The Jesus of the Bible was a communist. If you aren't a communist, then you are anti-Christ.

The 10 tenets of communism

Marx detailed the 10 essential tenets of communism
1) namely: Central banking system.
2) Government controlled education.
3) Government controlled labor.
4) Government ownership of transportation and communication
5) Government ownership of agriculture and factories.
6) Total abolition of private property. Property rights confiscation.
7) progressive income tax
8) Abolition of all rights of inheritance (except for the elites)
9) Equal obligation of all to work (except for the elites)
10) equable distribution of the population

^ Point to where Jesus supported any of that ^

Although There is a 'religion' that follows most on that list,
but it isn't Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, or even atheism.


__________________________

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I have given you exact quotes by Jesus, as recorded in the King James Version of the Bible. You have not acknowledged a single one. Who's claiming Jesus can't speak for Himself?

In Matthew 19:21, Jesus CLEARLY gives the formula to be PERFECT. By some sort of mental juggling, you somehow arrive to the conclusion that Jesus says/thinks that humans cannot be perfect when, again, he is literally giving you the formula to be perfect in that passage.

It's clear, you are denying Jesus' literal words and upholding your "own interpretation/opinion". This is the very definition of a Christian apostate, you've just proven my point.

All the rest you wrote, sure, whatever, your opinions on off topic subjects, blah blah. All fine, believe what you want, no issue. The point of my thread was to expose the mental juggling of the Christian apostates, and you just made the perfect example by denying Jesus' words in such a literal way.

I know, you won't agree, and that's fine. Clearly you seem to think that your interpretation of things is the "truth", so I won't expect anything different, all fine. The fact is that ANYONE ELSE reading with objective eyes can clearly see your apostasy when you decide to contradict Jesus' words, which is the only thing that mattered here. Thanks for the help.

Best to you, and much love

TheLtrz2025

a reply to: ltrz2025

first before i reply to anything you have written. do you believe in Yahweh / God and Yeshua/Jesus is his son?
i think i know what your answer is going to be just want to know first.

a reply to: ltrz2025

No.

He is telling the young man how he can be perfect. If the conditions he set the young man - to sell everything - were uniform to all. If this were so, then how do you explain Zaccheus who was saved for only going half as far and why wasn't Abraham required to give up anything and why was everything given back to Job?

Your focus is far to much on the material. It isn't the possessions. It's the people who have them. All of these people were wealthy but in different places in their personal relationships with God. That's what we have been telling you over and over, but you are of the world and refuse to see.

a reply to: ketsuko

Because the path to God is a solo journey. You can get advice and descriptions of what it is like so you know when you are there, but it is a communion between yourself and God.

Which is what Redneck’s Preacher explained to the young pot smoker….funny how that worked.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: MykeNukem

You could follow him without doing that according to that verse, but you wouldn't be considered perfect.

Who's perfect?

That statement wasn't to the masses either. It was to one rich man looking for what was missing in his peace with God, so he asks Jesus what else is it that he needs to do. This was a direct reply to the problem of one man, but the OP is trying to suggest it was a overarching proclaim by Jesus.

Note how the OP's quotation is different from most translations of that verse at the start (compare for example the different translations on Biblehub). Most of these start with something like "Jesus said to him". The OP's quotation just starts with "And Jesus said". I could not find that translation on Biblehub. But if you remove "to him", it's easier for people to get the wrong impression that this was meant for everyone who wants to be Christian. So there's a motive for someone to remove that detail when they want to give that wrong impression (or when they are hoping that some people will get that impression, or when the rest of their argumentation depends on people getting that impression).

It's a red flag.

Deuteronomy 4:2
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Study Edition)

2 You must not add to the word that I am commanding you, neither must you take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of Jehovah your God that I am commanding you.

Deuteronomy 12:32 (NW)

32 Every word that I am commanding you is what you should be careful to do. You must not add to it nor take away from it.

originally posted by: ltrz2025
a reply to: Sookiechacha

First, if someone, or the commune you talk about, owned a car or a property, that already goes against Jesus' commandments. They have to sell it all, and give the money to the needy. Then, I can understand that having "property" in the USA makes it "easier", but that's still doesn't make it ILLEGAL to live like a communist in the United States. So, the point you were making was wrong. You break no human law by following Jesus' commands. But you go straight to hell if you don't follow Jesus' laws.

Bud, you are as lost as last years Easter Egg.
By your reasoning, people should just go around naked, with no Earthly possessions, and die of starvation.
Pretty sure that's not what Jesus had in mind.

originally posted by: ltrz2025

...(Acts 4: 32–35)

Part 7—A Political Search for Utopia (Human Rule Weighed in the Balances; Awake!—1990)

...

Communism Reintroduces Religion

...

Does this perhaps support the theory that early Christians were themselves communists, practicing a type of Christian socialism? Some people make this claim, pointing to Acts 4:32, which says of Christians in Jerusalem: “They had all things in common.” Investigation reveals, however, that this was just a temporary arrangement brought on by unforeseen circumstances, not a permanent system of “Christian” socialism. Because they shared material goods in a loving way, “there was not one in need among them.” Yes, “distribution would be made to each one, just as he would have the need.”​—Acts 4:34, 35.

...

originally posted by: ltrz2025

... (Acts 2:41–46)

Early Christians Not Communistic (1951)

...

The political force that now crusades so zealously for the mind of the masses is communism. This wily user of propaganda knows all the tricks, including the ruse of selling an idea on merits other than its own by having testimonials for it from highly respected sources. When trying to make political converts of persons in Christendom who supposedly respect the Bible some communists frequently quote the Bible. They argue that the early Christians were communists, and quote Acts 2:44, 45 as proof: “All that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.” Like so many politicians who quote the Bible for selfish purposes, these communists have no understanding of the scriptures they repeat.

We need to have the setting in mind. ... Now, fifty-one days after Passover, Jerusalem was crowded by multitudes of Jews. They had come from near and far, to celebrate the feast of weeks, the day of Pentecost. It was one of the three feasts of the year that all Jewish males were to observe in Jerusalem.—Deut. 16:1-16.

Jesus’ followers were there also, about one hundred and twenty in number. On this day of Pentecost A.D. 33 they were assembled together. Suddenly a noise like that of a rushing wind filled the meeting place, tongues as if of fire became visible over them, the holy spirit filled them, and they started speaking in different tongues! The commotion attracted the religious Jews from many nations, Jews who were present in Jerusalem at this time of Pentecost. These Jews who spoke many different languages were “bewildered, because each one heard them speaking in his own language”. In answer to their astonished questionings the apostle Peter explained that it all came about in fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy concerning the outpouring of holy spirit, and he preached so convincingly to them that “those who embraced his word heartily were baptized, and on that day about three thousand souls were added”.—Acts 2:1-41, NW.

During the days that followed “all those who became believers were together in having all things in common, and they went to selling their possessions and properties and to distributing the proceeds to all just as anyone would have the need. ... —Acts 2:44-47, NW.

At the public religious feasts in Jerusalem there had always been a sort of community of goods. Houses or beds were loaned freely by their owners. Other necessary things were willingly shared during the limited period of the feast, especially with visitors from distant places. However, in the case of these Christians this generosity went much farther, even to the selling of possessions to provide funds to care for the poor and needy. The situation was unusual. Many among the three thousand souls added on the day of Pentecost were from distant parts. They had come to Jerusalem for the feast of weeks, but because of the miraculous things that had occurred they remained in Jerusalem much longer than they had anticipated. They had made no provisions for this unexpected, extended stay. Yet they stayed, for now their chief concern was to gain further understanding concerning this new faith that they had embraced, to be edified, to fellowship with other Christians, to preach to others, to assist in building up and organizing the early church. Additionally, other converts were poor, and needed brotherly help.

The Christians who were better off in material goods desired to share with their less fortunate brothers, especially in view of the unusual circumstances. That none might suffer want, goods were sold to supply the needs. If Christian brothers would not come to the assistance of the poor ones, who would? The orthodox Jews looked down on the Christians and rather than help them conspired to persecute them. Under religious pressure the Romans had killed their Leader; they hated His followers. So logically it was the materially blessed Christians that gave willingly to aid their poorer brothers. They properly showed indifference to worldly goods, not placing trust in them, but sharing them out of affection and Christian love. They knew Jerusalem would eventually fall, and its coming desolation and Judea’s ruin made them realize the futility of material wealth as a deliverer. Moreover, they wished to honor the Lord with their substance, make friends by wise use of the mammon of unrighteousness. So it was for all these reasons, and not because of any requirement or commandment or doctrinal precept, that these early Christians set up a relief arrangement among themselves, and were thereby enabled to continue for a time in a sort of extended convention. It was for getting the early church off to a good start. It was only a temporary arrangement to meet the unusual circumstances of those days; but even it was in no sense of the word a complete pooling of all the possessions of all the Christians.

Concerning this same general period of time it states, at Acts 4:32, 34, 35; 5:1-4, NW: ...

Those who did sell their possessions and give the proceeds to the apostles for distribution would certainly gain some notice and recognition because of this act of Christian love, as is evidenced by the special mention of the Levite Joseph Barnabas, at Acts 4:36, 37. This very recognition of them as exemplary contributors indicates that their giving was wholly voluntary, and not the result of any seizure of property in accord with some inflexible, communistic edict. Further showing the completely voluntary nature of the giving is the case of Ananias and Sapphira. Unlike the other contributors, the motive of these two was impure. Apparently they coveted the reputation of giving all, but were too selfish to earn it. ...

But the point here to notice is Peter’s words to Ananias: “As long as it remained with you did it not remain yours, and after it was sold did it not continue in your control?” The property was theirs. They did not have to sell it. And if they wanted to sell it and keep the price for themselves, they were free to do so. They were under no compulsion in the matter. This action of the early Christians in selling their goods and giving the entire proceeds into a common fund for relief work was entirely voluntary. ...

The ‘having of things in common’, as spoken of at Acts chapters 2 and 4, was confined to Jerusalem. There is no indication that it was practiced by Christian groups beyond the Jerusalem vicinity. Jerusalem was where mutual assistance was so urgent, for there was the stronghold of the scribes and Pharisees and temple priests, there was the hard core of opposition. The amazing increases of the Jerusalem Christians following Pentecost so roused clerical ire that a violent campaign of persecution was touched off, spearheaded by the stoning of Stephen. It was “on that day great persecution arose against the congregation which was in Jerusalem; all except the apostles were scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria”. It was well that prior to this the Christians had sold possessions to aid one another; it kept their goods from falling as loot to the persecutors that scattered them.—Acts 8:1, NW.

When this particular burst of persecution spent itself and the Christian congregation openly functioned again in Jerusalem, there is no record that any ‘holding of things in common’ was resumed. The early church had weathered a rough storm, and was stronger for it. The need for such emergency measures seemed past. In fact, just before the satanic wave of persecution broke over them, it seems that these more drastic relief measures were tapering off and giving way to the principles more generally set forth in the Scriptures, such as relief for the bereaved or fatherless and widows. This is indicated at Acts 6:1-4. Since this text also is sometimes construed as supporting communism, we quote it for analysis:

...

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ltrz2025

No.

He is telling the young man how he can be perfect. If the conditions he set the young man - to sell everything - were uniform to all. If this were so, then how do you explain Zaccheus who was saved for only going half as far and why wasn't Abraham required to give up anything and why was everything given back to Job?

Your focus is far to much on the material. It isn't the possessions. It's the people who have them. All of these people were wealthy but in different places in their personal relationships with God. That's what we have been telling you over and over, but you are of the world and refuse to see.

Exactly.
It's not about what possessions you own, it's about what possessions or activities own you and keep you from having a relationship with God.

originally posted by: ltrz2025

originally posted by: ketsuko
Jesus believed in charity which is giving of what you have freely.

And Jesus said: “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” (Matthew 19:21)

Does it read like Jesus is giving you an option? At no point he tells you that you are free to choose whatever you want, he is pointing you the way to heaven.

Wrong, in the rest of that verse Jesus says to get to heaven you must be born again (believe)

However if you want to be perfect, then you give everything away.

one of the things i noticed is the OP doesn't seem to be able to understand when Yehshua / Jesus was speaking metaphorically and a mater of fact, 80 to 90% of his teaching were done as metaphors.

the OP also doesn't seem to understand, is the reaction of people that hear the word or witness miracles. like when he quoted Acts. nothing in those chapters he quoted are words of Yehshua / Jesus. Acts was written by Luke, as a record of the Acts of the Apostles. most of the reactions should be attributed to the Holy Spirit who is a distinct person of the trinity whether you subscribe to that or not. which more than likely was done to get followers to spread the word the same way Yehshua / Jesus did with the twelve, living, traveling, and being sent out to spread the word of good news.

that's not communism, in communism even though you in your heart you may have and want free will your not allowed to exercise it, and still be part of the group if you don't want to share your stuff.

i'd also like to point out that Yehshua / Jesus said , and i'll use the King Jame Version cause i like the way jot or tittle' sound.


note words of Yehshua / Jesus in red

Matthew 5:17-20 King James Version

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. 18 For verily I say unto you,Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

through Moses in the book of Leviticus and others all through the old and through Yehshua / Jesus the new testament there laws about personal wealth and how it's to be for lack of a better word coming to mind ,managed.

one last thing, if Yehshua / Jesus said Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled wouldn't he be changing that which he said wouldn't be.
then one must look at Job and Solomon when it comes to Yahweh/God's feelings about wealth, Job was a very rich man by the standards of that time and could be seen as fairly well off nowadays, until tested and all taken away from him. then after a scolding by Yahweh/God his wealth was restored.

Solomon prayed for wisdom and not wealth or power, Yahweh/God answered,

1 Kings 3 ; 7 -13 King James Version

7 And now, O Lord my God, thou hast made thy servant king instead of David my father: and I am but a little child: I know not how to go out or come in. 8 And thy servant is in the midst of thy people which thou hast chosen, a great people, that cannot be numbered nor counted for multitude. 9 Give therefore thy servant an understanding heart to judge thy people, that I may discern between good and bad: for who is able to judge this thy so great a people? 10 And the speech pleased the Lord, that Solomon had asked this thing. 11 And God said unto him, Because thou hast asked this thing, and hast not asked for thyself long life; neither hast asked riches for thyself, nor hast asked the life of thine enemies; but hast asked for thyself understanding to discern judgment; 12 Behold, I have done according to thy words: lo, I have given thee a wise and an understanding heart; so that there was none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like unto thee. 13 And I have also given thee that which thou hast not asked, both riches, and honour: so that there shall not be any among the kings like unto thee all thy days.

i should mention that Yehshua / Jesus taught us in a prayer that Yahweh/God's will be done. clearly through all the laws and examples of Yahweh/God's restoring wealth and giving it he doesn't have a problem with it.

for Yehshua / Jesus to be preachin living in a hippie commune or any form communism would be going against his will and laws.

one last thing, the OP admitted that he is basically a troll in a post to another member a few post back. Please don't feed the trolls any more.

originally posted by: MykeNukem

a reply to: ltrz2025
1. Jesus required a communist way of life for those seeking Christian salvation.

2. Jesus condemned wealth and property.

1. No, he didn't.

2. He condemned the LOVE of wealth and property, not wealth and property.

Not sure what it is you're trying to accomplish with this, but you failed.

Game. Set. Match.

a reply to: ltrz2025

Again, I have given you multiple specific quotes that say the opposite. You have not addressed a single one. Is Matthew 19:21 the only verse you know? Blue Letter Bible has all 31,102 verses if you need help.

This is a discussion forum. If you didn't want to discuss the issue, why did you start it? Just to cause a stink? It's looking like it, since you obviously can't back up your hypothesis.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

team bible capitalists to the rescue

have you ever been so long in a room you only notice the stench when you leave... well, this is a smelly thread and I doubt it's ITRZ contribution

a reply to: Quadrivium

It's not about what possessions you own, it's about what possessions or activities own you and keep you from having a relationship with God.

Quoted for emphasis. Perfect explanation.


TheRedneck

a reply to: Terpene

Jesus didn't preach capitalism either. Why do you think money had anything to do with Jesus' message?

God is not an accountant.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ltrz2025

I guess Abraham was a sinner.

Genesis 24

34 So he said, “I am Abraham’s servant.
35 The Lord has blessed my master abundantly, and he has become wealthy. He has given him sheep and cattle, silver and gold, male and female servants, and camels and donkeys.
36 My master’s wife Sarah has borne him a son in her old age, and he has given him everything he owns.

Weird that David says you'll become wealthy and rich if you serve the lord.

Psalm 112

Praise the Lord. Blessed are those who fear the Lord, who find great delight in his commands.
2 Their children will be mighty in the land; the generation of the upright will be blessed.
3 Wealth and riches are in their houses, and their righteousness endures forever.

a reply to: Terpene

OP's argument is that you can't follow God and have material possessions. That means the best counters are all the many examples of Godly men who had God's favor *and* a good deal of wealth. OP really has not addressed any of this.

It would be like God telling an addict that he had to give up drugs in order to follow Him, and someone saying this is proof that we are not to have any drugs or alcohol. Then they blatantly ignore Jesus turning water to wine.

a reply to: ltrz2025

A true Christian who lives by the law would consider your point of view completely heretic and even Satanic, since you are relativizing/questioning the word of Bible.

A bit off topic, but do you believe that the only true Christians are those who take all of Scripture literally? Would Jesus himself qualify as a Christian under that rule? I seem to recall him interpreting the Ten Commandments somewhat freely.

a reply to: ltrz2025

How about the riches paying more taxes in which has a trickle down effect to afford to help those in needs and that's how partly our welfare system works.

And there are occasionally some people who'd given up all their fortunes after retiring.

Are they all communists?