I believe you are referencing Matthew 15? I also assume by your post that you are speaking on behalf of Jesus against the illegal aliens in our midst?
Yes Jesus referenced the woman as a dog. Only because she was not a Jew and she was begging him for a healing for her daughter. He stated that his mission at that time was to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”. He was not referencing her geographical standing, but her religious standing. He then told her it is not good to give the bread meant for the children (Jews )to the little dogs (Gentiles).
She then acknowledged her status and begged Jesus to grant her daughter a healing noting that the dogs can eat the crumbs that fall from the children’s table.
If you recall, Jesus then praised the woman for her faith and granted her prayer.
To use that story as an excuse to hate immigrants, is really a bridge too far. Most of the people who come to America illegally are simply here to eat the crumbs that fall from our tables. They do the work we don’t want to do. Most of the ones I know are God fearing religious social conservatives. While they are breaking the law, we have to recognize that a law that is not enforced is not a law.
speaking on behalf of Jesus
***I’m speaking on behalf of my own viewpoint, just like you are. I am using scripture to back up my viewpoint. Jesus has His OWN viewpoint and He can speak on behalf of Himself.
against the illegal aliens in our midst?
***How do you figure it’s ‘against’? I am FOR them going back to fix their OWN problems in their OWN countries so we can Make Shiiteholes Great Again.
Yes Jesus referenced the woman as a dog.
***Well, congratulations are in order. You’re the very first freeper after several years of me bringing this up who actually acknowledged the case. That puts you in rarefied atmosphere.
Only because she was not a Jew and she was begging him for a healing for her daughter.
***Like I said, more important than immigration.
He stated that his mission at that time was to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel”. He was not referencing her geographical standing, but her religious standing.
***He was referencing both. The common expression for Israelites towards Gentiles was ‘dog’.
He then told her it is not good to give the bread meant for the children (Jews )to the little dogs (Gentiles).
***He called her a dog.
She then
***You see, this is where you are trying to pull the argument away from the simple fact that Jesus called her a dog and said “let the children eat first”. Jesus knows who should get first crack at societal resources. Plain and simple. I can tell that the rest of your soliloquy will be some roundabout attempt to just dismiss this important aspect and pull in your own viewpoint but since you’re dismissive of what you factually acknowledge, it seems likely I will be just as dismissive of your viewpoint.
acknowledged her status and begged Jesus to grant her daughter a healing noting that the dogs can eat the crumbs that fall from the children’s table.
***Yeah huh, she said that.
If you recall, Jesus then praised the woman for her faith and granted her prayer.
***Yeah huh. So you’ve gone past where this passage is applicable to dogs and illegal colonizers.
To use that story as an excuse to
***Call illegal colonizers what they are: Illegal Colonizers. That’s what I am doing.
hate immigrants,
***That’s complete horse shiite. This isn’t hatred to call out illegal colonizers any more than it was hatred on Jesus’s part to call the immigrant woman a dog. Or do you accuse Christ of being unChristlike when He said that?
is really a bridge too far.
***You really do accuse Christ of going down a ‘bridge too far’, of being unChristlike? Really? I think you’re just finding it difficult to defend your viewpoint, that’s all.
Most of the people who come to America illegally
***Are illegal colonizers. Their first act upon coming here is to break the law. Usually their second act is to follow up that lawbreaking to get illegal papers. That’s MOST of the illegals, most of them...
are simply here to eat the crumbs that fall from our tables.
***Our dogs can eat those crumbs just as legitimately as their illegal colonizing dogs can do. The story of Ruth, whose daughter in law Naomi was gleaning the fields, that story is instructive. Because the low end workers often looked at those gleanings as belonging to THEM. Such gleaning activity was a direct competition for them and their own wage base, even the owners of the land knew it. The slaves didn’t have to glean after the harvest because it was the responsibility of the owner to feed them. So if these illegal colonizing people want the benefits of our societal resources, they should sign up the normal pathway which is to “be a slave for a few years” in Ruth’s day or simply apply for legal immigration status in today’s parlance. Boaz had to stop the workers from harassing Naomi and our guvmint’s job is to stop the illegal colonizers but they aint doing their job.
They do the work we don’t want to do.
***That’s becoming more and more bullshiite with each passing day. My first paycheck job, I was a dishwasher working my way up to cook. The waitstaff were all rounded up on an INS raid, turns out they were almost all illegal aliens. They owned houses in San Mateo, California which today are worth upwards of $2M/house. These are not lettuce pickers, they took a serious job that people like me working our way up WANTED. And that was more than 40 years ago, it has only gotten worse. You’re pushing a tired meme.
Most of the ones I know are God fearing religious social conservatives.
***Then let them be God fearing religious social conservatives IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY.
While they are breaking the law,
***Does that even register in your brain?
we have to recognize that a law that is not enforced is not a law.
***That’s as shallow a justification for lawlessness as I have ever heard. You are simply despicable.