Yep, "Jeff" is back, warping whatever he needs to warp to continue believing in liberalism. It's nothing new. "Jeff" now is claiming that Jesus was a socialist, in this tweet:
Oh "Jeff," seriously? I mean, it's just not possible you equate Jesus giving away what essentially belonged to him with socialism?
Let me ask you a question, "Jeff." If a doctor chooses to treat a patient, FOR FREE, without government compulsion but of his own free will, is that Socialism?
While we're at it, if I have food, and I choose to directly give it to a hungry person, without government compulsion but of my own free will, is that Socialism? Or, in the case of Jesus, if someone gave me some bread and fish to give to help feed hungry people I distributed them, is that Socialism?
Or if I were to take some wine, which I purchased with my own money, and wrap it up and put a nice bow on it and give it to someone, without government compulsion but of my own free will, is that Socialism?
No to all three, my friends. The first two fall under a very common English word: Charity. The third falls under another very common English word: Gift.
Now none of these are perfect analogies, because what all three of the examples "Jeff" gave were actually Jesus performing miracles. As God incarnate, Jesus took five loaves of bread and two fish and turned them into enough bread and fish to feed thousands miraculously; He healed the sick miraculously; and He turned water into wine miraculously. Jesus healing the sick wasn't through government compulsion and it didn't confiscate peoples' money to provide it.
Jesus had the ability to heal sick people, so He healed them (similar, if not exactly, in result to a doctor who chooses to give a sick person free care on his own).
A small boy gave (donated) his lunch to Jesus to help feed the hungry crowd. Jesus then miraculously multiplied it to feed thousands.
Wedding patrons gave Jesus pots of water, which Jesus was able to turn into wine and give to the wedding guests.
Now, how is this socialism, "Jeff"? Before you answer let's review how Webster's dictionary defines socialism, shall we?
Socialism (n) Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods.
So, "Jeff," was Jesus part of the government? No, He was not. Was Jesus taking collective goods by means of government and distributing them? No, He was not.
Jesus was privately charitable. And private citizens and charities taking care of the poor is not socialism, nor is it liberalism. It is an exercise of the conservative principle of charity. Plain and simple.
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: Double Standards
- Twitter Files: The Definition of Socialism
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: The False Premise
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: Teachers Should Earn More!
- Reactions to the Gosnell Verdict
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: Overgeneralization
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: Just Pass a Law, Problem Sol...
- No "Jeff," Jesus was not a Socialist
- Liberal Rhetoric 101: Condescension
- ▼ May (9)
- ► 2012 (464)
- ► 2011 (316)
(i originally wrote and posted this to renown on September 1, 2009. Last night we kicked off 30 days of fasting at Ridge Church. Begging God...
(This was originally written & posted to renown on June 1, 2010.) I was driving home from my soccer game last night and near my neighbo...
(i originally wrote and posted this to renown on June 30, 2010.) These 2 people live in Bulgeta, Ethiopia. i don't know their names. T...
Today was going to be the day I announced a hiatus from blogging to give more time to preparing for my upcoming wedding...then my good frien...
that's a pretty creative & original title for this post, don't you think? it's crazy, but 1,000 times i have written some th...