Posted on 04/05/2014 1:42:45 PM PDT by crazylibertarian
A member of a group sent this to me in response to a previous posting: Weird to suggest scripture on your side. Jesus made fun of people who accumulate wealth. Nothing in bible suggests Jesus would oppose inheritance or income tax. So many people pretend to be bible scholars without reading the bible. Bible explains unequivocally that all the early Christians lived as communists. So raise he'll about the need for no income or inheritance taxes if you want. You might be right. But you are a liar if you claim Jesus is on your side. New pope seems to understand Jesus unlike so many other church leaders.
Roderick T. Beaman (AKA crazylibertarian): Over the years, many socialists, progressives, liberals, etc. have used this argument as some kind of divine insight into the thoughts of Jesus. I call it sophistry at its basest.
First of all, Jesus never mocked anyone; the wealthy, poor, sinners, the holy, butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, doctors, lawyers & Indian chiefs, etc. He warned against devotion to wealth as did Paul who never said, “Money is the root of all evil,” but rather, “The love of money is the root of all evil,” a much different idea. I don’t completely agree with either statement but that is another discussion.
For Jesus part, he never took a position against wealth or the wealthy. In fact, among his disciples were Mary Magdalene whom many today consider not a prostitute but a wealthy woman and Matthew, a tax collector, also wealthy and many others .
There’s the story from Mark 10, 17 & Matthew 19, 16: where He told the wealthy young man to sell all he had and give it the poor and then follow him but the man didn’t. Jesus said it would be very hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The reader should ponder, who would have a tougher choice to face in giving up all he has, a poor man or a rich man? I suggest this is what He meant.
Like many of Jesus’ messages and illustrative episodes, there is a lot of room for interpretation but it must be done in the context of His entire message & life among which is The Anointing at Bethany, where the woman poured expensive perfumed oil on His head. The apostles grumbled that it could have been sold and the money given to the poor. Jesus admonishes them and allows her to continue.
Everyone should remember that Jesus and his earthly father, Joseph, were both carpenters, craftsmen. There is no way that they produced all of their needs for life in Nazareth so there is no doubt that they engaged in trade, most likely using the normal historically most common medium - money. Jesus never once spoke against trade! Any kind of free trade is a direct antithesis of socialism and progressivism. You can not have both.
Finally, any assertion ‘that all the early Christians lived as communists’ is demonstrably false. Many of them did elect to live in communes, especially the evangelists, perhaps from necessity, but there can be no doubt whatsoever, that many just absorbed Jesus’ message in living their lives as Jesus’ wished. He even told the tax collector to take nothing more than a fair share. What does that tell you other than that he accepted that people should go on living their lives but guided by His principles?
In fact, you can go through the entire Old Testament and find that scripture never rejected simultaneous wealth and holiness. Just read The Book of Job. The story of Lazarus is an example of someone who didn’t learn the truth about wealth.Another member of a group sent this to me in response to a previous posting: Weird to suggest scripture on your side. Jesus made fun of people who accumulate wealth. Nothing in bible suggests Jesus would oppose inheritance or income tax. So many people pretend to be bible scholars without reading the bible. Bible explains unequivocally that all the early Christians lived as communists. So raise he'll about the need for no income or inheritance taxes if you want. You might be right. But you are a liar if you claim Jesus is on your side. New pope seems to understand Jesus unlike so many other church leaders.
The Roman Republic drafted soldiers, but with the coming of Augustus the army changed to a larger, more professional force of volunteers. It was possible for foreigners to earn Roman citizen through military service.
Like Olsteen...Was he a counselor to the rich and famous? Take your camel’s foot out of my mouth. He taught all people regardless their circumstances. Remember if you can, we are talking about God incarnate. He knew poverty is no sinecure of virtue nor is wealth a harbinger of evil. To understand Jesus it is absolutely critical to get past worldly standards.
The power of Christ’s words cut through worldly sentiment and comforts to reach the spiritual condition of his listeners. Yes, Virginia, even wealthy people have souls and are in need of salvation.
Yes, indeed.
And they were only suppose to give a portion, not, all.
Yes, but the wealthy are least likely to recognize the need. The wealthy go to church less than any other demographic.
Why then did Roman Soldiers cast lots for his garmets?
If our Lord, during the years of His public ministry, lived on the donations of others (lodging, food, clothing), and if He had some wealthy friends (Zacchaeus, Joseph of Arimethea, the apostle Levi called Matthew), it seems reasonable that they bought for Him/donated to Him some nice clothes.
"And why are you worried about clothing? Observe how the lilies of the field grow; they do not toil nor do they spin, yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these." Matt. 6:28-29 NASB.
Our Lord relied on God the Father to provide for all His earthly needs, and that included clothing.
Just to add a bit to your post, the account of Ananias and Sapphira nails down your point. The property was theirs to keep or sell. After it was sold, the money was theirs to keep or give. Their sin was lying to the Holy Spirit, not holding back a portion. (Acts 5)
In 2 Corinthians 9, Paul explains the Kingdom’s economy. Its not based on buying and selling, but sowing and reaping. If you sow a lot, you reap a lot. You are to give cheerfully, not out of compulsion. God loves people whose giving is motivated by love. And there is a promise that He will generously provide everything you need, with plenty left over to share with others. You glorify God in your giving from the heart, and as the Holy Spirit directs.
At the Last Supper as Jesus dismissed Judas to betray him, the disciples thought since he was the treasurer, he was going to pay for food, or going to give money to the poor. (John 13:18-30) — The disciples would only have thought that if this was a common habit of Jesus, which obviously it was.
No big government redistribution system is Scriptural. They are all designed to replace God. Government can never provide what you need, much less provide anything close to what God has planned for His kids.
Kindness to the poor is a loan to the LORD, and He will give a reward to the lender. Prov 19:17
Those who give to the poor will lack nothing Prov 28:27
Delight yourself in the LORD; And He will give you the desires of your heart. Ps 37:4
Make God your Source, not Washington, and you will never lack any good thing - Ps 34:10
NO. Socialism is the specious ideology that society will be better off if we all live at the expense of everyone else. In order to do so, at least three of the Ten Commandments must be broken. Jesus would never approve of such sin.
Moreover, socialism at the fundamental level is an attempt to build a secular Utopia in opposition to the very things that Jesus taught. Jesus says that He will return as King of kings, to build a better society. The next time that Handel’s Messiah is played, just listen to the words. What about “He shall reign for ever and ever” is hard to understand? Socialism is therefore idolatry.
socialists have been trying to claim Jesus for decades. Only the gullible believe that crap.
people who want to exploit others for their pet cause.
Communism is based on no need for God. That idea would not fit well with He Who Is GOD.
Did He not, then, share in the wealth of the Lord of creation as its primary recipient? Was He not, then, wealthy beyond all worldly expectations?
10 For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 English Standard Version (ESV)
I don’t know about the “wealthy beyond all worldly expectations” in the material sense. I do know that God the Father provided for all essential needs of His Son.
Charity is voluntary.
Socialism is not voluntary. Socialism uses the power of government to confiscate and (at best) redistribute. The actual redistribution, of course, rarely takes place in the real world.
Socialism does not permit the individual to make the free choice to be charitable, therefore the individual who has his money taken under socialism has not been charitable. He has merely complied with the law. He has rendered unto Caesar, but he has not rendered unto God.
Taxation is not charity. We should print that on the money.
Oh yes, they were not only early socialists but early communists and political revolutionaries. They were also early religious revolutionaries and early Protestants!
And early to bed, early to wed, early to be fed.
They were early everything! SARCASM OFF
No because what they gave, they gave out of their own free will, the civil government did not force them to give anything.
Socialism and Fascism FORCE.
Jesus invited to share, exhorted to help your brethren, your brother...it is and was a choice.
Big difference between choice and edict (dictatorship).
I don’t disagree.
I think if you are rich and squander it, that is a sin.
I think if you are poor, but live an honest life..you are greater than a lot of people who are jealous.
Much religious discussion on these threads are ignorant (I am not calling you ignorant, just many of those preaching.). I think there are a lot of folks on here that are so interested in showing how others how much THEY know, and how everyone else is wrong, that Jesus—upon his return—will not laugh at them as much as he “appreciates” their effort, but shakes his head at how they missed the entire message.
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.