Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: big L dawg on March 12, 2010, 12:41:21 PM
-
(CNN) -- An evangelical leader is calling for a boycott of Glenn Beck's television show and challenging the Fox News personality to a public debate after Beck vilified churches that preach economic and social justice.
The Rev. Jim Wallis, president of Sojourners, a network of progressive Christians, says Beck perverted Jesus' message when he urged Christians last week to leave churches that preach social and economic justice.
Beck told his audience that they should leave churches that preach "economic and social justice." Wallis says Beck compared those churches to Communists and Nazis.
Wallis says at least 20,000 people have already responded to his call to boycott Beck. He says Beck is confusing his personal philosophy with the Bible.
"He wants us to leave our churches, but we should leave him," Wallis says of Beck. "When your political philosophy is to consistently favor the rich over the poor, you don't want to hear about economic justice."
Wallis says he wants to go on Beck's show to challenge the contention that churches shouldn't preach economic and social justice.
Social and economic justice is at the heart of Jesus' message, Wallis says.
"He's afraid of being challenged on his silly caricatures," Wallis says. "Glenn Beck talks a lot when he doesn't have someone to dialogue with. Is he willing to talk with someone who he doesn't agree with?"
Beck did not answer numerous requests for an interview.
When your political philosophy is to consistently favor the rich over the poor, you don't want to hear about economic justice
--The Rev. Jim Wallis
But a prominent evangelical leader says he, too, is suspicious of churches that preach economic and social justice.
Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University, a Christian college in Virginia, says Jesus wasn't interested in politics. He says that those pastors who preach economic and social justice "are trying to twist the gospel to say the gospel supported socialism."
"Jesus taught that we should give to the poor and support widows, but he never said that we should elect a government that would take money from our neighbor's hand and give it to the poor," Falwell says.
Falwell says that Jesus believed that individuals, not governments, should help the poor.
"If we all did as Jesus did when he helped the poor, we wouldn't need the government," says Falwell, the son of the late evangelical leader, the Rev. Jerry Falwell.
What is economic and social justice?
The term "economic and social justice" is not easy to define. It has different meanings for different people.
Jesus taught that we should give to the poor and support widows, but he never said that we should elect a government that would take money of our neighbor's hand and give it to the poor
--The Rev. Jerry Falwell Jr.
For some Christians, practicing economic and social justice means that churches should practice charity: setting up soup kitchens, assisting victims of natural disasters, and helping people find jobs.
For other Christians, practicing economic and social justice also means trying to change the conditions that cause people to be poor or unemployed. The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. subscribed to this definition of biblical justice.
Marty Duren, a Southern Baptist Convention pastor, says some conservative Christians have traditionally thought churches shouldn't get involved in economic or social justice.
"For a long time, Southern Baptists and evangelicals were so focused on the return of Christ that what was happening in the real world was almost incidental," says Duren, who blogs at martyduren.com.
But within the last two decades, Duren says, more evangelical Christians have come to believe that the Bible calls for economic and social justice.
William Wilberforce, for example, is a 19th century British politician who helped abolish the slave trade in his country. He is now regarded as a hero for some evangelicals because he applied his faith to the economic and social justice issues of his day, Duren says.
Did Jesus preach about social and economic justice?
The Bible cares about social and economic justice, Duren says.
"The Old Testament is replete with examples of God threatening to judge a nation because of a lack of justice or carrying out that threat of judgment against a nation,'' Duren says.
He believes Beck was wrong to tell Christians that they shouldn't belong to churches that seek justice.
"If I had any authority at Fox News right now, Glenn Beck would be seeking economic justice," Duren says.
The Rev. Jim Wallis is the president of Sojourners, a network of Christians.
That concern for justice is what helped convert him, says Wallis, president of Sojourners. Wallis, who counts King as one of his faith role models, says the Bible isn't just concerned with feeding the poor -- it's concerned about the conditions that create the poor.
Wallis also evoked the Christians who fought against slavery as well as civil rights activists.
"The Bible just didn't say take care of the victim -- it talks about justice," says Wallis, who is the author of "Rediscovering Values: On Wall Street, Main Street and Your Street."
Meanwhile, Wallis says he's waiting for that public debate with Beck.
"I'll have it," Wallis says, "anywhere he wants."
-
.
-
beck is better than anything on comedy central these days.
-
The last boycott attempt didn't work out so well (he's still on the air). I doubt this one works either.
-
Beck is 100000000000000000000000 000000000000000% correct and this is the main reason I left the Catholic Church.
My parents were upset, but I told them under no circumstances will I support economic marxism by pedophiles and perverts.
-
Social justice is another word for redistribution.There is ZERO in the Bible that gives the government the right to steal the working mans money and give it to lazy idiots who wont work."THE MAN WHO DOES NOT WORK ,SHALL NOT EAT"!!
-
10000% correct billy hit the nail on the head
-
10000% correct billy hit the nail on the head
Jesus was a Commie?
-
No worky no Eaty.
Wise man say.
-
You got that right. I think the Bible endorses hard work and charity, but not welfare.
-
No worky no Eaty.
Wise man say.
When Jesus is your friend you have unlimited access to bread, fish and wine
no work necessary
it's in teh bible
-
When Jesus is your friend you have unlimited access to bread, fish and wine
no work necessary
it's in teh bible
Show me. I don't think they paint Jesus as a all day free buffet. I'd ask loco or McWay about that.
-
Show me. I don't think they paint Jesus as a all day free buffet. I'd ask loco or McWay about that.
imagine if Jesus lived now (or comes back sometime soon) and you're hanging out at your house and you want t pizza
you wouldn't even have time to make the call before it appeared
-
imagine if Jesus lived now (or comes back sometime soon) and you're hanging out at your house and you want t pizza
you wouldn't even have time to make the call before it appeared
I don't think so. Pizza is of the fallen angel. Jesus would tell me to repent and get my ass to work.
-
I don't think so. Pizza is of the fallen angel. Jesus would tell me to repent and get my ass to work.
repent for what? being hungry
forget the pizza. Jesus was a jew so he probably wouldn't make it with pepperoni anyway
imagine you're hanging out with Jesus playing some XBox and you run out of beer
before you can even say it ........POOF!!!!
Thanks Jesus
-
repent for what? being hungry
forget the pizza. Jesus was a jew so he probably wouldn't make it with pepperoni anyway
imagine you're hanging out with Jesus playing some XBox and you run out of beer
before you can even say it ........POOF!!!!
Thanks Jesus
lol yeah, but wine would come out of the faucet first. ;D
-
lol yeah, but wine would come out of the faucet first. ;D
hopefully when he comes back he's into sushi
I might consider converting
wait, I'm already Catholic and that's teh only true church anyway
-
When Jesus is your friend you have unlimited access to bread, fish and wine
no work necessary
it's in teh bible
And guess what Straw - if no one is working and producing and sitting on their lazy asses, pretty soon the food and wine runs out and everyone starves.
-
Social justice is another word for redistribution.There is ZERO in the Bible that gives the government the right to steal the working mans money and give it to lazy idiots who wont work."THE MAN WHO DOES NOT WORK ,SHALL NOT EAT"!!
Both Old and New Testaments gave instructions on how Israel was to treat those less fortunate, none of which REMOTELY resemble the garbage these "social justice" numbskulls keep preaching.
The verse you just paraphrase comes from 2 Thessalonians 3:10.
But, other ways of caring for the poor includes widows serving in the Temple, such as Anna (the prophetess who saw Jesus, when He was around 2 months old in Luke 2).
Other means included people giving themselves into servitude (about which some Bible skeptics whine, regarding "slavery").
In the NT, specifically, Peter stressed that priority of the early church's charity be given to widows with small children, as widows with grown children should be attended by such, and childless widows cwould be redeemed by their in-laws.
The key in all of this is that, at some point, WORK was involved for all of those, receiving such aid (reinforcing 2 Thess. 3:10).
Check out Deu. 24:17-24
You shall not pervert the justice due an alien or an orphan, nor take a widow's garment in pledge.
But you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and that the LORD your God redeemed you from there; therefore I am commanding you to do this thing.
When you reap your harvest in your field and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow, in order that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.
When you beat your olive tree, you shall not go over the boughs again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow.
When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not go over it again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow.
That was charity for the poor. BUT, they had to go out and get the extra grapes, olives, and wheat. Again, the operative word here is WORK.
Yet, another example of how the poor got help:
From Deu. 26.
'Now behold, I have brought the first of the produce of the ground which You, O LORD have given me.' And you shall set it down before the LORD your God, and worship before the LORD your God; and you and the Levite and the alien who is among you shall rejoice in all the good which the LORD your God has given you and your household.
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.
You shall say before the LORD your God, 'I have removed the sacred portion from my house, and also have given it to the Levite and the alien, the orphan and the widow, according to all Your commandments which You have commanded me; I have not transgressed or forgotten any of Your commandments.
As stated earlier, neither Old nor New Testament justifies the so-called social justice, advocated by certain liberals (be they ministers or not). The Lord never punished the rich, simply for being rich.
-
I find it utterly hysterical that the marxist/communists who hate religion are now touting Jesus thinking it gives them some bouying in the health care debate.
Funny these same commies are nowhere to be found when abortion or gay marriage comes up.
Freaking phonies.
-
Both Old and New Testaments gave instructions on how Israel was to treat those less fortunate, none of which REMOTELY resemble the garbage these "social justice" numbskulls keep preaching.
The verse you just paraphrase comes from 2 Thessalonians 3:10.
But, other ways of caring for the poor includes widows serving in the Temple, such as Anna (the prophetess who saw Jesus, when He was around 2 months old in Luke 2).
Other means included people giving themselves into servitude (about which some Bible skeptics whine, regarding "slavery").
In the NT, specifically, Peter stressed that priority of the early church's charity be given to widows with small children, as widows with grown children should be attended by such, and childless widows cwould be redeemed by their in-laws.
The key in all of this is that, at some point, WORK was involved for all of those, receiving such aid (reinforcing 2 Thess. 3:10).
Check out Deu. 24:17-24
You shall not pervert the justice due an alien or an orphan, nor take a widow's garment in pledge.
But you shall remember that you were a slave in Egypt, and that the LORD your God redeemed you from there; therefore I am commanding you to do this thing.
When you reap your harvest in your field and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow, in order that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.
When you beat your olive tree, you shall not go over the boughs again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow.
When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, you shall not go over it again; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow.
That was charity for the poor. BUT, they had to go out and get the extra grapes, olives, and wheat. Again, the operative word here is WORK.
Yet, another example of how the poor got help:
From Deu. 26.
'Now behold, I have brought the first of the produce of the ground which You, O LORD have given me.' And you shall set it down before the LORD your God, and worship before the LORD your God; and you and the Levite and the alien who is among you shall rejoice in all the good which the LORD your God has given you and your household.
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.
You shall say before the LORD your God, 'I have removed the sacred portion from my house, and also have given it to the Levite and the alien, the orphan and the widow, according to all Your commandments which You have commanded me; I have not transgressed or forgotten any of Your commandments.
As stated earlier, neither Old nor New Testament justifies the so-called social justice, advocated by certain liberals (be they ministers or not). The Lord never punished the rich, simply for being rich.
how would these quotes be applied today - should widows, aliens and orphans sell themselves into servitude to wealthy people for table scraps?
since most of our food is from huge corporate farms should they let the widows orphans and aliens rummage through the field for remnants after the first harvest?
Didn't Jesus say something to the effect that by helping others you earn your way into heaven and by not helping others you guarantee yourself a trip to hell?
-
hE ALREADY HAVE FOOD STAMPS.
BY THE WAY YOUR QUOTE OF JESUS ENSURES EVERY COMMIE/MARXIST IS GOING STRAIGHT TO HELL.
-
hE ALREADY HAVE FOOD STAMPS.
BY THE WAY YOUR QUOTE OF JESUS ENSURES EVERY COMMIE/MARXIST IS GOING STRAIGHT TO HELL.
why all caps?
where did I quote Jesus and if you think about it, according to the fundies, almost everyone is going to Hell
-
why all caps?
where did I quote Jesus and if you think about it, according to the fundies, almost everyone is going to Hell
No, my point was that progressive marxists dont help anyone, they enslave them to the govt and promote laziness and and dependency.
-
how would these quotes be applied today - should widows, aliens and orphans sell themselves into servitude to wealthy people for table scraps?
What do you think maids, butlers, and housekeepers do? They serve their rich employers. In today's society, there are maids and butlers and housekeepers, who make WAAAY more money than you or I do.
since most of our food is from huge corporate farms should they let the widows orphans and aliens rummage through the field for remnants after the first harvest?
Didn't Jesus say something to the effect that by helping others you earn your way into heaven and by not helping others you guarantee yourself a trip to hell?
No, He did not!! But, thanks for playing!!
The point, which you clearly missed, is that AT NO TIME was anyone FORCED (especially via excessive taxation) to help the poor, particularly in lieu of the poor making little or no attempt to work.
The poor had to go to the field and WORK. No, they didn't get table scraps, as you so inaccurately put it. Read the verses again:
When you reap your harvest in your field and have forgotten a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it; it shall be for the alien, for the orphan, and for the widow, in order that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.
In other words, what was left in the field was NOT "scraps", else there would have been no need to instruct those of greater wealth NOT to go back and get it. Rich people/middle-class people don't go back for "scraps".
The aid to the poor STILL require work on their end.
And, if you bother reading what the rules were, regarding servitude, it was for a set period of time and upon their contract being up.......
Deu. 15:13-15:
When you set him free, you shall not send him away empty-handed.
You shall furnish him liberally from your flock and from your threshing floor and from your wine vat; you shall give to him as the LORD your God has blessed you.
You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God redeemed you; therefore I command you this today.
-
I also remember that the church emphasizes charity as being a volutary thing, not having the jack boot of the govt on your throat stealing your money to give it to sum bum they deem fit.
-
I also remember that the church emphasizes charity as being a volutary thing, not having the jack boot of the govt on your throat stealing your money to give it to sum bum they deem fit.
EXACTLY!! To top it all off, in the parable of the talents, Jesus states that the man with one talent (who did nothing with it) had his money taken from him and given to the one who had five (and doubled it to ten).
Notice, however, that the man who had two talents and doubled it to four RECEIVED HIS MASTER'S FAVOR, just as the man who had five talents and doubled them to ten.
-
EXACTLY!! To top it all off, in the parable of the talents, Jesus states that the man with one talent (who did nothing with it) had his money taken from him and given to the one who had five (and doubled it to ten).
Notice, however, that the man who had two talents and doubled it to four RECEIVED HIS MASTER'S FAVOR, just as the man who had five talents and doubled them to ten.
I just find it utterly amazing how progeressives/marxists like Straw will whore out the name the Jesus to promte a govt authoritarian plan all while he hates religious people and doctrine himself.
Disgusting, but typical.
-
I just find it utterly amazing how progeressives/marxists like Straw will whore out the name the Jesus to promte a govt authoritarian plan all while he hates religious people and doctrine himself.
Disgusting, but typical.
spare me the phony outrage
I never said anything about social justice in this thread - and any "meaning" you see in my posts are strictly the product of your own fevered brain
All I'm doing is asking my Christian friend McWay some questions about the bible
-
EXACTLY!! To top it all off, in the parable of the talents, Jesus states that the man with one talent (who did nothing with it) had his money taken from him and given to the one who had five (and doubled it to ten).
Notice, however, that the man who had two talents and doubled it to four RECEIVED HIS MASTER'S FAVOR, just as the man who had five talents and doubled them to ten.
so you're saying that the church encourages charity but there is no consequences for not being charitable, helping those less fortunate etc...?
do I understand that correctly?
-
so you're saying that the church encourages charity but there is no consequences for not being charitable, helping those less fortunate etc...?
do I understand that correctly?
The issue here isn't lack of consequence for not being charitable. It's about the claim that "social justice" (as defined by certain progressives and liberals) is the means for people being charitable.
It isn't the government's job to declare who's "too rich" and who isn't. Or who should get the money and who shouldn't. That's EXACTLY what Obama and his cronies are attempting to do.
Charity is based on the HEARTS of those who give, not bureaucracy......bottom line.
Lest you forget, Jesus ALSO CRITICIZED those who were being "charitable" but doing so to show off their wealth, as opposed to having genuine concern for those less fortunate. Technically, the money/grain/fooditems are given all the same. But, Jesus knew their hearts and motives.
-
The issue here isn't lack of consequence for not being charitable. It's about the claim that "social justice" (as defined by certain progressives and liberals).
Lest you forget, Jesus ALSO CRITICIZED those who were being "charitable" but doing so to show off their wealth, as opposed to having genuine concern for those less fortunate. Technically, the money/grain/fooditems are given all the same. But, Jesus knew their hearts and motives.
so you're saying that Jesus wanted genuine acts of charity and not just posers?
I'm still not clear whether Jesus warned of consequences for not being charitable?
-
so you're saying that Jesus wanted genuine acts of charity and not just posers?
I'm still not clear whether Jesus warned of consequences for not being charitable?
It s called trying to appeal to better part of people, not the fear of the jack booted ceasars and the praetorian guard you seem to love so much Straw.
-
It s called trying to appeal to better part of people, not the fear of the jack booted ceasars and the praetorian guard you seem to love so much Straw.
3333 - no offense but I asked McWay and not you.
I thought you were, for the most part non-religious
-
3333 - no offense but I asked McWay and not you.
I thought you were, for the most part non-religious
I'm not religious, but I defend their rights and freedom to practice religion and believe whatever they want as fiercely as i would yours, even though I think you are dead wrong on about 95% of the issues.
I detest religious people seeking to impose laws on me, but I equally loathe those who attack religious entities as well and would impose their athetistic nonsense on me just the same.
-
I'm not religious, but I defend their rights and freedom to practice religion and believe whatever they want as fiercely as i would yours, even though I think you are dead wrong on about 95% of the issues.
I detest religious people seeking to impose laws on me, but I equally loathe those who attack religious entities as well and would impose their athetistic nonsense on me just the same.
ok - so you're non-religious, but you are fine with religious people having the freedom to practice and believe what they want (I'm sure we can find a long list of exceptions but we'll ignore that for now) and you don't want religious people imposing their laws (or presumably their beliefs) on you.
I'm pretty much in complete agreement with you on that
still hoping McWay wil help me understand the charity thing better from the fundie perspective
-
ok - so you're non-religious, but you are fine with religious people having the freedom to practice and believe what they want (I'm sure we can find a long list of exceptions but we'll ignore that for now) and you don't want religious people imposing their laws (or presumably their beliefs) on you.
I'm pretty much in complete agreement with you on that
still hoping McWay wil help me understand the charity thing better from the fundie perspective
Ok, so now you are only wrong on 94% of stuff. ;D ;D ;D
-
ok - so you're non-religious, but you are fine with religious people having the freedom to practice and believe what they want (I'm sure we can find a long list of exceptions but we'll ignore that for now) and you don't want religious people imposing their laws (or presumably their beliefs) on you.
I'm pretty much in complete agreement with you on that
still hoping McWay wil help me understand the charity thing better from the fundie perspective
I already explained it. Jesus explained about how those who are kind to the downtrodden will be viewed as giving their charitable deeds to Christ Himself.
But, that hinges on two principles:
One, the giving is, in fact, GIVING, not being fiscally sodomized by a tax-happy, left-winged/"progressive" government that has appointed itself arbitrators as to who's "rich" and who ain't.
Two, the aforementioned GIVING is done from the heart, out of kindness, not out of braggadocio or arrogrance.
As for consequences, that aforementioned parable mentions accountability of those who are cruel to the less fortunate in Matt. 25.
-
I already explained it. Jesus explained about how those who are kind to the downtrodden will be viewed as giving their charitable deeds to Christ Himself.
But, that hinges on two principles:
One, the giving is, in fact, GIVING, not being fiscally sodomized by a tax-happy, left-winged/"progressive" government that has appointed itself arbitrators as to who's "rich" and who ain't.
Two, the aforementioned GIVING is done from the heart, out of kindness, not out of braggadocio or arrogrance.
As for consequences, that aforementioned parable mentions accountability of those who are cruel to the less fortunate in Matt. 25.
was it a proactive thing like being "cruel" to the less fortunate or passive thing of simply not helping the less fortunate?
....
and what was the result of such actions?
-
was it a proactive thing like being "cruel" to the less fortunate or passive thing of simply not helping the less fortunate?
....
and what was the result of such actions?
Remember this phrase Straw: "The poor will always be among us"
It was true then and it is true now the difference is that religions tried to get people to volunatrily get those with means to help out the poor, not equalize poverty amongst everyone like the typical progressive marxists do.
-
Remember this phrase Straw: "The poor will always be among us"
It was true then and it is true now the difference is that religions tried to get people to volunatrily get those with means to help out the poor, not equalize poverty amongst everyone like the typical progressive marxists do.
Yep!!
And, I listed some of those examples, done by ancient Israel and the Christians of the New Testament. And, you see virtually NO government interference or mandate that wealth be siphoned from one man to be given to another.
From temple service, to redeeming childless widows, to letting the poor glean in the field to gather the excess food, we all see WORK as the driving force of society and prosperity.
-
Yep!!
And, I listed some of those examples, done by ancient Israel and the Christians of the New Testament. And, you see virtually NO government interference or mandate that wealth be siphoned from one man to be given to another.
From temple service, to redeeming childless widows, to letting the poor glean in the field to gather the excess food, we all see WORK as the driving force of society and prosperity.
I am not religious in the sense that I follow an organized religion, but I vbelieve a lot of teachings in the bible as being true and common sense.
It is the utopian marxists/communists who are deluded into thinking they can betray reality and end up making everything worse for everyone!
-
Yep!!
And, I listed some of those examples, done by ancient Israel and the Christians of the New Testament. And, you see virtually NO government interference or mandate that wealth be siphoned from one man to be given to another.
From temple service, to redeeming childless widows, to letting the poor glean in the field to gather the excess food, we all see WORK as the driving force of society and prosperity.
It sounds to me like you're admitting we're not a Christian Nation?
McWay - what is the consequence in the Bible for the individual Christian who fails to help the poor, sick, etc..?
-
When Jesus is your friend you have unlimited access to bread, fish and wine
no work necessary
it's in teh bible
If you read John 6 (starts w/Jesus feeding the 5000) you will see that later the people follow him around for another free meal.
Jesus explains to them that their desire should be not for material things, but spiritual.
John 6:26-27
Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life..."
So no, He's not all about the free meal w/no work.
-
Didn't Jesus say something to the effect that by helping others you earn your way into heaven and by not helping others you guarantee yourself a trip to hell?
No.
Eph 2:8,9
You are saved by grace through faith, and not of works so that no one can boast.
John 3:16-18For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
-
If you read John 6 (starts w/Jesus feeding the 5000) you will see that later the people follow him around for another free meal.
Jesus explains to them that their desire should be not for material things, but spiritual.
John 6:26-27
Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life..."
So no, He's not all about the free meal w/no work.
Great quote.
-
If you read John 6 (starts w/Jesus feeding the 5000) you will see that later the people follow him around for another free meal.
Jesus explains to them that their desire should be not for material things, but spiritual.
John 6:26-27
Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, you are looking for me, not because you saw miraculous signs but because you ate and had your fill. Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life..."
So no, He's not all about the free meal w/no work.
no kidding
my post in that regard were in jest
I assumed that was obvious
still he was all about helping those less fortunate than oneself was he not?
-
2 Corinthians 9:7
Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.
-
no kidding
my post in that regard were in jest
I assumed that was obvious
still he was all about helping those less fortunate than oneself was he not?
I don't think it's correct to say He was "all about" helping those less fortunate if you mean by material necessities.
I see Him as being "mostly about" coming to earth to die on the cross for our sins thus making a way for those who believe to spend eternity in heaven.
But did he want us to help others less fortunate? Yes! But I think the argument here is "social justice" being presented as 2 diff things. ONe side seems to see it as, let's give people things freely and not expect them to try to help themselves and the other side seems to see it as, let's give people stuff freely because some people have more than others and it isn't fair to those w/less.
I think the question should be, who is truly in need? And we should give to them :)
Take a look at
1 Timothy 5:3-6
Give proper recognition to those widows who are really in need. But if a widow has children or grandchildren, these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God. The widow who is really in need and left all alone puts her hope in God and continues night and day to pray and to ask God for help. But the widow who lives for pleasure is dead even while she lives.
-
I don't think it's correct to say He was "all about" helping those less fortunate if you mean by material necessities.
what is a "material" necessity?
I'm talking about the poor, the homeless, the sick, etc...
you know what I'm talking about right.
McWay even listed the part of the bible I am referring to in a earlier post
you know what I'm talking about right?
-
what is a "material" necessity?
I'm talking about the poor, the homeless, the sick, etc...
you know what I'm talking about right.
McWay even listed the part of the bible I am referring to in a earlier post
you know what I'm talking about right?
Which post?
(sorry the board is going sloooooooooooooooooooooo oooow)
ARe you still asking me what Jesus was all (mostly) about? I believe he was all (mostly)about saving sinners.
-
It sounds to me like you're admitting we're not a Christian Nation?
May I suggest some Q-Tips!! ;D
McWay - what is the consequence in the Bible for the individual Christian who fails to help the poor, sick, etc..?
I believe I answered that by reference to Matt. 25. Those who do not have Christ's spirit and display such to the aforementioned folk, will not be recognized By Christ. Hence, they are accursed.
-
Which post?
(sorry the board is going sloooooooooooooooooooooo oooow)
ARe you still asking me what Jesus was all (mostly) about? I believe he was all (mostly)about saving sinners.
yeah - it's really slow for me too and has been for a long time.
No offense - but I know you're a christian and which means you might have a rationalization for why this passage doesn't mean what it appears to say. It seesm like there are at least two types of christians. The ones that embrace the words of Jesus and those that rationalize, parse, and restate the words so that it supports their preconceived feelings. I'm not sure which type you are.
The Sheep and the Goats
31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41]"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' [/font]
44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
-
yeah - it's really slow for me too and has been for a long time.
I just went and dried my hair waiting for my last post to post ;D
-
No offense - but I know you're a christian and which means you might have a rationalization for why this passage doesn't mean what it appears to say. It seesm like there are at least two types of christians. The ones that embrace the words of Jesus and those that rationalize, parse, and restate the words so that it supports their preconceived feelings. I'm not sure which type you are.
The Sheep and the Goats
31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41]"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' [/font]
44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Straw, did you read the chapter previous to this one and the beginning of 25?
The previous text shows He is speaking about people that survived the tribulation. He is speaking about how they treated the Jews during this time. If a person went through the tribulation and treated Jews well, they were (likely) believers in Christ. Belief/grace = salvation.
-
Straw, did you read the chapter previous to this one and the beginning of 25?
The previous text shows He is speaking about people that survived the tribulation. He is speaking about how they treated the Jews during this time. If a person went through the tribulation and treated Jews well, they were (likely) believers in Christ. Belief/grace = salvation.
so you're saying "the least of these" only applies to the Jews and no one else?
-
Straw,
I think what it boils down to is that a lot of us believe that people should be able to give to the charity cases that we want to give to, and not be forced to give to people that we may believe (mistakenly or no) can help themselves but don't seem to want to.
We have different homeless shelters in our town. Although there are need for all kinds, we donate the most to the ones that work to end homelessness through remedial classes, business courses, resume writing, etc. These are the ones that also do not allow people to be actively using drugs or alcohol while staying there. These are the ones that also share the gospel message w/people.
NOw, maybe you would never choose to donate to a charity that shares the gospel message. Don't you think that should be your right? I think it should be your right.
As a person who grew up w/a girl who was enabled by her mother to do whatever she wanted w/no consequences, I've seen 3 lives almost destroyed by this, including hers. We all have differing views on things and I've never been a parent, but I have seen that enabling someone like this is destructive and not helpful.
You may also find more of what I posted earlier from 1 Timothy 5 as informative:
No widow may be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the saints, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds.
As for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan.
If any woman who is a believer has widows in her family, she should help them and not let the church be burdened with them, so that the church can help those widows who are really in need.
-
Straw,
I think what it boils down to is that a lot of us believe that people should be able to give to the charity cases that we want to give to, and not be forced to give to people that we may believe (mistakenly or no) can help themselves but don't seem to want to.
We have different homeless shelters in our town. Although there are need for all kinds, we donate the most to the ones that work to end homelessness through remedial classes, business courses, resume writing, etc. These are the ones that also do not allow people to be actively using drugs or alcohol while staying there. These are the ones that also share the gospel message w/people.
NOw, maybe you would never choose to donate to a charity that shares the gospel message. Don't you think that should be your right? I think it should be your right.
As a person who grew up w/a girl who was enabled by her mother to do whatever she wanted w/no consequences, I've seen 3 lives almost destroyed by this, including hers. We all have differing views on things and I've never been a parent, but I have seen that enabling someone like this is destructive and not helpful.
You may also find more of what I posted earlier from 1 Timothy 5 as informative:
is
No widow may be put on the list of widows unless she is over sixty, has been faithful to her husband, and is well known for her good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the saints, helping those in trouble and devoting herself to all kinds of good deeds.
As for younger widows, do not put them on such a list. For when their sensual desires overcome their dedication to Christ, they want to marry. Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to. So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander. Some have in fact already turned away to follow Satan.
If any woman who is a believer has widows in her family, she should help them and not let the church be burdened with them, so that the church can help those wows who are really in need.
Stella - I asked a simple question
does this statement only apply to the Jews?
He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
-
so you're saying "the least of these" only applies to the Jews and no one else?
If you're asking if I think that people will be thrown into hell based solely on not helping others, the answer is no.
He's talking to people who survived the tribulation.
Do I think that if people don't treat Jews well that they will go to hell based soley on that? No.
And yes in the above passage I think he is talking about the Jews because the literal translation of "all the nations" is "all the Gentiles."
The treatment of the Jews by these people would show the condition of their heart (believers).
-
If you're asking if I think that people will be thrown into hell based solely on not helping others, the answer is no.
He's talking to people who survived the tribulation.
Do I think that if people don't treat Jews well that they will go to hell based soley on that? No.
And yes in the above passage I think he is talking about the Jews because the literal translation of "all the nations" is "all the Gentiles."
The treatment of the Jews by these people would show the condition of their heart (believers).
ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?
-
Stella - I asked a simple question
does this statement only apply to the Jews?
He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Sorry bro, I went and cleaned some spots on the carpet trying to post my last post. ::)
Hope it answered your above first question but now you are asking another I think?
Least of these (brothers of mine) = Jews
Your second question (first part) above= all unbelievers; righteous = believers
-
ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?
ARe you trying to make a specific point? Why not just state it and we can discuss it?
Here is what I believe = "You are saved by grace through faith and not of works."
I believe the ones that "will go away to eternal punishment" are not condemned soley because they didn't "do good works," but that they were unbelievers.
-
ARe you trying to make a specific point? Why not just state it and we can discuss it?
Here is what I believe = "You are saved by grace through faith and not of works."
I believe the ones that "will go away to eternal punishment" are not condemned soley because they didn't "do good works," but that they were unbelievers.
I have stated it.
I asked if Jesus taught that when you fail to help others in need you go to "eternal punishment"
I think you've told me that is not correct then I tried to clarify what you were telling me that the parable actually meant and you haven't actually told me whether I understand you correctly or not.
ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?
-
I have stated it.
I asked if Jesus taught that when you fail to help others in need you go to "eternal punishment"
I think you've told me that is not correct then I tried to clarify what you were telling me that the parable actually meant and you haven't actually told me whether I understand you correctly or not.
Sorry it's seemed so confusing.
Here is what I believe = "You are saved by grace through faith and not of works."
I believe the ones that "will go away to eternal punishment" are not condemned soley because they didn't "do good works," but that they were unbelievers.
To expand on my above post the scriptures in question do not negate state of heart as a requirement for the decision.
This may help also (if it doesn't just ignore it lol):
Matthew 7:15-21
"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'
-
Stella - I've asked you the question
can you answer in your own words?
-
Stella - I've asked you the question
can you answer in your own words?
Which question haven't I answered?
-
Which question haven't I answered?
3rd time is the charm?
ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?
-
3rd time is the charm?
Oh dear lol
"ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?"
Yes, like I said before, least of these brother of mine = Jews! And how they were treated by others in the trib. YES, in that particular passage I believe that is who He is talking about Yes!! If you read starting in Chapter 24 you will see why. :)
Least of these (brothers of mine) = Jews
Your second question (first part) above= all unbelievers; righteous = believers
-
Oh dear lol
"ok - so you're saying that particular passage applies only in that particular situation and when Jesus is saying "the least of these" and " the least of these brothers of mine" that he is only referring to Jews and only in that unique circumstance (the Tribulation) which hasn't actually happened yet (as far as I know - you may know different) and he most definitely is not simply referring to other human beings on earth.
Do I understand you correctly?"
Yes, like I said before, least of these brother of mine = Jews! And how they were treated by others in the trib. YES, in that particular passage I believe that is who He is talking about Yes!! If you read starting in Chapter 24 you will see why. :)
ok so the only time I have to help those less fortunate is during the tribulation and even then I only have to help the jews
is that your interpretation of that passage?
and, even though Jesus said pretty explicitly that : 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
he doesn't really mean it:
If you're asking if I think that people will be thrown into hell based solely on not helping others, the answer is no.
He's talking to people who survived the tribulation.
Do I think that if people don't treat Jews well that they will go to hell based soley on that? No.
-
"When you look at the data," says Syracuse University professor Arthur Brooks, "it turns out the conservatives give about 30 percent more. And incidentally, conservative-headed families make slightly less money."
"But the idea that liberals give more is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above-average percentage of their income, all but one (Maryland) were red -- conservative -- states in the last presidential election."
"The people who give one thing tend to be the people who give everything in America. You find that people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."
"Conservatives are even 18 percent more likely to donate blood."
"Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money -- four times as much."
"Religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly nonreligious charities. Religious people give more blood; religious people give more to homeless people on the street."
Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism
by Arthur C. Brooks
# ISBN-10: 0465008232
# ISBN-13: 978-0465008230
http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/24/america-philanthropy-income-oped-cx_ee_1226eaves.html
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=2682730
http://townhall.com/Common/PrintPage.aspx?g=8c6b1ed7-dcab-4886-adf6-2c554cd0cebf&t=c
-
ARe you trying to make a specific point? Why not just state it and we can discuss it?
lol. Good luck. :D
-
lol. Good luck. :D
No kidding. Arguing with Straw is like Chinese Water Torture.
-
Nowhere in the Bible will you find Jesus or anybody teaching that the government should force anybody, through taxing or otherwise, to help those in need.
Giving handouts to those who simply don't want to work is not charity. Giving handouts to those who simply don't want to work is doing harm both to them and to society.
The Bible is clear that if you do not want to work, then don't eat.
-
No kidding. Arguing with Straw is like Chinese Water Torture.
I rarely do. Unless I'm really bored. :)
-
ok so the only time I have to help those less fortunate is during the tribulation and even then I only have to help the jews
is that your interpretation of that passage?
and, even though Jesus said pretty explicitly that : 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
he doesn't really mean it:
I have no idea where you came up w/your first sentence.
And I already explained the rest to you.
lol. Good luck. :D
No kidding.
Now I see.
-
Sorry bro, I went and cleaned some spots on the carpet trying to post my last post. ::)
Hope it answered your above first question but now you are asking another I think?
Least of these (brothers of mine) = Jews
Your second question (first part) above= all unbelievers; righteous = believers
I've never met a chick who called me "bro"
you're a guy right?
-
I have no idea where you came up w/your first sentence.
I got that idea from you don't you remember?
I thought that alleged quote from Jesus was about all people but you explained to me that it was only about the Jews and only at the time of the tribulation. I still haven't figured out why you don't think Jesus's pretty clear statement about "eternal punishment" doesn't apply. It seems pretty cut and dried but then I realize that the bible is full of contradictions and just flat out bizarre statements. It does seem kind of harsh of Jesus to condemn someone to eternal punishment just for not helping the poor (Jews during the tribulation) but that seems to be what he's saying
Straw, did you read the chapter previous to this one and the beginning of 25?
The previous text shows He is speaking about people that survived the tribulation. He is speaking about how they treated the Jews during this time. If a person went through the tribulation and treated Jews well, they were (likely) believers in Christ. Belief/grace = salvation.
If you're asking if I think that people will be thrown into hell based solely on not helping others, the answer is no.
He's talking to people who survived the tribulation.
Do I think that if people don't treat Jews well that they will go to hell based soley on that? No.
And yes in the above passage I think he is talking about the Jews because the literal translation of "all the nations" is "all the Gentiles."
The treatment of the Jews by these people would show the condition of their heart (believers).
-
I've never met a chick who called me "bro"
you're a guy right?
::)
-
::)
why the eye roll
don't you have to be a "bro" to call someone a bro?
I've never seen a chick call a guy bro
just sayin