is voluntary giving, not socialism, which is government-mandated giving; see Neo Bretonnia's quote below.

And the scriptures also say, that if any will not work, neither should he eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12), and THAT is NOT socialistic. Furthermore, the Bible condemns laziness, and socialism encourages laziness.

Another point: The early Christians tried a socialistic setup (Acts 4:32-37), but it didn't work out because, later on, the Apostle Paul had to take up a collection for "the poor saints which are at Jerusalem" (Romans 15:25,26). In other words, they were still poor, in spite (or perhaps because) of socialism.

That's absolute bollocks. What Jesus preached put heavy emphasis on voluntary good works, regardless of the economic policies of the current government.

QFT.

Agreed. He preached giving of one's self. Whether that be time, wealth or ability. A Socialist system doesn't leave that up to the individual.

QFT.

The temple scene indicates nihilism. And the fact that he was executed indicates that he was a criminal. And it also indicates that he does not approve of the death penalty......

You're wrong about Jesus not approving of the death penalty.

He rebuked the Pharisees for making the words of God of no effect via their traditions, and the example He cited had to do with honoring one's parents, and He told them, "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." (Matthew 15:4-6)

So Jesus was not opposed to the death penalty.

And as for Him being a "criminal": He may have been a criminal in the eyes of the Jews, but He did not actually do anything wrong. The Jews' real reason for wanting Him dead was that people were believing on Him en masse, and they (the religious stuffshirts of Jesus' day) wanted to run things themselves, and Jesus was, you might say, "stealing their thunder". Jesus was, in fact, innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.

You're wrong about Jesus not approving of the death penalty.

He rebuked the Pharisees for making the words of God of no effect via their traditions, and the example He cited had to do with honoring one's parents, and He told them, "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." (Matthew 15:4-6)

So Jesus was not opposed to the death penalty.

And as for Him being a "criminal": He may have been a criminal in the eyes of the Jews, but He did not actually do anything wrong. The Jews' real reason for wanting Him dead was that people were believing on Him en masse, and they (the religious stuffshirts of Jesus' day) wanted to run things themselves, and Jesus was, you might say, "stealing their thunder". Jesus was, in fact, innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.
Jesus may have approved of the death penalty before being subject to it.

If He was not a criminal, all the more reason to dislike being executed.

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

There is absolutley no evidence that this man Jesus ever existed, and the historical account of Josephus has long been proven to be a fake, so in my eyes it's not worth arguing what this man who probably didn't exist may or may not have taught.
As for the socialism=good & capitalism=bad arguement, that is absolute nonsense. They are both just ideas that attempt to provide solutions to the problems of society. Some socialism is needed, some capitalism is needed. Life is not black and white, it is a shade of very middle of the road grey.
Having said all that, the largely Christian country that is the USA could do very well by taking on a bit more socialism, even if it does have to be spoon-fed by the bible

I think that's more of a perversion of Paul's writings, as opposed to Paul teaching something contrary to Christ's doctrine... Most problems people have with Paul are misapplication of his writings... An example would be Paul's "saved by faith" words; which were written against legalists, who used the "works of the law" to show their superiority as the Pharisees did; or his writting not to feed/support a group of people, not because it was ok not to feed the poor but because he was writting about a group of people who gave up their jobs to hand around and mooch off of other church members while "waiting on the Christ's return".

Wouldn't it make sense that he was a capitalist because it's really hard to give when you have no profit to give from

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

Pure christianity has little bearing on the government because it tells people explicitly not to care about the government. I guess if you had to put it somewhere, it would fit best in anarcho-communism.

Capitalism is propped up by contract law, which Jesus is depicted to have abhorred, what with the preaching of forgiveness of debts and trashing moneychangers in the temple. Jesus would approve of nothing less than a gift economy (not state-planned communism or state-enforced capitalism).

In terms of basic values, it would appear that Christianity would be more aligned with socialism.

However, the Bible seems pretty clear that charity is the responsibility of the individual and the church, not the government.

The Biblical view of human nature also supports capitalism. It assumes a fallen nature. This is one of the basic assumptions of capitalism (self-interest, aka greed). Socialism assumes the opposite.

True capitalism opposes organized labor, minimum wages, and job security.

That's rediculous. From the heart of a die hard moderate-radical Capitalist ideocrat, we whole-heartedly support organized labor as an alternative to government intervention. Most of the semi-moderate to moderate-radical capitalists support a minimum wage, just a low one that allows the buisnesses to make room for the harder working and longer working to earn more then the new and/or lazy, instead of the wages being to high for the work and those that work harder being forced to accept the same pay as the lazy joe who just got the job. We also support job security as a means of making a peace between the capitalist class and the proletarian. It's not great that we need it, but it's nessesary, just as long as its not taken to an extreme- or even centrist.
In awnser to the first question you posted, I don't think Jesus cares what political idealogy you are, so long as you are moral and just in your ways.


PS: A moderate radical is being VERY capitalist, but not so idealist as to be a radical capitalist like Ayn Rand.

bump

Socialism in any meaningful or coherant sense is not and cannot be tyranny. If it did mean that, I'd have been gone long ago.

Common ownership and workplace democracy is not "forced charity". It is based on the recognition that the cultural construct of ownership shouldn't confer power over other individuals.

Socialism in any meaningful or coherant sense is not and cannot be tyranny. If it did mean that, I'd have been gone long ago.

Common ownership and workplace democracy is not "forced charity". It is based on the recognition that the cultural construct of ownership shouldn't confer power over other individuals.

So long as the government is not involved, I agree.

If the government is involved, than we have a problem. One of the defining characteristics of a government is having singular control of force (the brute force type like police and military). Even the possibility of force makes it "forced charity." If there is no possibility of force, than you can break the law and get away with it, which negates the purpose of putting it in law.

So long as the government is not involved, I agree.

If the government is involved, than we have a problem. One of the defining characteristics of a government is having singular control of force (the brute force type like police and military). Even the possibility of force makes it "forced charity." If there is no possibility of force, than you can break the law and get away with it, which negates the purpose of putting it in law.

You're talking to an anarcho-syndicalist; I could go on for pages and pages about the illegitimacy of state institutions and coercive hierarchies.

I pointed out the non-sequitor in red. That simply does not follow. I own a gun. I have the capacity to force you to do a number of things. I'm not though. I am not coercing you, even though I have the means to do so.

Ideally, the monopoly on coercive power would be spread out among the people relatively evenly, and exercised though popular institutions.

First off, Im an atheist, and my opinion of christianity, is quite a bit different than an actual Christians, but I do remember this particular passage.


"It is far easier for a camel to walk through the eye of a needle, than a rich man to enter Heaven."
Matthew 19:24

Seems to be, you dont get in, if you have a lot of money that could be doing other things than lining ones pocket.

Course, one would have to believe any of it for starters...

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

In many European countries Christianity does align itself more with the economic left.

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?That Jesus didn't have a clue of modern economics back when he preached, so his teachings don't really apply.

That Jesus didn't have a clue of modern economics back when he preached, so his teachings don't really apply.

Did he have a clue about anything modern?

That's absolute bollocks. What Jesus preached put heavy emphasis on voluntary good works, regardless of the economic policies of the current government.

Right. And so Jesus was pro-choice, pro-gay marriage, pro-gambling, pro-murder, theft and rape. At least from a legal standpoint, because as soon as you make these things against the Earthly law, they no longer earn spiritual merit for resisting the urge to engage in them.

There should be no laws against any of these things. Generations of Americans are being consigned to hell because when their souls reach the Pearly Gates they are being told "sorry, you only didn't kill your mother-in-law because you were afraid of going to prison for it. You say you wouldn't have done it anyway, but what we see here is a lifetime of following Earthly law but no clear pursuit of divine law."

That Jesus didn't have a clue of modern economics back when he preached, so his teachings don't really apply.

He didn't have a clue about modern neurology, population density, or dermatology. Should we then decide that we don't need to listen to him on addiction, murder, and pouring oil on Jesus' head instead of selling it to fee the poor?

He didn't have a clue about modern neurology, population density, or dermatology. Should we then decide that we don't need to listen to him on addiction, murder, and pouring oil on Jesus' head instead of selling it to fee the poor?

Yes. There is a lot of good reasons to be a nice person. That Jesus said so is not a good reason.

How much do you think that head would fetch on E-Bay?

He didn't have a clue about modern neurology, population density, or dermatology. Should we then decide that we don't need to listen to him on addiction, murder, and pouring oil on Jesus' head instead of selling it to fee the poor?Since when is murder a modern phenomenon? And what did Jesus say about addictions?

Christianity should align itself more with Jesus.

Love thy neighbor vs Render unto Caesar?

Christianity, a religion, has jack-shit to do with capitalism or socialism.

You're wrong about Jesus not approving of the death penalty.

He rebuked the Pharisees for making the words of God of no effect via their traditions, and the example He cited had to do with honoring one's parents, and He told them, "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." (Matthew 15:4-6)

So Jesus was not opposed to the death penalty.

And as for Him being a "criminal": He may have been a criminal in the eyes of the Jews, but He did not actually do anything wrong. The Jews' real reason for wanting Him dead was that people were believing on Him en masse, and they (the religious stuffshirts of Jesus' day) wanted to run things themselves, and Jesus was, you might say, "stealing their thunder". Jesus was, in fact, innocent of any wrongdoing whatsoever.

When Jesus refers to "the death" isn't he usually talking about perdition rather than physical death? All people physically die, but quotes like "the wages of sin is death" mean to be deprived of "life everlasting," i.e. heaven. Not actual physical immortality.

Since when is murder a modern phenomenon? And what did Jesus say about addictions?

That alcoholics can not approach the altar of heaven.

Yes. There is a lot of good reasons to be a nice person. That Jesus said so is not a good reason.

How much do you think that head would fetch on E-Bay?

At least as much as that grilled cheese sandwich.

You're wrong about Jesus supporting socialism. He preached charity, which is voluntary giving, not socialism, which is government-mandated giving; see Neo Bretonnia's quote below.

And the scriptures also say, that if any will not work, neither should he eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10-12), and THAT is NOT socialistic. Furthermore, the Bible condemns laziness, and socialism encourages laziness.

Another point: The early Christians tried a socialistic setup (Acts 4:32-37), but it didn't work out because, later on, the Apostle Paul had to take up a collection for "the poor saints which are at Jerusalem" (Romans 15:25,26). In other words, they were still poor, in spite (or perhaps because) of socialism.

I find it appalling that Christians who are constantly trying to make the teachings of Jesus the basis of law when it comes to telling other people to stop doing things then turn around and say that it's all supposed to be voluntary as soon as it starts to impact them.

"You can't allow gay marriage, it's against God's Law."
"You can't allow abortion, it's against God's Law."
"You can't allow prostitution, it's against God's Law."
"You can't allow drug use, it's against God's Law."
"You can't make me give to the poor. Following God's Law only counts if you do it on your own."

You are the vilest bunch of grotesque hypocrites.

guys guys guys, isn't it obvious? Jesus was a hippie.

Walking from place to place with all his friends in tow, living off of kind strangers, sandals, long hair... this dude was just unfortunate enough to live 1967 years before his time.

And as for hippies and economics, its anarchy and communal farms. Live off the earth directly, or you're being exploitive some how.

Yes. There is a lot of good reasons to be a nice person. That Jesus said so is not a good reason.

Agreed. Jesus might have been new and insightful 2000 years ago, but time has moved on. New insights develop, societies change and so on.
"Eternal and unchanging" is a silly concept.

:)
if a Christian then the question should be "Should Socialism or Capitalism align closer to Christianity than it actually is now?"

if not a Christian then the question of this thread or the above is meaningless as a non-Christian can not conceive of what Christianity is or is not.

Christianity is supposed to lead the way in ideas and innovation and the rest will follow this tendency, asking the question of the thread is assuming that Capitalism or Socialism is the primary truth and that Christianity should follow one or the other, this is foolishness because the Bible tells the believer to be the ambassador of the "Real", not to follow human-invented doctrines.

Capitalism works because hard work is rewarded.
Socialism works because the unfortunate is aided through the difficult period.

Neither Capitalism, nor Socialism work as soon as the human gets involved because the human creature is flawed and will muck up any system.

So Christ would say that Capitalism or Socialism is irrelevant while the human is still flawed, which is why He stated that one should recognize one's flaws and to accept help from His maker to be re-made in a fashion that is acceptable to the maker. Once this is done, capitalism and socialism will not be necessary because it will be replaced with just being perfect. :)

guys guys guys, isn't it obvious? Jesus was a hippie.

Walking from place to place with all his friends in tow, living off of kind strangers, sandals, long hair....
....shoving everyone into a fuel efficient sedan

Christianity is supposed to lead the way in ideas and innovation

Sure about the bolded part ? Many Christians seem to disagree (varying from the anti-science creationists to the peaceful but "technologically impaired" Amish).

Sure about the bolded part ? Many Christians seem to disagree (varying from the anti-science creationists to the peaceful but "technologically impaired" Amish).

Also, arguably Jewity, Islamity, and others have contributed a lot more to innovation than Christianity. Even if it is just basic stuff like arabic numbers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numbers)

Sure about the bolded part ? Many Christians seem to disagree (varying from the anti-science creationists to the peaceful but "technologically impaired" Amish).

don't mistake Christians with churchians... anyone can put on a police uniform and claim to be a police officer, it does not make them official. the unfortunate part is that people tend to focus on the uniform the person is wearing and not the behavior. when a so-called christian acts anti-christian people tend to blame God or the message or other genuine Christians.

The anti-science creationists are focusing on letters of the Bible, not on what is being said in the Bible... the Amish have forgotten that they are supposed to be Ambassadors to the World not create a personal little paradise upon this World.

Also, arguably Jewity, Islamity, and others have contributed a lot more to innovation than Christianity. Even if it is just basic stuff like arabic numbers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numbers)

Very true, but the innovation I was referring to was how to live properly in this world not how to discover new science or new techniques. Each culture has contributed great things and it is good to use them, unfortunately we are not wise enough to use these treasures in the way God would want us to use them. Numbers and math are used both for medicine and for war.

The Amish would prefer to leave math alone because they seem to believe that the numbers cause the wars while the anti-science creationists would want us to use the Bible as a calculating tool to avoid using the math for war.

Also, arguably Jewity, Islamity, and others have contributed a lot more to innovation than Christianity. Even if it is just basic stuff like arabic numbers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_numbers)

It's interesting to note that, in Arabic, those numbers that we in the West refer to as "Arabic Numerals" are referred to as "Indian Numerals."

Sure about the bolded part ? Many Christians seem to disagree (varying from the anti-science creationists to the peaceful but "technologically impaired" Amish).

Actually, the Amish are not "technologically impaired"... They use diesel driven hydraulic equipment, telephones (including cell-phones), and even answering machines... It's just that the technology is used in very limited capacities... For example, an entire community may share one telephone, or a family may own a cell phone; they just do not use it while in their homes, nor allow any form of technology to act as a distraction to their lives; like the "English" do.

Clearly what Jesus preached was not in support of capitalism, but in support of socialism. Helping people, and remember the scriptures that almost condemn the rich. It kind of disgusts me that Christianity is associated with big businesses that crush the average man. What do you all think?

Hmmm . . . you know, all these things, christianity, socialism, capitalism, they're just ideas. Now if, as a person, you choose to live your life informed by capitalism, or socialism, or christianity, is up to you. You can even choose to live as a capitalist or socialist whose economic lifestyle is informed by christianity. But ideas only exist as electrochemical states in the brain, and as such, are rarely truly exclusionary or unalignable. You could even be a capitalist socialist if it suited you! Try not to worry so much about "should," and maybe more about "will." Who you are isn't a bunch of words, it's a bunch of actions.

It's interesting to note that, in Arabic, those numbers that we in the West refer to as "Arabic Numerals" are referred to as "Indian Numerals."

Indeed. I just did an online history test of 25 questions. The only question I failed was one that asked where our modern (no-Roman) numerals come from. I said Arabia. :(

Actual question:

5. Modern written numbers were firt developed by the mathematicians of

A. India.

C. Arabia.

B. France. :rolleyes:

D. China.

Actually, the Amish are not "technologically impaired"...

I know - the phrase is merely from a popular Weird Al song.

I know - the phrase is merely from a popular Weird Al song.

I know, but it's a popular misconception that the Amish are averse to technology; when really their aversion is to technology being allowed to interfere too much into their lives, especially interference in their family lives; which is why communities/families will own phones, but they land lines would be located away from houses; and they would go outside to answer cell phones; leaving them off while they are inside... If they need electricity for work equipment, they'll use a generator, rather than being connected to the general power-grid, or use hydraulic equipment that can be powered through a diesel or gasoline powered diesel pump... To maintain a separation between themselves and "the world"...

:)
if a Christian then the question should be "Should Socialism or Capitalism align closer to Christianity than it actually is now?"

if not a Christian then the question of this thread or the above is meaningless as a non-Christian can not conceive of what Christianity is or is not.

Christianity is supposed to lead the way in ideas and innovation and the rest will follow this tendency, asking the question of the thread is assuming that Capitalism or Socialism is the primary truth and that Christianity should follow one or the other, this is foolishness because the Bible tells the believer to be the ambassador of the "Real", not to follow human-invented doctrines.

Capitalism works because hard work is rewarded.
Socialism works because the unfortunate is aided through the difficult period.

Neither Capitalism, nor Socialism work as soon as the human gets involved because the human creature is flawed and will muck up any system.

So Christ would say that Capitalism or Socialism is irrelevant while the human is still flawed, which is why He stated that one should recognize one's flaws and to accept help from His maker to be re-made in a fashion that is acceptable to the maker. Once this is done, capitalism and socialism will not be necessary because it will be replaced with just being perfect. :)
The reality is Christianity has no say. Socialism has disavowed it, capitalism co-oped it. What Christ would say about either is irrelevant.

Christianity should align itself more with Jesus.

As a Christian myself, I have to confess there is far too much truth in this.