Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: As an Aethist sees it...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: As an Aethist sees it... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 8:27:23 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

Jesus Christ as a liberal? Liberalism has been redefined today, Jesus was against oppressive government. 

You need to read the gospels again. The Jesus portrayed therein would be right at home in the US Democratic party (though to be honest he be to the left of most).

Also modern liberalism is about expanding people's rights not oppressing them. You've bought into RW lies.

(in reply to Fellow)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 8:30:46 AM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline 		"If this is going to be a Christian nation that doesn't help the poor, either we have to pretend that Jesus was just as selfish as we are, or we've got to acknowledge that He commanded us to love the poor and serve the needy without condition and then admit that we just don't want to do it." -- Stephen Colbert

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 9:14:33 AM   
PatrickG38


Posts: 338
Joined: 10/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think the reference to oppressive government might be in relation to a verse from Mathew:22:17-21. It says ...

quote:

Mathew 22

"17 Tell us therefore what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: 'Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites?' 19 'Shew me the coin of the tribute.' And they offered him a penny. 20 And Jesus saith to them: 'Whose image and inscription is this? 21 They say to him: 'Caesar's'. Then he saith to them: 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.'."



You see, to a Christian (and Jesus' words aren't even open for misinterpretation, here), it isn't proper to give government more (importance, authority, control, "worship") than what it deserves in the hierarchy of the world/universe.

There is a tendency amongst many "non-believers" to make government a lot more important than it should be; almost a religion unto itself. Something which is evidenced by the liturgy-like talking points without which most PPLs are at a loss to make any kind of argument.

By slowly eroding the other faiths, government is becoming the new religion. May God have mercy on all of us, if that happens.



Peace and comfort,



Michael


Nice job completely misunderstanding the passage.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 9:48:01 AM   
xssve


Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think the reference to oppressive government might be in relation to a verse from Mathew:22:17-21. It says ...

quote:

Mathew 22

"17 Tell us therefore what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: 'Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites?' 19 'Shew me the coin of the tribute.' And they offered him a penny. 20 And Jesus saith to them: 'Whose image and inscription is this? 21 They say to him: 'Caesar's'. Then he saith to them: 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.'."



You see, to a Christian (and Jesus' words aren't even open for misinterpretation, here), it isn't proper to give government more (importance, authority, control, "worship") than what it deserves in the hierarchy of the world/universe.

There is a tendency amongst many "non-believers" to make government a lot more important than it should be; almost a religion unto itself. Something which is evidenced by the liturgy-like talking points without which most PPLs are at a loss to make any kind of argument.

By slowly eroding the other faiths, government is becoming the new religion. May God have mercy on all of us, if that happens.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

Well that does sound a tad hysterical, if anything, it would seem the right seems to treat politicians like priests of demi-gods (Reagan) while the left is pretty sure they're just a bunch of the usual assholes who, if we are lucky, occasionally get something right.

I mean Santorum sounded more like he was running for pope than president, the others are not much better although they do, if pressed, make some mention of what they might actually be thinking about for the rest of the country.

The president had to represent everybody's interest, sinners as well as wannabe saints, you can't pick and choose who you prefer to cater to (the one with the most money usually), and if you can't do that, you shouldn't be running.

If anything has become a fucking religion, it's wealth, and the right spends an inordinate amount of time demonizing the poor and praising the rich, which is kinda the opposite of what Jesus woulda done, and did do.

Shit they're anti-Christians, and when it comes to Calvinism, the departure is complete, it's a total 180 - they dispensed with the whole notion of forgiveness entirely, which is kinda what attracts most people to Christianity, given all the morally ambiguous things you find yourself doing in an imperfect world. It means that if you can't or don't end up always doing the right thing, you got another chance to get it right the next time, you get points for trying at least.

What we got here is some kind of fucking gated community shit, where anybody who might actually be in need of some kind of salvation need not apply, because daddy's house is full of people who are just way too good to associate with the likes of you.

I happen to think it takes more than a little incantation, jesusismypersonalsavior - to claim to be representing the words of Jesus, it's fucking idolatry really, it's a hollow symbol, emptied of all meaning.

In other words, save it for the choir, you can all pat each other on the heads while you plot the best ways to mow the Lillies.

Meanwhile, your Baal's are having a good laugh about shearing your gullible ass while getting you to do their dirty work for 'em.

You better all better pray there is no divine justice, that's all I can say 'cause what I see is is unrepentant corruption and perversion, I'm old enough to remember the real thing.

< Message edited by xssve -- 4/21/2012 9:53:37 AM >

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 10:15:57 AM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

Jesus Christ as a liberal? Liberalism has been redefined today, Jesus was against oppressive government. 

You need to read the gospels again. The Jesus portrayed therein would be right at home in the US Democratic party (though to be honest he be to the left of most).

Also modern liberalism is about expanding people's rights not oppressing them. You've bought into RW lies.

Christ wasn't a liberal, he was a socialist. The man was somewhere to the left of Marx and Engels. I have no idea what other interpretation could possibly be put on his advice to the rich man, or most of the sermon on the mount.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 10:50:11 AM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow
Jesus Christ as a liberal? Liberalism has been redefined today, Jesus was against oppressive government. 

You need to read the gospels again. The Jesus portrayed therein would be right at home in the US Democratic party (though to be honest he be to the left of most).

Also modern liberalism is about expanding people's rights not oppressing them. You've bought into RW lies.

Christ wasn't a liberal, he was a socialist. The man was somewhere to the left of Marx and Engels. I have no idea what other interpretation could possibly be put on his advice to the rich man, or most of the sermon on the mount.

Jesus to the left of Marx and Engels!! lol Do you seriously think he would have been a revolutionary socialist in the 20th Century or perchance even an Al Indie reader?

Personally I don't think he was strictly or purely liberal, socialist or capitalist. The meaning of liberal and capitalist are so vague anyway that it make any argument without qualification almost pointless but the parable of the three servants entrusted with coins shows that he at least valued the idea of basic capitalism because the one who invested the gold was praised by the king. He also appreciated some level of social justice so would be unlikely to be a hard capitalist today. Would that make him a liberal - not really because obedience was also stressed: "If any one loves me," replied Jesus, "he will obey my teaching; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him."

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 1:26:47 PM   
Mupainurpleasure


Posts: 393
Joined: 4/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think the reference to oppressive government might be in relation to a verse from Mathew:22:17-21. It says ...

quote:

Mathew 22

"17 Tell us therefore what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: 'Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites?' 19 'Shew me the coin of the tribute.' And they offered him a penny. 20 And Jesus saith to them: 'Whose image and inscription is this? 21 They say to him: 'Caesar's'. Then he saith to them: 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.'."



You see, to a Christian (and Jesus' words aren't even open for misinterpretation, here), it isn't proper to give government more (importance, authority, control, "worship") than what it deserves in the hierarchy of the world/universe.

There is a tendency amongst many "non-believers" to make government a lot more important than it should be; almost a religion unto itself. Something which is evidenced by the liturgy-like talking points without which most PPLs are at a loss to make any kind of argument.

By slowly eroding the other faiths, government is becoming the new religion. May God have mercy on all of us, if that happens.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

could mtyou pointout where where it says that? i see a pronouncement that worldlywealth is of no interest to jesus it bears ceasers image m the goverment so give it to him...seems to be an argument jesus didnt care about taxationn and goverment.



The problem your arguemnt really faces is it fails the logic check. It requires one to go from a basis that those in our society that churches had prviously met those needs before govrerment. If not what you procclaim is it is better for the poor to suffer than goverment be the instrument that eased there suffering. It's just not there. your argument about weakeneing churchs is a red herring. Seems tio me with that not being anything but a non supported assertion the root cause for opposition may be resistance to taxes(is it? do you hate welfare? hate medicaid? hate payingfor those programs?) and being forced by fellow citizens to treat the poor in a christian fashion. the other problem is it ignores that we the people are out goverment in a democracy and it is we the people who have chosen to act on Christ's utopian ideal of doing something to ease suffering of the less fortunate. . It also has to have ask? WWJD about a "temple" that thought it better to have the poor suffer and hold onto their wealth than to allow goverent to be the instrument to ease the sufferng? What would he say of a congregation living in colonials with 2 cars opposing paying taxes to provide medical a nd nutrion assitanc eto suffring children? If the church were living up to that ideal people would not be doing so through their, the peoples' goverment. Now, your premise that strong goverment weakens churches is a strwman. it may make it easier to justify a view that allows you to be against helping the poor in a real way but it has no basis in fact. The most powerful centralized states in historry have been christian theocracies, Spain, Papal states and her network of abbeys and bishoporics throughout europe, russa, The later Roman Empire, ... entirely christian. Please if youget a chance tell me what nation has a history of reliogoous institutions stronger than civil institutions and soesn't have a bloody history of tyranny and persecution by the majority.

if churches had met the needs of the poor people like me never would of fet the need t step up and elect a goverment that cared about the poor.


lastly the opposite is in factt rue. jefferson published a bibl removing the "bunk" all the miracles and was elected in a time of weaker goverment. Would someone who actively denied the dressurection win an election in today's america with the "weakened " christian influence on society? Washington didnt believein the ressurection, i could list a few more but the fact is that time when you view America as having strnger christian institutions and influebnce was actually the apogee of the deist movement and the piciples of that emlightenment movement not the bible are the baiss for our constitution. What was present was a much more libertarian attitude and as people insisted goverment act to ease sufferingwhere it could that has indeed weakened christian institutions have never been stronger and some ghave perverted christian priciples and adopted the phiosophy of ayn rand if not her aethsm...Paul Ryan great example an unchristian christian and a devout rand acolyte despite the philosophies beng near opposite

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 1:35:11 PM   
Mupainurpleasure


Posts: 393
Joined: 4/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mupainurpleasure


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think the reference to oppressive government might be in relation to a verse from Mathew:22:17-21. It says ...

quote:

Mathew 22

"17 Tell us therefore what dost thou think? Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus knowing their wickedness, said: 'Why do you tempt me, ye hypocrites?' 19 'Shew me the coin of the tribute.' And they offered him a penny. 20 And Jesus saith to them: 'Whose image and inscription is this? 21 They say to him: 'Caesar's'. Then he saith to them: 'Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to God, the things that are God's.'."



You see, to a Christian (and Jesus' words aren't even open for misinterpretation, here), it isn't proper to give government more (importance, authority, control, "worship") than what it deserves in the hierarchy of the world/universe.

There is a tendency amongst many "non-believers" to make government a lot more important than it should be; almost a religion unto itself. Something which is evidenced by the liturgy-like talking points without which most PPLs are at a loss to make any kind of argument.

By slowly eroding the other faiths, government is becoming the new religion. May God have mercy on all of us, if that happens.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

could mtyou pointout where where it says that? i see a pronouncement that worldlywealth is of no interest to jesus it bears ceasers image m the goverment so give it to him...seems to be an argument jesus didnt care about taxationn and goverment.



The problem your arguemnt really faces is it fails the logic check. It requires one to go from a basis that those in our society that churches had prviously met those needs before govrerment. If not what you procclaim is it is better for the poor to suffer than goverment be the instrument that eased there suffering. It's just not there. your argument about weakeneing churchs is a red herring. Seems tio me with that not being anything but a non supported assertion the root cause for opposition may be resistance to taxes(is it? do you hate welfare? hate medicaid? hate payingfor those programs?) and being forced by fellow citizens to treat the poor in a christian fashion. the other problem is it ignores that we the people are out goverment in a democracy and it is we the people who have chosen to act on Christ's utopian ideal of doing something to ease suffering of the less fortunate. . It also has to have ask? WWJD about a "temple" that thought it better to have the poor suffer and hold onto their wealth than to allow goverent to be the instrument to ease the sufferng? What would he say of a congregation living in colonials with 2 cars opposing paying taxes to provide medical a nd nutrion assitanc eto suffring children? If the church were living up to that ideal people would not be doing so through their, the peoples' goverment. Now, your premise that strong goverment weakens churches is a strwman. it may make it easier to justify a view that allows you to be against helping the poor in a real way but it has no basis in fact. The most powerful centralized states in historry have been christian theocracies, Spain, Papal states and her network of abbeys and bishoporics throughout europe, russa, The later Roman Empire, ... entirely christian. Please if youget a chance tell me what nation has a history of reliogoous institutions stronger than civil institutions and soesn't have a bloody history of tyranny and persecution by the majority.

if churches had met the needs of the poor people like me never would of fet the need t step up and elect a goverment that cared about the poor.


lastly the opposite is in factt rue. jefferson published a bibl removing the "bunk" all the miracles and was elected in a time of weaker goverment. Would someone who actively denied the dressurection win an election in today's america with the "weakened " christian influence on society? Washington didnt believein the ressurection, i could list a few more but the fact is that time when you view America as having strnger christian institutions and influebnce was actually the apogee of the deist movement and the piciples of that emlightenment movement not the bible are the baiss for our constitution. What was present was a much more libertarian attitude and as people insisted goverment act to ease sufferingwhere it could that has indeed weakened christian institutions have never been stronger and some ghave perverted christian priciples and adopted the phiosophy of ayn rand if not her aethsm...Paul Ryan great example an unchristian christian and a devout rand acolyte despite the philosophies beng near opposite

No likely he would of still been a community organizer who challenged the status qou and the evilness of greed in the face of so much poverty, dared speak truth to power and ended up killed for it.... fox would of exposed him as a commie america hater subversive when they broke the story the apostles and christ shared the wealth and no doubt he woudbe called "the one" and mocked as some second coming and some with huge followings hinted he was the beast and never suffered a repercussion forit unless I am wrong and their is a god. AFTE REREADING THIS I AM SCREAMING I SWEAR ALL POSTS WILL BE DONE IN WORD AND PASTED :(

< Message edited by Mupainurpleasure -- 4/21/2012 1:37:09 PM >

(in reply to Mupainurpleasure)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 1:48:53 PM   
Moonhead


Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
Personally I don't think he was strictly or purely liberal, socialist or capitalist

You don't feel there's any suggestion in any of the gospels that he might have been a social reformer, then?

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:03:13 PM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle



This sounds like a very reasonable response hlen5 - thank you. However if I apply it, it seems to me to exclude more or less the entire Religious Right - which would be news to them.

...Can you understand why non-believers might be reticent about applying it?


Yes I can, totally. I also try to take people at face value when they claim their faith. I truly try to remember the beam in my own eye before I consider someone else's mote.

That said, I think making women pay for a mandated and unnecessary vaginal ultra-sound is pretty f-ing heartless. I think keeping tax loop-holes for the wealthy while trying to cut Medic-Aid in half is insane. I think stripping people of their collective bargaining rights is calculating and greedy. I think the policies promoted are the fruits of some of the right's faith.

Judging all Christians by some bad actors is unfair. It reminds me of someone I used to work with saying they park their shopping carts in the handicapped slots cause it pissed them off to see-able bodied people use the slots. Apples and oranges.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:09:23 PM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

............ but the parable of the three servants entrusted with coins shows that he at least valued the idea of basic capitalism because the one who invested the gold was praised by the king.


I took the meaning of that parable as working to the best of your abilities and personal talents. The approval of the King wasn't that the servant had more than doubled the gold, but he had done his best by his King/Master/employer.

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:11:37 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline 		FR

I tend to be very skeptical of attempts to insert Jesus into contemporary politics. He was way too multifaceted for that.

< Message edited by dcnovice -- 4/21/2012 2:12:08 PM >

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to hlen5)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:36:46 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline 		Jesus, as I pointed out with the Mathew scriptures, was apolitical and didn't give a whip what was going on on earth except that people live their lives in a way that would secure for them the ultimate reward.

He made it quite clear that he had no use for Caesar or his coins of tribute (one of the reasons I detest organized religion, today). He wanted people to be more concerned with how they treated their fellow man.

Someone suggested that Jesus would be a lefty democrat, today. I find that difficult to believe only because He wouldn't have gotten involved in the small-time pissing contests of either day. It shows in many of the verses attributed to Him.

I think, though, that arguing that he would belong to a certain political party today is even more foolhardy than modern day republicans trying to claim Lincoln as "one of theirs". Clearly, anyone who is so discernably different and whose teachings manage to take hold is going to be looked upon by history as a social reformer. In that vein, to deny that the person known as Jesus has had a profound affect on the world is ridiculous. Whether He was the son of God or the product of a Roman soldier raping his mother or whether he was actually ressurected on the third day is to get involved in minutia and it helps to cloud the fact that if the words in red (the ones attributed to Jesus) are truly His words, then his teachings are solid and a good guideline as to how to live a fairly spiritual life.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 4/21/2012 2:39:43 PM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:46:17 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

That said, I think making women pay for a mandated and unnecessary vaginal ultra-sound is pretty f-ing heartless. I think keeping tax loop-holes for the wealthy while trying to cut Medic-Aid in half is insane. I think stripping people of their collective bargaining rights is calculating and greedy. I think the policies promoted are the fruits of some of the right's faith.


That is my humanity test. No one has to be religious to act humanely.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to hlen5)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 2:57:09 PM   
hlen5


Posts: 5890
Joined: 3/2/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

That said, I think making women pay for a mandated and unnecessary vaginal ultra-sound is pretty f-ing heartless. I think keeping tax loop-holes for the wealthy while trying to cut Medic-Aid in half is insane. I think stripping people of their collective bargaining rights is calculating and greedy. I think the policies promoted are the fruits of some of the right's faith.


That is my humanity test. No one has to be religious to act humanely.


You won't get an argument from me on that one, either!!

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 4:01:17 PM   
GotSteel


Posts: 5871
Joined: 2/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: daddyneedsluv
"Wow" is all I can say to this. There could possibly be many great points to be made if it were actually legible. Heck, I'm not sure "Main Stream Christians" could even try to fight whatever this post is meant to argue.

This argument or point just acts as a means to prove your lack of knowledge. Even if you are on the right track.

Knowledge is nothing more than idiocy without proper translation and effective communication.

I would advice editing and letting knowledge lead the way.

Besides that, Kudos to you for speaking your mind.


I generally expect people taking part in a discussion on Christianity to have a decent familiarity with the subject. Google "cleansing of the temple"

It's the story where Jesus goes to the temple in Jerusalem and disagrees with the way their religion is being practiced there. Instead of picking any of the responses we would use in a religious disagreement, he decides on a socially unacceptable (then and now) response to the situation, physical violence.

It gives some context to the arrest and trial of Jesus that Christians tend to gloss over. Yeah of course they called the cops, this guy was running around the temple beating people with a whip. That shit will get you arrested every time.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to daddyneedsluv)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 4:35:42 PM   
Mupainurpleasure


Posts: 393
Joined: 4/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Jesus, as I pointed out with the Mathew scriptures, was apolitical and didn't give a whip what was going on on earth except that people live their lives in a way that would secure for them the ultimate reward.

He made it quite clear that he had no use for Caesar or his coins of tribute (one of the reasons I detest organized religion, today). He wanted people to be more concerned with how they treated their fellow man.

Someone suggested that Jesus would be a lefty democrat, today. I find that difficult to believe only because He wouldn't have gotten involved in the small-time pissing contests of either day. It shows in many of the verses attributed to Him.

I think, though, that arguing that he would belong to a certain political party today is even more foolhardy than modern day republicans trying to claim Lincoln as "one of theirs". Clearly, anyone who is so discernably different and whose teachings manage to take hold is going to be looked upon by history as a social reformer. In that vein, to deny that the person known as Jesus has had a profound affect on the world is ridiculous. Whether He was the son of God or the product of a Roman soldier raping his mother or whether he was actually ressurected on the third day is to get involved in minutia and it helps to cloud the fact that if the words in red (the ones attributed to Jesus) are truly His words, then his teachings are solid and a good guideline as to how to live a fairly spiritual life.



Peace and comfort,



Michael

basically agree with the caveat he would condemn followers who actively sought to increase the hardships of the poor as surely as he did the merchants and the elders of the temple and would point to all the statements on wealth and it's corruting influence on the soul and his constant theme of caring for mthe less fortunate being a pillar of his teachings. he surely would be condemning as false the Rand philosophy of greed and it's barbaric undrpinning of social darwinism which so many today believe values at peace with christian teachings. i really value I had to think on what you said because you supported your arguement

< Message edited by Mupainurpleasure -- 4/21/2012 4:37:54 PM >

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 5:31:40 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

............ but the parable of the three servants entrusted with coins shows that he at least valued the idea of basic capitalism because the one who invested the gold was praised by the king.

I took the meaning of that parable as working to the best of your abilities and personal talents. The approval of the King wasn't that the servant had more than doubled the gold, but he had done his best by his King/Master/employer.

I think you are right about that but there seems to be another message in the parable too. The two servants who are successful double the value of the money by engaging in some unspecified business enterprise - perhaps buying and selling, while the unfortunate dude is given out to and severely punished for not even banking the money to generate some interest so it has a capitalistic theme. There is an interesting final verse: "For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2025:14-25:30&version=ESV which seems to be a moral about being rewarded for work, whilst those that do not will be punished. Thats a matter of interpretation of course but it certainly seems to be a far cry from liberalism and especially socialism!

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to hlen5)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 5:36:33 PM   
Anaxagoras


Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras
Personally I don't think he was strictly or purely liberal, socialist or capitalist

You don't feel there's any suggestion in any of the gospels that he might have been a social reformer, then?

I do, sure I said something similar about him caring about social justice in the post replying to you but that wouldn't necessarily mean he was to the left of two hardcore 19th Century socialists or even anywhere near their overall stance on politics!

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Moonhead)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: As an Aethist sees it... - 4/21/2012 8:19:48 PM   
Mupainurpleasure


Posts: 393
Joined: 4/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5
quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

............ but the parable of the three servants entrusted with coins shows that he at least valued the idea of basic capitalism because the one who invested the gold was praised by the king.

I took the meaning of that parable as working to the best of your abilities and personal talents. The approval of the King wasn't that the servant had more than doubled the gold, but he had done his best by his King/Master/employer.

I think you are right about that but there seems to be another message in the parable too. The two servants who are successful double the value of the money by engaging in some unspecified business enterprise - perhaps buying and selling, while the unfortunate dude is given out to and severely punished for not even banking the money to generate some interest so it has a capitalistic theme. There is an interesting final verse: "For to everyone who has will more be given, and he will have an abundance. But from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2025:14-25:30&version=ESV which seems to be a moral about being rewarded for work, whilst those that do not will be punished. Thats a matter of interpretation of course but it certainly seems to be a far cry from liberalism and especially socialism!
good point and well made but, it doesnt address wealth only that productivity has a reward. It ius also one parable and hoew many speak of the need to care for the poor. There ia lso the eye of the camel and the rich man. wealth in the presence of suffering was never expoused as a virue to my knowledge. then there is the to each there needs parable of the vinyard which spoke of pay by need not value added.

(in reply to Anaxagoras)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: As an Aethist sees it... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094