Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
He put the man to a test. Otherwise you’d have to ignore the hundreds of references in the OT and NT to wealth. You can’t parse the Bible to suit your purposes.What else would an apocalyptic Jew mean?Really? That’s what you believe he meant?Jesus had no economic theory beyond his saying we should give away all our material possessions. He expected the end times to be imminent so economics didn't matter.I made a video discussing my thoughts on if Jesus is a socialist. Let me know what you think of my arguments down below, and what do you think? Is Jesus a socialist? What evidence do you have that He is or is not?
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc., if they were all ordered to be dumpster divers and beggars, as some of the moron 'atheist' cultists keep claiming Christians are supposed to be.
But on the right wing, the nutjobs also like to forget the verses where it says workmen are worthy of their hire." They just like the 'sweat of their brows' part, as long as it isn't their brow that's sweating and they're getting a big cut of the bennies for 'investing n stuff'.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc.,
John Locke would disagree with you.Yet both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could.The Bible teaches that charity should come from the family, church and the heart, not the friggin Roman government.
The people that wrote the New Testament hated the government.
It was Christianity which brought freedom and liberty to the world. No wonder you hate Christianity, Ivan.He put the man to a test. Otherwise you’d have to ignore the hundreds of references in the OT and NT to wealth. You can’t parse the Bible to suit your purposes.What else would an apocalyptic Jew mean?Really? That’s what you believe he meant?Jesus had no economic theory beyond his saying we should give away all our material possessions. He expected the end times to be imminent so economics didn't matter.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc., if they were all ordered to be dumpster divers and beggars, as some of the moron 'atheist' cultists keep claiming Christians are supposed to be.
But on the right wing, the nutjobs also like to forget the verses where it says workmen are worthy of their hire." They just like the 'sweat of their brows' part, as long as it isn't their brow that's sweating and they're getting a big cut of the bennies for 'investing n stuff'.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc.,
were it not for the 4th century forgery the intent was not a church but the individual though not by sicko's means of a dumpster dive - rather by not praying but doing. a good way to get nailed to a board in those times to the present.
the religious itinerant was local with little inclination for a metropolis or rome for whatever reason limiting their true identity. and though obscured was most certainly a manifestation of the religion of antiquity.
He put the man to a test. Otherwise you’d have to ignore the hundreds of references in the OT and NT to wealth. You can’t parse the Bible to suit your purposes.What else would an apocalyptic Jew mean?Really? That’s what you believe he meant?Jesus had no economic theory beyond his saying we should give away all our material possessions. He expected the end times to be imminent so economics didn't matter.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc., if they were all ordered to be dumpster divers and beggars, as some of the moron 'atheist' cultists keep claiming Christians are supposed to be.
But on the right wing, the nutjobs also like to forget the verses where it says workmen are worthy of their hire." They just like the 'sweat of their brows' part, as long as it isn't their brow that's sweating and they're getting a big cut of the bennies for 'investing n stuff'.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc.,
were it not for the 4th century forgery the intent was not a church but the individual though not by sicko's means of a dumpster dive - rather by not praying but doing. a good way to get nailed to a board in those times to the present.
the religious itinerant was local with little inclination for a metropolis or rome for whatever reason limiting their true identity. and though obscured was most certainly a manifestation of the religion of antiquity.
.He put the man to a test. Otherwise you’d have to ignore the hundreds of references in the OT and NT to wealth. You can’t parse the Bible to suit your purposes.What else would an apocalyptic Jew mean?Really? That’s what you believe he meant?
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc., if they were all ordered to be dumpster divers and beggars, as some of the moron 'atheist' cultists keep claiming Christians are supposed to be.
But on the right wing, the nutjobs also like to forget the verses where it says workmen are worthy of their hire." They just like the 'sweat of their brows' part, as long as it isn't their brow that's sweating and they're getting a big cut of the bennies for 'investing n stuff'.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc.,
were it not for the 4th century forgery the intent was not a church but the individual though not by sicko's means of a dumpster dive - rather by not praying but doing. a good way to get nailed to a board in those times to the present.
the religious itinerant was local with little inclination for a metropolis or rome for whatever reason limiting their true identity. and though obscured was most certainly a manifestation of the religion of antiquity.
lol rubbish. We're all still waiting for all those verses you and Rosie claim Constantine 'rewrote'. Go ahead and post them here and back that silly claim up already.
lol rubbish. We're all still waiting for all those verses you and Rosie claim Constantine 'rewrote'. Go ahead and post them here and back that silly claim up already.
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
What you intend for evil, God uses for good..He put the man to a test. Otherwise you’d have to ignore the hundreds of references in the OT and NT to wealth. You can’t parse the Bible to suit your purposes.What else would an apocalyptic Jew mean?
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc., if they were all ordered to be dumpster divers and beggars, as some of the moron 'atheist' cultists keep claiming Christians are supposed to be.
But on the right wing, the nutjobs also like to forget the verses where it says workmen are worthy of their hire." They just like the 'sweat of their brows' part, as long as it isn't their brow that's sweating and they're getting a big cut of the bennies for 'investing n stuff'.
One also can't even remotely begin to fulfill the duties of a church that is asked to take care of the widows, the ill, and the orphans, etc.,
were it not for the 4th century forgery the intent was not a church but the individual though not by sicko's means of a dumpster dive - rather by not praying but doing. a good way to get nailed to a board in those times to the present.
the religious itinerant was local with little inclination for a metropolis or rome for whatever reason limiting their true identity. and though obscured was most certainly a manifestation of the religion of antiquity.
lol rubbish. We're all still waiting for all those verses you and Rosie claim Constantine 'rewrote'. Go ahead and post them here and back that silly claim up already.
lol rubbish. We're all still waiting for all those verses you and Rosie claim Constantine 'rewrote'. Go ahead and post them here and back that silly claim up already.
you just run and hide, sicko -
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
the above is a forgery, for simple minds like yours ... to use against humanity in pursuit of your own personal delusions.
I thought they were pretty hot on the law being obeyed.The Bible teaches that charity should come from the family, church and the heart, not the friggin Roman government.
The people that wrote the New Testament hated the government.
I don't know that. He wouldn't approve of a theocracy but he'd have to acknowledge the desire of religions to seek political power.John Locke would disagree with you.Yet both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could.The Bible teaches that charity should come from the family, church and the heart, not the friggin Roman government.
The people that wrote the New Testament hated the government.
John Locke, like our founding fathers, believed in natural law or nature’s law or the law of right and wrong. They believed that we have inalienable rights for no other reason than we are God’s creatures. They believed that these rights are conditional upon ours meeting our obligations and duties to the creator. They believed that the people and the government could not act any way they wished. That the people and the government should behave morally or according to nature’s law or natural law. They believed that no law should be written that was counter to nature’s law. These beliefs do not make them a theocracy anymore than the monarchies that existed before them made those nations a theocracy.I don't know that. He wouldn't approve of a theocracy but he'd have to acknowledge the desire of religions to seek political power.John Locke would disagree with you.Yet both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could.The Bible teaches that charity should come from the family, church and the heart, not the friggin Roman government.
The people that wrote the New Testament hated the government.
Where has this happened?he'd have to acknowledge the desire of religions to seek political power.
You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
I'd oppose it to but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.I believe he would oppose such a thing if it had occurred and so would I.
Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
It didn’t.I'd oppose it to but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.I believe he would oppose such a thing if it had occurred and so would I.
The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
You don't want to know your history.Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.
your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.
make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.
I do know my history. I know it enough to know that the king was the one who got his way.You don't want to know your history.Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.
your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.
make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.
When is a monarch more than a monarch?
The Church of England (C of E) is the established church of England.[4][5][6] The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior cleric, although the monarch is the supreme governor.
Popes could remove monarchs: The papal deposing power was the most powerful tool of the political authority claimed by and on behalf of the Roman Pontiff, in medieval and early modern thought, amounting to the assertion of the Pope's power to declare a Christian monarch heretical and powerless to rule.
How many kings do you suppose were deposed versus the total number of kings throughout history? What do you think that percentage would be?You don't want to know your history.Vatican City that’s an example of a theocracy.The Papal States (/peɪpəl/) (Italian: Stato Pontificio), officially the State of the Church (Italian: Stato della Chiesa, Italian pronunciation: [ˈstaːto della ˈkjeːza]; Latin: Status Ecclesiasticus;[2] also Dicio Pontificia) were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the Pope, from the 8th century until 1870.Again, monarchies. No matter how hard you want it to be otherwise.You made the statement that both the Jews and Christians opted for a theocracy whenever they could. I find that statement to be false.
- Jews arrested Jesus.
- Jews levied a Temple tax in Israel.
- The Puritans fled religious persecution by the British government's Church of England
- The Puritans created their own theocracy here
- Spain and England expelled Jews
- The Inquisition
Papal States. Also the Pope was a major player in the politics of Medieval Europe.The Catholic Church did not rule any nations. Those nations were not theocracies. Those nations were monarchies.
again, you are ignoring the sovereign rulers.
your bias is so strong you have abandoned reason and logic. You are defining the rule by exception.
make a complete list of monarchies and theocracies and then you will see how foolish you are being.
When is a monarch more than a monarch?
The Church of England (C of E) is the established church of England.[4][5][6] The Archbishop of Canterbury is the most senior cleric, although the monarch is the supreme governor.
Popes could remove monarchs: The papal deposing power was the most powerful tool of the political authority claimed by and on behalf of the Roman Pontiff, in medieval and early modern thought, amounting to the assertion of the Pope's power to declare a Christian monarch heretical and powerless to rule.
