Was Jesus soft?

Jesus was/is the absolute opposite of soft. He took the sins of the whole world and put them on his own shoulders. He willingly paid OUR debt. Soft? I think not.
 
That is funny that I made you frantically embark on a Google research project and to invent tales that you are a Marx scholar.

Frantically googling tidbits of information does not make you informed.

What made Marx and Lenin despise liberals and social democats is that from the Marxist perspective they were collaborationists with capitalism, and they were dangerous to a revolutionary mindset by misleading the proletariat in giving them false hope that social reform and equality can work hand in hand with raw market forces.

You are an ignorant leftist drone. We all know that. I provided you free links to the seminal works of Marx - knowing full well that you have never read them, nor will you.

The offer is there - I will debate you or any leftist on Marx and Marxism.

Again, Lenin viewed European "liberals" as useful idiots - a well known term you've never been exposed to due to your extreme ignorance of the subject at hand. But the real issue is you attempting to intimate that you or any democrat is a "liberal." democrats are fascists - totalitarian collectivists. There is nothing even remotely liberal about you.

Liberalism is above all about economic freedom and property rights, because absent the right to own property, there can be no liberty. I make no secret that I am Rothbardian in my views of economics. The foundation of liberalism is Laissez Faire Capitalism. You are no capitalist - certainly not Laissez Faire - assuming you know what the term means.

{One of the most influential ideas of the Gilded Age was laissez-faire (pronounced LAY-zay FAIR). From the French for “let them do [what they will],” proponents of laissez-faire policies, known as liberals, believed that the free market would naturally produce the best and most efficient solutions to economic and social problems.}

Laissez-faire policies in the Gilded Age (article) | Khan Academy

Now I'm sure you'll stomp your feet and scream "NUHN UHN,' because you're not intellectually developed enough to actually discuss anything.
 
You are an ignorant leftist drone. We all know that. I provided you free links to the seminal works of Marx - knowing full well that you have never read them, nor will you.

The offer is there - I will debate you or any leftist on Marx and Marxism.

Again, Lenin viewed European "liberals" as useful idiots - a well known term you've never been exposed to due to your extreme ignorance of the subject at hand. But the real issue is you attempting to intimate that you or any democrat is a "liberal." democrats are fascists - totalitarian collectivists. There is nothing even remotely liberal about you.

Liberalism is above all about economic freedom and property rights, because absent the right to own property, there can be no liberty. I make no secret that I am Rothbardian in my views of economics. The foundation of liberalism is Laissez Faire Capitalism. You are no capitalist - certainly not Laissez Faire - assuming you know what the term means.

{One of the most influential ideas of the Gilded Age was laissez-faire (pronounced LAY-zay FAIR). From the French for “let them do [what they will],” proponents of laissez-faire policies, known as liberals, believed that the free market would naturally produce the best and most efficient solutions to economic and social problems.}

Laissez-faire policies in the Gilded Age (article) | Khan Academy

Now I'm sure you'll stomp your feet and scream "NUHN UHN,' because you're not intellectually developed enough to actually discuss anything.

Your link is "Khan Academy"? :laugh:

Since you claim to be a Marx scholar, try writing in your own words, using your own thoughts, using your own syntax, style, and ideas instead of frantically googling, plagiarizing , and cherry picking tidbits of information from the "Khan Academy" :laugh:
 
Your link is "Khan Academy"? :laugh:

Since you claim to be a Marx scholar, try writing in your own words, using your own thoughts, using your own syntax, style, and ideas instead of frantically googling, plagiarizing , and cherry picking tidbits of information from the "Khan Academy" :laugh:

So there we are, "NUHN UHN"

Everyone knew that would be your reply.

You're an intellectual featherweight.
 
Jesus was/is the absolute opposite of soft. He took the sins of the whole world and put them on his own shoulders. He willingly paid OUR debt. Soft? I think not.

And here you are, repaying him by spitting in his eye, by being a total, unapologetic dickhead and liar.

Shame
 
So there we are, "NUHN UHN"

Everyone knew that would be your reply.

You're an intellectual featherweight.

The fact that Lenin and the Bolsheviks considered the liberal provisional government their enemy, overthrew them in a military coup, and arrested liberal and social democratic leaders reveals a lot more about Marxist-Leninist attitudes towards liberalism than the barely educated talking points Rush Limbaugh coached you to memorize
 
The fact that Lenin and the Bolsheviks considered the liberal provisional government their enemy, overthrew them in a military coup, and arrested liberal and social democratic leaders reveals a lot more about Marxist-Leninist attitudes towards liberalism than the barely educated talking points Rush Limbaugh coached you to memorize

Your talking points have failed you, and you have no actual knowledge.

Lenin sought absolute power. He sold a lie to the people that he wished to "liberate" them. He sought to establish himself as dictator and Marxists as the absolute rulers. After Lenin betrayed and murdered his allies, he wrote;

{“Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.”
Vladimir Lenin}

You of the democrat party are vassals of Communist China. Because you have replaced history with Marxist propaganda, you are not capable of learning from history. You believe Emperor Xi will happily share power with you. The betrayal of Lenin to the Republic teaches you no lesson, because you are a true believer in socialism.

The flaw you run from is the absurd fiction that you are in any way a liberal. You are a Marxist, a fascist, a totalitarian collectivist. I find it amusing that you are so poorly versed on the subject at hand that you can only scream about the man you were conditioned to hate 30 years ago.

Rush is dead Comrade, he is no longer a threat to your revolution.

What you Marxist fear more than all else is exposure. You seek not to prevail, but rather to "get away with it." What will derail your revolution is the mark getting wise to the con.
 
The difference is that I don’t buy into the bullshit of him dying for my sins.

Sins
Jesus = God
Resurrection

All that shit is your domain, Rufus. Not mine.

Yet here you are pontificating on someone you claim didn't exist.

Proving once again that there is NO hypocrisy like demopocrisy.

You are a Christophobic bigot and you mindlessly attack those with beliefs you hate.
 
Your talking points have failed you, and you have no actual knowledge.

Lenin sought absolute power. He sold a lie to the people that he wished to "liberate" them. He sought to establish himself as dictator and Marxists as the absolute rulers. After Lenin betrayed and murdered his allies, he wrote;

{“Unity is a great thing and a great slogan. But what the workers’ cause needs is the unity of Marxists, not unity between Marxists, and opponents and distorters of Marxism.”
Vladimir Lenin}

You of the democrat party are vassals of Communist China. Because you have replaced history with Marxist propaganda, you are not capable of learning from history. You believe Emperor Xi will happily share power with you. The betrayal of Lenin to the Republic teaches you no lesson, because you are a true believer in socialism.

The flaw you run from is the absurd fiction that you are in any way a liberal. You are a Marxist, a fascist, a totalitarian collectivist. I find it amusing that you are so poorly versed on the subject at hand that you can only scream about the man you were conditioned to hate 30 years ago.

Rush is dead Comrade, he is no longer a threat to your revolution.

What you Marxist fear more than all else is exposure. You seek not to prevail, but rather to "get away with it." What will derail your revolution is the mark getting wise to the con.

^^ Meaningless verbal diarrhea and word salad which have no explanatory power.

You should have taken Russian history classes at the college level, rather than letting Rush Limbaugh spoon feed you talking points about liberals and communists.


You haven't explained why the Bolsheviks considered the liberal provisional government their enemy, why they overthrew the liberal provisional government in a military coup, nor why they arrested leading liberals and social democats if Marxist-Leninists considered liberalism allies and fellow travelers
 
^^ Meaningless verbal diarrhea and word salad which have no explanatory power.

You should have taken Russian history classes at the college level, rather than letting Rush Limbaugh spoon feed you talking points about liberals and communists.


You haven't explained why the Bolsheviks considered the liberal provisional government their enemy, why they overthrew the liberal provisional government in a military coup, nor why they arrested leading liberals and social democats if Marxist-Leninists considered liberalism allies and fellow travelers

^^^ - Lowbrow dolt.

I knew at the start that you lacked the acumen to offer a serious debate or discussion. Your straw man argument is worthless. If you wish to counter my arguments, you'll have to address arguments I make, not those you fabricate and assign to me to fit your talking points.

Again, the flaw in your fiction is the absurdity that you and other democrats are "liberals.'

You're not - you are leftists. A collection of fascists, Marxists, and collectivists. You have nothing in common with liberalism.
 
Yet here you are pontificating on someone you claim didn't exist.

Proving once again that there is NO hypocrisy like demopocrisy.

You are a Christophobic bigot and you mindlessly attack those with beliefs you hate.

Wrong again, bitch.

Pointing out the hypocrisy of shitstains, like you for instance, who think this Jesus guy died for your sins and yet go around spreading your hate and venom. What an insult to your own god.

Me? Nobody died for me. The concept of sin is meaningless to me. Jesus never claimed he was God. That is your claim.
 
^^^ - Lowbrow dolt.

I knew at the start that you lacked the acumen to offer a serious debate or discussion. Your straw man argument is worthless. If you wish to counter my arguments, you'll have to address arguments I make, not those you fabricate and assign to me to fit your talking points.

Again, the flaw in your fiction is the absurdity that you and other democrats are "liberals.'

You're not - you are leftists. A collection of fascists, Marxists, and collectivists. You have nothing in common with liberalism.

^ Like a donkey braying. All fury and no substance.

The first people to resist the Bolsheviks once they shut down the Constituent Assembly were liberals and democratic socialists -- while the conservative aristocracy and landed gentry were fleeing the country in a panic.

Communist totalitarians have a long and sordid history of arresting liberals, executing human rights leaders, outlawing social democratic parties, and making independent labor unions illegal.
 
Wrong again, bitch.

Pointing out the hypocrisy of shitstains, like you for instance, who think this Jesus guy died for your sins and yet go around spreading your hate and venom. What an insult to your own god.

Me? Nobody died for me. The concept of sin is meaningless to me. Jesus never claimed he was God. That is your claim.

Oh, is that what I think, Christophobe?

You're just a mindless bigot. Your god is the almighty state and you lash out at anyone who fails to worship your god.
 
Has anyone else seen these stories? Evangelical leaders are becoming alarmed because some of their MAGA congregations are questioning the teachings of Jesus as being too weak, and even liberal, and that they're just not working anymore in today's environment. All of the "turn the other cheek" stuff.

The MAGA cult has taken it to a new level. I saw DeSantis was roundly booed in Iowa, as well. No other philosophy or point of view is welcome anymore. Trump is the new messiah - it's actually not unrealistic that a new religion could form with Trump as the savior.

I wonder what they'd have instead of a cross. A golf club? A model of a private jet?

They'd have you in a straight jacket
 
^ Like a donkey braying. All fury and no substance.

The first people to resist the Bolsheviks once they shut down the Constituent Assembly were liberals and democratic socialists -- while the conservative aristocracy and landed gentry were fleeing the country in a panic.

Communist totalitarians have a long and sordid history of arresting liberals, executing human rights leaders, outlawing social democratic parties, and making independent labor unions illegal.

Did you have a point?

You're clinging madly to your straw man. The talking points you operate from demand that your opponent hold the position you flaccidly attempt to assign myself.

I'll make it simple - I said nothing of "liberals" being allies with you Marxists. Quite the opposite.
 
Did you have a point?

You're clinging madly to your straw man. The talking points you operate from demand that your opponent hold the position you flaccidly attempt to assign myself.

I'll make it simple - I said nothing of "liberals" being allies with you Marxists. Quite the opposite.

The JPP forum dimwit is back on troll patrol.
 
Back
Top