Posted on 05/10/2006 6:28:01 AM PDT by bondjamesbond
Pilate once said: "What is truth?".
1. Of course the solution to all this is to stick to the clear teachings of Bible, with the writings intelligently interpreted in their literary and historical contexts. When they apply to life, even political life, apply them.
2. Andrew Sullivan's concept of conservative evangelicals is a bigoted, narrow minded sweeping generalization. Of course, since he is insulting Christians he will be lauded rather receiving the condemnation his vile drivel deserves.
(In any case, this is not the only relevant passage. Hint: "Samaritan" is to "1st century Judean Jew" as "Negro" is to "19th century American white".)
Oh brother! Read my tagline.
He's a talented writer, and you're right, it is painful to see his struggles with his conviction of sin, because the Lord's mercy is *so close*.
> Freedom of religion is guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
Exactly so. So, don't be too surprised when the people who are incessantly evangelized decide that "Christianists" are worrysome, and express themselves accordingly.
Of course, there's also the little probelm that "freedom of religion" is held in some considerable disdain by those very Christianists... when the religion is not their own.
That's entirely different. Paul is referring to people that refuse to work.
The "eating from any person's field" was more for people that had reasons, not for perpetual freeloaders.
You are the one who said: "I am compelled by my faith to try and make them see the error of their ways"
What gives you the right to pass judgement on a person's life? What gives you the insight to determine a person's religion is wrong?
For another example of the difference between God's Law and Moses's:
Matthew 19:
3Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?"
4And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE,
5and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'?
6"So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
7They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?"
8He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way.
9"And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery."
> Why do you attack me?
Wow. You're really working the whole victimhood angle, ain't'cha.
The "GOP convention" <> conservativism.
Got it?
I completely disagree. The Bible makes it very clear that humans have the right to food. It makes a clear distinction between eating food and taking food.
You are distorting history and culture.
There's a bible verse that says: If a man will not work, neither shall he eat.
And yet the Romans did have a form of welfare and Jesus did not condemn it or suggest that taxes not be collected to support it.
If government does supply aid to the poor, what would Jesus say to taking that aid away from the poor? If our understanding of Christianity condemns abortion and as Christians we feel compelled morally to pressure government to pass laws prohibiting abortion, then why don't we also extend to government the duty to care for the poor? Why not pass laws requiring farmers to leave a portion of their crops for the poor? Why should one be a matter of choice and the other not?
Another one...
I think the story of the good samaritan which you are referring to has much more to do with love and compassion as well, and less to do with equality, as we think of it today.
I could be wrong. My original comment on this topic had to do with the lazy habit of people have of ascribing whatever they see to be desirable to Christ, and thinking they have made an argument.
I could be wrong. I certainly don't mean to denigrate equality or tolerance.
See? You are just proving my original point... Jesus would be labled a liberal by modern conservative Christians.
> But sometimes you have to hit certain people between the eyes with a two-by-four to get their attention...
Bear this in mind:
"A wayfarer should not walk unarmed,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need a spear,
Or what menace meet on the road."
Whack someone with a two-by-four, and you could well end up on the pointy end of a pike or a sword. "Turn the other cheek" is a bizarre notion to those in many religions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.