Since it is Christmas Day in the US it might be a good time to post some of Jesus's teaching. Whether you are religious or not, these "works" would seem like something most good-hearted people would agree on.

The Seven Corporal Works of Mercy
1. To feed the hungry.
2. To give drink to the thirsty.
3. To clothe the naked.
4. To harbor the harborless
(Presently interpreted as Shelter the Homeless) .
5. To visit the sick.
6. To ransom the captive
(Presently interpreted as Visit the Imprisoned).
7. To bury the dead.





They are also required as a matter of obedience to the second of the two greatest commandments: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:35-40).
In Matthew 25:34-46, Jesus insists upon the necessity of observing the first six corporal works of mercy:
Then the King will say to those at his right hand, `Come, O blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' Then the righteous will answer him, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink? And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee? And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?' And the King will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'
Then he will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?' Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.' And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.

There's no proof that Jesus actually existed, so your post is irrelevant.

Whatever. Still, it is a good idea to bury (or cremate) the dead. Ever seen a dead guy laying on the floor in a poker room or restaurant? Not good.

Ideas which have endured tests of time, regardless of whomever they are attributed.

'To clothe the naked' is not particularly relevant anymore.

The rest have been observed and practiced cross-culturally for thousands of years, with or without Jesus. I'm not sure what it really adds to the discourse by attributing it to Jesus, or to any one single individual or institution.

May be narrowed and simplified down to:
Have empathy for others.

Speaking up and stating the facts is very merciful towards that problem. Doesn't seem fair to just blame capitalism though, but like religion and cuisine the devil is in the individual preference, interpretation, and practice.

The people who choose to follow the ideals of the thread are definitely lending towards solutions to the problems of need and distress. People taking steps.

Capitalism: the common scapegoat for all personal and societal ills.

The inadequacy of research funding for mental health treatment, and the punishing retributive justice system can't be attributed to any homelessness problems. That would involve too much thinking, so let's just call it "capitalism" (or insert whatever label contrarians use commonly inside the quotation marks).

While we're at it, let's campaign for a gold-standards system, because that worked so much better prior to the modern monetary-based system. Even better, let's go all the way back to the barter system, because we enjoy having to travel 1, 000 miles to trade a cow for a sheep, since no one closer to us wants to trade their sheep for a cow.

Capitalism can easily be practiced by Christ-like ideals and definitely contributes to works of mercy.

The free will to mercilessly exploit and other villainous characters of humanity is the same free will that leads to choosing to buy and donate adult male socks for the homeless.

What about those that did both like Carnegie.

If you want to go by the teachings of Jesus, you'd end up with a pretty limp version of capitalism by today's standards. But sure, all the things Jesus criticizes about money and greed can be argued not to be a part of capitalism if you just water capitalism down a nudge, especially as it is actually carried out as compared to how it looks on paper.

Still, this issue is of the central themes of the gospels (there are almost 300 verses in the gospels about this issue). Criticism of money, materialism, greed, desire for comfort and accumulation are rampant.

Not to mention that everyone who is well off will mourn, weep and go hungry when the kingdom of God comes, and that is a direct quote by the man himself. This one is usually not mentioned a lot in our opulent "western" countries, for obvious reasons.

So, anyone who doesn't notice discrepancies between capitalism and the teachings of Jesus aren't really looking. They're more like... browsing very carefully, with a tendency to blink at the right moments.

Valuing compassion and mercy more than wealth doesn't stop wealth from happening and growing or commerce from existing.

It might cause problems for egocentric or exclusive interpretations of both religious and economic dogma. However those problems may just be a symptom of facing having a lack of kindness and compassion, rather than a problem with kindness and compassion. Seems a reputedly merciful way to find out is to try it.

The new testament is basically a story of the downtrodden and outcasts gaining their due. The poor, the gentiles, the outcasts, the diseased, the ones of unaccepted ethnicity, criminals (heck, the only promise of salvation in the entire Bible is given to a convicted thief) and the ones with jobs that gather no recognition. It continually criticizes wealth, accumulation, riches and lauds humility, having experienced suffering / poverty and chief of all; holding faith.

It is a radical idea of societal upheaval through religion. It certainly doesn't encourage "revolution" or any such things, rather it is close to dismissing notions of politics and economics almost altogether as irrelevant to your religion ("Let every person be subject to the governing authorities", "give unto Caesar"), but points out that such things very often leads to a lack of faith and understanding. And the days of reckoning, as Jesus explicitly states, won't be nice to the wealthy.

Sure, it might not explicitly dismiss capitalism, but when reading the narrative as a whole there isn't much doubt that a "capitalistic system" as we know them to exist would garner little but scorn and dismissal.

You make these troubled people ugly and dirty but it should become clear that he knew the righteous would be OK and he came for the sinners . I don't see how you can see that the New Testament continually criticizes the wealthy but only in the sense that a man who places all of his being in the making of money can fall prey to earthly materiality and therefore it will become difficult to enter the Kingdom of God . It wasn't a condemnation but advice as to be careful as to letting riches overwhelm your being. Knowledge of the spiritual realm , while on the earth, is the route to living in spirituality or the supersensible.

The New Testament is about Love, for all of us but clarity is important. The Gospels are not historical documents nor are the teachings of Christ Jesus the important matter. Its about the Resurrection and the conquering of Death and the entry of the Christ Being into the Earth in which he becomes the Spirit of the Earth.

A little explanation; just as you and I are spiritual/soul beings who in a sense "ride the horse of the body" the Christ Being , also a spiritual being entered the Earth, His body, and works as an Impulse through the ages within each and every man, no matter how much money he has or how much evil he performs; He is there for all men.

Choosing to make the New Testament to be a polemic against "capitalism", by insinuation or otherwise, is a fabrication and only ill will can come to this conclusion, the conclusion of a lie.

I'd like to speak to "capitalism" in another post in this thread but I'll stop here, for now.

The Gospels are templates of initiation within four distinct mystery lodges. the writers of the Gospels were "seers" of different ability who saw the life of Christ Jesus within their respective mystery centers. the life of Christ Jesus, as seen from different perspectives, all true, but none the less not exactly the same. Each had the gift of mystery wisdom clairvoyance and in this were able to "see" the life as written.

If one looks at the Revelation of John and other places in the Bible we note the four beasts, Lion, Eagle, Bull and Man.

The Matthew Gospel or the "Gospel of Man" brought forth the initiate journey the development of man beyond the animal nature. No, man was never an animal. the Matthew Gospel is related to the lodge of Man, as above.

The Luke gospel , as written by a doctor, is the lodge of the Bull and in this the healing is brought forth to the extent that it will become a template for the healing of the human being.

The Mark Gospel or gospel of the Lion initiate speaks to the Cosmic Christ of that Being foretold by the mystery centers, who would come to the Earth; the Cosmic Christ. Particularly the Mark Gospel is the appropriate reading for our times but its not a good idea to stick to one Gospel but better to read the different views.

The three Gospels above are called the synoptic gospels and written by men after the event of Golgotha as they were not eye witnesses.

The John Gospel or Lodge of the Eagle is about the future and may be called the gospel of the philosopher. This disciple witnessed the Christ Being and was in fact the first Christian initiate as he is/was the risen Lazarus. Likewise the Revelation of John and Acts of the Apostles were written by John, the risen Lazarus, the disciple whom Christ Loved.

See the Gospels as paths of initiation, not as historical tomes or as a catechism which have offered solace and enlightenment to mankind, a boon of Love.

That they are ugly and dirty is your claim, not mine - so that one you can debate with yourself.

And, as I explicitly stated, there is no explicit dismissal of capitalism in the New Testament. Not that there ever could be of course, as capitalism as a model of what the market is and should be arose some 1400 years later after he died on the cross. And no, it didn't exist "de facto" prior to that either, regardless of how much it makes libertarians butthurt when pointed out.

However, even if we extrapolate we can see that Jesus teaches people to respect the laws of a nation and certainly agrees that the material is necessary for humans. Since he condones slavery, we can probably also be reasonably certain he doesn't mind private ownership or the selling of labor. Capitalism as the model of a nation then, is we can be reasonably certain is not dismissed - merely ignored.

However, you and other in this thread go much further than this. You claim there is no conflict between the teachings of Jesus and capitalism. That is, and pardon my french here, completely bogus. The teachings of Jesus must be interpreted to mean his religious teachings, not his comments on nations. And his religious teachings on this issue are very simple: Desire for accumulation is bad for you, period. And desire for accumulation is the suggested driving force even in the nicest paper models of idealistic welfare capitalism.

Christ Jesus is about Individuals, not political movements, economic forays or whatever. somehow you've snipped in slavery since it was common during that time but it should be apparent when Love and Freedom is involved there can be no slavery.

Christ is about Freedom and you can't Love unless Free otherwise there is no such thing as a coerced Love. Its an Impulse in progress and each man works his way through recurrent lives to a higher state of being.

Right, you can't serve God and mammon but this in no way implies that he condemns those who earn money; I believe I gave the perspective in my previous post. Each in his own time; Christianity has really only just begun and the process is such for there are no powers who can enforce the matter as each man progresses with the Christ within.

Judging the past is easy and trivial but that's not what its about.

Sorry about the "dirty", read too much into it.

Morality will change over time and it is possible for mankind to fall to a lesser state and even individuals can fall into a lesser state of being in a life but the change for the individual is gradual improvement. This is a big statement for the individual but Grace abounds as the future is Christ.

There is no advocation or denial of capitalism, socialism, or whatever ism in the New Testament for again its about man's relationship to man, political or economic force notwithstanding.

I wrote a piece in Economics which gives an insight into what one might call a "Threefold Social Order"; it wasn't very good and I'll try again in this thread.

It should be apparent that you can't eliminate money anymore than one can eliminate sex but the questions of "greed" and "lust" come to the fore as it is certainly possible to earn money and prepare for the future, the Christ state of being. One step at a time, not difficult to understand.

Individuals can free themselves from psychological attachments to wealth and possessions (which can limit kindness and compassion) through the practice of kindness and compassion. Financial worth (rich and poor) is just a number, not a statement of an individual's human worth.

Jesus was clearly a rather lolstupid communist:
One of many such quotes. I wonder if he would change his mind (as God changed his mind, OT -> NT) after reading Ayn Rand?

I haven't read the bible in a while. Forgot what a piece of trash it was. Twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel? Just for following Jesus? Kind of weird. "Here guys, you followed me, so I'm going to give you bucketloads of power just because!" Didn't Jesus have enough personality to keep people around without big noting himself and promising massive rewards? Kind of sad.

Wealth is also a wonderful thing. Wealth inequality is responsible for most of what's good and beautiful in the world. Yet not a single wealthy person (of which OP would be one, no doubt, going by any reasonable standard vs the rest of the world) is not going to heaven under any circumstances.

It's no more a difficult concept than one that a fictional dwarf can state a variety of it quite plainly...



It's not political unless you make it that way. You don't vote for anyone but yourself in a matter of changing perspective of your own values.

The dwarf statement is simply false.

Where does food come from? Work
Where does shelter come from? Work
Where do instruments come from? Work

Cheer is free, but depends on health (work), enough food (work), variety (work), predictability/not losing loved ones/not living a brutish life (work), and working itself (work).

People get hung up on money, and it's utter bull****. Money is just a proxy for work contribution so we can roughly fairly distribute the fruits of work (since no one should be a slave, or be told what he deserves). It works more efficiently than central planners/communes (we get more for less work), more freely than central planning/communes (we can choose our work type and volume and still meet our needs efficiently), and better fulfills our wants and merry-making (we can choose how to receive the fruits of work, with great variety). Even people who avoid money and choose merry making over money are riding on the coattails of those that work.

And of course it's political. Jesus is espousing a tard's version of 1st century politics/economic understanding. Without the rich the world would fall apart and be a mess, yet Jesus is preaching against having wealth, when desiring and having wealth is one of the greatest forces for good in this world. The world would be far less happy, beautiful, bountiful and diverse if the fruits of labor were spread equally among all.

The dwarf's statement is not anti-wealth unless you adopt an anti-wealth interpretation.

Just predict the results of mercy, kindness, and compassion. Fellowship and merriment may soon follow before, during, and after the day's efforts. Whomever has the most gold.

No, the the teachings of Christ are not about freedom. They are about submission to God and the word of God. That the choice must be made of your own volition does not change that.

What has happened is that we have adapted the gospels to our culture as it exists today. Wealthy and rich societies have re-interpreted them into being about moral values as opposed to moral actions, so you don't have to question your own opulence. Societies that cherish individuality have re-interpreted them into being about personal spirituality rather than communal spirituality. Societies that cherish privacy have cleverly forgotten the missionary commandment. Heck, even the explicit commands against violence are long since forgotten.

Exceptions apply, but they are rare.

Since it's not anti wealth and Jesus was rabidly anti-wealth, why did you post it? No one's denying that being merry is a good idea. By the way, Jesus was no Bacchus, he was a pretty serious dude, who endorsed a pretty serious/whacked out Old Testament, so I'd say he'd disagree with your view.

They are very difficult to predict. Kindness is contrary to meritocracy and competition, both of which are enormously positive forces. Mercy is somewhat contrary to effective laws and the repelling of less civilized invaders with less civilized/compassionate/kind/merciful ideologies, should they gain power. Compassion is somewhat contrary to the development of strength and efficiency.

You're positing pop culture nonsense. Life isn't as simple as your slogans are making it to be. When to be kind and when to be hard are just as important as being kind and hard. People with your ideology have been wiped out too many times to count, both by people with less compassionate ideologies and by internal decay and stagnation.
So why call out rich men?

Geez, this ends now: "submission" is Islamic not Christian and anyone who has studied Christianity even in its stretched out form would ever make that statement. Christ is Love and you can't Love without freedom but the understanding of "freedom" may be lost on you and I can't help there, at least with the approach you evidence.

Yes, the world on the surface, can be seen as degenerate or whatever you're trying to say but this is in no way denies individual freedom. Salvation will not come about through the present politics but like I said, the Christ Being is an Impulse and it won't be voted on at the ballot box or won in a war.

If you want to study the "teachings of Love" then study Buddhism but knowledge of Christ is more like a "picture" which sits before the individual man as he sees what he can be and what is lacking. Christ is the template for the individual future which each man carries within him from this life into the next. The Christ Being, that Being that incarnated within the being of Jesus of Nazareth at the Baptism by John, lived within this human body for 3 years, was crucified and rose after 3 days is that future to which all of mankind seeks, even if you can't bring it to clarity now on this forum.

None of this can be appreciated unless there comes some understanding that we are not just what science calls material for if one espouses matter as the beginning and end and in this the difficulties you point to is the root cause. Atheism, as only material, is an illness which can only be healed no matter how many finesses are brought forth. Real atheism is matter incarnate and thankfully very few understand its consequences or will experience the same. Theoretical materialism is different than atheism as there are very few who live life within this realm of matter.

Again, the fruits of the earth, weighed and measured, are the entrance to the atheist stance and we, in our times, live within the same. Scientific materialism rules and that's the shame.

I don't really dabble in literalist interpretations on this topic or grasping for strawmen, but I don't mind if you do.

What you see as anti-wealth and an attack on your competitive paradigm, I see as anti-cruel authority and a complementary alternative to the very superficialism you so casually make accussation of.