Why I Think God Warned us About Conservatives and Capitalism.

SisyphusRide
republican politicians do not use religion to sucker people to their causes... we all grow up (most of us) and listen then make decisions based on our own lives.

The Christian right has been a notable force in both the Republican party and American politics since the late 1970s

Source

Sis... sometimes you just say things without thinking what you're saying... Also about the New Testament stuff, does it not bother you that it was written by sinful men? Like the Church of England being made from the Catholic religion just so King Henry VIII could go get laid with more than one woman.

MamaJ

When you serve others you in turn serve "God". Ever wonder why the majority of the commandments is in relation to how we treat others?

No, I've never wondered that.

Jesus helped and forgave those that were against him for a reason. His fruits never changed.

You might want to have a word with the "money changers" in the Temple about how that beating they got was really just some "help" and "forgiveness".

I do agree that his fruits never changed - but the modern view of them sure seems at odd with various reports. Maybe it's the modern view that has changed instead?

[quote]

I understand your way of thinking, I'm just seeing if you can understand mine.



Yes, I understand your way of thinking. We just don't happen to agree in everything, that's all. Wouldn't the world be a more boring place if we did?

iRoyalty
reply to post by nenothtu

 

No doubt he wouldn't agree too much with either side of the political coin, I just wish the republicans and democrats stopped posing. Like I said I'm not a Christian, it just annoys me that they use it to pull in the blind Christians who can't see that what these men are perpetrating is wrong, even according to the bible (harbouring riches and cultivating greed).

"Harboring riches" is not wrong biblically, but greed IS, whether "cultivated" or growing wild. Being rich is not automatic greed any more than being poor is automatic greed - but both conditions do seem to tend to foster greed in many people.

Whenever I think how a Christian should act is, do as Jesus did, it's similar in Buddhism, not sure how to act/re-act, what would the Buddha have done?

Yeah, I hear that more and more. Seems to be an outgrowth of the 1960's when Buddhism blossomed in America. Didn't see much of that sort of thinking in reference to Christianity before then.

nenothtu
"Harboring riches" is not wrong biblically, but greed IS, whether "cultivated" or growing wild. Being rich is not automatic greed any more than being poor is automatic greed - but both conditions do seem to tend to foster greed in many people.

Sure but money changes you, ask anyone who has won the lottery ever, they are not happy or they delve pretty quickly into sin. I feel like Jesus understood this which is why he constantly urges people to give up their riches. The way I see a Rich christian person, is someone who has a decent sized house, with everything he needs in the house which are of a good standard, but all excess money goes to charity and they live a humble life. All these rich 'christians' you see on TV are obviously victims of greed, especially the ones pushing Capitalism.

Yeah, I hear that more and more. Seems to be an outgrowth of the 1960's when Buddhism blossomed in America. Didn't see much of that sort of thinking in reference to Christianity before then.

Charles Sheldon's 1896 book, In His Steps was subtitled "What Would Jesus Do?"[2] Sheldon's novel grew out of a series of sermons he delivered in his Congregationalist church in Topeka, Kansas. Unlike the previous nuances mentioned above, Sheldon's theology was shaped by a commitment to Christian Socialism.

iRoyalty

Sure but money changes you, ask anyone who has won the lottery ever, they are not happy or they delve pretty quickly into sin. I feel like Jesus understood this which is why he constantly urges people to give up their riches. The way I see a Rich christian person, is someone who has a decent sized house, with everything he needs in the house which are of a good standard, but all excess money goes to charity and they live a humble life. All these rich 'christians' you see on TV are obviously victims of greed, especially the ones pushing Capitalism.

I don't think money "changes" anyone, but it often does seem to bring latencies they harbored secretly to the fore. I've known rich folks who were as good as gold, and poor folks so full of greed and envy they could define evil. Conversely, I've known some rich folks who were like ATM machines distributing evil, and some poor folks who would give you the coat off their back, even if it meant they would freeze themselves. My point here is that it's not overabundance of money nor lack of money that gives people over to evil. Money itself is nothing. It only unveils what is already present within, and poverty can and does do that just as easily an powerfully as riches do. If you take a poor but evil man and give him money, you end up with a rich or well to do evil man. If you take a rich but evil man and break his bank, you wind up with a poor evil man.

It's not the money, it's what's already inside them.

Yeah, I hear that more and more. Seems to be an outgrowth of the 1960's when Buddhism blossomed in America. Didn't see much of that sort of thinking in reference to Christianity before then.

Charles Sheldon's 1896 book, In His Steps was subtitled "What Would Jesus Do?"[2] Sheldon's novel grew out of a series of sermons he delivered in his Congregationalist church in Topeka, Kansas. Unlike the previous nuances mentioned above, Sheldon's theology was shaped by a commitment to Christian Socialism.

Are you saying that Buddha was a Christian Socialist? Or that Christ was a Buddhist Socialist? I thought the conversation was about comparing Christians to Buddhists, not a Christian preaching Socialism. If we want to go there, we can discuss the much more recent disastrous consequences of "Liberation theology" as it presented itself in Central America in the 1980's. That's a conversation I'm fresh from, having had it a couple of hours ago with a girl who grew up in that crazy mess in El Salvador. Her mother was present when Romero was shot, so she's not a stranger to it.

reply to post by iRoyalty


I believe that you are missing the point of all your "quotes" from the Bible. Jesus advised the rich man to give up his riches, this was a voluntary, free will offering. When the rich young man decided his riches were more important Jesus didn't say "let's get him, take his riches, that will then get him into heaven." Jesus was sad when the rich young man made his choice. The point is for free will giving not to take riches for redistribution. Your other quotes are warnings, yes, but not directions to take it from the wealthy and give to the poor. It is up to each of us to make the decisions to share or help others. WE can make the choices.

nenothtu
I don't think money "changes" anyone, but it often does seem to bring latencies they harbored secretly to the fore. I've known rich folks who were as good as gold, and poor folks so full of greed and envy they could define evil. Conversely, I've known some rich folks who were like ATM machines distributing evil, and some poor folks who would give you the coat off their back, even if it meant they would freeze themselves. My point here is that it's not overabundance of money nor lack of money that gives people over to evil. Money itself is nothing. It only unveils what is already present within, and poverty can and does do that just as easily an powerfully as riches do. If you take a poor but evil man and give him money, you end up with a rich or well to do evil man. If you take a rich but evil man and break his bank, you wind up with a poor evil man.

It's not the money, it's what's already inside them.

That is very true, but those people that had the evil brought out in them would have been evil had they never received the money? One of my favourite sayings is 'Money is power, and power corrupts absolutely", it definitely brings out the worst in people, although I do see your point, I've known enough people from a background like my own that would pull a knife on you for the fiver in your pocket.

Are you saying that Buddha was a Christian Socialist? Or that Christ was a Buddhist Socialist? I thought the conversation was about comparing Christians to Buddhists, not a Christian preaching Socialism. If we want to go there, we can discuss the much more recent disastrous consequences of "Liberation theology" as it presented itself in Central America in the 1980's. That's a conversation I'm fresh from, having had it a couple of hours ago with a girl who grew up in that crazy mess in El Salvador. Her mother was present when Romero was shot, so she's not a stranger to it.

Haha, none of the above! I'm saying people thought of "What would Jesus do" long before the 1960's! It also had an interesting bit at the end about a sect of left wing Christian supporters which I thought helped my OP a little, I wish I'd seen it before I posted!

Interestingly enough though (and also off topic), saw a thread on here stating the the three kings were believed to have come from the east (china, tibet etc) and they were holy men of silence (Buddhist monks) who came to give gifts to Jesus! In Buddhism we recognise Christ as an enlightened being who's goal was very much in line with all the Buddha's motives and attitude to the world.

reply to post by Mahree


Well it also seems to state in the bible that if you DON'T give and live humbley, you're going to hell...

Luke 16:19-31
English Standard Version (ESV)
The Rich Man and Lazarus 19

“There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's side.[a] The rich man also died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side. 24 And he called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am in anguish in this flame.’ 25 But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner bad things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish.

So it seems like free will to give, but if you don't your pretty screwed.

iRoyalty
reply to post by Mahree

 

Well it also seems to state in the bible that if you DON'T give and live humbley, you're going to hell...


So it seems like free will to give, but if you don't your pretty screwed.

Yes, We all have that choice. It seems pretty plain to me. Do you think that if the government takes it away from me (against my will) and then gives it to the poor I will have a ticket to heaven? Actually it is said in your latest quote about another rich man, that God has already sent His son, and we all have had plenty of warning. The choice is ours.

@op..... While its true that Jesus had a soft spot for the poor, he did not exactly say that people who are rich are evil by default. He said wealth in this life is temporary (where moth and rust destroy) and said to store up heavenly wealth instead.

@iRoyalty.....

''here was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20 And at his gate was laid a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21 who desired to be fed with what fell from the rich man's table.''

_________________________________________ I read that the parable is supposed to be symbolic of the divide between the corrupt relgious leaders and the common folks. It can also teach that the rich man was punished for not feeding and clothing the poor man with some of what he had. Again, the rich man was not punished simply for being rich.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


My point is though, that he went to hell just because he didn't feed and clothe that poor man. It didn't say anything about him being bad or horrible, his only crime was that he didn't feed and clothe the homeless man outside his house. Whilst I totally agree with the sentiment, it seems like the man went to hell PURELY because he didn't impart some of his possessions to this man. What difference is it to simply tax the rich to use for a welfare system? It seems like if you don't do something like that of your own accord you will be condemned anyway, which begs the question: how free is that choice really? Besides, if you were truly happy to give up some of your riches to help the poor then a system of taxing the rich more should be a welcomed prospect.

I know in Islam they have a rule where if someone knocks on your door begging, you have to help them (if you can) and all Muslim men must give some of their income to charity like 5% or something you can easily afford, yet that does not seem forced.

@ iRoyaltypg]
.....''
My point is though, that he went to hell just because he didn't feed and clothe that poor man'' _________________________________________ In that case I cannot disagree. Also, refer to the chapter on the ''sheep and goats'' judgement. People were punished for not feeding and clothing those who needed feeding and clothing. I don't know if you already brought this up. _________________________________________ I don't think God has a problem with capitalists, but I think the lesson about more being expected from those who are given more, could also be applied here.

@iroyalty.....''if you were truly happy to give up some of your riches...'' _________________________________________ I doubt Jesus taught people to give for the sake of achieving personal happiness. Imagine a society where the rich lived by rules designed to keep the poor fed somehow. Israelite law and islamic law is designed that way.... At least in an ideal scenario.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


That's it though isn't it, an 'ideal' scenario! There's too many factors for a black and white on morals. IMHO I doubt God has any opinion on government as long as you follow a Christian (or Islamic or Jewish depending on how you wish to pray to God) way of life, however, my quarrel is with political figures who use God to get votes on a system which promotes greed and in-equality.

@iRoyalty...'' however, my quarrel is with political figures who use God to get votes on a system which promotes greed and in-equality.'' _________________________________________ imo, political figures are only half the problem. The people playing to win in such a system promoting greed and inequality are in the same boat as the politicians. At least a politician puts himself in a position where he can be publicly criticized and disgraced. Who criticizes the section of voters who remain nameless and prosper in a system promoting greed and inequality? _________________________________________ You think people in general would be content with what they have and give to the less fortunate? Just a point of view.

sk0rpi0n
imo, political figures are only half the problem. The people playing to win in such a system promoting greed and inequality are in the same boat as the politicians.

Yes politicians are half the problem, the other half of the problem is the system they are working. The system of whatever form of capitalism we have currently, which promotes politicians who voice greed and war to the masses. "Don't hate the player, hate the game!"

My point is that it's a system that breeds corruption, imo by design. Corrupt politicians certainly seem to be more successful than people with any form of integrity.

sk0rpi0n
You think people in general would be content with what they have and give to the less fortunate? Just a point of view.

edit on 23-12-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

I would like to think so, but probably not.