Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
They are so far gone I doubt if that would work. What would work is the shock therapy of the electric chair!
The Left has become dangerously unhinged.
- Thread starter glorydaz
- Start date
They are so far gone I doubt if that would work. What would work is the shock therapy of the electric chair!
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Of course not because they don't have to be saved because they are innocent of any wrong doing.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Can't take a joke?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Sure, you?
Actually, you're wrong in just about every part. Our government, we the people, has the right to help the poor collectively. We're actually doing more than the people of Israel were obligated to do in their day. And you've yet to provide scriptural support for you ideas about God's limitations on government, while I've supplied scriptural support for government authority, which is the root of our laws.
Except that it isn't theft. Theft is an unlawful taking of something from someone who has legal claim to it.
A store can charge anything you're willing to pay, provided you understand what you're paying. If a store tries to make a bargain with you and then attempts to change that bargain they have legal troubles ahead.
That's not God commanding all governments to build roads. It's a very specific situation involving sanctuary cities. Or do you also believe all governments should divide their land into 3rds and build sanctuary cities?
Then there's no such thing, because God compels it and always has.
It's neither. And the state takes up taxes at large then determines the best way to spend them in particular.
It's a commandment by the most inherently coercive force in the universe. Or do you think the idea that what you fail to do for the poor you fail to do for God is a suggestion of sorts. Do or don't do sort of thing, just a suggestion, no consequences attending?
No support for your idea in the latter, or for how you choose to see helping those who aren't in a position to provide for themselves.
I know you believe that, but you won't demonstrate God limiting the operation of government like that. In fact, charity was built into the law.
In order, I didn't say you did and I never did. Way to dodge what I'm actually saying though.
You'd just written that stealing was taking without legal right. My response is that the law cannot be "without legal right" so you lose at the outset. It's not stealing, can't be. It can be immoral and objectionable to your mind, but it can't rationally be considered theft.
You keep saying that. I don't believe you have it right. Which is why I've repeatedly asked you for scriptural support for that. And you've yet to set it out.
And given what little government provided in return that seems fair and just. What isn't there is God calling more than that, without even touching upon the foundation of government providing a good bit more than border security and judgement, "wicked". Or in any sense forbidding a government from doing more. You just don't like taxes, don't like how they're spent, and you want a moral leg to stand on in opposition.
It's not obvious when you don't frame it that way. All you needed to do is substitute "refuses" for "does not." Because they aren't saying the same thing.
If a parent abandons their responsibility to anyone the sin and the fault are theirs. But sending a child to school isn't that, whether done privately or publicly.
Caesar has a right to lay taxes and spend on whatever he wants. Fortunately, in our government, we are Caesar. In that the state is expressing authority given to it by God.
I gave you two major social programs doing a definable good and you've yet to do more than wave hands at them. What's the point in expanding a list you haven't really answered with rebuttal of any substantive sort? Saying interestates, a social program, isn't a social program doesn't make it so.
Trying to suggest education is the province of the parent is in the sense you use it as mistaken as suggesting that because the health of a child is the parent's responsibility they should practice medicine on the child instead of seeing to it that the child has a doctor.
Except a republic, our representative democracy, is a self-determining government where "we the people" is an apt description. The people elect representatives to hammer out our laws by that means, to speak for us with our voice. So no matter how you yell, "No!" the truth is plain and observable.
Caesar was the government in that day and I've read and responded to Samuel as you used it. It doesn't say what you're saying. So if that's it you're making some of your charge up.
That's evasion, not counter. And I set out a good bit of scripture in support. Set it out to be read.
No idea why you added a number of other particular rebuttals from me without responding, but...thanks?
Sure. When you divided a sentence in half so you could write "Duh" I think that speaks to something worth pointing out. I'd also note it if you starting randomly cursing, even though it wasn't substantive, because it's indicative.
Also, putting a lot of different responses into a needlessly long post where you move in and out of different conversations makes it a royal pain to answer, as well as creating a needlessly long post. When you do that and someone goes into quote mode it doesn't distinguish between quotes aimed to one person or the other. So you need two windows or a lot of scrolling to get to the parts that are responsive.
That's funny.
I always preview and it looks fine to me. Maybe it's your phone or something. :idunno: Way to dodge all that scripture though. :thumb:
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
JR, if you think that welfare programs and safety nets for the poor are "theft" then what solution do you have for the myriad people who would be left starving and destitute because they have no family or friends to aid them or any meaningful means of support? What about the children of such people where no governmental aid is available? Charity wouldn't reach everybody by a long shot, even with such safety nets in place there's people who fall through them and are on the streets.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
in the same manner, abortion isn't murder because a corrupt, immoral and evil legal system says so
drbrumley
Well-known member
Same Paul, same Bible. Yet here is Paul saying to stay away from the governments judicial systems and basically says the whole thing is unrighteous.
1 Corinthians 6:1-7
“Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers! Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather [let yourselves] be cheated?”
Free trade benefits all! We can always impose taxes on sales, which go to the state, not the importer.
I do mean dangerous. These out of control haters are fast becoming mobs who will stop at nothing to destroy this country. They are vulgar and proud of it. Where does this evil come from? Blame this on Trump, too, I suppose?
The new tactic is a blatant war on anyone who is not a member of their mob. Danger is here.
Watch the haters zoom in with their personal attacks.opcorn:
Make sure you are economically viable, and take your vitamins.
Such a simple truth, so hard for some people to understand.
some of them legal and assisted state sanctioned suicide?
It is like you are becoming my buddy!
drbrumley
Well-known member
CS Lewis
“It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
:up:
“It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
:up:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Um, not really sure where you're going with that or how it addresses my post to JR?
I think Paul is setting out how Christians should act if they are to imitate Christ fully. I don't see a contradiction in this, especially when you consider the tribunals he is referring to were pagan and the business conducted by heathens. Paul was keenly aware of how Christians behaving like the rest of the world around them would impact their witness.
I like JR and respect him. My post goes to the fact that some of these persons might find life intolerable and would like a way out.. It is purely pragmatic. Not all have much to live for and barely making it past fifty with no family, just maybe opting out is a viable option.
Should wanting to opt out be denied by someone else s religious beliefs, as that is the reason it is denied, why not allow anyone who cannot deal with life, after a certain age, the right to opt out?
It may seem left wing but it is not, as it saves taxpayer dollars.
drbrumley
Well-known member
…those who received the temple tax came to Peter and said, “Does your Teacher not pay the temple tax?”
He said, “Yes.”
And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?”
Peter said to Him, “From strangers.”
Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take that and give it to them for Me and you.”
He said, “Yes.”
And when he had come into the house, Jesus anticipated him, saying, “What do you think, Simon? From whom do the kings of the earth take customs or taxes, from their sons or from strangers?”
Peter said to Him, “From strangers.”
Jesus said to him, “Then the sons are free. Nevertheless, lest we offend them, go to the sea, cast in a hook, and take the fish that comes up first. And when you have opened its mouth, you will find a piece of money; take that and give it to them for Me and you.”
Theft as a legal matter rests on the foundation that when something is taken from another against their will, it is a thing they have legal title to. Because if that isn't the foundation a thief has as much complaint against the police who confiscate the property he has stolen. The law establishes what constitutes that title.
If you live here and pay taxes you are paying them willfully, participating in a system from which you derive benefits. Living in this compact is prima facie an agreement on your part to abide by the rules, to obey the law and to bear your portion of its freight. If you don't agree with the premise strongly enough you can remove yourself and are free to find another that suits you, leaving those taxes and participation behind.
So he met the obligations of the state, as he had commanded others to do.