Jesus Stance on Corporate Greed.

[Stoicish]

Matthew 19:23-24

23Then said Jesus unto His disciples, "Verily I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter into the Kingdom of Heaven

24And again I say unto you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of God."

Ahem.

Sooooo...

I also have a little addition for those people who are anti-tax right now as well.

Matthew 22:17;21

17Tell us therefore, what thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?"

21And they said unto Him, "Caesar's." Then said He unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

This isn't very political and falls more under the realm of religion, but...

It is food for thought.

I dunno.

Think about it Bank of America and teabaggers.

[darkrchaos]

haha well i guess that means there not going to be alot of people in heaven.

[fli]

At 9/23/09 02:36 AM, Stoicish wrote: Think about it Bank of America and teabaggers.

Jesus had friends who were tax collectors...
Jesus collected taxes too... (although, in form of charity of course.)

Also food for thought...

[dySWN]

At 9/23/09 02:36 AM, Stoicish wrote: 21And they said unto Him, "Caesar's." Then said He unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

I guess the real trick nowadays is defining the dividing line between the two...

[SadisticMonkey]

So fucking what.

Let people make their own damn choices.
Where exactly in your big book of jesus does it say we should force people to follow the Lord?

And what's more, all of this nonsense has not a single scrap of proof to support it.
What a joke.

[Stoicish]

At 9/23/09 08:49 AM, Victory wrote:

At 9/23/09 05:46 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Where exactly in your big book of jesus does it say we should force people to follow the Lord?

You've got it wrong SM, Stoicish's actual point is that it is in fact against Jesus' teachings to amass large sums of personal wealth - and as such it is hypocritical of Conservative Christians to hoard their riches and to oppose measures like increased taxation that go into social support systems for the poor (healthcare reform in particular).

Spot on my friend! Spot on!

Wow, I never even had to explain myself and you were brilliant enough to figure it out.

[Proteas]

*sigh*

At 9/23/09 03:19 AM, darkrchaos wrote: haha well i guess that means there not going to be alot of people in heaven.

If you go by that standard, then no one is Heaven. Nobody. Not the Pope, not Mother Teresa, not your grandmother who baked you cookies as a kid, not your parents, and especially not your pet dog that "ran away" when you were a kid. They're all burning in hell right now begging Satan for a drop of ice water to give them a millisecond of respite from the eternal damnation that God sentenced them to for NOT FOLLOWING EVERY THING IN THE BIBLE.

And guess what? You're headed that way to, and so am I, because none of us are perfect and it's impossible to follow every letter of the law set down before us. So you know what? See you all in hell.

At 9/23/09 05:46 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Where exactly in your big book of jesus does it say we should force people to follow the Lord?

Nowhere. Jesus never preached that people should be forced into believing in him, just that they be allowed to do so if they so choose. The people out there who violently force their beliefs on other people are in violation of Christ's teachings, and they are a discredit to the faith.

And what's more, all of this nonsense has not a single scrap of proof to support it.

Neither does Buddhism, Islam, Taoism, Sihkism, Hinduism, or any other "ism" that can be cited. Yet... there's no topics about those religions, is there? Why is that?

[Presidentjlh]

At 9/23/09 08:49 AM, Victory wrote:

At 9/23/09 05:46 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Where exactly in your big book of jesus does it say we should force people to follow the Lord?

You've got it wrong SM, Stoicish's actual point is that it is in fact against Jesus' teachings to amass large sums of personal wealth - and as such it is hypocritical of Conservative Christians to hoard their riches and to oppose measures like increased taxation that go into social support systems for the poor (healthcare reform in particular).

That's what charities are for. The Lord encourages people to give out of the goodness of their heart, not because they are forced to lest they want to experience "dropping the soap" in prison.

So, it is not hypocritical to denounce government raising taxes and spending if those denoucing it donate time and money to good causes. Does that mean there are no hypocrites? No. But does that mean Christ was saying if you are wealthy, you go to Hell? No. He was saying that if you spend your life accumulating money without giving to the poor through charity, that is a waste of a life and a waste of time, as all the treasures of the Earth cannot compare to the wonder of God's Kingdom.

[fatape]

At 9/23/09 04:06 PM, Proteas wrote:
Neither does Buddhism, Islam, Taoism, Sihkism, Hinduism, or any other "ism" that can be cited. Yet... there's no topics about those religions, is there? Why is that?

becuase buddist's don't want to force there belife's on others , or teach unscientific hopothises in school.

beside's its just natural that we talk about the biggest religion in the western hemasphere (christainity), its like saying why don't you complain about thoose rabid dog's on your lawn, when's theres a a 700 pound on your doorstep.

[fatape]

At 9/23/09 04:47 PM, fatape wrote:
beside's its just natural that we talk about the biggest religion in the western hemasphere (christainity), its like saying why don't you complain about thoose rabid dog's on your lawn, when's theres a a 700 lion pound on your doorstep.

god damn, fixed

need to proof read these things.

[Memorize]

At 9/23/09 08:49 AM, Victory wrote:

You've got it wrong SM, Stoicish's actual point is that it is in fact against Jesus' teachings to amass large sums of personal wealth - and as such it is hypocritical of Conservative Christians to hoard their riches and to oppose measures like increased taxation that go into social support systems for the poor (healthcare reform in particular).

Except that he said "Render unto Cesar that which is Cesar's".

Translation: Give him the money you owe him.

So considering "Health Care" reform would be in the form of forcibly stealing people's money on a national level to give it to someone else... then people would be stolen from rather than paying what they owe.

Would you look at that. You can take it in two ways.

It's just too bad that attempting to apply "spiritual" teachings to this is... well, stupid.

[Proteas]

At 9/23/09 04:47 PM, fatape wrote: becuase buddist's don't want to force there belife's on others

But they are equally as wrong in their beliefs, are they not?

or teach unscientific hopothises in school.

Intelligent Design is no longer taught in public schools, and no one is calling for it to be taught as what little bit of legislation that was introduced to have it taught has been withdrawn. Get with the fucking times and quit basing your opinions on old news.

beside's its just natural that we talk about the biggest religion in the western hemasphere (christainity), its like saying why don't you complain about thoose rabid dog's on your lawn, when's theres a a 700 pound on your doorstep.

Oh, I like this metaphor... so since those other dogs aren't in your yard, they are none of your concern, hm?

[TheladiesMan47]

At 9/23/09 08:49 AM, Victory wrote:

At 9/23/09 05:46 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: Where exactly in your big book of jesus does it say we should force people to follow the Lord?

You've got it wrong SM, Stoicish's actual point is that it is in fact against Jesus' teachings to amass large sums of personal wealth - and as such it is hypocritical of Conservative Christians to hoard their riches and to oppose measures like increased taxation that go into social support systems for the poor (healthcare reform in particular).

I guess it's a good thing that we have the speration of church and state then. I'm a devout Catholic but the church has no place in government, and government has no place telling me what to do with my life.

[AapoJoki]

At 9/23/09 02:36 AM, Stoicish wrote: 21And they said unto Him, "Caesar's." Then said He unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's."

That can also be interpreted that Jesus advocated the separation of church and state. Religious practice belongs in the house of God and public administration belongs in the house of Caesar. That's how I want to see it anyway. I like finding out positive things about Jesus.

[Stoicish]

At 9/23/09 06:47 PM, AapoJoki wrote:
That can also be interpreted that Jesus advocated the separation of church and state. Religious practice belongs in the house of God and public administration belongs in the house of Caesar. That's how I want to see it anyway. I like finding out positive things about Jesus.

Except in the previous passage there was a person asking if it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar (taxes). Soooooo...

Whatever.

The fun part of the Bible is that no matter how much stuff is in there people will always pick and choose the ones that will apply to how they are living and knowingly ignore the rest.

[fatape]

At 9/23/09 05:06 PM, Proteas wrote:
But they are equally as wrong in their beliefs, are they not?

yes but one poses more of a threat, and more often then not the people were argueing aginst ar christian.

Intelligent Design is no longer taught in public schools, and no one is calling for it to be taught as what little bit of legislation that was introduced to have it taught has been withdrawn. Get with the fucking times and quit basing your opinions on old news.

I never said it was being taught, im saying people are still trying to get it tuaght though, and yes thankfully they aren't succesful.

but if you want something else some creationist is giving away free copys of the orgin of the species with a inteligent design slant to university students

HERE

Oh, I like this metaphor... so since those other dogs aren't in your yard, they are none of your concern, hm?

they are of our concern it's just we have to focus on the most dangerous one first, .

[SadisticMonkey]

At 9/24/09 08:28 AM, Victory wrote: Oh, you mean like exactly what taxes are?

Tell me, how do you think police salaries are paid? Are the police 'forcibly stealing' your money?

yeah, but the main function of government is to protect it's people, police being the way to do so, so taxes are justified in this instance.

Forcing a tax raise on people for a service they won't use and is not constitutionally justified, that's when it's not right.

[Proteas]

At 9/23/09 10:25 PM, fatape wrote: yes but one poses more of a threat, and more often then not the people were argueing aginst ar christian.

Uh huh. And how many extremist Christians do you see firebomb KFC's over a bad depiction of Christ?

HERE

"Site Unavailable, please contact your administrator."

And my point still stands; legislation is being withdrawn left and right regarding intelligent design being taught in schools, making any actions to have it taught the actions of a select few, and in no way prevalent enough to be considered a widespread movement to have it taught. The actions of a few do not represent the majority.

they are of our concern it's just we have to focus on the most dangerous one first, .

Yeah, because Christians are really a threat to your every way of life.

[Stoicish]

At 9/24/09 06:10 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
yeah, but the main function of government is to protect it's people, police being the way to do so, so taxes are justified in this instance.

Forcing a tax raise on people for a service they won't use and is not constitutionally justified, that's when it's not right.

Who says they wont use it? I'm pretty damn sure quite a few people would or at least a little more than half the country.

Oh and if the governments main function is to protect the people then shouldn't they have an obligation to protect them from disease, injury, harm, sickness and other lethal things. I mean you need to be clear on the obligation because if government is supposed to protect me then I'm pretty sure I'd want them to provide me with the best health care out there.

Sad to say that that isn't what is happening. Good thing everything is just a-okay in your world and people in America obviously aren't suffering because lack of health care or being denied claims because of something really fucking stupid.

Oh well, I guess your morality only is based on the fact that, "My money is my own and I will use it how I see fit and fuck everyone else."

I however live in a world where I think its okay to shed a few more dollars from my paycheck and actually know that people are getting care. I think its a God given right that everyone has health care regardless of the costs.

[WolvenBear]

At 9/23/09 08:05 PM, Stoicish wrote: Except in the previous passage there was a person asking if it was lawful to give tribute to Caesar (taxes). Soooooo...

Whatever.

The fun part of the Bible is that no matter how much stuff is in there people will always pick and choose the ones that will apply to how they are living and knowingly ignore the rest.

Again, they asked if it was OK to give to the government what the government said they owed.

Jesus said yes. But also give God what is Gods.

Hence, seperation ofchurch and state.

You're not all that quick are you.

At 9/24/09 06:54 PM, Stoicish wrote: Oh and if the governments main function is to protect the people then shouldn't they have an obligation to protect them from disease, injury, harm, sickness and other lethal things. I mean you need to be clear on the obligation because if government is supposed to protect me then I'm pretty sure I'd want them to provide me with the best health care out there.

Of course not. Protecting someone has never been understood as protecting them from themself.

Conflating outward harm with sickness is foolish.

Sad to say that that isn't what is happening. Good thing everything is just a-okay in your world and people in America obviously aren't suffering because lack of health care or being denied claims because of something really fucking stupid.

No one in America has a lack of health care.

Oh well, I guess your morality only is based on the fact that, "My money is my own and I will use it how I see fit and fuck everyone else."

And if it's your money that is your choice.

I however live in a world where I think its okay to shed a few more dollars from my paycheck and actually know that people are getting care. I think its a God given right that everyone has health care regardless of the costs.

And you're basing this off what? Certainly not the bible, the Constitution or anything else.

Just your gut. Good stuff.

[Stoicish]

Let's not forget that the Constitution also said that alcohol should be illegal and that black people only count as 2/3 of a person.

Just because something is the status quo for a long time doesn't exactly make it right.

[Christopherr]

At 9/23/09 03:25 AM, fli wrote: Jesus had friends who were tax collectors...
Jesus collected taxes too... (although, in form of charity of course.)

Unrelated nitpicking, Jesus never accepted money for his services, to my knowledge.

[Christopherr]

At 9/27/09 03:13 PM, Christopherr wrote:

At 9/23/09 03:25 AM, fli wrote: Jesus had friends who were tax collectors...
Jesus collected taxes too... (although, in form of charity of course.)

Unrelated nitpicking, Jesus never accepted money for his services, to my knowledge.

Shit, forgot to post a separate comment with that last post:

The way the original Christian church was set up was that there were rich people and poor people within the church, but should anyone NEED anything, the others would all help as best they could, including the rich. There's no sin at all in having a lot of money--the sin associated with it falls under greed and pride.

Money comes with responsibilities.