Do you love The Lord Jesus?

[Quirk]

Jesus loathes me.

[demonfork]

Sorry but I reject anyone who demands a feodal title like 'Lord'.

I don't think he gave himself that title, it was the people who did that.

Just in the same way that the people gave the title of "The Boss" to Bruce Springsteen.

[Bernie Sanders]

Click image to enlarge.

[Woodruff]

From what I have read of Jesus Christ, I think I'd like him. He seems to have been a thoughtful, interesting, and caring liberal man who unfortunately has been saddled with a lot of claptrap related to an apparent mental condition.

He gets bonus points from me for occasionally losing his temper.

I wish there were more folks like him around. I definitely wish more of his followers were like him.

[warmonger1981]

Oh Bernie you misguided old man. I don't know where to begin.

[tkr4lf]

Holy shit its Woodruff.

[Bernie Sanders]

Oh Bernie you misguided old man. I don't know where to begin.

Perhaps, if you can connect more than 2-3 neurons in that empty cranium of yours, that might help start your thought process.

[tzor]

First of all, Bernie, Jesus was not and never was a "socialist." I think it is fair to say that it was not really an advocate of any modern "ism." The closest might be "capitalism" where in a parable he has a master tell his servant that at the very least he should have deposited the money into a bank where it would have earned interest, but that's a stretch even there. If you take the Gospel stories are more or less their word, he had a very hands off approach to government.

Now the early church did have a "hippy commune" phase, but they also insisted that those who did not work would not eat. (Hey Bernie, weren't you thrown out of the commune because you weren't doing your fair share of the work?) But even then, it is not the same thing. Socialism is top down unified central government, while the early church was a bottom up community of believers (sort of like your old commune). The different is represented in the "Christian" principle ("Christian" as in held by the church but generally forgotten by the Protestant communities who in the United States basically almost rediscovered it through "Federalism") of "Subsidiarity." Government should always be implemented at the lowest level possible; as close to the people as possible.

But we are not talking about the early church, but Jesus. Jesus always talked directly to the people. He told the people what they needed to do and how they should behave. Even when he spoke to members of the government, he spoke to them on a personal basis and not on their proper role should be. He lived under an occupying force and the only people of authority he called out were the religious leaders, not the secular ones.

[riskllama]

bernie got punted off a kibbutz???

[tzor]

bernie got punted off a kibbutz???

Bernie Sanders Was Asked to Leave Hippie Commune for Shirking, Book Claims The Washington Free Beacon

Bernie Sanders was asked to leave a hippie commune in 1971 for “sitting around and talking” about politics instead of working, according to a forthcoming book.

We Are As Gods by Kate Daloz, scheduled for release April 26, chronicles the rise and fall of the Myrtle Hill Farm in northeast Vermont. Daloz, a Brooklyn writer, was in a special position to write a history of Myrtle Hill: she was raised near the commune in a geodesic dome residence with an outhouse called the Richard M. Nixon Memorial Hall. Her parents were close acquaintances of the commune residents, who offered them tips about wilderness living.

Sanders’ idle chatter did not endear him with some of the commune’s residents, who did the backbreaking labor of running the place. Daloz writes that one resident, Craig, “resented feeling like he had to pull others out of Bernie’s orbit if any work was going to get accomplished that day.”

Sanders was eventually asked to leave. “When Bernie had stayed for Myrtle’s allotted three days, Craig politely requested that he move on,” Daloz writes.

[betiko]

What kind of wine? I know God's omnipotent and all, but He'd have to be in the Champagne region of France for it to be Champagne, for example.

'Cept for those pesky Californian regions.

-TG

If it's not from Champagne, it's not Champagne.

The United States bans the use from all new U.S.-produced wines.[3] Only those that had approval to use the term on labels before 2006 may continue to use it and only when it is accompanied by the wine's actual origin (e.g., "California").

Obviously you can call champagne only wine from the Champagne region.
Just like you can only make Rioja in the Rioja region in spain and whatever other examples.

Suppose Jesus could make coca cola from his blood without a licence from the coca cola company. Would that be fine?
I supposed that with the roman legislation from back then, such counterfeit could end up in crucifixion.

God knows what he told his fan club they were drinking...

Stupid argument. If you're omnipotent, you can teleport the water to Champagne or Rioja, complete the transmutation there, and then teleport it back to where you are, all in a time too brief for anyone to see that it was ever gone.

Alternatively, you can just say that's what you did, and beat the shit out of anyone who argues.

Or, you could just have the French government annex the place where you are and designate it to be legally part of the Champagne region. Ditto for the Spanish government and Rioja. Or you could just rename the entire planet Planet Champagne or Planet Rioja. Or you could rewrite the dictionary so that "Champagne" means "the place where the Lord walked" or something like that.

ok, you made a point, you win the argument!

[demonfork]

First of all, Bernie, Jesus was not and never was a "socialist." I think it is fair to say that it was not really an advocate of any modern "ism." The closest might be "capitalism" where in a parable he has a master tell his servant that at the very least he should have deposited the money into a bank where it would have earned interest, but that's a stretch even there. If you take the Gospel stories are more or less their word, he had a very hands off approach to government.

Now the early church did have a "hippy commune" phase, but they also insisted that those who did not work would not eat. (Hey Bernie, weren't you thrown out of the commune because you weren't doing your fair share of the work?) But even then, it is not the same thing. Socialism is top down unified central government, while the early church was a bottom up community of believers (sort of like your old commune). The different is represented in the "Christian" principle ("Christian" as in held by the church but generally forgotten by the Protestant communities who in the United States basically almost rediscovered it through "Federalism") of "Subsidiarity." Government should always be implemented at the lowest level possible; as close to the people as possible.

But we are not talking about the early church, but Jesus. Jesus always talked directly to the people. He told the people what they needed to do and how they should behave. Even when he spoke to members of the government, he spoke to them on a personal basis and not on their proper role should be. He lived under an occupying force and the only people of authority he called out were the religious leaders, not the secular ones.

That's all great and all but do you love The Lord?

[jonesthecurl]

Is he gonna give me some of that champagne?

[DaGip]

[Dukasaur]

DaGip is back.

[demonfork]

Is he gonna give me some of that champagne?

At the very least it will be sparkling wine.

[apey]

what about rum

[warmonger1981]

Only if it's Sailor Jerry's

[notyou2]

First of all, Bernie, Jesus was not and never was a "socialist." I think it is fair to say that it was not really an advocate of any modern "ism." The closest might be "capitalism" where in a parable he has a master tell his servant that at the very least he should have deposited the money into a bank where it would have earned interest, but that's a stretch even there. If you take the Gospel stories are more or less their word, he had a very hands off approach to government.

Now the early church did have a "hippy commune" phase, but they also insisted that those who did not work would not eat. (Hey Bernie, weren't you thrown out of the commune because you weren't doing your fair share of the work?) But even then, it is not the same thing. Socialism is top down unified central government, while the early church was a bottom up community of believers (sort of like your old commune). The different is represented in the "Christian" principle ("Christian" as in held by the church but generally forgotten by the Protestant communities who in the United States basically almost rediscovered it through "Federalism") of "Subsidiarity." Government should always be implemented at the lowest level possible; as close to the people as possible.

But we are not talking about the early church, but Jesus. Jesus always talked directly to the people. He told the people what they needed to do and how they should behave. Even when he spoke to members of the government, he spoke to them on a personal basis and not on their proper role should be. He lived under an occupying force and the only people of authority he called out were the religious leaders, not the secular ones.

You need to learn the difference between socialism and communism

[notyou2]

DaGip is back.

Nope, he's dead

[apey]

he is i hid his body for wicked

[tzor]

You need to learn the difference between socialism and communism

Socialism is communism only by far less violent means.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment. Social ownership may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these. Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal") is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.

Communism vs. Socialism "In a way, communism is an extreme form of socialism."

[Dukasaur]

You need to learn the difference between socialism and communism

Socialism is communism only by far less violent means.

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production, as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim at their establishment. Social ownership may refer to public ownership, cooperative ownership, citizen ownership of equity, or any combination of these. Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them, social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.

In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal") is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.

Communism vs. Socialism "In a way, communism is an extreme form of socialism."

Communism is an extreme variant of socialism repudiated by most socialists.

To tar socialists with the communism brush is sort of like saying all Christians are Branch Dravidians. It's intellectually dishonest, and quite frankly it's a schoolyard bully rhetorical device.

[DoomYoshi]

Pius IX listed socialism in his list of errors. If you are a socialist, you are going straight to hell.

[tzor]

Communism is an extreme variant of socialism repudiated by most socialists.

Well of course they would say that ... once again ... their vision is long term. We can't have the water suddenly boiling; the frog will jump out. But if the temperature is raised over time no one will notice. Socialism is merely the very hot water leading to boiling. Once that state is reached the water will continue to rise. Socialists, like all despots are never happy with even their own status quo.