Jesus Christ a Liberal......

[franklin]

Yesterday at 04:47 PM Job_38 said this in Post #20 Part of the Right Wing Conspiracy and proud of it!
HAha.

Happy B Day there 38, from one rightWing conspirator to another! 

 

[franklin]

21st February 2003 at 11:40 PM seebs said this in Post #13 In reality, both groups contain immense numbers of self-righteous hypocrites who are largely free of compassion. Certainly, about half of the self-identified "conservatives" I know have been largely free of compassion.

Seebs, are you a liberal?  To even think for a second that Jesus is a liberal is blasphemy in itself! I'm not saying that He was conservative either, however, he is closer to that position or haven't seen the list I posted?   And what is compassion anyway?  Can you difine it?  Is it giving someone in need a hand out?  Don't think so!  Liberalism says, you are not smart enough to make it on your own, you need help from the government!  Conservatism says, you have all the potential in the world to be the best that you can be on your own without the help from the government!  In a nutshell seebs, liberalism is the most gutless choice a person could ever make. Think about it!  What do liberals stand for anyway?  Nothing! zip, zero, nada!  I don't think there has ever been a book written about any great liberals do you?  

 

[seebs]

Today at 11:38 AM franklin said this in Post #22 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=673124#post673124)

Seebs, are you a liberal?

I am not really either liberal or conservative. I tend towards liberal positions on social issues, but I tend towards conservative positions on economic issues, but there's exceptions in both cases.

 I'm not saying that He was conservative either, however, he is closer to that position or haven't seen the list I posted?   And what is compassion anyway?  Can you difine it?  Is it giving someone in need a hand out?  Don't think so!

Liberalism isn't a specific philosophy any more than conservatism is, exactly.

Compassion? Compassion is caring what happens to other people.

  Liberalism says, you are not smart enough to make it on your own, you need help from the government!

No, that's liberalism mixed with a desire for power.

Matthew 25:34-46.

"For I was hungered, and ye gave me meat..."

Christ preached charity, and distribution of wealth to the poor. The degree to which we do this, and the way we go about it, may be subject to debate - but the basic idea that it is necessary that we help people in need is *not* something we can get away from!

  Conservatism says, you have all the potential in the world to be the best that you can be on your own without the help from the government!

But, as a down side, tends to say "it's good for you to go hungry a bit, it'll make you work harder" - which is bad thinking.

  In a nutshell seebs, liberalism is the most gutless choice a person could ever make. Think about it!  What do liberals stand for anyway?  Nothing! zip, zero, nada!  I don't think there has ever been a book written about any great liberals do you?  

This is perhaps one of the most short-sighted and bigoted things I've ever seen written, not to mention the gigantic factual gaps. Books have, indeed, been written about great liberals. Whether their plans worked or not, they at least *tried*.

I think most attempts to feed the poor are incompetently organized, but that doesn't change the fact that Christ commanded us to look after those less fortunate than ourselves, and merely trying to allow them a chance for success isn't enough; we have to go out there and help them get on their feet, and if some of them just can't hack it, well, then we need to support them. That's what Christ said to do, and we cannot escape or deny it.

 

[eldermike]

Politicizing Jesus is silly. Calling someone on blasphemy in a silly argument is a bit more than silly, it's rude.

Franklin, please edit your remarks to a kinder gentler kind of right wing conspirator.

 

[undead1]

Today at 05:38 PM franklin said this in Post #22 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=673124#post673124)

Liberalism says, you are not smart enough to make it on your own, you need help from the government!  Conservatism says, you have all the potential in the world to be the best that you can be on your own without the help from the government! 

That's ridiculous. What use is potential, if big business keeps you enslaved to it without hope of realizing your potential? And don't say a man can change jobs, because the likelyhood its the evil boss won't even give you a reference, so you'll be unable to.

Everyone needs laws to protect them, and laws only come from the government. A mere absence of government does not equate to good government.

 

[caley]

Franklin--that list was quite amusing, and I agree much.

Personally, I don't think Christ would have endorsed any political system over any other.  He certainly didn't get along with the government of his day too well.  It's tempting for people to always claim that Christ would endorse their political system and condemn all others.  I even know a guy who claims that Jesus was an Anarchist and wrote an article about it: http://www.anti-state.com/article.php?article_id=153.  It's a good article, but I don't think I agree with everything in it.  I am an anarchist as well, and I certainly don't think Christ would condemn the beliefs of anarchists, but I don't think he would necessarily condemn the political beliefs of anyone, as long as they endorsed love, compassion, kindness, justice, fortitude, and mercy.

 

[Aurelius]

I like this post.

Jesus was politically neutral in his day with regards to this world. He was no part of this world.

His kingdom or government is no part of this world. It is heavenly.

True Christians are also politically neutral. They do not get involved in the politics of this world nor in its military squabbles. They do not demonstrate...pro or con.

Their activity is to preach the good news of the kingdom. Matthew 24:14

True Christians await the destruction of all man-made governments by Christ Jesus.

Sincerely, Lared

I agree with this unreservedly.

 

[franklin]

  Yesterday at 12:26 PM eldermike said this in Post #24 Politicizing Jesus is silly.

Mr "ElderMike" , .... I was not politicizing Jesus, if anything, I was pointing out the fact that to say He was a liberal is highly insulting!  Actually to call anyone a liberal is an insult!  It doesnt take any courage to be a liberal. As a matter of fact, have you ever noticed that there aren't to many liberals that actually will come out and admit they are liberal!  Imagine that? A liberal won't say he is a liberal, he will simply put the usual spin on it and say, "well, I'm not liberal or conservative". 

   Calling someone on blasphemy in a silly argument is a bit more than silly, it's rude.

And how was I being rude Mr "ElderMike"?  I simply said that liberalism is the most "gutless choice" a person could make.  Just telling it like it is friend.  Boy, it's a good thing I didn't address the lib's like Jesus did, he called them brood vipers, snakes and hypocrites!  Referring to the Pharisee's, let's see now, would they be considered liberals in Jesus day?  I'm sure.  

Franklin, please edit your remarks to a kinder gentler kind of right wing conspirator.

  Oh my mr "ElderMike"  ....  OK, so instead of me using such terms as "liberalism is the most gutless choice", I'll just try to be a little bit more gentler, a little more kinder and somewhat touchy feely and just say that liberalism is basically spreading misery equally and calling it fairness or simply, liberalism is the most cowardly position to take on life.  BTW, aren't you a RW conspirator yourself there EM? 

 

[Job_38]

 When we look at the gospel as a whole, Jesus was a liberal/conservative/progresive. But most of all, He was our savior. He is the one who redeems man, He is the one who atones the wrath of God.

 Anything else just drags us and Him into the mud.

 

[caley]

Today at 08:06 PM Job_38 said this in Post #29

 When we look at the gospel as a whole, Jesus was a liberal/conservative/progresive. But most of all, He was our savior. He is the one who redeems man, He is the one who atones the wrath of God.

 Anything else just drags us and Him into the mud.

What he said.

 

[franklin]

Today at 08:06 PM Job_38 said this in Post #29
When we look at the gospel as a whole, Jesus was a liberal/conservative/progresive. But most of all, He was our savior. He is the one who redeems man, He is the one who atones the wrath of God.  Anything else just drags us and Him into the mud.

38, You can leave off liberal!  Great Savior He is! Actually, you can even leave off the other two also.  The life He lived speaks for itself.  He was the ultimate expression of God's love for all.   

 

[caley]

Today at 08:48 PM franklin said this in Post #31

38, You can leave off liberal!  Great Savior He is! Actually, you can even leave off the other two.  The life He lived speaks for itself.  He was the ultimate expression of God's love for all.   

Franklin, please define "liberal."  I don't think the word really has a definition (neither does "conservative").  Prove me wrong.

 

[Job_38]

Well, I do agree with leaving off liberal. In some senses. The definition of liberal is chaning the status quo and tradition.

 

[franklin]

Today at 08:50 PM caley said this in Post #32
Franklin, please define "liberal."  I don't think the word really has a definition (neither does "conservative").  Prove me wrong.

Hi Caley,  Actually, I already gave part of a definition for a liberal and liberalism in this thread.  However, I'll add some more to that definition.  I'm not sure what part of the country you live in but if you listen to radio like I do on a daily basis, there is a great man out there who broadcasts over the airwave's with the conservative voice known as Rush Limbaugh.  His definition of liberalism is not what you would find in any dictionary.  So!  Here are some of the things he has to say about their sad and sorry position on life and what they think of people in general. Liberals basically provide excuses for people to fail, which is shameful, because America is not about failure and misery and mediocrity.  Conservatives have faith in the individual human spirit than liberals do!  Did not Christ have faith in people?  He came that they might have life more abundantly.  And yes He said that we should help those in need but He didn't preach a message of gloom and doom and failure.  The message of self-reliance is a very threatening message to liberals. Why? Because they truly don't believe people can take care of themselves! Moreover, they don't want them to. Liberals believe that if there are fewer people in need, there is less demand for the expensive role of government and thus, a declining need for liberals. Does that sound like Jesus?  Did Jesus want people to fail?  Yes, Jesus preached about taking care of the poor and the needy but if He was alive today He would not be out preaching the same sorry message the liberals are always shoving down our throats!  He woulndn't be preaching about how right it is for the government to confiscate the hard earned incomes of working people to give to those who are able to work but refuse to work!  Conservatives like Jesus believe in people.  The definition I gave previously is one from Rush....  Liberalism: "Spreading misery equally and calling it fairness"

 

[seebs]

Franklin, if you've got a guy whose definition of liberalism isn't what you see in dictionaries, and doesn't correspond to what most people who call themselves liberals believe... Then maybe it's *not* actually liberalism?

I mean, I could tell you about this guy named Joseph Smith, and all the stuff he explains about what his particular tribe of Israel believes... but I bet you would argue that he doesn't get to define what "Jews" are.

Limbaugh is attacking straw men of his own invention; I've seen him take a study, change numbers, and recite the changed numbers on the air - not the actual numbers in the study.

What he is talking about has nothing to do with "liberals" in any world that has ever existed.

What really stuns me is that you *acknowledge* that the definition you're using isn't the real one, but you don't seem to realize the implications.

Liberals believe that they are helping people who have failed, not providing excuses. They may err sometimes, but their basic goal is not what you make it out to be. It would be only polite of you to recognize this, and come up with a new term for these people you wish to complain about.

 

[Outspoken]

I tthink its funny how you're using current culture definitions and trying to apply it to a different culture He was a liberal for his time, and any conservative christian would be in that time too.

 

[seebs]

That's an excellent point, actually - the cultural norms have changed so much, and our social context has changed so much. It's actually sort of fun trying to figure out what Christ's answer would be to some aspects of modern culture. Do you think He'd favor laws against spam?

 

[Outspoken]

I don't think he would say anything about laws at all seebs. He made that quite clear in the taxes remark.

 

[seebs]

You're probably right, but I don't necessarily know. I've been told by many people that Christ would favor laws against abortion... I wonder what He'd say about loans and interest rates; usury is a VERY big deal in the Bible.

 

[Job_38]

Today at 02:06 AM Job_38 said this in Post #29

 When we look at the gospel as a whole, Jesus was a liberal/conservative/progresive. But most of all, He was our savior. He is the one who redeems man, He is the one who atones the wrath of God.

 Anything else just drags us and Him into the mud.

 

 I am gonna quote this. I think it applies. He was a liberal because He changing the status quo. He was a conservative because He still advocated following God.