lol I guess you just exposed yourself! But any way, what a bunch or garbledegoop and what the hell does Christ have to do with an insurgent group of foreigners infiltrating and bankrupting whole states and the liberals who support disarming people to keep them from defending themselves?????? PC libs who ignore the constitution and allow the most corrupt government this country has ever known to trash the second amendment? Its funny the most educated people in America have given away half their state without a peep! Duuuuh, real bright!!!! Or just plain ole pc pussies! Letthem eat liberbal lettuce!

<"I'm a Christian, communist, liberal. I follow the teachings of Jesus - who was a liberal. Original communism was practiced by the Christian community in the book of Acts - just like the Essenes did it. (In fact, Jesus was an Essene.)">


I agree that original socialism was practiced by the early Christian community. It is a lovely, ideal system. HOWEVER, I believe that socialism works only when all people are willing participants, gladly embrace the concept and are willing to work hard. Actually, I only think it can truly work in a fully Christian community. For example, Koinonia:
http://www.koinoniapartners.org/whatis.html


Otherwise, the people who do not grasp or embrace the concept will abuse the system, which eventually dooms it to failure.

As to Jesus being a "liberal", I don't know that I agree. I think Jesus' instructions were to his followers, first of all, not necessarily to be applied to those who do not choose to follow. Secondly, I think some of those verses are taken out of context.

For example, under "Crime and Punishment", I understand Jesus to be speaking to his followers, teaching the Jewish people, or at least teaching individuals. However, I don't think he was saying that there should be no judging or punishment, ever, so that a government should never judge. If we applied just the words "Do not judge" to America's government, then we couldn't enforce any laws, and if we couldn't enforce any laws then it essentially would cease to exist. Again, should a government never, ever punish lawbreakers? I think not. Thus, these verses have an application to individuals, not a government entity.

For your "Corporate Greed and the Religion of Wealth", I would point out that Jesus cautions against greed, materialism, and the love of money; however, being wealthy in itself is not evil or wrong. It is God who gives the ability to produce wealth! (Deut. 8:18)
When Solomon requested wisdom and knowledge, "God said to Solomon, "Since this is your heart's desire and you have not asked for wealth, riches or honor, nor for the death of your enemies, and since you have not asked for a long life but for wisdom and knowledge to govern my people over whom I have made you king, therefore wisdom and knowledge will be given you. And I will also give you wealth, riches and honor, such as no king who was before you ever had and none after you will have." (2 Chron. 1:11-12)
Paul instructed Timothy to "Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share." (1 Timothy 6:16-18) So they were to be generous and WILLING to share, not forced by the government to share their wealth and, in the end, not be wealthy.

It seems that much liberal thought involves forcing others to do things that, while they may be good things, like sharing with the poor, liberals want to force that to happen, whereas Jesus calls for people to do these things VOLUNTARILY.

Consider the difference between the following, as a continuum: 1) Stealing from/taking advantage of the poor, 2) not harming but not sharing with the poor, 3) voluntarily sharing and helping the poor, 4) being forced to share and help the poor.

I would suggest that the two extremes (1 and 4) are wrong, and that society should be in a position of choosing either 2 or 3 for themselves. 3 is better, obviously, but people need the option of 2 or else it will be situation 4. #2 with #3 is a free society, #1 is a corrupt and unjust society, #4 is a tyrannical and (ironically) unjust society. Also, for #2, 3 AND 4, the government must judge and mete out punishment.

Well, that's all I have for now!