How can the right even suggest that they are Christian[W:487]

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

:shrug: if that were true, you would be able to outline either the messages of Jesus or conservative beliefs. You are not only unable to do either, you are unwilling to try.



That is incorrect. The thrust of Jesus' message is "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". Jesus didn't come to Earth to get us to give each other money, but rather to redeem a sinful and fallen people to God. That is why he lists "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind" as the first and most important commandment. "Love your neighbor as you love yourself" is the second most important commandment. Loving your neighbor as you love yourself, however, =/= supporting government programs for the forced redistribution of wealth.



Actually he sorta does, when he explicitly separates the functions of government (rendering unto Caesar) from the functions of faith (rendering unto God), and then again when he explicitly states that we aren't to give alms publicly, but privately. Furthermore, Jesus never commands "care for one another and see that none are unnecessarily in need", that is not a quote. He told us to take care of the Least of These, but that section is explicitly directed at individuals, not the State. He certainly he never did so at the Society level. He additionally re-affirmed the Ten Commandments, which include a prohibition against the kind of coveting that forms the basis for class warfare.

That is not to say that social safety net programs violate Jesus teachings (though many of the motivations for supporting them can). However, not explicitly stating "You Shall Not Do X" is in no way a command "You Shall Do X", which is what you turn it into when you claim that conservatives are adopting a hypocritical position by opposing X, even though conservatives do not necessarily oppose X.

Which, again, only highlights your ignorance of both Christianity and Conservatism.

Jesus never says not to give money publicly. He actually says the opposite of that.

Ironic how you quoted and immediately misinterpreted the statement to fit your personal ideology.

Cognitive dissonance is a powerful force for American conservatives.

 

[cpwill]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Every government expenditure is to "help people" so your goalpost moving is just plain silly.

No, every government expenditure is not a social program intended to help people (which was Frank's delineation).

For example, paying for the pensions of retirees is not a social program, it is a manpower cost. Ditto for paying for electricity, buildings, landscaping, and the like.

Do you not see how "Sine we are talking about Christianity, which includes more than just the teachings of Jesus, yes. " totally dispels your own ideological contortion that somehow quotes from the old testament are not applicable to Christianity ?

:lol: I have been quoting the New Testament, with the one exception of when I quoted the 10th Commandment, which Jesus re-affirmed in the New Testament.


For example:

Honor widows who are truly widows. But if a widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show godliness to their own household and to make some return to their parents, for this is pleasing in the sight of God.... Command these things as well, so that they may be without reproach. But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

Let a widow be enrolled if she is not less than sixty years of age, having been the wife of one husband, and having a reputation for good works: if she has brought up children, has shown hospitality, has washed the feet of the saints, has cared for the afflicted, and has devoted herself to every good work. But refuse to enroll younger widows, for when their passions draw them away from Christ, they desire to marry and so incur condemnation for having abandoned their former faith. Besides that, they learn to be idlers, going about from house to house, and not only idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying what they should not... If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows.

Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone's bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you... For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat. For we hear that some among you walk in idleness, not busy at work, but busybodies. Now such persons we command and encourage in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work quietly and to earn their own living.

Now it is superfluous for me to write to you about the ministry for the saints, for I know your readiness, of which I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia has been ready since last year. And your zeal has stirred up most of them. But I am sending the brothers so that our boasting about you may not prove empty in this matter, so that you may be ready, as I said you would be. Otherwise, if some Macedonians come with me and find that you are not ready, we would be humiliated—to say nothing of you—for being so confident. So I thought it necessary to urge the brothers to go on ahead to you and arrange in advance for the gift you have promised, so that it may be ready as a willing gift, not as an exaction.

The point is this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work. As it is written,

“He has distributed freely, he has given to the poor;
his righteousness endures forever.”​

He who supplies seed to the sower and bread for food will supply and multiply your seed for sowing and increase the harvest of your righteousness. You will be enriched in every way to be generous in every way, which through us will produce thanksgiving to God. For the ministry of this service is not only supplying the needs of the saints but is also overflowing in many thanksgivings to God.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Except that American conservatives give more of their wealth away than liberals do, and American conservatism celebrates charity, even as American conservatives are more likely to take part in it.

So, it seems like you are arguing against a strawman, here.

Again, this is a strawman. There is a belief that violating the 10th Commandment is wrong:

Just as there is the belief that a structure of free trade that forces us to serve others if we wish to gain ourselves helps not only to turn humanity's selfish inclinations to others' gains, and the historical awareness that structures that utilize that form of economic interaction benefit society in general and the poor in particular.

Generally, conservatives (and Christians) see nothing wrong with being wealthy, and nothing wrong with not being wealthy. We see something wrong with trying to stir up one against the other, and we think that avarice is just as wrong when it is done by the poor as well as it is when done by the middle class or by the rich. We also do not confuse giving away other people's money with actual charitable giving.

No, that is you projecting. It's about as meaningless as those pro-lifers who claim that pro-choice folks just want to kill babies.

Because I actually read and spend time in the New Testament, and read and spend time in the conservative policy and belief discussions.

That is because this is a bias of yours, rather than a position that you have arrived at after careful consideration of the evidence. Biases are often difficult to explain or defend, because they are assumptions, rather than conclusions.

No, I disagree because I actually know what both of those belief systems say, and am aware that they do not conflict as you claim.

It leaves us where we started. Me actually knowing what I am talking about (which is why I am able to support my position with data), and you a close-minded individual who looks down on people who disagree with you. :shrug:

You're right that American conservatives "give more money" than liberals :


Where you get mixed up is that they don't give a flying **** about actually helping people, they're perfectly happy spending $2 trillion killing infidels in Iraq but would scream bloody murder at a $200 billion welfare increase.

Maybe you're right. Maybe they do think they're helping people when they take from the poor to give to the rich. Maybe they're not hypocrites at all, they're just gullible, propagandized saps. Is that your claim ?

 

[cpwill]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Jesus never says not to give money publicly. He actually says the opposite of that.

Matthew 6

“Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven.

“Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.

Liberals love to be generous with other people's money, not least because it allows them to adopt the pose of "caring for the poor". When we take a look at what they actually give, however, we generally find that they give less themselves, indicating that they wish to adopt the pose of caring for the poor while avoiding or minimizing any personal costs of caring for the poor. Those who do so are practicing their righteousness before other people to be seen by them, but apparently less willing to give quietly and privately, which is Jesus' actual measure of righteous charity.

Ironic how you quoted and immediately misinterpreted the statement to fit your personal ideology.

Using the state to redistribute wealth was not Jesus message :shrug: Which is why Frank is unable to provide any support for his positions, and unwilling to try.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

No, my argument was that the article was pretending that by "welfare spending" Republians should have meant TANF, that TANF was not as big a piece of the pie as all social spending, which did indeed dwarf defense spending. You responded by pretty much arguing the same thing - that TANF was different than TANF+All-The-Other-Programs. :shrug:

IOW, you pretended that a semantic argument about the proper use of the term "welfare" could operate as a stand-in for actual discussion of annual expenditures.



Well that's interesting. Where did I say "welfare dwarfs defense spending"? What I stated was that social programs intended to help people dwarf military spending. And they do.



The article cited is referring to a graph put out by conservatives that used "welfare spending" to mean "social spending to help people", rather than the narrow use of the term which is often used to mean "TANF". It was a semantic, rather than a budgetary argument.

I understand that your sham of an argument rests on the assumption that all social spending is "welfare."

When you look at medicare and medicaid, ask yourself, are conservatives interested in putting in cost control measures? Or do they not care ? Some want to go to a cash-only healthcare system where we let people die. That hardly seems very Christian.

Unbounded healthcare cost growth was not well curbed by Obamacare, it was a little bit, but not enough. Why is that ? Conservative obstructionism. They let their pride get in the way of helping people, hmm, does that sound Christian to you ?

 

[cpwill]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

I understand that your sham of an argument rests on the assumption that all social spending is "welfare."

Nope. You are confusing me with a poster/billboard/image that was mentioned by an article that was linked by a different poster. I have consistently used the phrase "social programs to help people" (with some variations, usually adding in "intended to") because that is what Frank used when he made his first, ignorant claim on this topic.

When you look at medicare and medicaid, ask yourself, are conservatives interested in putting in cost control measures?

Absolutely we are. The problem is that doing so is difficult, complex, and easily demagogued. However, if we wish to retain these support structures, then we have to reform them. In the process, there is some space where we could improve them while doing so, which is excellent, but that time-window is limited. Cost-Control measures that simply take away poor people's access to healthcare, but don't improve the system (such as simply slashing reimbursement rates), are poorly structured, and should be opposed.

Some want to go to a cash-only healthcare system where we let people die. That hardly seems very Christian.

I would concur that a system where we do not make any provision for the poor to receive healthcare would not be terribly Christian. Neither would it be in line with American Conservatism, which is choc-a-block with ideas on how to improve how we help assist the poor in getting access to healthcare. I'm not sure what you mean by "cash only" in this instance.

Unbounded healthcare cost growth was not well curbed by Obamacare, it was a little bit, but not enough. Why is that ? Conservative obstructionism.

:lamo Obamacare was 100% a Democrat fiasco, written by Democrats, negotiated between Democrats, voted on by Democrats, and signed by a Democrat. Not a single Republican was able to stop that monstrosity from passing, despite a special election in which Massachusetts (of all states) rejected Obamacare and elected a Republican to stop it.

I remember laughing and joking that it would only be a matter of time before Democrats were blaming Obamacare on George Bush and Republicans. That was supposed to be satire, but hey I'll take the successful prediction and add it to my score.

 

[tosca1]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

The irony there being that the left is more open to help people and therefore better exemplifies Christian values, which is surely lost on many conservatives.

EH? The left exemplifies Christian values?

Now, that's funny. :lol:

 

[tosca1]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

"Donating" to a charity that bears your own name is not necessarily giving to someone else. It may be largely re-appropriation for tax purposes.

How do you judge that? It may be, or it may be not.

Furthermore, there's nothing wrong if it's a tax deduction....if the government gives a tax deductions for donations, what's wrong with that?
That's the way it is, according to the government!

Anyway, why are you complaining about the tax deduction? Why do you criticise that? At least, somebody's donating to charity! Isn't that what you bleeding hearts are grumbling about - that no one cares about the needy?

DONATING TO CHARITY......... is GIVING TO CHARITY!

I thought you guys just want to help the needy? Now....it seems you have a different agenda. :lol:

 

[tosca1]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Yes, but American conservatives act like they are the only true representatives of Jesus, and yet their political ideology is firmly at odds with the idea of helping one another.

Just because you misunderstand it.....doesn't mean it is, you know.

 

[tosca1]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Jesus never says not to give money publicly. He actually says the opposite of that.

If we listen to you, then we'd truly be hypocrites!

This is what it says in the Scriptures:

Matt 6
2 “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.

3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret.



Exactly the opposite of that?

Cite the Scriptures. Where does it say that we should be giving publicly ??

 

[CrabCake]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

The irony there being that the left is more open to help people and therefore better exemplifies Christian values, which is surely lost on many conservatives.

There is no irony. You indeed missed the point of what I wrote; or to use your own words, the point was lost on you.

The left is not more open to helping people, they simply have different beliefs about what the best way of helping is.

We can compare this to parenting styles. Some parents are advocates of "attachment parenting" and other such approaches which put great emphasis on immediately gratifying the desires of their child. Others see such an approach as "spoiling" and see the best way of raising a child as one that encourages them to work for everything and that emphasizes personal responsibility over gratification of their desires. Both love their children and hope to raise them to become productive adults. They disagree on the best way to do that.

There is no irony. Conservatives are as invested in helping people as Liberals are.*


*There's an ascendant wing of conservatism that this doesn't apply to. The libertarian wing has embraced a social darwinism model. But the libertarian wing tends to be the home of atheist conservatives, not Christians, and it seems to have peaked (just look at how poorly the libertarian candidates are doing).

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

:shrug: the new Uber-Rich tend to be more liberal, concentrated in Silicon Valley and New York, so that makes sense.

While the conservative "Christians" tend to donate for tax protest or personal branding reasons, neither of which is terribly Christian unless you think not giving to Caesar that which is Caesars' is Christian (literally the opposite of what's actually in the bible) or self serving for the sake of your own greed or pride is Christian.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

There is no irony. You indeed missed the point of what I wrote; or to use your own words, the point was lost on you.

The left is not more open to helping people, they simply have different beliefs about what the best way of helping is.

We can compare this to parenting styles. Some parents are advocates of "attachment parenting" and other such approaches which put great emphasis on immediately gratifying the desires of their child. Others see such an approach as "spoiling" and see the best way of raising a child as one that encourages them to work for everything and that emphasizes personal responsibility over gratification of their desires. Both love their children and hope to raise them to become productive adults. They disagree on the best way to do that.

There is no irony. Conservatives are as invested in helping people as Liberals are.*


*There's an ascendant wing of conservatism that this doesn't apply to. The libertarian wing has embraced a social darwinism model. But the libertarian wing tends to be the home of atheist conservatives, not Christians, and it seems to have peaked (just look at how poorly the libertarian candidates are doing).

Ohhhh so Christian conservatives think they're helping people when they let them starve to death.

Thanks for clearing that up!! There's no hypocrisy, just stupidity !!

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

No, every government expenditure is not a social program intended to help people (which was Frank's delineation).

For example, paying for the pensions of retirees is not a social program, it is a manpower cost. Ditto for paying for electricity, buildings, landscaping, and the like.



:lol: I have been quoting the New Testament, with the one exception of when I quoted the 10th Commandment, which Jesus re-affirmed in the New Testament.


For example:

Missed the point i see, likely intentionally i would guess.

Since Christianity means more than just the teachings of Jesus, does it or does it not include the old testament, you know, the part whose quotes you summarily dismissed for no apparent reason ...?

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Matthew 6



Liberals love to be generous with other people's money, not least because it allows them to adopt the pose of "caring for the poor". When we take a look at what they actually give, however, we generally find that they give less themselves, indicating that they wish to adopt the pose of caring for the poor while avoiding or minimizing any personal costs of caring for the poor. Those who do so are practicing their righteousness before other people to be seen by them, but apparently less willing to give quietly and privately, which is Jesus' actual measure of righteous charity.

Using the state to redistribute wealth was not Jesus message :shrug: Which is why Frank is unable to provide any support for his positions, and unwilling to try.

It's not other people's money, it's our ****ing money, that's how we can legally spend it. When Bill Gates makes a billion dollars, he doesn't create that money from a vacuum, he sucks up wealth from all sorts of sources. Christian conservatives like to turn a blind eye to this ugly truth of economics because it's what their propaganda tells them to believe.

The reason Jesus preached quiet charity is because of PRIDE. What you've failed to account for is that liberals are actually practicing Jesus' teaching better by your own admission- they don't try to take public credit for private contributions as much as conservatives. Well done! Thanks, i was having trouble believing that you seriously think you have a case in this thread.

 

[CrabCake]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Ohhhh so Christian conservatives think they're helping people when they let them starve to death.

No, they believe that eliminating the social safety net would lead to people taking more responsibility for their own welfare and thus they would not starve, they would get a job instead.

I already covered this. I'll repost here:

Christians on the right believe that poverty is the result of a lack of motivation and that if we ended the safety net programs that are allowing the poor to live off of charity, the threat of starvation would motivate them to better themselves. They also see taxes and government regulation as chains that constrain businesses. They believe that if we unburdened those business by cutting taxes and getting rid of some of those chains of regulation, they could operate more efficiently and become stronger engines in the economy, leading to more job growth and increased opportunity. Thus they seek to cut social programs as well taxes and government regulation. In this way, conservatives seek to address the issue of poverty

Thanks for clearing that up!! There's no hypocrisy, just stupidity !!

Precisely. We can, and should, question the legitimacy of their views. We can and should question whether the evidence supports their conclusions. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is effective. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is misguided or naive. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is efficient. Those are all legitimate arguments to have.

What we shouldn't be questioning is the sincerity of their spiritual beliefs. We shouldn't be asking "can they call themselves Christian?" because the answer is an obvious and resounding YES. We should be asking "does what they propose make any sense?"; in my opinion, the answer to that question will be No.

 

[Absentglare]

Nope. You are confusing me with a poster/billboard/image that was mentioned by an article that was linked by a different poster. I have consistently used the phrase "social programs to help people" (with some variations, usually adding in "intended to") because that is what Frank used when he made his first, ignorant claim on this topic.

Absolutely we are. The problem is that doing so is difficult, complex, and easily demagogued. However, if we wish to retain these support structures, then we have to reform them. In the process, there is some space where we could improve them while doing so, which is excellent, but that time-window is limited. Cost-Control measures that simply take away poor people's access to healthcare, but don't improve the system (such as simply slashing reimbursement rates), are poorly structured, and should be opposed.

I would concur that a system where we do not make any provision for the poor to receive healthcare would not be terribly Christian. Neither would it be in line with American Conservatism, which is choc-a-block with ideas on how to improve how we help assist the poor in getting access to healthcare. I'm not sure what you mean by "cash only" in this instance.

:lamo Obamacare was 100% a Democrat fiasco, written by Democrats, negotiated between Democrats, voted on by Democrats, and signed by a Democrat. Not a single Republican was able to stop that monstrosity from passing, despite a special election in which Massachusetts (of all states) rejected Obamacare and elected a Republican to stop it.

I remember laughing and joking that it would only be a matter of time before Democrats were blaming Obamacare on George Bush and Republicans. That was supposed to be satire, but hey I'll take the successful prediction and add it to my score.

No confusion. All spending is supposed to help people, therefore all spending is "welfare" via your perversion.

Conservatives have not had a single health care reform proposal since the early 90s when they proposed Obamacare. Cite your claim or abandon it. Slashing reimbursements alone is insufficient, obviously, but without reductions in reimbursements you can't reduce costs... So your point sounds horribly naive. Reimbursements are the costs... Or is your point that "we shouldn't do a poorly structured reform," which is obviously true since you define it to be poor. That's an implicit admission that you assume liberal approaches to healthcare are poor by definition without even looking at them, letting pride get in the way of progress. Hardly seems very Christian.

Cash-only meaning people pay directly and therefore must see the real cost of services rendered. Some of these conservatives genuinely believe that a freer market would solve all the problems. In other words; they think everyone should be on their own, we should let poor people die off. Hardly seems very Christian.

I didn't blame Obamacare on republicans- i said it didn't go far enough. Why? Because lobbying dollars only had to pressure democrats. Political obstructionism opened the door for further abuse from wealthy donors who have heavy business interests in abusing the public. Hardly seems very Christian.

What about how Christian conservatives dealt with Obamacare? Did Jesus say "If the crazy Muslim worshipping liberals pass healthcare reform, then deny the expansion of medicaid in your state so that millions of Americans will be denied healthcare for no reason." Or are Christian conservatives plainly hypocritical ? By your own admission, they should not have done this: "I would concur that a system where we do not make any provision for the poor to receive healthcare would not be terribly Christian."

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

EH? The left exemplifies Christian values?

Now, that's funny. :lol:

The left wants to help refugees.

The left wants to help the poor.

The left wants to help the old.

The left wants to help the sick.

The left wants to help people. Seems the right has made a habit of stopping them wherever possible. Stop making it true if you don't want it to be.

 

[humbolt]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

No, i do not define poverty. You can't just close your eyes and assume the problem doesn't exist. That's not Christian, that's cowardice.

Sure you do. If you accept another's definition you have tacitly defined it because that definition is acceptable to you. It becomes your definition because you accept it and you use it. And now you're defining Christianity and what's Christian. To repeat your assertion, you can't just close your eyes and pretend you aren't defining things when you in fact are, and doing it in a manner not entirely honest, to boot.

 

[humbolt]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Yes, but American conservatives act like they are the only true representatives of Jesus, and yet their political ideology is firmly at odds with the idea of helping one another.

No it isn't at odds with any particular thing except liberalism and it's untoward brothers. And American conservatives are a large and extremely varied group of which you have little knowledge, so don't pretend you know what American conservatives think, much less what their personal religious convictions might be. You demonstrate no such knowledge.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

How do you judge that? It may be, or it may be not.

Furthermore, there's nothing wrong if it's a tax deduction....if the government gives a tax deductions for donations, what's wrong with that?
That's the way it is, according to the government!

Anyway, why are you complaining about the tax deduction? Why do you criticise that? At least, somebody's donating to charity! Isn't that what you bleeding hearts are grumbling about - that no one cares about the needy?

DONATING TO CHARITY......... is GIVING TO CHARITY!

I thought you guys just want to help the needy? Now....it seems you have a different agenda. :lol:

No, charities are far more wasteful than government programs. A typical charity will result in 15% or less of your donation actually going toward your cause. According to cpwill, the government spends the majority of its money helping people. Good intentions are not a substitute for bad outcomes.

Charities are poorly regulated and frequently mismanaged. Further, in order to get the tax deduction, you have to publicize your donation, thereby going into direct opposition of Jesus' literal teachings.

Just because you misunderstand it.....doesn't mean it is, you know.

That which you do for the least of my brothers and sisters, you do for me.

It's not hard to understand what that means.

If we listen to you, then we'd truly be hypocrites!

This is what it says in the Scriptures:

Matt 6
2 “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.

3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret.

Exactly the opposite of that?

Cite the Scriptures. Where does it say that we should be giving publicly ??

The government gives.

The wealthy who donate for public praise or personal income tax are precisely betraying the notion you lay out here. Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

No, they believe that eliminating the social safety net would lead to people taking more responsibility for their own welfare and thus they would not starve, they would get a job instead.

I already covered this. I'll repost here:




Precisely. We can, and should, question the legitimacy of their views. We can and should question whether the evidence supports their conclusions. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is effective. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is misguided or naive. We can and should question whether what they are proposing is efficient. Those are all legitimate arguments to have.

What we shouldn't be questioning is the sincerity of their spiritual beliefs. We shouldn't be asking "can they call themselves Christian?" because the answer is an obvious and resounding YES. We should be asking "does what they propose make any sense?"; in my opinion, the answer to that question will be No.

I see. Well that makes sense, they've perverted reality to think that they can help their brethren by abandoning them.

Still, it is interesting that the quote "he who does not work, shall not eat" occurs in both the bible as well as being Vladimir Lenin's first principle of socialism. Seems to me that this anti-socialism prejudice isn't very Christian.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

I'm glad you admit to being ignorant about who Jesus is. But I and the Bible know. Here's some clues for you:

The Deity of Jesus Christ in Scripture « The Righter Report

If you want to guess that the Bible tells you about a single person named Jesus who walked on water and all that other nonsense...fine. But don't tell me you KNOW who Jesus was, because you don't. You are guessing...and not doing an especially good job of it.

Not at all. It's what the Bible reveals, Frank. You should study these if you're going to debate Jesus.

Jeremiah 23:5-6 - The Messiah as God

I have no problem debating what the Bible says about Jesus...but that is a long way from debating about what Jesus was like.

If you want to guess the Bible is a "Holy Book" filled with knowledge about REALITY...be my guest. Try not to mind if I laugh.

"Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I AM!” - Jesus, John 8:58

Have you ever read the Bible, Frank? If so how did you miss these?

I have read the Bible. Here is a bibliography of the Bibles on the bookshelf in front of me at the moment:

St. Joseph Edition of The New American Bible; Catholic book Publishing, NY; 1968 (Catholic)

The New American Bible; Thomas Nelson Inc, Nashville; 1971 (Catholic)

The Holy Bible King James Version; Thomas Nelson, Nashville: 1984 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible New International Version; Zondervan Bible Pub. Grand Rapids; 1978 (Non-demoninational)

The Scofield Reference Holy Bible (King James Version); Oxford Univ. Press; NY; 1909 (Protestant)

The Holy Scriptures Masoretic Text; Jewish Publ Society; Philadelphia: 1955 (Jewish)

The Holy Bible, St.Joseph Textbook Edition, Confraternity Version; Catholic book Publ: NY; 1963; (Catholic)

The Holy Bible Revised Berkeley Version; The Gideons Intrl; 1984; (Non-denominational Protestant)

The New American Catholic Edition of The Holy Bible; Benziger Bros, Boston; 1950 (Catholic)

The Old Testament; Guild Press NY; 1965 (Catholic)

The Living Bible; Holman Illustrated Edition: A.J. Holman Co; Philadelphia; 1973 (Protestant)

The Holy Bible; King James Version; The World Publ Co: Cleveland; (no date); (Protestant)

The Old Testament; Hebrew Publishing Co: NY; 1916 (English & Hebrew) (Jewish)

**** Also I use

The Common Catechism of the Christian Faith: Seabury Press;NY 1975 (Protestant)

Catechism of the Catholic Church: Libreria Editrice Vaticana; Urbi et Orbi Comm; 1994 (Catholic)

The New St. Joseph Baltimore Catechism: Catholic Book Publish; NY; 1962 (Catholic)

*****Plus, I have (estimated) 40 - 50 other books dealing with the Bible, religion, and philosophy that I use when posting.

If you have to give me your nonsense about me being ignorant of this stuff...go for it. Whatever get your rocks off. But I would take a quiz on the Bible against you for money any day of the week.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

Sure you do. If you accept another's definition you have tacitly defined it because that definition is acceptable to you. It becomes your definition because you accept it and you use it. And now you're defining Christianity and what's Christian. To repeat your assertion, you can't just close your eyes and pretend you aren't defining things when you in fact are, and doing it in a manner not entirely honest, to boot.

You don't seem to understand how linguistics works. The explanation is outside the scope of this thread.

However, i will do my best.

We do not define things in a vacuum. Definitions can be prescriptive (the dictionary has a meaning and that's what it means) or descriptive (how people use it has a meaning and that's what it means).

There are people who use well established criteria (prescriptive and descriptive).

There are people who use differing views ("who did you see?" versus "whom did you see?"- prescriptive and descriptive) of established criteria.

There are criteria that people resist (using "literally" to mean figuratively- descriptive only).

And then there are people who just make **** up with no basis in prescription or description (neither prescriptive nor descriptive).

You seem to suggest that i should be neither prescriptive nor descriptive, that i need to throw out the well established criteria for the definition of poverty for no discernible reason. I don't like your argument, i'm hoping i simply don't understand what you're saying. Please restate it in a way that it is not nonsense.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: How can the right even suggest that they are Christian

No it isn't at odds with any particular thing except liberalism and it's untoward brothers. And American conservatives are a large and extremely varied group of which you have little knowledge, so don't pretend you know what American conservatives think, much less what their personal religious convictions might be. You demonstrate no such knowledge.

Your argument rests on the idea that conservatives exemplify a spectrum.

Sure. Cpwill, for example, has some good ideas on a negative income tax and on social security reform. He could very well be a good Christian. Conservative politicians do not seem to be. Perhaps liberal politicians are not, either, but i don't care because they don't use their Christian status for votes so ferociously.

But, realistically, uncertainty doesn't throw the argument out the window. It just means that it doesn't apply to everyone. I don't believe in prejudice but i find it hard to reconcile the idea that we should reduce spending on social programs and cut taxes coming from self-proclaimed Christians.