rich republicans don't like homeless Jesus

[CrusaderFrank]

I am agnostic and still can recognize how full of crap progressives are about scripture.

Well what do you expect when people pontificate on scriptures they don't read?

I've read them in depth.
Repeatedly.
Used to preach them.

When you used to be a Republican?

 

[chikenwing]

Christians Ignore this part of their bible
Matthew:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

Christians don't ignore it.

Dems read it and think Jesus was talking about food stamps

So, like Avatar, you regularly put homeless people up in your home?
The only solution to public support is private support, and we already know that isn't enough.

Do you??

We haven't put up any homeless,but we do donate monies to the local shelter,and supply the local,CHURCH sponsored food bank with a lot of food. When the garden starts to produce we give much more.

Once again,if you bring the homeless into your house,good for you,but............... its very unlikely that you do.

 

[chikenwing]

How many other homeless do you extend the same respite?
What you do for the least of these, you do for me, right?
Do you, therefore, have regular homeless houseguests?

Bet would be the same number s as you?

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

 

[chikenwing]

How many other homeless do you extend the same respite?
What you do for the least of these, you do for me, right?
Do you, therefore, have regular homeless houseguests?

Bet would be the same number s as you?

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

Who is?? the huge assumptions ,your type so love to make,are wrong,and most likey you know that,but for some pathological reason you still make them.

 

[Avatar4321]

How many other homeless do you extend the same respite?
What you do for the least of these, you do for me, right?
Do you, therefore, have regular homeless houseguests?

Bet would be the same number s as you?

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

And yet only charity can help. Because Robbery will never fix the problems.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Bet would be the same number s as you?

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

And yet only charity can help. Because Robbery will never fix the problems.

Did the early church "rob" everyone in it by taking all they had and pooling it for the common good?
Or is their a special dispensation for them having followed that model?

 

[thebrucebeat]

Well what do you expect when people pontificate on scriptures they don't read?

I've read them in depth.
Repeatedly.
Used to preach them.

When you used to be a Republican?

Never have been. Independent my whole life.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Bet would be the same number s as you?

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Cons don't believe the bible where Jesus says, "The son of man has no place to rest his head" because they don't like the poor and the homeless. One rich ***** called the cops on the church that had a statue of homeless Jesus on a park bench.

Statue of a homeless Jesus startles a wealthy community | 89.3 KPCC

Christians Ignore this part of their bible
Matthew:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

Yes some people clam to be Christians,don't really walk the walk,good bet you don't ether.

Conservatives out pace people like yourself,by miles when it come to charity and helping others,saying anything different,is ether so totally misinformed its almost a crime,or just a flat out lie which do you do?

Real compassionate people,the one that make a difference in life,don't point fingers and accuse people in a blanket statement. Your underbelly is showing pull your pants up.

So many people getting very, very defensive!!!
Very telling.
LOL

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

And yet only charity can help. Because Robbery will never fix the problems.

Did the early church "rob" everyone in it by taking all they had and pooling it for the common good?
Or is their a special dispensation for them having followed that model?

They didn't take anything. Money was freely given. No force was involved.

Do you understand the difference between freely donating your property and having it taken by the use of force?

 

[Avatar4321]

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

No. you're just the one pretending that those who do charity are somehow the bad guys when you do nothing.

 

[thebrucebeat]

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

No. you're just the one pretending that those who do charity are somehow the bad guys when you do nothing.

I never said I do nothing.
I didn't comment on that at all.
I said government is a necessary component for handling the problem.
The rest is your own unfounded accusations.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

It can meet the need. But then the Democrats would lose their voting base.

I would argue that local charities could do more to help the truly poor than any government bureaucracy.

Hell the government can't even make the post office profitable while FedEx and UPS are kicking ass and taking names!

 

[thebrucebeat]

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

It can meet the need. But then the Democrats would lose their voting base.

I would argue that local charities could do more to help the truly poor than any government bureaucracy.

Hell the government can't even make the post office profitable while FedEx and UPS are kicking ass and taking names!

Then why aren't they already taking care of it?
They don't have the capacity, and no amount of pleading about the goodness of people of faith will change the math.

 

[westwall]

I'm not the one suggesting charity will be sufficient.

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

It did during the Great Depression. All government does is make the lower class permanent. The Church stepped in and fed people, housed them in some cases, educated them, and eventually the people who benefited got back on their own feet and when the Church asked for charity it was they who gave it next.

So far the Federal Government has spent over 5 trillion dollars on the "war on poverty" and as is true with all governmental programs the same people who were poor then, are poor now. They just have nice TV's and section 8 housing. There is no incentive for them to advance themselves...they are now nothing more than slaves who's sole job for the plantation owner, is to give the Master their vote.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

It can meet the need. But then the Democrats would lose their voting base.

I would argue that local charities could do more to help the truly poor than any government bureaucracy.

Hell the government can't even make the post office profitable while FedEx and UPS are kicking ass and taking names!

Then why aren't they already taking care of it?
They don't have the capacity, and no amount of pleading about the goodness of people of faith will change the math.

They do help those in their community already and if the federal government would get out of the way and allow us to keep our money we would be free to give more to our local charities and they in turn could help more people.

The charities can only help those that seek it, the government seeks out people to give welfare to, they run radio ads to get more people on food stamps.

A private charity cannot compete with the $2 to $3 million dollars the government pays for ads.

Government wants more people on food stamps

 

[koshergrl]

Talk to people who get foodstamps, and ask them where they get funding for the power bill when they're shut down, or water...or where they go when the foodstamps are gone and they still have a week left before the next issuance...

Answer...the church. They go to the church. They go to the pastors in their community, and the church-funded, housed and managed FOOD BANKS.

 

[thebrucebeat]

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

No. you're just the one pretending that those who do charity are somehow the bad guys when you do nothing.

You are getting very, very defensive and making accusations that are frankly absurd and unknowable by you. Shameful really. You have no idea what I do.
I don't think people "who do charity" are "bad guys". I just know from the data they can't provide for the need.

 

[koshergrl]

Really. Why don't you provide that *data*.

Be sure to link.

 

[thebrucebeat]

So you don't then right??

You should look up the def.of hypocrite.

No hypocrisy.
I'm not the one saying charity will solve the problem.
We already know it can't meet the need.

It did during the Great Depression. All government does it make the lower class permanent. The Church stepped in and fed people, housed them in some cases, educated them, and eventually the people who benefited got back on their own feet and when the Church asked for charity it was they who gave it next.

So far the Federal Government has spent over 5 trillion dollars on the "war on poverty" and as is true with all governmental programs the same people who were poor then, are poor now. They just have nice TV's and section 8 housing. There is no incentive for them to advance themselves...they are now nothing more than slaves who's sole job for the plantation owner, is to give the Master their vote.

Like all those parasitic seniors on SS and Medicare.
Despicable!