Leftist wackjob misunderstands Christianity.

[dutch508]

NoJusticeNoPeace (1,967 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026311081

I need help figuring something out. If I am a Christian, do I want my fellow humans to have
food, shelter and healthcare?

Or do I not want them to?

Or do I not care either way?

The American Taliban (TeaparTY) and Repubican position seems to be they are adamantly against providing food, shelter and especially healthcare for people if tax dollars are needed to pay for it, I am sure everyone agrees with that statement. Are we in agreement that the vast majority of American Taliban (TeaParTY) are self described Christians?

So are they saying that Jesus would be for taking care of the poor as long as tax dollars arent involved?

Surely they arent saying Jesus only cares for the poor with non tax dollars?

The answer is kind of black or white here, and I would love to hear it.

Jesus said, "Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's and unto man what is man's."

He asked them to show him a coin. "Shew me the tribute money." They brought it to Him. At that point, He had them trapped. The "penny" was a denarius. This was a coin used specifically to pay taxes. If taxes were not legitimate, why did his critics possess one? Furthermore, it bore an image. It also had an inscription. The inscription invoked the language of divinity. The Jews regarded this as idolatrous. But they had brought Him a coin. What were they doing with such coins?(6)

Jesus asked them specifically: Whose image? Whose inscription? Caesar's, they answered. What else could they say? "Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." By acknowledging that they possessed a tax coin, they were also acknowledging that Rome brought civil order. Civil order must be paid for. If Caesar's image and inscription were on the coin, then those who used such coins in trade were gaining a benefit: money. By using money to gain what they wanted to buy rather than bartering, they were extending the division of labor. This increases men's output per unit of resource input. It makes them wealthier.

Caesar's rule brought social stability. It created international legal framework for economic growth. It was Rome, not Israel, that had built the highways and had cleared the Mediterranean Sea of pirates. There are no free lunches, and Rome was merely collecting what belonged to it. Jesus was saying that the benefits of civil government had to be paid for. The beneficiaries owed something to the State.

A coin was a mark of political sovereignty in the ancient world. It still is. The theology of Rome was visible on Rome's coins. The image and the inscription announced the divinity of the emperor: "Emperor Tiberius august Son of the august God."(7) This is what angered the Jews. But the agents of the Pharisees or their Herodian allies had such a coin in their possession. The Herodians were content with the coins. The Herod of Jesus' infancy had been a ruthless tax collector.(8) But the Pharisees were indeed hypocrites. "But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone" (Luke 11:42).(9)

Jesus was not arguing that Caesar owned everything that he laid claim to. On the contrary, men are to render to God what God possesses. What Caesar owned was legal authority over the political system that provided the Roman Empire's money. This legal system had to be supported by taxes. Israel was benefitting from this system, despite the system's inequities. Besides, Israel was under judgment, and had been since the captivity. Living under foreign domination was nothing new for Israel. Rome had brought greater trade and prosperity by opening up new markets. Israel was benefitting from the arrangement. On what basis should Israelites have refused to pay taxes? Jesus had the answer: none. But He gave this answer in such a way that the Pharisees could not embarrass Him.

The tithe is mandatory. It preceded the Mosaic law. Abraham paid a tithe to Melchizedek (Gen. 14:20). There is nothing in the New Testament to indicate that this law has been annulled. Only the recipients have changed: from the local Levites to local churches. Through Christ, the church is the heir of the Melchizedekan priesthood. "So also Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest; but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec" (Heb. 5:5-6). "Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec. For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace" (Heb. 6:20-7:2). Men owe the local church their tithes.(12)

What do they owe the State? Less than a tithe. Any system of civil government that takes as much as ten percent is tyrannical, Samuel warned.

And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day (I Sam. 8:11-18).

The Israelites in Samuel's day refused to heed this warning (v. 19). In the twentieth century, Christians have not cried out when the State has extracted four times the tithe or even more from them. They live under what the Bible clearly identifies as tyranny, yet they call it democratic liberty. What rouses their ire is any suggestion that they owe a tithe to their local churches. "We're under grace, not law!" they proclaim. In fact, they are under pagan law, pagan bureaucrats, pagan tax collectors, and pagan lawyers.

Jesus made it clear that the State is entitled to taxes. He implied that the church is also entitled to tithes. If we do not turn to the Old Testament to find out what the limits of taxes and church contributions are, we shall forever be caught between the tax collector and the church in their quest for funding. The Old Testament provides information on these limits. For the church, the limit is ten percent of our net income. For the State, the limit is less than ten percent (I Sam. 8:15, 17). The State does not have the right before God to extract from residents as high a percentage as the church has the right to demand of its voting members. Any State that demands as much as ten percent is a tyranny. The total level of taxation, from local civil government upward, must be less than ten percent of a person's net income.

The modern church does not believe this. The result is a church that does not have the courage to demand tithes of its voting members, and a State that cannot resist extracting four or five times the tithe. Christians have sought to starve God's church by refusing to tithe. Meanwhile, the messianic State extracts their wealth unmercifully. God is not mocked.

The Bible identifies what God is legally entitled to and what the State is legally entitled to. This, the world has refused to do. The result in our day is the widespread acceptance of the welfare State. The end result of this is personal dependence on the State and social bankruptcy.

BlueCaliDem (8,598 posts)
1. Nothing these radical whacky-Christians practice is Christian-like. Nothing. Therefore,

they're not Christians since they don't follow the example of Christ. Everything they do is a 180 from what Christ's followers were asked to do.

These Neo-Confederate people (commonly but mistakenly referred to as Republicans) are anti-Christ.

You have no clue of what you speak.

BlueCaliDem (8,598 posts)
21. There is only ONE objective: do as Christ did. That's all. eom

PassingFair (21,358 posts)
39. "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?" She said to Him, "Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God, even He who comes into the world."

Trillo (8,566 posts)
32. These anti-Christ people are also ones running Christian schools. As a non-Christian, I'm upset as heck that any of my tax dollars are supporting Christian food banks, whether they are Christians or "Christians" (anti-Christ). Food banks should be secular.

WDIM (420 posts)
5. I can tell you what Ive been told by the christian right That if people didnt have to pay so much in taxes that people would donate more to charities and churches and the charities and churches would take care of the poor and unfortunate.  I dont believe this rationalization they give. I believe one of the most important jobs of the government is to provide a safety net and that it is for the common good that we take care of all of our citizens.

jwirr (27,993 posts)
7. Almost all churches would have agreed that you would want everyone to have food, shelter and
healthcare PRIOR to the 80s. Than along comes Jerry Falwell, the fundies and raygun with their hate propaganda and now it depends which god you follow.

 

sarisataka (4,655 posts)
26. It's really not that difficult

Matthew 22:37-39 ESV / 39 helpful votes

And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.
So if you like food, make sure others have food...

As for taxes

Matthew 22:17-21, the Pharisees asked Jesus a question: "Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?" But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? Show me the coin used for paying the tax." They brought Him a denarius, and He asked them, "Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?" "Caesar's," they replied. Then He said to them, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's."
Implication being that Caesar can do what he wishes with his money.

How to tell a "real" Christian? The instruction manual has that too

John 13:35

By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

Another so called expert with no clue.

JimDandy (4,621 posts)
30. How are posts with religion as the subject being allowed to keep creeping into GD where they are not allowed? 

Ooops

NoJusticeNoPeace (1,967 posts)
55. Charity wont do it, wont come anywhere close, if it is up to charity alone hundreds of thousands will starve or freeze to death

If everyone gave with a Christian heart there wouldn't be a need for Government handouts. However- look at you on DU... not one of you says "I will give more." It's all, "The Government must do more- with someone else's money."

Revanchist (750 posts)
54. Ask them what they think of Deuteronomy 15

7 If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother.

8 Rather be openhanded and freely lend him whatever he needs.

10 Give generously to him and do so without a grudging heart; then because of this the LORD your God will bless you in all your work and in everything you put your hand to.

11 There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.

Or any of these other verses for that matter http://www.openbible.info/topics/helping_the_poor Let's see them weasel their way out of that discussion.

What about you? I see Christian Charities aplenty. Not alot of Atheist ones.

[Skul]

Stupid DUmpmonkies digging for DUmp cred, just piss me off sometimes all the time. 

[Chris_]

The American Taliban (TeaparTY)

Stopped reading right there.

This is why they're called DUmmies.

[franksolich]

Oh now.

Christians aren't commanded to give away that which isn't theirs; to give away other people's money.

Christians are commanded to give away that which is theirs to give away.

Are the primitives dense, or what?

[98ZJUSMC]

Thoroughly excellent! 

Are the primitives dense, or what?

Both.

[thundley4]

Trillo (8,566 posts)
32. These anti-Christ people are also ones running Christian schools. As a non-Christian, I'm upset as heck that any of my tax dollars are supporting Christian food banks, whether they are Christians or "Christians" (anti-Christ). Food banks should be secular.

The closest thing to a secular food bank is called government welfare.

Almost every single food bank in this country was established by one religious organization or another.  Many of those groups do not take any federal money, because the government wants to interfere with them.

Then there is this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/11/05/fort-lauderdale-cracks-down-on-feeding-homeless-in-public-arrests-90-year-old-man/

The "government" actively preventing poor people from being fed.

[ChuckJ]

NoJusticeNoPeace (1,967 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026311081

I need help figuring something out. If I am a Christian, do I want my fellow humans to have
food, shelter and healthcare?

[2Th 3:10 KJV] For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

And you'll notice that the wording is "would not" instead of "could not."

[HawkHogan]

Sorry you can't claim to be Christian when you have sixty million unborn murders under your belt.

[Carl]

How cute...a group that loathes and mocks God with demonic fury pretends to tell people what being a Christian is.

[FlaGator]

For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.
2 Thessalonians 3:10

The Gospel makes it clear that one is not to be a burden on the church or society if one is capable of contributing to both.

[Gina]

Trillo (8,566 posts)
32. These anti-Christ people are also ones running Christian schools. As a non-Christian, I'm upset as heck that any of my tax dollars are supporting Christian food banks, whether they are Christians or "Christians" (anti-Christ). Food banks should be secular.

NOTHING is stopping athiest, muslims, buddhists, etc from opening a food bank.  So you are upset that a Christian took it upon themselves to open a food bank?  Idiot.

[Gina]

How to tell a "real" Christian? The instruction manual has that too

John 13:35
Quote
By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

I can HATE the sin but still love the sinner.   

[Mr Mannn]

We've all seen this argument before. It says, "You are not a real Christian unless you support the Democrat political agenda."

[SVPete]

Oh now.

Christians aren't commanded to give away that which isn't theirs; to give away other people's money.

Christians are commanded to give away that which is theirs to give away.

Are the primitives dense, or what?

H-5!

Jesus' command to feed the poor, visit the sick, etc. is to believers individually and personally, and to church congregations (not without boundaries, BTW). IOW, I am to do those things, not get government to force others - including non-believers! - to do those things. And that command is not even close the entirety of what Jesus commanded believers to be and do.

As for NJNP's claim - direct and/or implied - that politically conservative Christians are disobeying Jesus' command, what is his evidence for this claim? Has (s)he staked out and watched every politically conservative Christian? It's a ludicrous claim based on sheer ignorance and hatred.

[SVPete]

Hmmmm ...... Hatred ...... seems to me that Jesus had somewhat to say about that, too.

[MrsSmith]

Oh now.

Christians aren't commanded to give away that which isn't theirs; to give away other people's money.

Christians are commanded to give away that which is theirs to give away.

Are the primitives dense, or what?

Dense as bricks.  I'd love one of them to find the verse that says "Tax your neighbor more so the government will provide you a better home, better food, a cell phone, etc."   

[MrsSmith]

NOTHING is stopping athiest, muslims, buddhists, etc from opening a food bank.  So you are upset that a Christian took it upon themselves to open a food bank?  Idiot.

That's the left in a nutshell..."How dare those ____ing Christians vote against my tax raises and then try to GIVE food away.  "

[SVPete]

NOTHING is stopping athiest, muslims, buddhists, etc from opening a food bank.  So you are upset that a Christian took it upon themselves to open a food bank?  Idiot.

  Wait! NJNP complained that Christians are not feeding the hungry, but Trillo is complaining that they (we) do? Which is it?!

But, yeah! Nothing hinders atheists, etc. from forming their own 70%-90% efficient food banks and such. Well, nothing hinders them except themselves! And their focus on using OPM for their agenda.

[obumazombie]

Excellent treatise dutch.
I enjoyed reading it.
I am now more well informed because of it.

[FlaGator]

I don't believe that Jesus cared how the poor where taken care of whether it was with tax money gathered by the state, tithe money gathered by the Temple\Church or if individuals took it upon themselves. He did care as to how the poor were defined. A person capable of working but who chose not to was not to be treated as a member of the poor. The poor were those who could not work because of illness or age and had no family to support them.

What Paul was pointing out in Romans 13 and the point that Jesus was making about "Rendering unto Caesar's" was that there is the world in which we live and to obey it's laws as long as they don't violate God's laws. As Paul said Romans 13:1

"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. "

That means that Hitler and Stalin's regimes were ordained by God via God's inaction in stopping them. Their existence served some greater good that we may not be privy too. When God was ready to remove Hitler, He did so by raising up the Allies. When it was time for Stalin to go the Lord took him.

What we tend to forget or in more cases ignore is that God is in control of everything. Either by action or inaction everything is ordained by the Lord. Now if the government was to raise taxes to 100% then God may allow them to do that in order to stir up the masses for revolt. The masses are breaking God's law will be forgiven when the realize what they have done but those not living for God will be punished for violating God's laws.

Look at the Babylonians. They were raised up and used by God but they where still held accountable for the disobedience to God. This is not a contradiction because God used the disobedience that was already a part of their nature to His benefit and for His purposes, in this case to punish the Hebrews for idolatry.

I have strayed from the topic, so to get back on track, God want's the poor helped and I don't think it matters if it is through taxes, tithes are donations. However, he doesn't want assistance going to those who do not need it because they are literally taking food out of the mouths of the truly needy.

The bottom line here is to simply trust the Lord but be ready to discern when He is moving you into action. You act not be cause you feel it is the thing to do but because you have used reason, prayer and scripture to craft your response.

[BlueStateSaint]

I don't believe that Jesus cared how the poor where taken care of whether it was with tax money gathered by the state, tithe money gathered by the Temple\Church or if individuals took it upon themselves. He did care as to how the poor were defined. A person capable of working but who chose not to was not to be treated as a member of the poor. The poor were those who could not work because of illness or age and had no family to support them.

What Paul was pointing out in Romans 13 and the point that Jesus was making about "Rendering unto Caesar's" was that there is the world in which we live and to obey it's laws as long as they don't violate God's laws. As Paul said Romans 13:1

"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. "

That means that Hitler and Stalin's regimes were ordained by God via God's inaction in stopping them. Their existence served some greater good that we may no be privy too. When God was ready to remove Hitler, He did so by raising up the Allies. When it was time for Stalin to go the Lord took him.

What we tend to forget or in more cases ignore is that God is in control of everything. Either by action or inaction everything is ordained by the Lord. Now if the government was to raise taxes to 100% them God may allow them to do that in order to stir up the masses for revolt. The masses are breaking God's law will be forgiven when the realize what they have done but those not living for God will be punished for violating God's laws.

Look at the Babylonians. They were raised up and used by God but they where still held accountable for the disobedience to God. This is not a contradiction because God used the disobedience that was already a part of their nature to His benefit and for His purposes, in this case to punish the Hebrews for idolatry.

I have strayed from the topic, so to get back on track, God want's the poor helped and I don't think it matters if it is through taxes, tithes are donations. However, he doesn't want assistance going to those who do not need it because they are literally take food out of the mouths of the truly needy.

The bottom line here is to simply trust the Lord but be ready to discern when He is moving you into action. You act not be cause you feel it is the thing to do but because you have used reason, prayer and scripture to craft your response.

Well worth an H5.

[obumazombie]

The Tragedy Of American Compassion...-Marvin J. O'Lasky.

Great book. In it he dispels a lot of lib welfare myths.

[Ptarmigan]

Oh now.

Christians aren't commanded to give away that which isn't theirs; to give away other people's money.

Christians are commanded to give away that which is theirs to give away.

Are the primitives dense, or what?

Exactly. I do not recall the Bible saying people should be forced. It is voluntary. It is nowhere in the Bible.

[obumazombie]

Charity at the point of a gun isn't charity at all.
Is it ?
And lest anyone doubt the point of a gun, don't pay your income taxes for awhile.
See what happens.

[Movie buff- The Sequel]

A thread like this shows up on the DUmp every day, and demonstrates the hypocrisy of the left.
In their posts, it's always either "Christianity is good, but conservatives aren't really Christians because of their political views," or "Christianity is stupid, all Christians everywhere in the world are a bunch of brainless rednecks who practice snake handling."

"So are they saying that Jesus would be for taking care of the poor as long as tax dollars arent involved?"
Actually, yes. You see, when a lot of it is done with our tax dollars, that is our helping the needy because we are being FORCED to do so by the government. There's nothing generous or charitable about that, and says nothing about the moral character of the person doing the giving. In contrast, when it's people giving to the needy purely out of their own free will (Something which, btw, studies show that conservatives greatly exceed liberals at), that IS generous and charitable, and says a LOT about the person doing the giving.
Another issue is relating to how the money is actually used. The government- run organizations tend to be extremely incompetent and ineffective when it comes to directly helping people in need using the taxed money/ resources (Case in point: FEMA), and there is almost no real accountability with how money and other resources are used. In contrast, when people give of their own free will, especially to Christian- run charities and missions, those groups tend to do an excellent job using their money and resources wisely and in such a way as to do as much good as they can, with the givers often able to directly see how their contributions are used.

"If everyone gave with a Christian heart there wouldn't be a need for Government handouts. However- look at you on DU... not one of you says "I will give more." It's all, "The Government must do more- with someone else's money.""
Amen to that entire statement!