The Jesus of the Bible was a communist. If you aren't a communist, then you are anti-Christ.

a reply to: Halfswede

Don't play the naive victim here. Your intentions are absurdly transparent, and also a shameful effort to use a deity to peddle your agenda. You should think hard on this as it is the worst kind of disrespect to the divine.

Extremely well said , Many applause for you

originally posted by: ltrz2025
“No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matthew 6:24) The term mammon refers to the evil influence of wealth as a false object of worship.

If that is to be taken literally then the wealthiest person in the world is literally mammon? The anti-Christ?

a reply to: TheRedneck

At the risk of being too far off topic I have a bit of mental confusion you may be able to shed some light on and I'd like to hear your take on the subject.

Adam and Eve were the first humans, and all others came from them. The genealogy is carefully recorded to the time of Jesus, proving his linage and encompasses approximately 6,000 years.
Mankind has been on earth far longer, so does that mean God created a 'perfect' chosen race when he created Adam and Eve?

I know Jesus didn't come to replace the law, but to fulfill the law. The law seemed to have been created by anything but a 'loving' God, and creating the perfect race makes me uncomfortable in my lack of understanding.

The Bible almost reads like a power-play to have dominion over the human species, one created by fallen angels and a 'superior' race created by God. The Bible gives us the Jewish version of religions, while all others are deemed wrong and hedonistic. It all seems similar to political belief systems, with people willing to fight wars over their beliefs or trying to convert others-much like brainwashing.

I'm just having a hard time reconciling all of the controversy I see and would appreciate your insight on the matter.

Thank you-
Nugget

If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me

It's not a sin to be rich , just how you regard being rich .

"How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of heaven! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven."

Hard , but not impossible. One cannot put riches above all else .
The "eye of the needle" "
Most of the larger towns had a small , guarded entryway for those entering at night .
Merchant caravans could only go through one person at a time , and the camels had to kneel and crawl through .
Possibly taking hours to pass through .
Thus that saying .

There was nothing "communistic" about Jesus' teachings.

Denying ignorance.
Why ?
ATS Motto keeps me going .

Thank you ltrz2025 for very interesting thread. Communism is sharing of wealth among citizens whereas Jesus condemned all material wealth. The desires thereof, in themselves, bind us to wheel of life (reincarnation). Thus only those that sell all the worldly pearls will be able to buy the pearl of great price. No if's or but's.

If one owns a home that doesn't mean you need sell it or give it away. You need see that home as an attribute of Gods creation that belongs only to Him. Continual thanking Him for allowing you to take shelter in His home.

Personally I own very little so I am not weighed down as much as most here. So I can understand the objections to this thread. But I believe ltrz2025 is correct.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: ltrz2025
“No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” (Matthew 6:24) The term mammon refers to the evil influence of wealth as a false object of worship.

If that is to be taken literally then the wealthiest person in the world is literally mammon? The anti-Christ?

The topic about the anti-Christ (which I interpret to be a title, not an actual entity) is quite a complex one, the figure of the "anti-christ" is actually not named neither in the gospels nor in the book of revelations, but in the letters of John. So, with the information we have, it would be impossible to confirm that the mammon being named in Matthew would be a reference to the "anti-christ" of the letters of John. By the way, interesting fact, the word "money" comes from mammon.

originally posted by: glend
Thank you ltrz2025 for very interesting thread. Communism is sharing of wealth among citizens whereas Jesus condemned all material wealth. The desires thereof, in themselves, bind us to wheel of life (reincarnation). Thus only those that sell all the worldly pearls will be able to buy the pearl of great price. No if's or but's.

If one owns a home that doesn't mean you need sell it or give it away. You need see that home as an attribute of Gods creation that belongs only to Him. Continual thanking Him for allowing you to take shelter in His home.

Personally I own very little so I am not weighed down as much as most here. So I can understand the objections to this thread. But I believe ltrz2025 is correct.

Hi there Glend, thanks for your kind words. Fair point. Regarding communism, there are several interpretations, for sure. The way I always understood communism is as a classless society where private property doesn't exist, and the wealth (the means of production) is owned by the community itself, to which each individual gives and receives from in exchange. Disregarding our interpretations of the words "wealth" and "share", the communities of Jesus and the early Christians seem to have lived by these precepts, and the description of Acts indicates that as well.

originally posted by: ltrz2025
communism is as a classless society where private property doesn't exist, and the wealth (the means of production) is owned by the community itself, to which each individual gives and receives from in exchange.

Well kind of... There is still classes just different than what we might think, still the haves and have nots, but everything is owned by the Government to include the people, but then who runs the Government, but people. In the end you can't get away from the whole people part in the equation.

Another part is people tend to get lazy when able, so if you provide everything then people just stop working. We see that in every aspect of the human race. This is why when we see communism come along it just go bad every time.

a reply to: ltrz2025


Jesus frequented the Essene Community , nearby his family residence,,, Quam Ron i think it was

a reply to: MykeNukem

He wasnt keen on money and banking.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Not so much off topic as addressing historical perspective as to when such terms came about.

Jesus can’t be a communist as Communism (as well as Marxism) shuns religion. Not just some, but all religion.
How can there be charity under Communism when one of the points (Marxism too) is you own nothing as an individual. Jesus also said to sell your cloak to buy a sword if you needed a sword. Under communism you stand in the cloak line and are handed a cloak. Same as standing in the sword line or toilet paper line.

Now I spoke of the Holy Roman Empire. But didn’t mention the Greek Orthodox Church nor the Gnostics. Both earlier Christians. But what I did say is that Christianity is a corruption of the teachings of Jesus. Here are some easy examples

Does Christianity teach turn over tables in the market or turn the other cheek?
Can a Catholic Priest be married? Can a Methodist? Which one is a Christian?
Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God?

Oh they are not easy questions, but are easy examples to see the difference between the word and the philosophy of the word. Because you can sum up Confucianism in a single word: reciprocity. But the closest to a single word summery for Christianity is love. And even love doesn’t cover it all.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: ltrz2025
communism is as a classless society where private property doesn't exist, and the wealth (the means of production) is owned by the community itself, to which each individual gives and receives from in exchange.

Well kind of... There is still classes just different than what we might think, still the haves and have nots, but everything is owned by the Government to include the people, but then who runs the Government, but people. In the end you can't get away from the whole people part in the equation.

Another part is people tend to get lazy when able, so if you provide everything then people just stop working. We see that in every aspect of the human race. This is why when we see communism come along it just go bad every time.

I see your point about modern socialistic/communist governments, I get it, they are bad, but that's a different subject. What I was pointing out is that, according to the Bible as described in Acts (read my OP again), Jesus and his followers sold all their private property and distributed the wealth among the community. Then, Matthew 19:21, simply confirms that. That's how Jesus and his followers lived, without private property, were everything was of everyone.

a reply to: Ahabstar

Many of Jesus's parables were also told in terms of prosperity in capitalistic terms with individuals who were prosperous. You can make the argument that the deeper layer of meaning refers to something beyond mere material prosperity, but without a society that lives with and understands material prosperity, those parables would have no meaning. In that sense, Jesus never meant for us to live in a world without material prosperity because he meant his parables to continue to have meaning right up until the End of Days.

originally posted by: St Udio
a reply to: ltrz2025
Jesus frequented the Essene Community , nearby his family residence,,, Quam Ron i think it was

Yep, as the Essenes, there seem to have been many ancient groups of people who engaged in communists societies, rejecting private property, or possessions. A very gnostic way of understanding life.

originally posted by: ltrz2025

originally posted by: ketsuko
Jesus believed in charity which is giving of what you have freely.

And Jesus said: “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Matthew 19:21)

Does it read like Jesus is giving you an option? At no point he tells you that you are free to choose whatever you want, he is pointing you the way to heaven.

i missed the part about eating bugs and cbgb money, climate chhange mental health drag queen shows, etc.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: ltrz2025
Jesus can’t be a communist as Communism (as well as Marxism) shuns religion. Not just some, but all religion.

I think you are wrong here. Cuba, for example, is a communist Marxist-Leninist country, and its constitution recognizes, respects, and guarantees religious liberty. Catholicism (around 60% of the population) is a big thing in Cuba.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: ltrz2025
How can there be charity under Communism when one of the points (Marxism too) is you own nothing as an individual.

Read my OP again, the descriptions made by Acts. Jesus and his followers sold all their private property and distributed the wealth with the community.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: ltrz2025
Now I spoke of the Holy Roman Empire. But didn’t mention the Greek Orthodox Church nor the Gnostics. Both earlier Christians. But what I did say is that Christianity is a corruption of the teachings of Jesus.

I agree with you, the Catholic church behaves practically the opposite to the teachings of Jesus. However, facts remains, the Bible as we know it was the result of the Council of Nicaea. We can't know what they changed, erased, added, etc. The oldest Bibles we have are only 1.000 years old.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Unfortunately, if they had hit upon the secret to anything, their societies would have thrived. The fact that these are ancient societies that we are mainly having to speculate on should tell you something - their ideas did not work.

You don't have to go as far back as the Essenes though. Jamestown tried it, and they nearly all starved to death.

a reply to: ketsuko

Ok, sure, but this is irrelevant. I'm not here defending communism or capitalism over the other. I'm philosophically and metaphysically against any "government" telling humans how to live their lives. The point of my thread is what type of life Jesus lived and preached for, it's a remembrance to the Christian faith. Then, if people want to starve to death to defend a principle, it's their own choice, whatever.

originally posted by: ltrz2025

I see your point about modern socialistic/communist governments, I get it, they are bad, but that's a different subject. What I was pointing out is that, according to the Bible as described in Acts (read my OP again), Jesus and his followers sold all their private property and distributed the wealth among the community. Then, Matthew 19:21, simply confirms that. That's how Jesus and his followers lived, without private property, were everything was of everyone.

Jesus and his disciples lived a life of voluntary poverty, but that didn't mean everyone just drop all they have and stop everything they do to become one with Jesus.

The thing is that Jesus did not say it was wrong for the young man to have wealth, rather, the Lord tells him to sell his possessions and give to the poor if he wanted to be perfect. Jesus’ main lesson is to help the poor, and since this young man had great wealth, he should give to those living in poverty. This is charity plain and simple for all to look at helping those around them. It seems you are mixing up a couple of thoughts here in having wealth is not inherently bad. It is what we do with the wealth that can turn bad. Money can be the root of evil, as Paul tells us, “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs”. The Lord does not want us to actively seek out a lifestyle of poverty. If everyone was poor, then everyone would have nothing with all being the same. What you are trying to suggest is more of an egalitarian society and God never pushed that.

a reply to: ltrz2025

My point is that you keep going back to these old societies and ancient Christians and admonishing us that "this is the way" like you're the Mandalorian. The problem is that if these were viable ways to live and survive, people would be still be doing it.

In fact, nothing at all prevents a group from going off on their own and setting up a commune as it is. All they have to do is secure the land and starting stake. In fact, there has been an on going drama in the news about an LGBT group of transfolk who tried it recently in Colorado with an alpaca ranch.

How many do you see that actually can make it work?

I'll wait.

The problem isn't that it's economically not viable so much as the problem is the people. And this is something that has been hammered home to you over and over. *We* as human beings cannot live in a commune for long. The closest we get is a family group, sometimes extended. Power and power relationships always rear their ugly heads. We will never live the perfect life in the perfect society because we can't. *We* *aren't* *God* to have the wisdom to order such things ourselves. If we could, the type of society you claim only a true Christian can live in would exist all over.