'Jesus was an Occupier'

reply to post by CREAM

What an ignorant statement.

Really?

Fake Christians(This is not directed at Rockpuck) need to read the new testament again and realize Jesus was a "dirty hippy" like those at occupy, just a man sending out good vibes by speaking of peace and love.

Because I found this to be quite ignorant.

Generally speaking, I take offense to people attempting to hitch Jesus into their objectives. "We are like Jesus!"

Jesus was not a "dirty hippie." His teachings parallel, in many ways, the efforts of the Protestant Reformation that came about following more widespread literary comprehension of scriptures. Jesus was drawing a clear line between politics, religion, and spirituality. "Give to Cesar what is due to Cesar, and give to God what is due to God."

To say he was "about peace, love, and good vibes" is to seriously water-down his message and close one's mind off to his teachings. To "turn the other cheek" is a dare - when slapped, you were slapped with the back of the hand. Turning the other cheek was daring them to slap you again with the palm - meeting you as an equal.

It is a concept we have lost, as we have not lived in such a caste-bound society for quite some time.

People don't give much thought to this man. He traveled through the country with twelve other people (and likely more). He would be comparable to a touring band, in terms of the logistics necessary to facilitate his travel and establish where he would stop and speak for the day. All of this would cost money....

People forget, all to often, the concept of "do unto others..." - it doesn't mean you get from others as you would have done to yourself. It doesn't mean you expect from others as you would give yourself. It sure as hell does not mean "do anything you want to those who do not give you as you feel you deserve."

If anything, Jesus was against mob-persecution ("Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.") and taught us to attempt to understand and help each other before resorting to punishment and persecution (all of which were being used at the time for financial gain - exploiting Jewish law, basically).

Jesus didn't advocate a crusade against those who you felt were treating you unfairly. He taught you to focus on your own interactions with other people.

OWS will win.

God will win. Where, exactly, OWS stands in relation to that is yet to be seen.

Peace is the way.

Sorry but no.
Before anything new can be build, the old must be torn down.

I hate to agree with Jesse on anything but when you're right your right. I think it's pretty safe to say that Jesus would be more at home in an occupy camp than a $10,000 a plate fundraiser. As a matter of fact the only recorded act of violence by Jesus in the New Testament was against the financiers of His day.

Cleansing of the Temple

In this episode Jesus and his disciples travel to Jerusalem for Passover, where he expels the money changers from the Temple, accusing them of turning the Temple to a den of thieves through their commercial activities.[1][2] In the Gospel of John Jesus refers to the Temple as “my Father’s house” thus in some views making a claim to being the Son of God.[3] This is the only account of Jesus using physical force in any of the Gospels.The narrative occurs near the end of the Synoptic Gospels (at Mark 11:15–19, 11:27–33, Matthew 21:12–17, 21:23–27 and Luke 19:45–48, 20:1–8) and near the start in the Gospel of John (at John 2:13–16).

If I remember my Sunday school correctly he overturned their tables and chased them out with something akin to a bullwhip. I don't think I'm being blasphemous when I state "Jesus wasn't very fond of banksters either." From an intellectual level I find it very interesting that the one recorded act of violence was against traders/banksters and that the two parties responsible for the crucifixion were the two bloodiest entities in human history--the State and Religious Establishment.

Originally posted by LionOfGOD

Peace is the way.

Sorry but no.
Before anything new can be build, the old must be torn down.

Not really.

And in any case, why would you want to "build" that new thing? It's probably just more crap which will fail.

So your need to build "the new thing" means that you must then logically have the "tearing down" moment first, eh?

But you know, really, this reminds me of the Obama "Cash for Clunkers" requirement that the old cars and their engines be utterly destroyed. They really wanted the old cars traded in, to be put to death. They wanted to kill off some classic cars, by ruining the engines utterly. And everyone now knows cash for clunkers was a complete scam designed to try and force the people into new car loans and absurd 30k dollar vehicles.

So your idea is very much like "planned obsolescence" which causes "cash for clunkers" idiocy that only makes people buy more cheap crap-sposable cars, and so on. You see? Value as such, is destroyed by such limited thinking?

It's sad that you are choosing to type such revolutionary pap in OP's thread. It's weak sauce.

I don't trust the occupy movement at all. Not that there aren't very legitimate and enlightened people out there trying to do good, but they got sucked into this cover-all gripe and moan movement that seems manufactured to me. It's like the McDonalds of democratic action. It's like somebody high up said "Hey, I got this great way to make all of the malcontents converge into one place where they can be led and controlled...."

The other people mentioned in the OP weren't followers who jumped on bandwagons - they were leaders who took great risks as a means of bringing about change.

My thoughts at least....

~Heff

Jesse Jackson's support for OWS is enough for me to disregard OWS entirely.

What an ignorant statement. Fake Christians(This is not directed at Rockpuck) need to read the new testament again and realize Jesus was a "dirty hippy" like those at occupy, just a man sending out good vibes by speaking of peace and love. OWS will win.

reply to post by CREAM


Speaking of ignorant statements.....

What makes you an expert on whether or not Jesus was dirty? Granted he did spent some time out in the desert but i suspect he bathed when he got home. I have never seen any representation in art of Jesus with a tie dyed T-shirt that says "Peace Man."

Hippies, dirty or clean more often than not have a clean living peaceful philosophy we could all learn from.

Jesus was the only true "Occupier" mentioned in the OP.

second line

reply to post by soficrow


That’s terribly inaccurate and dishonest to compare the struggles and achievements of Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Mandela to that of OWS. None of those men acted like this…

##inappropriate image removed by staff##

Jessie Jackson is an opportunistic, dishonest, crooked has-been who wouldn’t even be invited to give a speech at his own church if not for his riding Dr. King’s coat tails many years ago.
I have to agree with Rockpuck on this one when he stated:

Jesse Jackson's support for OWS is enough for me to disregard OWS entirely.

Originally posted by seabag
[flag crapper pic removed]

Excuse me but this is just seeding the crowd with idiots.

Besides, "flag crapper" shows up at burning man too, but that doesn't mean burning man has to totally suck just because there's one dude on the mesa who wants to crap on a flag.

You focus on this crap and so you give this crap power. It's sick really. Jingoist crap I think is the term.

reply to post by smallpeeps


Maybe if OWS would police its own you wouldn’t have such great examples of the movement for me to post?? Face it – This is the kind of people OWS attracts.

I didn’t see this guy (or any like him) at the 'I Have A Dream" speech in 1963 - Did you?

Originally posted by jefwane
I hate to agree with Jesse on anything but when you're right your right. I think it's pretty safe to say that Jesus would be more at home in an occupy camp than a $10,000 a plate fundraiser. As a matter of fact the only recorded act of violence by Jesus in the New Testament was against the financiers of His day.

Cleansing of the Temple

In this episode Jesus and his disciples travel to Jerusalem for Passover, where he expels the money changers from the Temple, accusing them of turning the Temple to a den of thieves through their commercial activities.[1][2] In the Gospel of John Jesus refers to the Temple as “my Father’s house” thus in some views making a claim to being the Son of God.[3] This is the only account of Jesus using physical force in any of the Gospels.The narrative occurs near the end of the Synoptic Gospels (at Mark 11:15–19, 11:27–33, Matthew 21:12–17, 21:23–27 and Luke 19:45–48, 20:1–8) and near the start in the Gospel of John (at John 2:13–16).

If I remember my Sunday school correctly he overturned their tables and chased them out with something akin to a bullwhip. I don't think I'm being blasphemous when I state "Jesus wasn't very fond of banksters either." From an intellectual level I find it very interesting that the one recorded act of violence was against traders/banksters and that the two parties responsible for the crucifixion were the two bloodiest entities in human history--the State and Religious Establishment.

And yet one of his disciples and friends was one of the 1%...the lowly tax collector Matthew Levi. Another friend of His was Zaccheus, another tax collector that was corrupt and He was also friends with Nicodemus, a member of the ruling priests. Not to mention, there are several references of Him enjoying dinners in the houses of several very well-connected and important Pharisees. So Jesus had friends from all social groups.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by smallpeeps

 

Maybe if OWS would police its own you wouldn’t have such great examples of the movement for me to post?? Face it – This is the kind of people OWS attracts.

I didn’t see this guy (or any like him) at the 'I Have A Dream" speech in 1963 - Did you?

Yeah but you are having your just desserts in posting it, you love it, actually.

In fact it's the Federal Reserve that are the occupiers, a totally foreign non-Federal, non-Reserve entity. So sure, you can generalize, but it won't make you look smart.

Originally posted by smallpeeps

Originally posted by seabag
[flag crapper pic removed]

Excuse me but this is just seeding the crowd with idiots.

Besides, "flag crapper" shows up at burning man too, but that doesn't mean burning man has to totally suck just because there's one dude on the mesa who wants to crap on a flag.

You focus on this crap and so you give this crap power. It's sick really. Jingoist crap I think is the term.

Ya, the flag crapper is the only one, right?
[inappropriate image removed by staff]

OWS is very clean and respectful of the places they are occupying too.



They have never destroyed property of innocent, hard working Americans.



And they haven’t incited violence or attacked police either.



Get a grip, dude. This is how the country views OWS…and rightfully so.

If that's how the rest of the country views OWS then the only thing I have to say to that is what the hell's wrong with them?

The vampire squids (ie- the socialist when we lose, capitalist when we win bankers), and their lackeys in Washington have bled this country dry.

Someone finally stands up and says enough, and people attack them?

I will never understand it.

reply to post by jefwane

I hate to agree with Jesse on anything but when you're right your right. I think it's pretty safe to say that Jesus would be more at home in an occupy camp than a $10,000 a plate fundraiser. As a matter of fact the only recorded act of violence by Jesus in the New Testament was against the financiers of His day.

Jesus taught in an attempt to break down the social and economic barriers of the day. He spoke directly to Children - who were often treated as vessels of labor or inheritance and little more until they were considered an adult. He blessed tax collectors employed by Rome (there really isn't a parallel to this in U.S. society; it would be like the local police chief, except he was able to use the police to force you to pay whatever taxes he deemed necessary... and these tax collectors would often abuse their power).

The list goes on. He challenged the stereotypes and the barriers of the day, attempting to get people to look beyond the bull# and see the person.

If I remember my Sunday school correctly he overturned their tables and chased them out with something akin to a bullwhip.

There's your problem. You're relying on Sunday School. It's great introductory - but most people never make it past the watered down, spoon-fed interpretations of events.

I suppose that's where I always differed from my peers, and was always a curious subject of my pastors. I asked the tough questions and sought to see through the dogma. Most people just want a direct: "This is a scripture that provides some insight to your predicament, and how you should handle it."

I don't think I'm being blasphemous when I state "Jesus wasn't very fond of banksters either."

Why must you dilute your own intelligence with vocabulary that sounds like something that would come from a preschool child? "Banksters?"

You base this off of one statement, and seem to have forgotten the importance of the setting. The Temple had become more of a market than it was a place of worship. Rather than going to worship - people were going to trade, sell, etc.

It should be noted that these were not just money lenders and bank representatives - these were local farmers and tradesmen peddling their wares, as well.

That was the issue Jesus had with what was going on - that a place of Worship was being used as a place of commerce.

Again, this fits in line with the phrase: "Give to Cesar what is due Cesar, and give to God what is due God."

From an intellectual level I find it very interesting that the one recorded act of violence was against traders/banksters and that the two parties responsible for the crucifixion were the two bloodiest entities in human history--the State and Religious Establishment.

The Pharisee were almost solely responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus, spare for the "popular vote" that chose to release Barabbas over Jesus. The local Roman authority, Pilate, reviewed the charges against Jesus (levied by the Pharisee), and found the man innocent under Roman jurisdiction.

This loops back into what I was talking about in a previous post, with Jesus intentionally avoiding acts of violence and claims to be the savior of the Jews - as it would have led to a visit from the Roman army, and he would have died like all of the other would-be messiahs. (That is something you do -not- often hear about in Church; the fact that there was a new messiah every time the Jews turned around; this 'Jesus' fellow was a sideshow by comparison to many of the others seeking to lead armies against Rome with no shortage of volunteers).

So, it got turned back over to the Religious authorities, who decided to try him as a heretic (which, I believe, is continued to this day in the belief that Jesus was "God in human form." - I contend he was not, but many people can't wrap their heads around that being the case and him still being the Messiah).

In all honesty, the best parallel I could ever think of to Jesus would be the character, Naruto, from the series of the same name. Kishimoto, whether he intended to or not, understood the message of Jesus. It was pretty simple - to look past unreasonable hatred and to attempt to understand another person. You don't have to agree with them, or let them take advantage of you - but never hate them.

Unfortunately, you don't always get that side of the character in the English dub. Since English is not a very formal language (as Japanese is), they attempt to compensate for his 'rough around the edges' use of Japanese by making him annoying and boastful as all holy hell in the English dub - to the point where they destroy a lot of the wisdom in his statements (spare for some of the more iconic scenes).

However, I still find it quite repulsive when groups or individuals attempt to say: "Look, I'm doing what Jesus would!"

Originally posted by seabag
[flag crapper pic removed]


They have never destroyed property of innocent, hard working Americans.

That looks like a pretty bad place to do cartwheel.

He took the Lord's name in vain.

Rev. Jackson did some occupying. How many women has he occupied that aren't his wife? Jesse Jackson is a joke. And a bad one at that.

/TOA

Originally posted by seabag
Get a grip, dude. This is how the country views OWS…and rightfully so.

Not me, I see very clearly that the Federal Reserve Bank is the occupier.

No Americans invited a foreign bank to print fractional debt notes for us.

It's not surprising that you can't see that, and are just framing the issue with your little pictures. You are a shallow person with little depth.

Would you like me to explain the history of the Federal Reserve or its occupation in the USA? Or would you prefer to post more framing pictures that display your contempt for the young?

Would you like to go over the assasinations which the Federal Reservists like Rothschild accomplished against Lincoln and Garfield and Jackson (almost)? You seem to be fully ignorant so I'm not sure it would help.

Do you know the meaning of the word occupy? Because there's no amount of camping or tents that are truly a military-style occupation like the Russians inside East Germany. But actually, the Federal Reserve Bank's HAVE occupied this temple called the USA, and they've been the ones crapping on us.

You are a fool, and I'm glad to continue the discussion about your foolishness. Can you post some more shocking pics so as to show how much you hate young people and anything they do? Make sure when you post you frame it as if "Hey dood all 'mericans agree OWS is lame!"

Does that sound fun? I'll post historical and real info, and you can post useless crap.

I'll post historical theft and occupation data as to the Federal Reserve Bank and their debauchery of the whole world's finances, and you can post more churning pictures that accomplish some shallow jingoist psy op to defend the Federal Reserve Bankers who are not even American and who had no invitation or business addicting our treasury to debt or stealing ours (and other country's gold).

Which side do you think you are on? Becuase it sure aint the side of the Americans like myself. You're lost friend.

reply to post by Aim64C


Your treatise on the issues of the crucifixion and responsibilities is interesting and though provoking. I still hold my view that State+Religious Establishment = Crucified Messiah. I'll let the Romans completely off when proof is provided that the soldiers who wielded the cat o' nine, drove the nails, cast lots over the robe, and pierced His side with the spear were paid by pharisees rather than Rome.

Your attack against my use of the word "gangster" however I take a little more personal. It's the most powerful word I can use to show my complete derision for that profession and still remain within the T&C. It's not a recently made up word. It's at least 80 years old, and maybe older. It has been entered in the Congressional record via the Pecora Commission that investigated the collapse that started the Great Depression, and the Oxford American Dictionary listed it as one of the finalists for top words for 2010.
New Oxford American Dictionary

bankster noun (informal) a member of the banking industry perceived as a predator that grows rich at the expense of those affected by an economic recession: trillions of dollars are flowing to the banksters in the form of near-zero interest loans. [origin — 1930s: blend of banker and gangster]

I think it's the perfect word to describe characters, who much like the fictional gangster Michael Corleone, do things like:
Launder drug money for Mexican Cartells like Wachovia.
Bribe public officials who are later convicted but no bankster is charged like in Jefferson County Alabama.
Contribute to police departments like the millions JPMorgan gave the NYPD
Own politicians, just go to Open Secrets and have a look
Submit hundreds of thousands of fraudulent filings in courts across the country, and not a single charge against anyone important.
Steal over a billion of customer money in segregated accounts from farmers, producers, traders, and speculators like MF Global.
Threaten total anarchy if they aren't rescued from their bad bets like Hank Paulson.



I personally try to use the word at least once a day, in conversation or on a post like this, to raise the level of awareness of the criminal class of banksters that own and or bribe our politicians, rip off farmers trying to get some certainty, launder money for criminal enterprises, forge documents presented to courts across the country, and a litany of other crimes that as yet remain to be prosecuted.

Found this story from 2009 as source, has some history of the word and a nice little moral story showing the difference between banker and bankster.
Banker+Gangster