Redistribution of Wealth

[Fool]

Yes and no. They were really kinda specific. However, I do note that, at least with Jesus, Jesus never funded anything and bummed off everyone else. If he was put to the grindstone, he used magic to get out of having to do anything himself. Jesus' "charity" consists of photo op moments with no real mission to fix the social infrastructure so this crap will go away. Sure, it's nice to feed the widow, but how's about making it so her life isn't essentially useless without marriage to a man? Giving her rights would do way more than tossing her a bag of cookies every now and again, right?

siddhartha gautama didn't work at anything other than being a teacher of the spiritual. he begged with an alms bowl.

Siddhartha - Even the Buddha himself went begging in the morning. - Book Drum

personally i find teaching to be a noble profession; which is similar to parenting in behavior.

unfortunately siddhartha didn't initially accept women as disciples either.

Pajapati

 

[Kuzcotopia]

Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?

Ultimately, I think they both found some kind of peace or nobility in being poor, and something about the poor accepting their lot or value the spiritual over their own material poverty.

That's a crock, which is why I'd never listen to ignorant people from the Iron Age.

So the answer is "no", seeing as how passive their beliefs are in failing to organize the poor tor try to improve their conditions.

What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?

Something pessimistic and ignorant. Iron Age thinking.

Poverty is not a permenant human reality, it can be solved with enough political will.

 

[Kemosloby]

Yes and no. They were really kinda specific. However, I do note that, at least with Jesus, Jesus never funded anything and bummed off everyone else. If he was put to the grindstone, he used magic to get out of having to do anything himself. Jesus' "charity" consists of photo op moments with no real mission to fix the social infrastructure so this crap will go away. Sure, it's nice to feed the widow, but how's about making it so her life isn't essentially useless without marriage to a man? Giving her rights would do way more than tossing her a bag of cookies every now and again, right?


Oh no, a religious leader is a hypocrite -- look at my shocked face


That's why you bring a jack hammer.


My impression is that the superwealthy can't wipe their own behinds without 20 staff members. As most rich people got that way through everything BUT hard work (because if you're not on the floor, it's really your STAFF doing all that work, not you), they should really learn what using elbow grease is. Meanwhile, California is burning and apparently we're using slave labor with inmates getting 2 bucks for the "privilege of working". No one in their right mind would agree to those conditions in normal society.


No, from what I understand, Herod was doing that without Jesus' advice.

Let me put it this way: I have a dying friend. Her bills are mounting. I can't afford all of them. No one else helps her, not even her own flesh and blood. What she needs is a better network or infrastructure and that's something individuals can't accomplish. If private donations fix things better than the government, please show us where poverty is taking a dive thanks to all those private donations. No? Doesn't happen? And the government is beholden to people who don't want to help, so what to do? People are still getting hurt and dying. Jesus didn't have a solution. There has to be one. I refuse to believe that a planet full of people in the 21st century can't fix this.


Doing it to virtual characters to get your jollies and not actually hurting real people.

Herod was redistrubing wealth from his Palace? Sounds a lot like todays redistribution of wealth, the Robin Hoods of the world, stealing from the middle class to almost give it to the poor.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?

What verse are you speaking of. Jesus spoke in parables most of the time. And there were different reasons, usually lessons, sometimes historical accounts etc for the different responses and comments. If you want a serious response I would be happy to give an opinion if you relay the verse etc. Jesus did not dislike the rich, he loved all people. Of course some people earned his displeasure such as the dishonest 'bankers', the Pharisees who set up shop in the temple.

EDIT @ 1:23 PM; I suppose you were looking at Matt 26. My personal opinion is that Jesus was saying more good would come from the action of the woman rubbing burial oils on his feet than selling the oil and donating the money. What do you think it means? I don't think Jesus was trying to score....I have wondered if Jesus was asexual, or ? Despite all I have read about sex in the bible and by authors and scholars that have forgot more than I know Jesus has never condemned homosexuality.

: {>

Luke 14:12-14
He said also to the one who had invited him, ‘When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.’

Luke 21:1-4 He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury; 2 and he saw a poor widow put in two copper coins. 3 And he said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all of them; she did it for my burial. 13 Verily I say unto you: Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her." (Mt 26:6-13)

 

[Fool]

My impression is that the superwealthy can't wipe their own behinds without 20 staff members. As most rich people got that way through everything BUT hard work (because if you're not on the floor, it's really your STAFF doing all that work, not you), they should really learn what using elbow grease is. Meanwhile, California is burning and apparently we're using slave labor with inmates getting 2 bucks for the "privilege of working". No one in their right mind would agree to those conditions in normal society.

i worked in a social program for multiple years. I've seen first hand those who didn't want to work. Unfortunately I've seen the same type of person in my own family. Extremism comes from both ends of the spectrum.

The Little Red Hen is a favored child's book. We reap what we sow. ......

 

[Koldo]

What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?

And proceed to ignore the rest of the New Testament.
Sure...

 

[Fool]

Ultimately, I think they both found some kind of peace or nobility in being poor, and something about the poor accepting their lot or value the spiritual over their own material poverty.

That's a crock, which is why I'd never listen to ignorant people from the Iron Age.

So the answer is "no", seeing as how passive their beliefs are in failing to organize the poor tor try to improve their conditions.



Something pessimistic and ignorant. Iron Age thinking.

Poverty is not a permenant human reality, it can be solved with enough political will.

you can lead an uneducated/inexperienced person to water but you can't make him drink. you can't force political views, beliefs on anyone.

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

But He did not tell King Herod to sell all the peoples stuff and give it to other people.

Maybe the subject did not come up? Lol, of course Herod wanted to kill baby Jesus, and he was not a big fan of Jesus into adulthood. I am sure Jesus's teachings and persona proceeded him so the Jewish leader knew about Christianity and its teachings rendering the matter inconsequential.

; {>

 

[MrMrdevincamus]

One seems to have advocated a life of poverty. The other favored a middle way.

Jesus called for giving away one's possessions, but that was for the benefit of the person embracing an aesthetic lifestyle as well as those who received his charity. Given the incredibly humble living standards Jesus advocated, I'd think he'd find most of what we, from a modern ethnocentric perspective, think of as "poor" to be living a life of luxury and in need of giving up their excess possessions.

Both really called for having a moderate amount of possessions, but that's mainly for the benefit of the one embracing an unmaterialistic lifestyle.

I don't think either called for forcible redistribution, if that is what you are talking about.

Most modern forms of a "wealth redistribution" mentality are fairly foreign from the ideas espoused by those two thinkers. In the modern era, earning as much money as possible and giving it to uplift those in need would be considered the ideal.

From a Jesus of Nazareth standpoint, the ideal would be giving up a pursuit of wealth, and living in a state of personally chosen poverty with a bare minimum amount of things needed to live. In fact, embracing that kind of lifestyle would make it very hard to give to charity, again reinforcing that this state of giving away one's possessions is more about benefiting the person embracing the lifestyle than it is about benefiting the people receiving his material possessions.

That was a very good piece member Sanzbir, I am agreeable to its conclusions.

; {>

 

[Nakosis]

Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?

I have to agree, no.

Both implied a renunciation of wealth to be beneficial. The poor have an easier time of this is all.

 

[BSM1]

Where do you get a no from, when Jesus said time and time and time again people are to take care of the poor, give their money to the poor, sell their belongings and give the money to the poor, and that rich people won't make it into the Kingdom anyways?

No. He told one rich dude to do this when asked. The point Yesua was making that it was the guy's love of money that restricted him, not his money. Many of Jesus' parable were about who owned land and worked to make a profit. This doesn't sound like he's telling everyone to wear rags and feathers. Again I ask, what did Jesus say about the poor when he was getting a pedicure with some very expensive oil?

 

[BSM1]

And proceed to ignore the rest of the New Testament.
Sure...

You mean that book mostly written by Paul and his associates? Sure...:stares ahead:

 

[Koldo]

You mean that book mostly written by Paul and his associates? Sure...:stares ahead:

You would have look no further than the gospels themselves.

 

[Fool]

I have to agree, no.

Both implied a renunciation of wealth to be beneficial. The poor have an easier time of this is all.

a poor person doesn't necessarily renunciate wealth. they may be poor by circumstance and not by choice. a poor person could still advocate materialism. hoarders sometimes believe their trash is valuable. it's interesting how the mind assigns value to something;

especially something unaware of self and/or others vs something aware of others and/or self.

 

[metis]

Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?

Yes, as both taught about having compassion for all whereas we all have an obligation towards each other. A "redistribution of wealth" happens the minute we provide assistance of any type, whether it be money or materials. Neither of these men taught that "stand alone" was proper.

 

[DavidFirth]

The first church actually sold all that they had and shared everything. This is how Christianity is supposed to work. Of course it doesn't work that way now, which I think is one of the Church's biggest problems. We are more worried about ourselves than about everybody as a whole.

Jesus said, "Blessed are the poor in spirit," not the poor in material wealth.

 

[Fool]

Yes, as both taught about having compassion for all whereas we all have an obligation towards each other. A "redistribution of wealth" happens the minute we provide assistance of any type, whether it be money or materials. Neither of these men taught that "stand alone" was proper.

i like the contrast of stand alone vs suffering with friendship and love.

thanks

 

[DavidFirth]

i like the contrast of stand alone vs suffering with friendship and love.

thanks

I totally agree.

 

[Nakosis]

a poor person doesn't necessarily renunciate wealth. they may be poor by circumstance and not by choice. a poor person could still advocate materialism. hoarders sometimes believe their trash is valuable. it's interesting how the mind assigns value to something;

especially something unaware of self and/or others vs something aware of others and/or self.

I'm just saying that I think this is what these two recommended. Which is not a redistribution of wealth.

There maybe any number of reasons why the poor are poor.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Again I ask, what did Jesus say about the poor when he was getting a pedicure with some very expensive oil?

You're going to hold getting his feet washed when he himself had a habit of washing the feet of others, including those societal lows? We can also speculate that the so-called "holy grail" probably wasn't the humble chunk of clay as featured in the Last Crusade, but probably something that looked a bit more wealthy, special occasion special ware even, as the meal was hosted. Certainly that does not call into doubt Jesus' love of those in poverty and his loathing of hoarding wealth, and hatred of spending it on lavish extravagant wasteful things rather than taking care of your fellow human.
Really, if it wasn't for the whole god and miracles thing, turn the other cheek, casting people into furnaces and casting them out into darkness, and Luke 19, there wouldn't be much to complain about, other than the rest of the baggage attached to him that make up the rest of the Bible.
There is a reason as to why the early Christians lived in communes, and it wasn't because of Paul or Matthew or Luke or Moses.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Yes, as both taught about having compassion for all whereas we all have an obligation towards each other. A "redistribution of wealth" happens the minute we provide assistance of any type, whether it be money or materials. Neither of these men taught that "stand alone" was proper.

I find it astounding that in this "Christian nation," communism got lumped together as one big rotten dog-turd of Stalinism, while Capitalism was praised and hailed as Biblically approved, even though clearly Jesus would have preferred the communal living aspects of communism while condemning the dog-eat-dog, highly competitive, and wealth-rewarding nature of capitalism.