To all of my "Bible scholars" here in the political section of YA: Riddle me this?

That those who take care of the poor will go to Heaven, but those that don't will not.

I think it goes with the story of the Good Samaritan, which Jesus told after his Apostles asked what the most important Commandment was. Jesus had responded, "Love your neighbor as yourself." When the Apostles asked who their neighbor was, Jesus told the Good Samaritan parable (technically about someone helping an alien).

It also goes with Jesus' statement that it would be harder for a rich man to enter Heaven than for him to get through the eye of a needle - and that "you should have no other gods before me." Money is a god to many people. Look at people who don't want to be taxed to take care of the poor! How many times have you heard them say "It's MY money!"

What about the parable about the rich man who ignored the blind beggar in front of his home every day? When the rich man dies, he goes to "hell" and then understands that he should have been better to the beggar. He tries to tell his brothers, but can't.

AND if you read the Book of Acts, the Apostles live a pure communist lifestyle...

Well, it seems pretty straightforward to me. It says that Jesus will invite those who helped the needy into heaven, and banish those who didn't from heaven.

Of course, that raises two enormous questions:

1. To what extent is "help the needy" personal and to what extent is it societal? If you support policies that make the poor poorer, but give money to beggars on the street, can you be saved? If you refuse to give money to beggars on the street, but support policies that bring people out of poverty, can you be saved? Jesus doesn't really say.

2. How are we supposed to reconcile this with all the material in the New Testament that explains that God forgives all sins through divine Grace if we repent and pray to Jesus, presumably including the sin of ignoring the homeless? Is this a predestiny "by their fruits ye shall know them" sort of thing? Or did Jesus actually have no intention at all of trying to weave it into any kind of broader, more formal theology?

One thing is clear: Jesus wants us to help the needy. Beyond that basic and simple truth, the parable of the sheep and the goats contains more questions than answers.

Firstly - the bible shouldn't carry any more authority than any other old book of stories, although its historical references, where verifiable, can be fascinating.

The verses you quoted sound a bit like - Jesus returns and says if you didn't treat the poor well he's going to fvck you up real bad.

Agape - christian love?

"I do not mean to brag" - lie?

And the name Jesus Christ - what does it mean? Joshua the Annointed One - referring to the Jewish coronation ceremony.

I see quite a few definitions of a troll. people who reason difficulty and then leave, those with quite a few debts, and now people who checklist abuse or thumbs down. The buttons are there for a reason. in case you injury the regulations and get caught, who in actuality is the troll. And why do those human beings think of its against the regulation to desire issues finished the main suitable way, which by utilising the way, i did not MAKE UP THE YAHOO words OF provider in case you have a situation with my remark. Who could admit to being a troll.?

Okay...I'll bite.

Since you know what it means, when the government forcibly extracts money from people, does that demonstrate "agape"?

Or is "agape" a personal characteristic, reflecting the Holy Spirit within that person?

It means exactly what it says... It's written in basic English, and unless you provide an context or reason why you're asking the question, then I might as well copy-and-paste so you can read it for yourself.

Agape is love.

Just a thought but it's possible that some of your scholars may be wearing liberal troll panties making feeble attempts to suck in people like you who are conservative (I know you made it clear on the liberal thinking), just saying.

About the same as the 6th chapter of "Starship Troopers". To me the Bible is nothing more than fiction generated to consolidate the power of early Catholics. Why do you think so much was left out?

the only Avatar of Jesus that offended me was the one with an "aroused" Savior with a lascivious look on his face and what I assume was his mother offering up an infant for rape..THAT offended me!.and NOT because it portrayed Christ in a bad light!..it depcted child rape!

"Original Liberal" is jibbering idiot, but this question really belongs in R&S.