80 share
40 is our goal
for optimum readership
Instead
of supporting a war they oppose, after losing the debate, the
Pacifist Left forces the press to post endless body counts (but only when their
man is not in office), and spend millions of dollars bad-mouthing the
military, all of which, makes any war effort a political
"football," resulting in far more deaths of American soldiers
than necessary, and, hundreds or thousands more casualties, as a result
of having to stay on the battlefield longer, in order to achieve our
stated goals.
How many
men died in Viet Nam
Letting foreign people suffer and die, in the thousands, is just fine with these
self-centered morons. Their opposition to "preemptive war" is a
declared statement that says, "We are willing to sacrifice our own
people and YOUR soldier children, rather than fight a war to prevent that from happening." Surrender is, literally, a reasonable choice, to these clowns. Obama, a member of this collective, is on record saying that he believes wars need not embrace "victors or vanquish." And his Afghan War is evidence of this ultimate silliness.
I say, if you do not believe in war, you cannot serve as "Command and Chief" of the best fighting force in the world . . . . . . period. There is a reason why Obama has a 65% disapproval rating within the active military.
We wouldn't want to oppose war, that's something Jesus might do.
ReplyDeleteThere is a time and place for everything, including opposition to war. When our men and women are in the middle of a fight (a fight for their lives, I might add), is not one of those times. And you know nothing about Jesus and laugh at religion, so why bring him up? The facts of the main post are what they are. In the end, you care much more about your small minded ideology than you do for the safety and security of our soldier children - while they are men and women, they are children to any number of American parents, and your side of the aisle, doesn't give a crap about any of those folks. The second they put on a uniform, you think they become the enemy . . . . . and to think that ISIS would saw your goofy little head off as certainly as anyone's, is the amazing thought in this debate. Our men and women fight for the freedom of Hollywood, the Queer Nation, and the drug infested peacenik's of our nation. You should never forget that little fact. Jesus wouldn't, I am certain of that.
ReplyDeleteOne final thing: why do you think Jesus was a peacenik? There is nothing in New Testament script that gives us that opinion. There were a number of "military" types converted, as recorded in the Holy Text, and none of them were told to leave their profession. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is qualified by "live at peace with your fellow man, as much as you can." When Jesus of Nazareth drove the money changers and merchants from the Temple porches, no one lifted a finger to oppose him. Why wasn't there a fight at that very moment in time? Because they were so impressed with what a nice guy he was? When he came into that courtyard and started whipping their animals, over-throwing their tables and driving the merchants away, they were OBVIOUSLY afraid of him. Guess what. He offered no apologies and mended no fences. He was badass on that day, a force to be reckoned with and, yet, in the end, he willingly died for these morons . . . you and me, included. He didn't die because he was weak, my friend; just the opposite.
Jesus was a baddass that day, the only day he ever showed physical violence in his life.... targeting capitalists. Jesus was a philosopher who argued that true happiness could be found by charity and kindness, not by accumulation of wealth. Jesus argued that Roman commercialism had corrupted Jewish society. Under Roman rule, their society was becoming dominated by a wealthy arrogant elite grinding down on an increasingly desperate working class. This disparity was against the principles of Jesus, and the Bible is clear on these values:
ReplyDeleteBut when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. You will be repaid at the resurrection of the just. [Luke 14:13 &14.]
If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. [Matthew 19:21]
You cannot serve both God and Money. [Matthew 6:24.]
For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
[1 Timothy 6:10,11]
Labour not to be rich: cease from thine own wisdom. Wilt thou set thine eyes upon that which is not? for riches certainly make themselves wings; they fly away as an eagle toward heaven.
(Proverbs 23:4,5)
He that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor.
(Proverbs 28:8)
The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again: but the righteous sheweth mercy, and giveth.
(Psalm 37:21)
A faithful man shall abound with blessings: but he that maketh haste to be rich shall not be innocent.
(Proverbs 28:20)
What would Jesus think of Republicans targeting the poorest and weakest among us by cutting funding for community health centers, heating for the poor, foodstamps, and medicare while fighting tooth and nail to protect tax cuts for the most wealthy?
Jesus was clearly a liberal socialist
This is the difference between a disciple of Christ and a secular minded Marxist. The "disciple" believes in all of the points made from the Text, including Prov 28:20 which makes the point that there is no redeeming value in a self chosen poverty, where "blessings" include all the material and fiscal wealth available.
DeleteMatt 19 and Luke 24 touch on what we call "social justice." Make note of the fact this is an individual responsibility, not a corporate function, and most certainly, not a function of Central Planning. The "government" in first century, Palestinian times was Rome, and Rome is never included his directives or call to discipleship, except that we are to accept the fact of governance, regardless of its godless nature.
But this is great for you, right? In your small minded way, Central Planning is to organize and perform all of the above. YOU are freed from any personal responsibility, and, so, you do not invite the poor to your table, you do not surrender your wealth because of Central Planning's redistribution, you do not suffer AT ALL when food stamps are restricted or heating fuel is cut off in the name of saving the planet. How pathetic a "theology." But, of course, it is not "theology" when a godless type thinks to quote scripture, is it.
So, you are perfect, knowing what was in the mind of Jesus? The fact that he did not resist when he could have, proves his passivity. How in the world do you deny that?
ReplyDeleteYou did not deal with anything I said in my first "comment," above. Typical to a very right-wing theology, is learning the art of ignoring all scripture and commentary that does not line up with you given point. You biggest error, IMO, is believing in the notion that biblical revelation is linear. It is not. It is dialect in the most fundamental of ways. This means that we will never come to a point when our thinking is not challenged by something in the Holy Text. You can study and outline and successfully debate for years and years and, then, suddenly, you read something in the Text that you realize does not agree with your long held position. Most of us have had this experience. Why? Again, because God's revelation is a simple minded, linear discourse. Rather, because it is dialectic or paradoxical in its revelation, we have to read and reread the Text. It stays relevant to our day and time. It it were linear, as is a text book, you could read the thing and, BAM, have it all figured out, just like a textbook.
ReplyDeleteBible says plenty about Rome, Government, taxes and institutional giving.
ReplyDelete"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.
This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor." (Romans 13:1-7)
And He said to them, "Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." (Luke 20:25)
Also in the OT the law of Moses and the Hebrews provided an institutional way of providing for the poor that did not depend on good will of individuals. Not only was individual generosity encouraged, but, as a matter of LAW, part of everyone's produce or income was to be set aside to aid the poor - socialism:
"And you shall sow your land for six years and gather in its yield, but on the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow, so that the needy of your people may eat; and whatever they leave the beast of the field may eat. You are to do the same with your vineyard and your olive grove. (Exodus 23:10-11)
"When you have finished paying all the tithe of your increase in the third year, the year of tithing, then you shall give it to the Levite, to the stranger, to the orphan and to the widow, that they may eat in your towns, and be satisfied. (NAS, Deuteronomy 26:12)
All of this proves without a shadow of a doubt, not only was Jesus a socialist by philosophy, he demonstrated it in his actions. He was also a great community organizer, which got him crucified.
You can dig, rationalize... but the evidence is overwhelming.
Jesus was a liberal socialist
I said, " 'The "government' in first century, Palestinian times was Rome, and Rome is never included his directives or call to discipleship, except that we are to accept the fact of governance, regardless of its godless nature. " Your scripture quotes stand in agreement with what I wrote. They prove that we are to pay taxes and accept the governance of those we despise . . . . and the Jews of the day despised Roman rule. He was never about the fundamental transformation of Roman rule or the pathology of the lie.
DeleteChrist was the author and finisher of the Christian faith, not a "liberal socialist." In fact, such a claim is simply stupid, if "stupid" is the result of willful ignorance. Further, you do not know what a "community organizer is" or you would not make the claim that He was such. He was not a politician, at all, and certainly, not a socialist organizer. In fact, the socialist systems of this world, including godless Progressivism, rejects Christ and his teaching. They have driven Christian teaching from our schools, and laugh at the cross with all that it symbolizes. You are a part of that cabal. You are an enemy of the Cross, so much so, that you do not mind quoting scripture you do not believe, in an attempt to rewrite the very teachings of Jsus.
He believed that we all have a responsibility to the poor, but stated that the "poor will be with you always." He believed that if you did not work, you should not eat. He believed that God and faith were/are at the very center of all we that do . . . everything - something you flatly deny. The texts you quote above, prove that he was no social reformer, that whatever governance exists at the time, we are to accept that fact, as we live our lives for the sake of God in man. You, of course, believe none of this. Finally, community organizing had nothing to do with his death and you prove your stupidity as you make that claim. He died to give people like you a chance in the after life and a healthy purpose in this life. You believe that ???!!! Of course not. You are not going to win this argument. You can't because you are not a disciple nor do you have any background or time spent in studying the biblical message. So give it up. All you are doing is revealing your rebellion to what Jesus taught and your total ignorance of the biblical text.
Smithson can't quote "Jesus the capitalist" because he wasn't one. He takes little snippets out of context and inserts his own meaning. I, on the other hand prove my point with more socialist quotes from he Gospels
ReplyDeleteMark 10:21-22 Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.
Luke 6:20-21 Then he looked up at his disciples and said: ‘Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. ‘Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled. ‘Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh.
Matthew 25:34-36 Then the king will say to those at his right hand, “Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.”
Mark 12:41-44 He sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the crowd putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which are worth a penny. Then he called his disciples and said to them, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”
Luke 14:12-14 He said also to the one who had invited him, “When you give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.”
Luke 16:19-25 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man’s table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores. The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried.
In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side. He called out, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.’ But Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony.
Luke 12:16-21 Then he told them a parable: “The land of a rich man produced abundantly. And he thought to himself, ‘What should I do, for I have no place to store my crops?’ Then he said, ‘I will do this: I will pull down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. And I will say to my soul, ‘Soul, you have ample goods laid up for many years; relax, eat, drink, be merry.’ But God said to him, ‘You fool! This very night your life is being demanded of you. And the things you have prepared, whose will they be?’ So it is with those who store up treasures for themselves but are not rich toward God.”
Show me where Jesus espoused capitalistic principles of wealth, growing income equality, abandonment of social programs, crony capitalism, pay ratios of 5000 to 1.
Jesus was indeed a liberal socialist
The reader should know that in other posts, this same "anonymous" has ridiculed faith, made it clear that to believe in God is to believe in a myth, that a godless science has all the answers when "God" has none . . . . THAT is who I am arguing with.
DeleteObviously, when I say things like "you are the enemy of God," I am not simply blowing smoke. And what does this small minded Marxist do? He tries to make a case for godless socialism as best he can. He cannot appeal to any large economies that practice Marxism successfully, because there are none, so he avoids that debate. Nor does he have any concept of "context" when doing whatever he is doing with the scriptures he is quoting using the words of God to defeat God. Blasphemy is an old world word that no one uses any more, but this is exactly what this man is guilty of. For the sake of the readership and my commitment to free speech with few rules, I publish his silliness and take time to argue his absurdities.
Matt 10 quote : our Marxist pretender does not allow for the context of this passage, Jesus talking to one man, a rich young ruler who, seemingly, had everything. It was "everything" that was keeping him from following the rule of God in his life. Jesus spoke to this. The passage is not a statement against wealth. Rather, it is a statement against an imagined benefit to wealth possession. This young man had allowed wealth to be his all in all . . . . . you know, just like my Marxist friend, a One Percenter, who lives the very good life and practices none of the scripture he quotes (he has shared these things in times past). Understand this: there is every reason to believe that Jesus of Nazareth, funded his own 3 to 5 year ministry, including feeding and housing the 12, plus the care of their families. While he chose to live “in the streets,” like so many in his day and time, he and his disciples had to eat, drink, and cloth themselves. He had a mother, at home, who needed his help, and the disciples had their families. No, this man from Nazareth had wealth and did not mind sharing it.
Luke 6 quote: apparently our resident Marxist believes that socialism is all about remaining poor, hungry and in tears. Is that what you believe, William?
Matt 25: a passage that presents the basis for godly judgment. Christ is talking about judgment, not a political system. Our friend wants you to believe that this proves "socialism," as if a capitalist is excluded from this charge to feed and care for those who have less. In fact, when you stop to think about it, it is the successful capitalist, who has enough money to feed and quench thirst, house and cloth the poor - not the socialist who has no more wealth than the next guy.
DeleteMatt 12: So, according to William (Mr. Anonymous), Jesus and the socialist order is all about giving away every single penny you have to the Temple or Church. How are you doing on that score, Willy Boy? Up on your mountain, training, running, playing that classical guitar and doing nothing for the poor, the imprisoned, the naked and the blind AND doing nothing for the Church.
Luke 14: Soooo, a true socialist only eats with strangers? Is that what you do and believe, Willy?
Luke 16: Soooo, socialism is about dying with your sores and in your abject poverty, always wanting what others have. Is that the message, here? Where am I going wrong, oh Great Philosophical One? By the way, I didn't know that you believed in Hell. You ought to think about that reality, the next time you laugh about "God" and make fun of his Jesus.
Luke 12: Sooo, a man cannot be a successful capitalist and a believer in God? Is that your point? Think about this, William. Of all the passages you have quoted, this one is specifically talking about YOU. That is the point of Luke 12.
Turns out you proved nothing, but indicted yourself, over and over again. I actually would not mind calling you a "brother," but you are repelled by that thought, in spite of your ability to look up and quote scripture. You are intelligent and competitive. You live the life of a One Percenter, admittedly, and have been quite a successful capitalist, as it turns out, Yet, you simply cannot be as happy as you want to be, because God is not in your life at all. God is not singular in the way he reveals Himself to individuals. You can have God in your life and not be an evangelical type, but pretending is not fulfillment.
Notice how Smithson attacks the commenter when he loses an argument. This is not about me. He has to do interpretive gymnastics to refute the Gospels message and the obvious character of Jesus.
DeleteJesus was clearly a liberal socialist
Brother John, you should investigate the writings of the prophet Bahá'u'lláh and the writings of his son, `Abdu'l-Bahá. A very pertinent message for today's society.
"When religion, shorn of its superstitions, traditions, and unintelligent dogmas, shows its conformity with science, then will there be a great unifying, cleansing force in the world which will sweep before it all wars, disagreements, discords and struggles--and then will mankind be united in the power of the Love of God.' -- 'Abdu'l-Bahá
I learned the art of personal attack from the likes of you. Funny how that works. When the tables are reversed and we are laughing at you, you don't seem to like that treatment. Turn about is always fair play, in the world of political debate. Stop whining. Your quote of Baha proves my point. You have no religion. You run around picking out what you like and then, writing as if you are some kind of humanistic scholar. Humorous. Like I said, you are an enemy of the cross - not a personal attack, just a fact. And what about the debate specifics? Have no answers? Obvious not. Why "not?" Because you are not a student of religion nor a believer.
Delete"Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism." - Abdul Baha
Delete"If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation." - Abdul Baha
Bahá'u'lláh affirmed that man's intelligence and reasoning powers are a gift from God:
"This gift giveth man the power to discern the truth in all things, leadeth him to that which is right, and helpeth him to discover the secrets of creation." --Bahá'u'lláh
Science results from our systematic use of these God-given powers. The truths of science are thus discovered truths.
"Religion and science are the two wings upon which man's intelligence can soar into the heights, with which the human soul can progress. It is not possible to fly with one wing alone! Should a man try to fly with the wing of religion alone he would quickly fall into the quagmire of superstition, whilst on the other hand, with the wing of science alone he would also make no progress, but fall into the despairing slough of materialism." - Abdul Baha
Delete<<<< Religion is about God and man and the direction man should take in the conduct of his life and its many expressions (governance, charity, people management, etc.). Science a process of of inquiry that gives us predictive truth and consequence in matters that can be tested in a tube. >>>>
"If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science, they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible, and there is no outcome but wavering and vacillation." - Abdul Baha
<<<< In this quote, man is at the center of his own world. Science is not a moral rule of conduct; religion is. When man judges himself, his views are static and without context, because he is looking to himself for guidance. It is like trying to find guidance for life by looking in a mirror. >>>>
Bahá'u'lláh affirmed that man's intelligence and reasoning powers are a gift from God:
<<<< Everything in this world is a gift from God. He is the creator and the life force for all things, living and “dead.” >>>>
"This gift giveth man the power to discern the truth in all things, leadeth him to that which is right, and helpeth him to discover the secrets of creation." --Bahá'u'lláh
<<<< Nonsense. It is not within man to direct his own steps. This last quote is the foundational thought in a godless existentialism; the “truth” of this verse would eliminate God from the life of the “believer.” >>>>
Science results from our systematic use of these God-given powers. The truths of science are thus discovered truths.
<<<< Absolutely. >>>>
Jesus lived a communal lifestyle in a close-to-the-land manner. He was a hippie by today's standards. He shunned wealth accumulation at the expense of the poor, spoke of the meek inheriting the earth and of creation – all creation – as being a gift from his father, God. He identified with pain and suffering and sacrifice for the good of the whole, promoting a spirit of equal access to many, as opposed to special privileges for the few. Exploitation, he preached, was a sin.
ReplyDeleteJesus was a liberal socialist
Ridiculous. You have turned the savior of the world into a political creation, a "liberal socialist" of all things, and a free-loving, drug infested, Marxist oriented, Woodstocking waste of humanity (i.e. "a hippie"). You do not believe in his virgin birth, his miracles, the reason and fact of his death and resurrection (correct me if I am wrong, here). Neither do you believe in "the father," and have stated your disdain for belief in "God" in comments made on this blog.
DeleteWho paid for his "communal life?" Understand that he, his 12 disciples, and their families are involved and the families - while needing support - did not travel with these 13 men. You make it sound as if these folks set up camp somewhere and did what modern-day hippies do. You ignore the fact that they traveled together, for several years, from town to town, preaching a gospel of human failure and divine redemption. THAT's what they did. You disagree? Know any socialists who do the same, including you? And, again, who paid for all this? The government? The local/political apparatus of the day? You have no clue, do you? And what on earth do you mean when you say "He identified with pain and suffering and sacrifice for the good of the whole, promoting a spirit of equal access to many, as opposed to special privileges for the few." Do you mean, by this statement, to argue that his political views included the requirement that we all give away our wealth and give it ALL to the poor who, then, become the rich by transfer?
In turning Jesus into a hippified politician, you do not need to deal with him as your Lord and Savior . . . . and you live your life accordingly, putting yourself at the center of your life, and your sense of reason the ultimate determination of your values and direction in life. Good luck with that, but, know this, in so doing, you make yourself an enemy of the cross and thoroughly unqualified as a "theologian." In other words, you don't know a damn thing you are talking about and don't live His life to any degree, at all. You are just trying to win the debate. Thank gawd you have not reproduced.
Biblically documented teachings of Jesus Christ clearly show that Jesus is a Liberal. His philosophy, based in compassion, equality, inclusion, forgiveness, tolerance, peace and - most importantly - love. 100% Liberal.
ReplyDeleteOn the other side you have conservatives who promote inequality, intolerance, and war.
Webster's dictionary defines a Liberal as one who is open minded, not strict in the observance of orthodox, traditional or established forms or ways. Jesus was a pluralist Liberal who taught that one need not conform to strict and orthodox views of God, religion, and life. He rejected greed, violence, the glorification of power, the amassing of wealth without social balance, and the personal judging of others, their lifestyles and beliefs.
Over and over again, He taught us to believe in and live a spiritual and ethical life based in our essential, inherent goodness. What Jesus promoted was succinct set of spiritual principals and a way of life based upon the of love, compassion, tolerance, and a strong belief in the importance in giving and of generosity to those in need.
Certainly, Jesus brought a radically Liberal theology to the Orthodox believers of his time.
Smithson would rather ignore these facts and attack me. Perhaps because he may see how un-Christlike his thinking really is.
Jesus was a man of peace but not a pacifist and his trip to the temple proves my point; he was not tolerant of those who insisted on their own way versus God's way, thus his very critical remarks as to Jewish leadership; he most certainly was not a philosopher and anyone who disagrees is ignorant of both the biblical text and the Christ defined meaning for his time on earth; and he was no politician so "liberal" or "conservative" are terms that are most inappropriate. By contrast, you have liberals burning down the city of Ferguson, as we debate this point; libs have killed more than 20 million Africans as they force those nations into its DDT ban, 4,000 blacks during the KKK days of violence and have grown the ranks of the poor by millions; libs are not tolerant of ANYONE who disagrees with their Utopian agenda, thus terms such as "Uncle Tom" applied to disagreeing blacks, "nazi" as applied to Israel, "t-bagger" referring to millions of Americans; homophobe when faced with disagreement as to the Queer Nation’s agenda, Islamphobia when applied to those who see “jihad” as the work of atheist demons. "Forgiveness" is not central to the liberal's politic and Obama is living proof of such – one of the most unforgiving politicians in American history. Most importantly, If Christ were here, today, in America, among those whom he would attack, rhetorically, would be the godless Progressives and their anti-faith agenda, Hollywood and its decadence, and the narrowness of some in the Religious Right.
DeleteHe never taught - NEVER - a morality based on an inherent goodness. That is just plain silly. Two biblical statements come to mind: "Our righteousness is as filthy rags" and ""Work out your salvation because it is God at work in you to both will and do his good pleasure ( Phil 2:13). You say "over and over" as if you know what you are talking about. Give us one scripture in which Christ said, "Live your lives according to your innate goodness apart from my indwelling." You have no such text.
The last time you called me a "t-bagger" was the last time I took your complaints seriously. You have laughed at my faith and my God; you ridicule my weight and intelligence, yet, you have the balls to complain when I go after you. YOU started the insults, so grow up, and act like a man, for a change.
You are an enemy of the Cross, a willful decision on your part. Not my fault for pointing out the facts. Or, do you now claim the Cross as yours, Jesus as the center of your Life, and the Church as your social home away from home?
In the end, Your "ends justify any means" doctrine for political change is something that this Jesus you discuss, would summarily reject, and that teaching is both at the center of your politics and antithetical to the teachings of Christ. I do not want to cast him in the light of "conservative," but I do know that he would reject the politics of the Progressives, faithless, Left.
I am ending this thread. It is much too long, and my opponent, now, has resorted to making up his own facts as he gets serious in his personal attacks. All this I can take, but none of it adds to the debate. I think the two of us have said all that can be said without going solo-ad hom The difference in our approach to debate is this: my opponent never feels it necessary to answer my questions or deal, specifically, with my facts or my challenges. I answer all of his germane questions, deal with all of his opposing claims and I do so, as specifically as I can. He does none of this, per the Liberal/Progressive style of debate. He is afraid of the issues, I assume, and, thus, never deals with them in specific ways. Like Rush is fond of saying: fantasy over substance. Case closed.
ReplyDelete