-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Would Jesus put up with the very wealthy and very poor?
- Thread starter oldbadger
- Start date
I do not even try to align His political ideas (and in my opinion He does have political ideas) with any group in existence, I simply say "it is the Lord's." But in charity to neighbor to me it is self-evident that He would not allow injustice which is often a cause of these situations (consider the economic injustices which are the background of the Gospel and is a reason why He speaks of money so much, First-Century Galilee, Judae, Samaria, and the rest, were a mess), as He Himself spoke against that in various decrees. But He is not against wealth either, but that kind alone. That is all in my opinion of course.
Matthew 6:19-21
19 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
I suspect Jesus didn't give two hoots about a person's earthly wealth.
19 “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. 20 But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. 21 For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.
I suspect Jesus didn't give two hoots about a person's earthly wealth.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I can just imagine Jesus with Creflo Dollar or Kenneth Copeland at their heavily armed multi million dollar residences.
74x12
Well-Known Member
It's the liberals who are making the wealth divide way worse. They've destroyed small businesses on purpose which is poorer people's ticket out of poverty. People are supposed to work hard in their chosen field of industry and eventually go into business for themselves so they can actually move up through social strata; but that dream has been stolen by so called liberals. (Fakers) The hope of the poor has always been opportunity not "equality of outcome" which is nonsense and never will happen.
Even Jesus said "The poor you have with you always" So if you believe Jesus then you will seek to give poor people more opportunity to rise out of poverty but you won't seek for "equality of outcome" which is a pipe dream and only leads to broken dreams in the end and shattered lives.
The liberals want a dependent class that always votes for more freebies. So it's in their best interest to keep people poor.
They've made an unholy alliance with the biggest corporations in the world because they know that the fewer corporations get a share of the pie; the more money and power will be centralized in their hands. This is why liberals and mega corporations are now working together and getting away with it. As an American I know the days when the Democratic party was the party of the little people are long gone.
Jesus certainly would stand up for the poor people I think; but not like center-leftists do it. They just support policies that ultimately enslave the poor. Even if they mean well they should know the old saying that the path to hell is paved with good intentions.
For example has anyone considered that it's all really convenient that poor people don't want to go back to their jobs since covid? Liberals think it's a good thing; but actually the government is stabbing poor people in the back again. They are in bed with mega corporations who want to do away with low skilled workers and replace them with robots. Now that no one wants to go back to work they have the perfect opportunity and excuse to get that done which will insure that poor people have even less opportunities. That as once they awaken out of their free stuff from the government dream and realize they do need a job. But there won't be any jobs. These people are always scheming while most of are just busy trying to survive. It's not even fair.
I suggest people invest in robotics tech and if you have a business try to get your own automated systems in now; so you can keep up.
They want AI everything. So called "smart government" is coming. That is AI controlled government. You really think it's going to be fair when AI decides everything including court cases? But it's not necessarily. It's the image of the beast in Revelation. The AI government can't really be trusted anymore than the people who program it and ultimately when Ai becomes sentient it could make even more anti-human decisions. Once this takes place; no one will even hear the screams of the dying; because they'll be silenced first.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe He accepts all those who receive Him as Lord and Savior.
I believe you are in error both about wealth and poverty. I do believe He considers giving to the poor a mitzvah.
I believe He raises up who he wishes. Trump won.
He would side with social justice.
Muffled
Jesus in me
Maybe he will get those who want to vote for S1 kicked out of office.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I do not believe so. He has His own justice. And if you think that he always holds to social justice, He mentions an unjust judge.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Good lord. A pink Jesus with green and blue hair sporting multiple tattoos.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Or a hippy if you are more nostalgic of the 60's and 70's. Yeah Jesus was a hardcore pacifist, acetic and paleo-communist. He was also pretty much a mystique. Most people would today would see Jesus very poorly, especially conformists, rationalists, expansionists and most people invested in a modern developed economy who cannot stand stuff like the de-growth movement.
Wealth used properly no. But wealth gathered because of greed, amassed because of envy of others with a bit more, wealth used to satisfy the animal nature? That's another matter.
It's the right that does not care if people die or suffer in misery as long as the rich pay less taxes than the poor and big corporations shareholders get government handouts. It's the right that is anti-life (cradle to grave) and has zero care for the suffering of others. It's the right who feel entitled.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
And then the hippies grew up. Took charge and here we are today. In all its present glory.
Which of these, having repented, would Jesus have rejected?
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Actually the hippy didn't all "grew up" and "took charge". For once, there are still hippies today. Most hippy were in their 30's in the sixties and are now either dead or very old. We often referred to the aging hippies of yesterday now as "the granolas". They are currently the Left-wing section of the anti-vaxx movement and coined such terms of art as "naturopathy", "Big Pharma" and "holistic medicine". They are also far less numerous than stock photo images of Woodstock 68 would let you believe in the first place. Hippies were always marginal and still are.
Kooky
Freedom from Sanity
How did they accomplish all that, in your opinion?
epronovost
Well-Known Member
The man is basically lumping neoliberals, liberals and socialists in the same bag since a large quantity of the neoliberal politicians have migrated from the Republican Party to the Democrat Party during the rise of the Tea Party and the radicalization of the Right in the US. The man makes points of party politics and assess economy and politics only through the lenses of party politics probably because he doesn't know enough of politics, history and economics to discuss it at an ideological level or from using any historical or economical framework. It's a lowbrow political editorial. You should probably ignore it unless you enjoy futile debates.