Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 An odd interpretation of the Bible, that. You supposed that Jesus' intent in that passage was to equate the authority of the state with the authority of God? A former tax collector. You'll note that Matthew repented his wickedness, and collected no taxes after joining Jesus. The meaning is God has no interest in material things. That's the realm of Caesar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 He's not a commie. Show me where the Pope forces, or recommends the use of force, to separate an individual from his property. It seems both the libs and the conservatives on here want to think the Pope is a commie. He isn't. Read better. The Pope, on multiple occasions, including infront of the United Nations, has called for "a legitimate redistribution of wealth". Stating that not redistributing wealth to the poor, is the exact same thing as "stealing from them". Calling on governments, the ultimate arbitors of force, to redistribute wealth, is a call for the use of force to separate individuals from their property. This Pope is the Red Pope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 The meaning is God has no interest in material things. That's the realm of Caesar. God certainly does have interest in material things, as evidenced by the material world He created for us. That passage does not mean what you seem to think it means. It makes no sense, in any way, that Jesus would abdicate any of God's moral authority, and defer to Caesar. Rather, he is making the point that Caesar holds no authority. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's before God's means that nothing at all belongs to Caesar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 He's not a commie. Show me where the Pope forces, or recommends the use of force, to separate an individual from his property. It seems both the libs and the conservatives on here want to think the Pope is a commie. He isn't. Read better. i don't think he's a communist., i linked a story where he said he wasn't. i take him literally. his words are very clear on almost all the topics that he's commented on. it's the stretched interpretations that are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 i don't think he's a communist., i linked a story where he said he wasn't. i take him literally. his words are very clear on almost all the topics that he's commented on. it's the stretched interpretations that are not. Like the stretched interpretation that he said governments should take money and re-distribute it? Or that he even supports that? He seems to me to want people to do this on their own and not necessarily in ways that are simply financial. Sort of like his boss did. This is in no way a license for government to coerce anything from anybody. The Pope, on multiple occasions, including infront of the United Nations, has called for "a legitimate redistribution of wealth". Stating that not redistributing wealth to the poor, is the exact same thing as "stealing from them". Calling on governments, the ultimate arbitors of force, to redistribute wealth, is a call for the use of force to separate individuals from their property. This Pope is the Red Pope. Link with direct quotes? Doubt it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Link with direct quotes? Doubt it. http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html “It is the responsibility of the State to safeguard and promote the common good of society. Based on the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, and fully committed to political dialogue and consensus building, it plays a fundamental role, one which cannot be delegated, in working for the integral development of all. We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a ‘dignified sustenance’ for all people, but also their ‘general temporal welfare and prosperity. This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labor that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 If society does not create the above - what are we all doing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html “It is the responsibility of the State to safeguard and promote the common good of society. Based on the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, and fully committed to political dialogue and consensus building, it plays a fundamental role, one which cannot be delegated, in working for the integral development of all. We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a ‘dignified sustenance’ for all people, but also their ‘general temporal welfare and prosperity. This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labor that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives.” this makes him an humanitarian, not a communist. i give you this: he's certainly not a libertarian. Edited January 12, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 If society does not create the above - what are we all doing here? You need a good dose of Robert Ringer's books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Pope Francis, his talk Monday morning to the Vatican diplomatic corps this morning about a throwaway culture of rejection, enslavement, and persecution. FTA: Here, in your presence, I appeal to the entire international community, as I do to the respective governments involved, to take concrete steps to bring about peace and to protect all those who are victims of war and persecution, driven from their homes and their homeland. In a letter written shortly before Christmas, I sought to express my personal closeness and the promise of my prayers to all the Christian communities of the Middle East. Theirs is a precious testimony of faith and courage, for they play a fundamental role as artisans of peace, reconciliation and development in the civil societies of which they are a part. A Middle East without Christians would be a marred and mutilated Middle East! In urging the international community not to remain indifferent in the face of this situation, I express my hope that religious, political and intellectual leaders, especially those of the Muslim community, will condemn all fundamentalist and extremist interpretations of religion which attempt to justify such acts of violence. Entire text at the link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 this makes him an humanitarian, not a communist. i give you this: he's certainly not a libertarian. At a minimum, it makes him a socialist; but more importantly, it makes him unChrist-like, Christ himself advocating freedom of action without force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) ttyt - Who is your role model? What Libertarian society has existed and flourished? You seem obsessed with labels... Edited January 12, 2015 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) ttyt - Who is your role model? What Libertarian society has existed and flourished? You seem obsessed with labels... 1. My role model is my late paternal grandfather. 2. A truely libertarian society has never existed. 3. I'm not even sure what that means. Edited January 12, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) God certainly does have interest in material things, as evidenced by the material world He created for us. That passage does not mean what you seem to think it means. It makes no sense, in any way, that Jesus would abdicate any of God's moral authority, and defer to Caesar. Rather, he is making the point that Caesar holds no authority. Give to Caesar what is Caesar's before God's means that nothing at all belongs to Caesar. The context of the passage is one in which Jews are questioning the authority of Caesar to gather taxes in Judea. Jesus is being grilled by Jewish anti-tax zealots, and they try and trap him with a trick question. So, Jesus asks one of his questioners for a coin. He asks the questioner who's face appears on the coin. The questioner replies "Caesar." It's at that point he says "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Given the context, the meaning is clear, and it's something Paul later reinforces, in Romans I believe. Further reinforcement of this comes at Jesus' trial where he tells Pontius Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But now (or 'as it is') my kingdom is not from the world." Edited January 12, 2015 by joesixpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Sheesh - I haven't wasted my time to read all this thread - but people are actually dissecting whether the pope is a communist or just a socialist? Maybe - maybe he is the leader of one of the largest religions on earth and is preaching for the less lucky. I am an atheist (there goes a label!) and I can't help but truly be impressed with him. I notice in his quotes he is not especially espousing the exact means to which the impoverished get to a better life - but that society should endeavor for it. Should any society - whether it is libertarian or capitalistic or the current mess that we seem to have - have a metric of its success to raise the bottom - eliminate as much poverty and sickness as possible? He is also the first pope in recent time to preach inclusion....not exclusion.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations, and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the dreadful judge will judge his people. The End Prophecy of St Malachy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 Sheesh - I haven't wasted my time to read all this thread - but people are actually dissecting whether the pope is a communist or just a socialist? Maybe - maybe he is the leader of one of the largest religions on earth and is preaching for the less lucky. I am an atheist (there goes a label!) and I can't help but truly be impressed with him. I notice in his quotes he is not especially espousing the exact means to which the impoverished get to a better life - but that society should endeavor for it. Should any society - whether it is libertarian or capitalistic or the current mess that we seem to have - have a metric of its success to raise the bottom - eliminate as much poverty and sickness as possible? He is also the first pope in recent time to preach inclusion....not exclusion.... Like those labels are mutually exclusive? Again, get ahold of Robert Ringer's first two books, then read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) The context of the passage is one in which Jews are questioning the authority of Caesar to gather taxes in Judea. Jesus is being grilled by Jewish anti-tax zealots, and they try and trap him with a trick question. So, Jesus asks one of his questioners for a coin. He asks the questioner who's face appears on the coin. The questioner replies "Caesar." It's at that point he says "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's." Given the context, the meaning is clear, and it's something Paul later reinforces, in Romans I believe. Further reinforcement of this comes at Jesus' trial where he tells Pontius Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But now (or 'as it is') my kingdom is not from the world." Your context is incorrect. The Jews questioning Jesus are Rabbinical Pharisees, who are not posing the question because they are "anti-tax zealots", but rather because they are opposed to the teaching of Jesus, whom has now asserted Himself as their reformer. The trap which they are attempting to spring is thus: By addressing Jesus as "Master" or "Teacher" they have conferred on Him the title of Rabbi, and by defering to Him for instruction, they seek to force Him into a choice: if He refuses to answer the question He will lose credibility as a Rabbi with those who just proclaimed Him King; and if He does answer as Rabbi, then He must answer according to the dictates of the Torah, which creates an additional problem: If Jesus answers that it is lawful under the Torah to pay tribute, He immediately becomes collaborator with the Romans, and again loses credibility with those whom have named Him King. If Jesus answers that it is not lawful under the Torah to pay tribute, He risks being branded a political criminal by Rome, and would likely have been killed before His work was done. The brilliance of Jesus' answer is that it embraces a Rabbinical teaching method of debate: he asks a question of his questioner, and uses the answer to attack his questioner's position. Jesus' question: "Whose image and inscription is this?" -------------- *** At this point a knowledge of the history of currency becomes important. *** The denarius in question would have been issued by Tiberius, whom only issued three, the third of which was Tiberius' favorite, and was minted for more than 20 years. It is important to note that the exact coin is very significant, as it is the reason Jesus lables his questioners hypocrites: the denarius was, quite litterally, the property of the Roman Emperor. It was the coin that was required for use to pay tribute by those Rome had conquered and subjugated, though they were rare in Judea (which led to the necessity of the much maligned Biblical money changers), and only carried commonly by Roman officers and their collaborating Jewish leaders. The coins reflected the diefied image of the Emperor Augustus, and were inscribed with the translated phrase "Tiberius Caesar, Worshipful Son of the God, Augustus." -------------- Jesus' asking about the "image and inscription" on the coin is a direct reference in two parts: the first is to name the Pharisees as Roman collaborarors, the second is to name them heretics, standing in gross violation of both the First and Second Commandments, for clinging to the diefied image of a pagan god, compounded by occupying a Temple while doing so. The Pharisees, being highly educated Rabbis themselves, clearly understood Jesus' reminder of the province of God. They understood Leviticus 25:23, which instructs us that "The land (of Israel) must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you reside in my land as foreigners and strangers."; they understood Haggai 2:8 which instructs us that (paraphrased) "All of the silver and all of the gold belongs to God"; and they understood that the firstfruit, as outlined in Proverbs 3 is the acceptance that all things come from God, and all things belong to God. The Roman Emperor disagreed, stating instead that all things in Rome belonged to Tiberius and to Rome. What Jesus had accomplished, in His wise way, was to throw the question back upon those plotting against him. He now demanded of them a choice: "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, Render unto God what is God's." He did not answer the Parisees' question, but rather He reminded them that there is only one King in Israel, and they must choose which one to serve; and further that the Torah had already instructed them of this. Edited January 13, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html “It is the responsibility of the State to safeguard and promote the common good of society. Based on the principles of subsidiarity and solidarity, and fully committed to political dialogue and consensus building, it plays a fundamental role, one which cannot be delegated, in working for the integral development of all. We are not simply talking about ensuring nourishment or a ‘dignified sustenance’ for all people, but also their ‘general temporal welfare and prosperity. This means education, access to health care, and above all employment, for it is through free, creative, participatory and mutually supportive labor that human beings express and enhance the dignity of their lives.” That link was long. What # was that in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted January 12, 2015 Share Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) That link was long. What # was that in? Chapter 4, Sue. Edited January 12, 2015 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts