Posted on 12/24/2004 8:21:47 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
President Bush has implemented economic policies that resemble those of the Roman Empire, which forced the baby Jesus into homelessness on the night of his birth, former civil rights leader Rev. Jesse Jackson said in a pre-Christmas rant late Thursday.
"In the last [Bush] budget, we cut housing again, and that was Jesus' dilemma. In Bethlehem, his family ended up homeless," Jackson told MSNBC's Campbell Brown.
"Rome was a wealthy country that left Jesus and Mary and Joseph, in a sense, homeless," he complained. "He was born an at-risk baby."
The GOP bashing Democrat said that while Bush's reelection campaign had been successful in "marketing the language of religious values," the Bush White House isn't practicing what it preaches.
Jackson charged that under Bush's policies, the U.S. "appears to be indifferent toward the poor as we seek tax cuts and no-bid contracts for the wealthy; as we engage in wars of choice - driving our nation into isolation."
"Today we are celebrating the wealthy and war, not the poor and peace," he contended, while urging the Bush administration to "restore the Lyndon Baines Johnson vision where we wipe out poverty - not wipe out the poor."
I don't think that everyone in the family tree was rich. I think if Joseph was rich, he could have taken a whole herd of animals and also the people that worked for him to Bethlehem. They could have build a shelter for Mary to have her baby in.
And he was black, queer, developmentally disordered, rather short by Roman warrior standards, and spoke with wild gesticulations, but he eventually managed to work his way up to become a somewhat successful itinerant fisherman.
Mary and Joseph lived in Nazareth. The only reason they were in Bethlehem was to register to pay taxes. They had a home. These liberals who want to say They were homeless and Mary was an unwed mother just drive me nuts, especially when they have a Rev. in front of their name.
What's your text for that? In the Gospels, the people of Nazareth refer to Jesus as "Joseph's son" or "the carpenter's son." There's no indication I'm aware of that Jesus was not considered the legitimate son of Joseph.
35% of people currently in poverty???? (I don't think so. And if so, the way poverty is defined is then bogus)
If you're referring to the episode in the Temple that's described in Luke 2, that was in Jerusalem. However, that text does not describe a Temple service, but only an educational conversation. Jesus was not of the Tribe of Levi, and would not have acted in any Temple rituals.
It seems more probable that He became Bar Mitzvah and read from the Torah in his home synagogue in Nazareth.
I didn't say rich. He wasn't like Barbra Streisand or Jesse Jackson, but it seems that he was solidly middle class, equivalent to a contractor or cabinet maker in our time.
I'm sure I'm not the first to point out that Mary and Joseph had a home in Nazereth, they were in Bethlehem to pay newly imposed taxes, they stayed in the manger because the inn was full ... of taxpayers and Joseph was gainfully employed as a carpenter from which income he was there to pay taxes on.
I hope this latest pile of verbal cow patties from the good Revrund helps clear up for millions of fine Bible reading black American Democrats that Je$$e Jack$on is nothing but a race-baiting, Bible-pimping liar.
Anti-reverend, anti-husband, anti-father, anti-man.
DOH!!! You are right. Shame on me!!! I am supposed to know this stuff. Ok, According to Matthew God told Joseph to flee to Egypt to wait Herod's deathand they stayed there till Herod died, so obviously he died within a few years. When Herod saw he had been decieved he got ticked off and thats when he ordered the male babies in Bethlehem to be slaughtered, between birth and two years of age. Then Joseph took them to Isreal and then Nazareth. In Luke it says that Jesus's parents went every year to Jerusalem for the feast of the Passover and they went when Jesus was 12. It does not say in Luke he had his Bar Mitzvah though. Do you know where it says anything about that?
Jesse would be a lion turd in that era.......well wait !
Jesse is a lying turd even today !.....who'd a thunk it ?:o)
Merry Christmas TC !........Stay safe !
YOu are right, I just read it, and it doesn't say anything about it in Luke, or in the other books.
Poverty is defined by a percentage of the bottom earners in society.
If they place it as the bottom 10%, then 10% of the country is in poverty. If they place it as the bottom 35%, then 35% of the country is in poverty. They could set it at 99% and 99% of the country would be in poverty.
You're referring, I assume, to the "Finding in the Temple" incident. I don't see the support for considering that a Bar Mitzvah. The custom is for the boy entering adulthood to read from the Torah in the synagogue, and Jesus could not have done that in the Jerusalem Temple. He was simply discussing religion with the rabbis there, just as His own disciples later learned from Him in the Temple area.
We all know that Joseph was his Earthly father(raised him as a son), but God was his true father.
Yes, that's true.
In his own home town, he was even rejected as a profit prophet, so this never surprised me.
The Gospel says that He was rejected as a prophet in Nazareth precisely because He was believed to be the son of a local workman, with no legitimate claim to divinity or even prophet-hood. If you've got a text that suggests Jesus was believed by His contemporaries to be an illegitimate son, please post it!
If we had some of our Orthdox Jewish FReepers on this thread, they might be able to tell us whether Bar Mitzvah customs of that period were similar to today's customs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
