Will the Pope be assassinated like Archbishop Romero of El Salvador for saying radical things?? http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/The-Pope-Hails-Communism-for-Focus-on-Poor-and-Marginalized-20161111-0017.html [video=youtube;pCELfmbtIW4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCELfmbtIW4[/video] https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=pope+the+communi st+hink+like+christ
Those who profess to accept Jesus as their Savior and aren't aware that he was proposing a socialist society... are missing the real message he preached.
Indeed, only a person not driven by the profit motive could be a true christian. But wait a minute didn't Jesus say: Why should I feed the multitude? Can't the multitude pull themselves by their own sandal-straps? Now get these moochers off my property!
No he didn't say that he said.. "Heal thine self of thine own preexisting condition" He also said... "thou shalt not feed the children of those who require food stamps" And my favorite quote from Jesus has to be... "Let no woman abort a child she can't afford or does not want as it is good to bring children into a hopeless situation and force them to endure pain and suffering that eventually turns them into those requiring food stamps as they traverse the path leading to life in prison foisted on them from their life of pain and rejection decreed upon them from those who should have loved them in so much that they may become a burden on society to which the Alt Right might condemn them in an effort to make themselves feel better about being the low life unempathetic narcissistic perpetrators of ill informed judgemental losers that they are... AMEN" "
Where did Jesus suggest using state police powers to force strangers to pay for the wants/needs of other strangers? I don't recall that he exalted any state nor the violence that goes with it.
He didn't... he just said treat other people the way you want to be treated... So if you want me to not give you food when you are hungry... Or not give you clothing when you are cold... Or not take you in from the weather and give you shelter because you may freeze to death... Or deny you life saving medicine and or treatment because you can't afford it and I have it to give... then just let me know and I will be happy to accommodate you... but most folks don't really want to be treated this way and would not treat others that way!
None of this is socialism. Did Jesus say that the answer was to initiate aggression against those people, take their stuff, and give some of it to others?
OK... I'm not much concerned with how you label it! Not that I'm aware of... he said treat other people the way you want to be treated... Not sure why or how this is confusing?
He meant socialism, not authoritarianism. Sharing, solidarity, empathy, putting forth the needs of the many, all these ideals were at some points upheld by Jesus, all these are socialiste ideals.
It's not just for the sake of argument, this is what socialism stands for. Well, you're not entirely wrong, socialism is also about sharing the wealth of those who have an excess of it with those who have been unfortunate and have a lack of it. If you take into account that material success (and success in general) is either an accident of birth or due to luck (some people would like to think that it's due to hard work, however we know that it's not entirely true)then it makes perfect sense. Of course, it's always easier to understand when one lives in a place where you get good public services in exchange for you tax dollars.
Do you want to be ordered to do something you are unwilling to do or which conflicts with your other goals, plans, desires, or dreams? Perhaps Jesus should have gone with the platinum rule: treat others as they wish to be treated. I think that's what he really meant, since we all want to be treated in the way that we wish, not in a way that someone else demands.
If you wish to not be given food if you are hungry... if you wish to not be given shelter if you are freezing to death... if you wish to be denied life saving health care because you're poor... I, for one, am way more than willing to accommodate you specifically!
I'm with you in that the platinum rule probably more accurately describes the best way to act, but the golden rule is probably more meant to open ones eyes to the humanity and concerns of the other person than prescribe actions. Besides, the golden rule depends a lot of phrasing. Let's say you like apples and you have a friend who actively dislikes apples. You want to be given an apple, so you interpret the golden rule to say "if you want to be given an apple, then give your friend an apple" and everything goes wrong. However, you can also interpret the golden rule to say "you want to be given things you like, so you should give him something he likes". In this interpretation, giving him an apple is no longer the relevant action, because he does not like apples, and you might give him an orange, which he likes instead. Under some interpretation, the golden rule can mostly (dare I say "always"?) be phrased in a way that makes sense morally, while at the same time highlighting the fact that their human needs and wants are similar in nature (albeit maybe not specifics) to yours (which the platinum rule does not). This isn't really a point in the golden rule's favour, since it makes it arbitrary and prone to misunderstanding or misconstruction, but it does resolve your concerns. The golden rule is phrased to make one consider the other as a person with their own mind similar to yours, even if the wording is ambiguous and weird, whereas the platinum rule's wording is better, although the phrasing seems to deny legitimate hostilities and allow the recipient to exploit the person following the rule.
It's what socialists claim that they want. It is not, however, socialism. "Sharing"? And if those people choose not to share? The socialist resorts to violence. Jesus was a pacifist. Everything he taught was how to come to God through peace and love, not command and control. Did Jesus say "take your moral values and force them upon others using bureaucrats and police"? That's what you are suggesting. "The End Justifies the Means" must have been the part left out of the Sermon on the Mount entirely by accident.
And where does that food come from? And who builds that shelter and from where do they obtain the resources and labor? And who provides that care and how do they obtain the resources and labor? So, you own all those resources or do you advocate taking them through violence, if necessary? Did Jesus teach that the end justifies the means so long as it's an end that you want?
The Earth which was kind enough to share it with homo sapiens. Those who can afford to build it with the help of those they can afford to pay.. the resources?... again from the Earth which was kind enough to share with homo sapiens. The person who through the sharing of knowledge of others is now capable of providing the care... they obtained the knowledge from schools that either they paid for or borrowed the money from another or were granted a scholarship to. I don't own them any more than you do... and the only one here talking about "violence" so far has been you. No he said treat others the way you would want to be treated... except in the case of those who like to parse words and insist on being treated as they wish.. But I seriously doubt anyone wishes to be forced to starve to death if they are... or were poor!
"Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Silver Rule: Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you. Brazen (Brass) Rule: Do unto others as they do unto you. Iron Rule: Do unto others as you like, before they do it unto you. Nepotism Rule: Give precedence in all things to close relatives, and do as you like to others. Tin Rule: Suck up to those above you, and abuse those below. Tit-for-Tat Rule: Cooperate with others first, then do unto them as they do unto you." - Carl Sagan from Billions and Billions
