Why the the left should NEVER try exploiting the Bible

[hadit]

He was silent on the subject. He was, however, clear on how He expected His followers to act. Regardless, it's still ridiculous for "liberals" who want nothing else to do with Him to try to use his teachings.

Who are all these liberals that you think want nothing to do with Jesus? Are you, for example, declaring Barack Obama to be a pretend Christian?

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments.

That's how you know. Tell you what, let's answer this question. If Obama is a Christian, when did he become one? His father was Muslim and he grew up in a Muslim country, attending Muslim schools. When exactly was he converted to Christianity, and why is he not considered an apostate Muslim with a price on his head?

<pfffft> trump is an adulterer who hasn't stepped foot in a church on his own in eons because he knows he has a lightening bolt with his name on it.

I have yet to see evidence that Trump is in fact a Christian.

& the extreme fundies who shout how christany they are don't really care, but voted for him anyway. why would that be?

Because they're not looking to elect a Christian to lead the country, they're looking for a leader who supports a lot of what they support. If they can't have a strong Christian in office, the next best thing is a leader who stay out of their way as much as possible.

 

[hadit]

And:

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

where's the love coming from those who want to cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor? from getting a meal delivered because they are homebound?

talking the talk, but not walking the walk = wolves in sheep's clothing.

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

 

[Hum Dinger]

The OP is pure strawman nonsense. Never has there been a large number of liberals using the Bible to justify wealth redistribution.

First, because almost all liberals are anti-theocracy, so the Bible bears no weight on politics.

Second, because very few if any liberals support wealth redistribution in any way.

What liberals are generally for is fair wealth distribution, which is very different than wealth redistribution. Wealth redistribution implies seizing currently owned assets. No one is for that.

 

[playtime]

Who are all these liberals that you think want nothing to do with Jesus? Are you, for example, declaring Barack Obama to be a pretend Christian?

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments.

That's how you know. Tell you what, let's answer this question. If Obama is a Christian, when did he become one? His father was Muslim and he grew up in a Muslim country, attending Muslim schools. When exactly was he converted to Christianity, and why is he not considered an apostate Muslim with a price on his head?

<pfffft> trump is an adulterer who hasn't stepped foot in a church on his own in eons because he knows he has a lightening bolt with his name on it.

I have yet to see evidence that Trump is in fact a Christian.

& the extreme fundies who shout how christany they are don't really care, but voted for him anyway. why would that be?

Because they're not looking to elect a Christian to lead the country, they're looking for a leader who supports a lot of what they support. If they can't have a strong Christian in office, the next best thing is a leader who stay out of their way as much as possible.

ne'eh. then they are not putting their christianity first. if they did, then their heart would prevent them from voting such a morally corrupt individual into office.

 

[playtime]

where's the love coming from those who want to cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor? from getting a meal delivered because they are homebound?

talking the talk, but not walking the walk = wolves in sheep's clothing.

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

& there it is.

 

[hadit]

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments.

That's how you know. Tell you what, let's answer this question. If Obama is a Christian, when did he become one? His father was Muslim and he grew up in a Muslim country, attending Muslim schools. When exactly was he converted to Christianity, and why is he not considered an apostate Muslim with a price on his head?

<pfffft> trump is an adulterer who hasn't stepped foot in a church on his own in eons because he knows he has a lightening bolt with his name on it.

I have yet to see evidence that Trump is in fact a Christian.

& the extreme fundies who shout how christany they are don't really care, but voted for him anyway. why would that be?

Because they're not looking to elect a Christian to lead the country, they're looking for a leader who supports a lot of what they support. If they can't have a strong Christian in office, the next best thing is a leader who stay out of their way as much as possible.

ne'eh. then they are not putting their christianity first. if they did, then their heart would prevent them from voting such a morally corrupt individual into office.

You sound like the conservative Mennonites I grew up with, who would not vote for that very reason. Face it, in this last election, morally corrupt was the order of the day. Like I said, the next best thing is to get a leader who will stay out of the way more than the other one.

 

[hadit]

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

& there it is.

Yep. Get economic activity going and there's no need for a MW. Tell you what, let's just raise the MW to $100/hr and get rid of poverty altogether.

 

[boilermaker55]

Here now little man... don't get all pissy now you have had your ass handed to you and you can't defend your ignorance.

Never has there been a "christian" claiming to be one that never was one.
YUP!!! you.!

Get over the fact that you are not the superior being you think you are.

I don't think I'm superior. I think your comment here goes to illustrate your psyche of an inferiority complex. That is further supported by your immature cartoons you resort to due to your inability to articulate anything properly.

 

[boilermaker55]

Yes you do but you are to full of yourself to realize how dumb your comments are.

Get over the fact that you are not the superior being you think you are.

I don't think I'm superior. I think your comment here goes to illustrate your psyche of an inferiority complex. That is further supported by your immature cartoons you resort to due to your inability to articulate anything properly.

 

[P@triot]

Yes you do but you are to full of yourself to realize how dumb your comments are.

Again - this is a reflection on you and your acute realization of your inferiority once I pointed out all of the flaws in your position and your grammar.

But hey...maybe a few more cartoons will make you feel better about yourself.

 

[OnePercenter]

where's the love coming from those who want to cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor? from getting a meal delivered because they are homebound?

talking the talk, but not walking the walk = wolves in sheep's clothing.

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

It was called 'freeze your ass off pay.' Also, $2k/mo for a room with a shared bath. Greed.

 

[danielpalos]

What liberals are screaming about laws to help the poor?

They're not, they're trying to use Jesus' words as justification when castigating "conservatives" who don't support a massive nanny state.

And you used Jesus to justify NOT having the government help the poor.

He was silent on the subject. He was, however, clear on how He expected His followers to act. Regardless, it's still ridiculous for "liberals" who want nothing else to do with Him to try to use his teachings.

Who are all these liberals that you think want nothing to do with Jesus? Are you, for example, declaring Barack Obama to be a pretend Christian?

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments.

That's how you know. Tell you what, let's answer this question. If Obama is a Christian, when did he become one? His father was Muslim and he grew up in a Muslim country, attending Muslim schools. When exactly was he converted to Christianity, and why is he not considered an apostate Muslim with a price on his head?

We have a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge and no anti-hypocrisy laws on the books?

 

[danielpalos]

And you used Jesus to justify NOT having the government help the poor.

He was silent on the subject. He was, however, clear on how He expected His followers to act. Regardless, it's still ridiculous for "liberals" who want nothing else to do with Him to try to use his teachings.

you mean:

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

?

And:

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

where's the love coming from those who want to cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor? from getting a meal delivered because they are homebound?

talking the talk, but not walking the walk = wolves in sheep's clothing.

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

The right wing Only cares about the bottom line.

 

[danielpalos]

you mean:

A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

?

And:

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

where's the love coming from those who want to cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor? from getting a meal delivered because they are homebound?

talking the talk, but not walking the walk = wolves in sheep's clothing.

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

Only the right wing is that cognitively dissonant.

We have one of the largest economies in the world, even with welfare and illegal immigration.

Our Poor are not really poor enough by true, third world Standards; and the right wing complains about that, too.

 

[hadit]

You're assuming things that are not in evidence. Is it wanting to "cut off the most vulnerable from being able to see a doctor" when someone wants to keep more of his own resources so he can take care of his neighbor who is unable to see a doctor on his own? Is it wanting to prevent someone from "getting a meal delivered because they are homebound" for someone who wants to keep more of his own resources so he can help his neighbor who is homebound and cannot provide for themselves?

It's the difference between personally identifying a person in need and helping them, and ignoring those in need because we think the government is going to take care of them.

It's not heartless to think the more compassionate choice is to take care of those around you yourself. In fact, it is more heartless to ignore those in trouble because we're paying the government to do it for us.

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

It was called 'freeze your ass off pay.' Also, $2k/mo for a room with a shared bath. Greed.

It's opportunity that growth gives you.

 

[danielpalos]

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

It was called 'freeze your ass off pay.' Also, $2k/mo for a room with a shared bath. Greed.

It's opportunity that growth gives you.

You have no solution to capitalism's natural rate of poverty inducing, unemployment.

 

[OnePercenter]

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

It was called 'freeze your ass off pay.' Also, $2k/mo for a room with a shared bath. Greed.

It's opportunity that growth gives you.

What growth? Breaking even is the best you can hope for.

 

[playtime]

uh-huh. if that were the case, there wouldn't be a need for outside help. too many claim they would help, but don't. just like all the little zygotes that aren't adopted by those that want them born.

That just means there aren't enough Christians around.

The "war on poverty" hasn't been terribly effective, has it? Know what is more effective? A roaring economy that gives all who are willing to work the opportunity to do so.

with a minimum wage of $15?

A high MW is not synonymous with a roaring economy. Do you remember when McDonald's was paying $19/hr during the fracking boom? There was no need for a MW.

& there it is.

Yep. Get economic activity going and there's no need for a MW. Tell you what, let's just raise the MW to $100/hr and get rid of poverty altogether.

are you kidding? no matter how well the economy is doing, those at the top of the food chain will still be giving the worker bees a golden shower in that silly 'trickle down' theory that hasn't worked in 40+ years. they will still hoard & sit on that cash while still being the true welfare queens. i remember when <puke> Mickey D's instructed their workers how to budget their money by getting a second job & applying for food stamps & of course medicaid....

why would anybody favor the likes of 'fracking' as a way to economic growth? & the idea of rolling back EPA regs on clean water & air to allow for more lax production of dirty energy- allowing for the potential of more destruction to the earth & increased health problems among worker bees & residents is not a great example of being good stewards of the earth.

 

[playtime]

What liberals are screaming about laws to help the poor?

They're not, they're trying to use Jesus' words as justification when castigating "conservatives" who don't support a massive nanny state.

And you used Jesus to justify NOT having the government help the poor.

He was silent on the subject. He was, however, clear on how He expected His followers to act. Regardless, it's still ridiculous for "liberals" who want nothing else to do with Him to try to use his teachings.

Who are all these liberals that you think want nothing to do with Jesus? Are you, for example, declaring Barack Obama to be a pretend Christian?

By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments.

That's how you know. Tell you what, let's answer this question. If Obama is a Christian, when did he become one? His father was Muslim and he grew up in a Muslim country, attending Muslim schools. When exactly was he converted to Christianity, and why is he not considered an apostate Muslim with a price on his head?

the fundamental crux of your question matters not because the Constitution provides nothing in the way of a religious litmus test. however, whether he is a christian or muslim or jew or atheist matters more to 'christians' than anybody else.

funny though- how that kenyan born muslim led his adult life & governed much closer to what the golden rule dictates than those who love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men....

 

[LeftofLeft]

The left is all over the news, social media, and even right here on USMB these days attempting to exploit the Bible for their own political gain. Whenever they are incapable of defending their irrational position, aside from screaming racist/homophobe/xenophobe/etc., they will invariably scream "the Bible says to redistribute wealth". The problem, of course, is that the Bible says no such thing. And they would know that if they didn't hate the Bible and religion. It's a bad idea to attempt to quote something one has never read.

Josh Protas, the vice president of public policy at MAZON, a Jewish anti-hunger group...quoted a verse in Leviticus. Not to be outdone, Rep. Jodey Arrington quoted a Bible verse of his own, saying, “If a man will not work he shall not eat.”

“I did hear Mr. Protas, your opening remarks, where you quoted Leviticus, I believe — and I think that’s a great reflection on the character of God and the compassion of God’s heart and how we ought to reflect that compassion in our lives,” Arrington said. “But there’s also, you know, the Scripture, tells us in 2 Thessalonians chapter 3:10, he says, ‘for even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: if a man will not work, he shall not eat.’ And then he goes on to say ‘we hear that some among you are idle.’

Boom! Talk about a knockout blow. This is what happens to a person who doesn't know the Bible and yet attempts to exploit it for the evils of socialism/marxism/communism.

Libs FURIOUS! Texas Republican Has 10 BRUTAL Words For Food Stamp Junkies

The Bible is a medium for Liberals to hold Conservatives "accountable" by cherry-picking. Vintage Alinsky.