Terrorists break into US Capitol Building

[Suppressed Poet]

I'll start by acknowledging that I just argued that we need to remove the morality conversations from this so we can address it like a policy issue, as we should be. And nothing I'm about to say is actually relevant to how we should approach poverty as a nation.

But as a woman of faith, I feel it's my duty to point out that there were a hand full of topics that Jesus was excruciatingly clear on and a whole bunch of topics that were of zero interest to Him.

Jesus did not mince words on how we are to treat the poor, and He had no real concern with trying to figure out if those in need were "deserving" of help or not. Being in need was the same thing as being deserving in His eyes. And the New Testament is riddled with scripture on the subject. I mean Luke alone makes the point abundantly clear. And the Old Testament is just as lucid on the topic- if not more so. We were instructed not to harden our hearts to the poor, we were instructed to defend the rights of the poor and needy, and Jesus very explicitly told us to sell what we have and give to the poor. Those with two coats must share with those who have none. There are no caveats to that. No carve outs. God decides who shall be judged- not us. And He was very clear that those of us who turn from the poor will be judged.

The other topic, always worth noting, is how we were commanded to treat immigrants. New Testament and Old, we were given clear instructions to treat them as we would treat God. We are not to wrong or oppress a resident alien, and the alien who resides among us is to be treated as a citizen. We were told in no uncertain terms that the mark of a true Christian is our willingness to extent our hospitality to strangers. And that's for VERY good reason by the way. The apostles often faced persecution for spreading the word of God in foreign lands, or even their own. Paul may have told us to play nice with the Roman government, but Paul understood very well that even as a citizen you risked forced deportation for spreading non-Roman religions. And it was the hospitality of strangers in foreign lands who allowed early Christians to spread the word of God.

Notably Jesus was completely silent on the issues of same sex relations and abortion- both of which were very much going on in His time.

So if you do want to play the Scripture game, I have to be honest: you're not starting in a strong position.

Just because you decided to wear today your WWJD bracelet from circa 1997 because it’s once again trendy, that does not qualify you as a woman of faith...

[Suppressed Poet]

In all seriousness, Jesus didn’t give a flying fuck about government. He was not an activist. The Jews of the time anticipated their messiah to be a military leader that would free them from Roman captivity, and he made it absolutely clear that such worldly affairs was not his mission. Quit trying to play identity politics with Jesus.

[Seran]

I'll start by acknowledging that I just argued that we need to remove the morality conversations from this so we can address it like a policy issue, as we should be. And nothing I'm about to say is actually relevant to how we should approach poverty as a nation.

But as a woman of faith, I feel it's my duty to point out that there were a hand full of topics that Jesus was excruciatingly clear on and a whole bunch of topics that were of zero interest to Him.

Jesus did not mince words on how we are to treat the poor, and He had no real concern with trying to figure out if those in need were "deserving" of help or not. Being in need was the same thing as being deserving in His eyes. And the New Testament is riddled with scripture on the subject. I mean Luke alone makes the point abundantly clear. And the Old Testament is just as lucid on the topic- if not more so. We were instructed not to harden our hearts to the poor, we were instructed to defend the rights of the poor and needy, and Jesus very explicitly told us to sell what we have and give to the poor. Those with two coats must share with those who have none. There are no caveats to that. No carve outs. God decides who shall be judged- not us. And He was very clear that those of us who turn from the poor will be judged.

The other topic, always worth noting, is how we were commanded to treat immigrants. New Testament and Old, we were given clear instructions to treat them as we would treat God. We are not to wrong or oppress a resident alien, and the alien who resides among us is to be treated as a citizen. We were told in no uncertain terms that the mark of a true Christian is our willingness to extent our hospitality to strangers. And that's for VERY good reason by the way. The apostles often faced persecution for spreading the word of God in foreign lands, or even their own. Paul may have told us to play nice with the Roman government, but Paul understood very well that even as a citizen you risked forced deportation for spreading non-Roman religions. And it was the hospitality of strangers in foreign lands who allowed early Christians to spread the word of God.

Notably Jesus was completely silent on the issues of same sex relations and abortion- both of which were very much going on in His time.

So if you do want to play the Scripture game, I have to be honest: you're not starting in a strong position. And your reading of the famous Camel/Eye of the Needle verse comes across as extremely strategic.

Well said.

[Seran]

If you must know, as I can tell your genuine about religious study…. The statement about the difficulty of the rich to enter Heaven is because it’s a sin to worship false idols. If you are wealthy and have many worldly possessions there exists a strong temptation to put your own will ahead of God’s. That verse was not in any way saying that rich people are inherently immoral.

Also by any standard of measure today, we are all wildly rich compared to even Tiberius Caesar Augustus of his time.

Also also this is why we have priests, religious scholars, and Sunday school…so some jackasses on the PC don’t come up with their own twisted misinterpretation of scripture and spread heresy.

You know, you're right if you ignore the entirety of the rest of the Bible calling for us to be charitable and treat our fellow man with love and dignity. But since you're wanting to parse words about idoltry, why is it you choose to parse your savior's words as being an inference to idol worship instead of a plaintext reading? You can read the translations upside down and sideways for the next three weeks and the words still say the same thing.

Let's not forget our Bakkers, Falwells, Karesh, Jeff, LeBaron, Raniere and countless priests still diddling children to this day. Religious scholars are no less viable of jackassness than you or I, but unlike the above murderers, rapists, polygamists and extortionists, I don't use my faith to hurt others.

[time4fun]

Just because you decided to wear today your WWJD bracelet from circa 1997 because it’s once again trendy, that does not qualify you as a woman of faith...

I can't help but notice that you have gone out of your way to avoid responding to the substance and scripture in the argument. That gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that you feel that you have no response to give. And *that* gives the impression that you're actively avoiding information and arguments that question your worldview.

You deciding to question my faith as a way to avoid engaging with the Word isn't just weak and transparent. If you really are a Christian- then you don't need me to tell you how God would view a statement like that said to another Christian who referenced scripture to you in good faith.

[Neveragain]

I can't help but notice that you have gone out of your way to avoid responding to the substance and scripture in the argument. That gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that you feel that you have no response to give. And *that* gives the impression that you're actively avoiding information and arguments that question your worldview.

You deciding to question my faith as a way to avoid engaging with the Word isn't just weak and transparent. If you really are a Christian- then you don't need me to tell you how God would view a statement like that said to another Christian who referenced scripture to you in good faith.

A "woman of faith" would not advocate killing children, promote mental illness as normalcy or using government to confiscated peoples labors.

[Suppressed Poet]

I can't help but notice that you have gone out of your way to avoid responding to the substance and scripture in the argument. That gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that you feel that you have no response to give. And *that* gives the impression that you're actively avoiding information and arguments that question your worldview.

You deciding to question my faith as a way to avoid engaging with the Word isn't just weak and transparent. If you really are a Christian- then you don't need me to tell you how God would view a statement like that said to another Christian who referenced scripture to you in good faith.

I’ll bite just this once, but then I’d like to move past religion and get back to politics. It’s not what I come here for. So after this I’ll respond no further on the subject and give you the last word. Cool?

Yes Jesus was an advocate for helping the poor, downtrodden, and gentiles.

But you know what he didn’t say? That Caesar needs a progressive tax system with social safety nets to help the poor. Nor did Jesus ever advocate that the Roman Empire should open their borders to the barbaric horde of migrants so they may rape & pillage as they see fit.

Jesus was apolitical. If you are really a person of faith and intelligence you know this.

Have you ever stopped to think that people, even rich people…<gasp>…can be charitable and kind to the less fortunate without government taxing the shit out of them & legislating forced speech laws to make sure we address a person by their preferred pronouns? ZOMFG NOOOoooo!

Now can we kindly get back to our regularly scheduled political talks and separate church & state?

[time4fun]

A "woman of faith" would not advocate killing children, promote mental illness as normalcy or using government to confiscated peoples labors.

Jesus had no problem with abortion- as I pointed out. Jesus had no problem with gay people either- as I also pointed out.

And you just described capitalism.

[Suppressed Poet]

You know, you're right if you ignore the entirety of the rest of the Bible calling for us to be charitable and treat our fellow man with love and dignity. But since you're wanting to parse words about idoltry, why is it you choose to parse your savior's words as being an inference to idol worship instead of a plaintext reading? You can read the translations upside down and sideways for the next three weeks and the words still say the same thing.

Let's not forget our Bakkers, Falwells, Karesh, Jeff, LeBaron, Raniere and countless priests still diddling children to this day. Religious scholars are no less viable of jackassness than you or I, but unlike the above murderers, rapists, polygamists and extortionists, I don't use my faith to hurt others.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Just stop.

[Neveragain]

Jesus had no problem with abortion- as I pointed out. Jesus had no problem with gay people either- as I also pointed out.

Oh yes, I'm sure Christ would have been pleased as he walked by the local abortion clinic with Gods creation mutilated in the dumpster.

You're batshit crazy.