Jesus was NOT a capitalist

[metis]

Lots of people travel and work together, doesn't make them socialists

Maybe you should read Acts and see for yourself what it actually says. What do you think it's saying since the apostles under Jesus' leadership formed the first "church" (meaning "community") and pooled their incomes together, which is what "socialism" is? Did you spend even 30 seconds to look at the link on "socialism" that I provided?

What in tarnation does this quote even mean? "...give of their need..."?

To go beyond what the Law requires. I posted where you can find this in reference to the 613 Commandments, so did you spend the maybe even another 30 seconds to actually look at it?

 

[metis]

The money changers were in the inner sanctum area of the temple and they were ripping off the pilgrims as well as kicking back to the Rabbis.

The are two falsehoods here, with one being that the money-changers you say were in the "inner sanctum", which would be the "Holy of Holies", which was not the case as only the Temple priests were allowed in there.

The other error is you had the scammed money going to the wrong people, which in reality were the Romans, who used this ploy to raise money for their projects. Were their kickbacks to the priests? Hypothetically possible, but there's no evidence of that found in any of the gospels.

 

[metis]

Matt 25:15 And unto one he gave five talents*, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

Socialism... Give 2 2/3 to each one.
Communism... give each 1 and use the rest to promote communism
Capitalism... each one according to their ability and then give to God what belongs to God and don't forget the poor.

You're conflating "socialism" with "Marxism" ("Communism"), whereas there is a variety of types of "socialism", with "communism" being only one of them: "Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. Social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms...". -- Socialism - Wikipedia

Knowing you, I'm sure this is the first error you're ever made-- or something close to that.

 

[BSM1]

The are two falsehoods here, with one being that the money-changers you say were in the "inner sanctum", which would be the "Holy of Holies", which was not the case as only the Temple priests were allowed in there.

The other error is you had the scammed money going to the wrong people, which in reality were the Romans, who used this ploy to raise money for their projects. Were their kickbacks to the priests? Hypothetically possible, but there's no evidence of that found in any of the gospels.

You're right, I misspoke about inner sanctum, they were in the Temple courtyard. However, the money changers were changing Roman and whatever coin that had a graven image into Jewish money or "temple coins" so that the pilgrims could buy the correct and required animals for sacrifice.These animals, doves, goats, and such, were owned by the Temple rabbis. However, this was usually cheaper and more convenient then bringing animals from outlying villages to make the mandatory sacrifice in Jerusalem. But the money changers, with the tacit blessings from the Temple leaders, were gouging the exchange rate tremendously. Plus the pilgrims were being grossly overcharged for the sacrificial animals. This was so ghastly that it even ticked off the Prince of Peace. Go figure.

 

[BSM1]

You're conflating "socialism" with "Marxism" ("Communism"), whereas there is a variety of types of "socialism", with "communism" being only one of them: "Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. Social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms...". -- Socialism - Wikipedia

Knowing you, I'm sure this is the first error you're ever made-- or something close to that.

A chain is a chain, even if it's gold. Marxism, Socialism, Communism--it's all the same principle; the government telling you what to do. No thanks. I'm sure it's not the first mistake I've made, but I can't think of another one.

 

[metis]

But the money changers, with the tacit blessings from the Temple leaders, were gouging the exchange rate tremendously.

The Temple leaders operated at the mercy of the Romans, so your saying that they had the "tacit blessings" of the priests is quite debatable.

Plus the pilgrims were being grossly overcharged for the sacrificial animals.

Where does it say that? Verse(s) please?

This was so ghastly that it even ticked off the Prince of Peace.

The issue for Jesus appears to be more that the Temple area was being used by a foreign and un-Judaistic power to rip people off-- a double-whammy. Whether he had animosity for the priesthood in this case is at least hypothetically possible but not clear.

 

[metis]

A chain is a chain, even if it's gold. Marxism, Socialism, Communism--it's all the same principle; the government telling you what to do. No thanks.

There are democratic forms of socialism, which is actually considered to be the ideal with the vast majority of socialists. Even Marx wanted that as an end product.

BTW, since you supposedly oppose "the government telling you what to do", can I assume that you are strongly opposed to the U.S. military?

I'm sure it's not the first mistake I've made, but I can't think of another one.

I wasn't talking in reference to you, but...

 

[Kenny]

You're conflating "socialism" with "Marxism" ("Communism"), whereas there is a variety of types of "socialism", with "communism" being only one of them: "Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political theories, and movements associated with them. Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership, or to citizen ownership of equity. There are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them. Social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms...". -- Socialism - Wikipedia

Knowing you, I'm sure this is the first error you're ever made-- or something close to that.

There IS a reason why you are older than I.

I guess, since there are many varieties of socialism, I made my own definitions?

 

[Kenny]

There are democratic forms of socialism, which is actually considered to be the ideal with the vast majority of socialists. Even Marx wanted that as an end product.

And what an end it was!!

Didn't the first pilgrims try it also and it was a flop?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sooo...these are your best arguments? Okay, you win.

What it means when anyone of them received a source of income, he shared with the rest of the apostles to provide for their needs, and he was required by their master and Lord to give the remaining to the poor (and this was not something he said specifically to his apostles).

 

[Shadow Wolf]

-it's all the same principle; the government telling you what to do.

Strictly speaking a Marxist state would work towards dissolving the state, with a strong emphasis on society prospering as a whole. Instead of a "corporate xyz" boss tell you what to do, you'd be providing your skills and services to all. Strictly speaking, Marx didn't really go too much into detail as to exactly what all that entails, but trade schools would prosper, apprenticeships would again become a thing, and doctors and lawyers could still go do their thing. But, other than that, Marx wrote more about the state and economy and other philosophical perspectives than he did about actually transforming them.

 

[The magical volleyball]

Obviously you don't understand Capital gains. Capital gains come from money you invest and receive--wait for it--a gain. This investment money has already been taxed as income at some time previous. So not only are you misinformed, but, as you can see, the "rich" actually get taxed twice.

Again you are thinking far too simply these guys have the game so rigged they have you convinced that they play by the same rules as you. The CEO of Goldman Sachs earned over 20 million dollars last year only 7 million of that was paid in cash and was subject to income tax. The rest was equity in the company or stock which when sold only requires payment of capital gains tax it's not taxed twice. They are GIVEN THE STOCK instead of money, they don't buy it with previously earned money and they don't pay income taxes on the value of the stock received. It's not just the individuals but the companies they work for.

Profitable Companies, No Taxes: Here’s How They Did It

 

[BSM1]

Again you are thinking far too simply these guys have the game so rigged they have you convinced that they play by the same rules as you. The CEO of Goldman Sachs earned over 20 million dollars last year only 7 million of that was paid in cash and was subject to income tax. The rest was equity in the company or stock which when sold only requires payment of capital gains tax it's not taxed twice. They are GIVEN THE STOCK instead of money, they don't buy it with previously earned money and they don't pay income taxes on the value of the stock received. It's not just the individuals but the companies they work for.

Profitable Companies, No Taxes: Here’s How They Did It

Again you've ran off the rails. So they got stock instead of cash. I'd say that was not a bad deal. When, and if, they cash the stock in they'll be taxed on the income.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Given that we have no way of knowing what Jesus' actual words were, as he didn't write anything down himself, it is tough to "use his own words". But, by his actions, he seems to have preferred a more socialistic society where the main concern was that everyone is taken care of by their neighbors. Certainly capitalism would not fit into his worldview. But, he apparently did not teach abstinence. He provided alcohol to others, there is no claim in the Bible that he abstained from alcohol, and, back then, alcohol was sort of a necessity. But, when it comes to money, he said that his followers should give up all of their possessions and follow him. So, abstinence when it comes to buying nice things and such seems off limits.

"everyone is taken care of by their NEIGHBORS" by their own love and free will, as opposed to everyone is taken care of by the STATE, in exchange for political favors, he was nailed to a tree for opposing the latter

 

[JJ50]

Nobody really knows what the Jesus was like. I suspect he was very different to the way the gospels feature him.

 

[leibowde84]

everyone is taken care of by the STATE, in exchange for political favors.

This is not how "socialism" is defined. It only dictates that the community as a whole controls the means of production, distribution, and exchange. Socialism has never been actualized purely. It has always been poisoned by violence and corruption.

so·cial·ism
ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/
noun

1. a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

 

[Thief]

It depends on how one perceives capitalism. If it's the idealized form of capitalism which only exists in fairy tales and economics textbooks, then Jesus might have been okay with capitalism (in theory). But since Jesus and His Father seemed to have a very serious problem with lying, stealing, cheating, manipulation, and hypocrisy, then I doubt He would have supported the current system.

you seem suspicious of capitalism......

not unwarranted

 

[Thief]

Indeed it is.
However, I am pretty sure that there were money changers there as well as merchants to provide services like food etc
As I see it, these people provided a service to the pilgrims who come their to express their devotion to God.

Pilgrims that come to my town to visit the abbey have a place where they can buy food as well as a shop which can change money, all within the abbey grounds.

then why the clearing of the Temple?
and the accusation of thievery?

 

[Kenny]

A capitalist with no heart becoming a capitalist with a heart.


Luke 9
19 And [Jesus] entered Jericho and was passing through it.
2 And there was a man called Zacchaeus, a chief tax collector, and [he was] rich.
3 And he was trying to see Jesus, which One He was, but he could not on account of the crowd, because he was small in stature.
4 So he ran on ahead and climbed up in a sycamore tree in order to see Him, for He was about to pass that way.
5 And when Jesus reached the place, He looked up and said to him, Zacchaeus, hurry and come down; for I must stay at your house today.
6 So he hurried and came down, and he received and welcomed Him joyfully.
7 And when the people saw it, they all muttered among themselves andindignantly complained, He has gone in to be the guest of and lodge with a man who is devoted to sin and preeminently a sinner.
8 So then Zacchaeus stood up and solemnly declared to the Lord, See, Lord, the half of my goods I [now] give [by way of restoration] to the poor, and if I have cheated anyone out of anything, I [now] restore four times as much.Messianic and spiritual] salvation come to [all the members of] this household, since Zacchaeus too is a [real spiritual] son of Abraham;
9 And Jesus said to him, Today is [Messianic and spiritual] salvation come to [all the members of] this household, since Zacchaeus too is a [real spiritual] son of Abraham;

Interestingly, Jesus never told him to sell everything he had.

 

[Desert Snake]

Fisherman==capitalist.