-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
2017 is 1984
- Thread starter Crabtownboy
- Start date
- Status
So you don't help anyone because you might help a few that are in your view undeserving? Do you know why someone isn't working? Maybe they can't get a job. What about the coal miners in KY who can't find work? I agree that you have to use some discernment but personally I'd rather help someone who's scamming me occasionally than not help anyone. What did Jesus say to the rich young ruler? Sell everything you have, give it to the poor, and follow me. MAT 25 tells us that whenever we help someone in need we are actually doing that for Jesus.
Actually, dollar wise most of the help I give is to needy people I know primarily through my church. I will help people on the street if they seem to be deserving (one elderly couple with the man in a wheel chair comes to mind) but not with a lot of money.
Last edited:
What money? The money the government TAKES from one to dole out to another?
Is THAT Biblical? Compelled theft and redistribution?
Do you always start a response with a false argument based on assumption?
My point is in regards to...
I had a great plan that I paid for out of my own pocket, and then...it was against the law for them to sell me that plan, so they offered me a sub-standard plan for more than double the cost.
So if you want to talk about taking money away from someone, then perhaps you would do well to see where that money is coming from, and who it is going to.
I am in the homes of people all the time who have enough money to drive nice cars, have cell phones, cable TV, and drugs...but they live in Section 8 Housing. They don't work.
I do.
2 Thessalonians 3:10
King James Version (KJV)
10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
Now I can support my statement from Scripture...
...your turn.
Show me where we are to supply health insurance for someone.
There are numerous reasons, and again we look to Scripture for guidance:
1 Timothy 5
King James Version (KJV)
3 Honour widows that are widows indeed.
4 But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.
Secondly, when it comes to charity, if we didn't have so many Liberal "Christians" buying into the Liberal Agenda...
...we would have more "Christians" obeying the principles of Scripture and less "Christians" thinking that welfare...
...actually helps everyone.
It is true there are people who desperately need help, I don't have a problem with that, but, we all know there are many who are bilking the "system" who are perfectly able to go out and find a job.
Secondly, if we didn't have so many bleeding heart psychobabblers putting people on psych meds because their mommy didn't show them enough attention when they were children we would have far less people who become "disabled" by those medications.
For some, this is true, but for many its a matter of "I can't find a job that I want."
Now its your turn to say, "You try living by working at McDonalds," right?"
Thank you Barack Obama.
I have, and will...do my share.
But, I am going to first provide for my family, as I am commanded, and I am not going to give able bodied people the first cent.
You ever heard of the term "hungry" applied to those who are...motivated?
A little hunger can be a good thing, and get some people off their duffs.
As an employer I can tell you that the mindset of America has changed quite a bit in the 35 years or so that I have been in the workplace. Everyone wants to start at the top, and few are willing to "pay their dues" anymore.
And that is a result of Liberal nonsense that tells people they have "rights" that they have not earned, and in no way deserve.
And Christ ministered to this proud man...under the Law.
He was dealing with the problem of the man's heart...
...not creating a Doctrinal Position we are to live by.
Here is another teaching of Christ:
Matthew 20
King James Version (KJV)
6 And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
The point is that being idle is considered by the Householder as...remarkable.
In the principle of gleaning people did not have charity delivered to their door, but were expected to go out into the fields.
And this...
Matthew 7:21-23
King James Version (KJV)
21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
...makes it clear that works mean nothing.
Just as is the case with the rich young ruler.
And that is the way it should be. So instead of appealing to the Government, perhaps those who need help, if they appeal to God, and God's People, they would receive support and help that we know is God's will for us in regards to charity.
I will help anyone I run across according to how I am led of God. Sometimes, FTW, "helping" people can be the worst thing you can do. Sometimes it is better to let someone get "hungry" instead of enabling idleness.
So do me a favor, if you respond to a post of mine in the future, do not begin it with a false argument based on assumption.
God bless.
If I say the sky is blue, we can always depend on Darrell to say it's gray.
No actually you can depend on me to present the proper context and give a realistic answer, not one contrived by Liberal Philosophy.
An example...
"Well, it may look blue, and might even be blue, but...can we really be sure the sky is there at all?"
As far as Politics being a Religion, it is usually easy to spot the Political Religionists, because they are consumed with Politics, and usually know very little about the Word of God.
Glad you found a board you fit into.
God bless.
LOL - I have never heard ANYONE claim "politics is their religion". Nor was my comment saying any such thing -
My point was you can be relied on to twist and rewrite others comments!
And no, someone interested in an discussing politics, does not make them "consumed" with politics, nor does it make politics their "religion".
What you "spot" is others not conformed to "your way".
Perhaps you should recognize Biblically "your way", is not measure of what a person should be conforming to.
And politically, is each individuals choice, even when you want to falsely LABEL them.
And most drunks do not claim they are alcoholics.
Here is your comment:
If I say the sky is blue, we can always depend on Darrell to say it's gray.
You're heading in the right direction if you want to gain sympathy here with other members. Might even be, that because of their dislike for me...they will overlook your Liberal Theology and never once try to help you to understand Salvation in Christ.
How do you rewrite...
If I say the sky is blue, we can always depend on Darrell to say it's gray.
...?
So you are saying, on a Public Debate Forum, that the suggestion that there are people consumed with Politics, who have made Politics their religion...is not a reality?
What "way" have I tried to convince others to conform to, other than The Way?
It is true, I would like to see certain people use a little more common sense, spend more time in the Word of God, and rightly divide the Word of God...
...so sue me.
So instruct me in the Way of Righteousness, Happy.
Show me from Scripture:
1. Annihilation;
2 Abortion is acceptable;
3. Men can be Christians without being born again.
I'll be more than Happy to discuss what is Biblical, in case you haven't caught on yet.
But, lest this thread be derailed, please do so in the appropriate threads. This is hallowed ground for some...
I don't label them, as I have already told you. If a person's doctrine is liberal...they are a Liberal.
If their doctrine is Philosophy, and they are Liberal, then it is no surprise that all they offer is Liberal Philosophy.
It's really quite simple math, Happy.
God bless.
No. Do you? "So is giving support to people who will not work."
Actually yes.
Mar 12:17
And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him.
So, you think what is OWED to the government is for one man to pay for another mans living expenses?
I am pro-life and anti-refugee: make their countries safe and give the refugees the life they want to lead back.
Sorry for being off topic, that was the only interesting thing in the OP I could find to comment on.
God bless.
Then you are simply pro-birth, not pro life.
That is not a false argument, that is a statement of a basic Bible Principle.
Here is your false argument:
What is false is :
1. Your assumption that I don't help anyone;
2. That I refuse to help the many to refrain from helping a "few" that are undeserving";
3. That it is actually a " 'few' that are undeserving."
God bless.
Birth has nothing to do with my statement.
The general principle is to help the refugees to live in their own countries, and this is something that is better achieved by making their countries safe from Terrorists than setting them up in tents in another country.
It is false to charge those of us who are Pro-Life (and pro-birth, for that matter) with being anti-refugee because some of us recognize that infiltration of an enemy occurs within that process. "Life" means more than simply being alive, it pertains to the actual existence of the one alive. And for many refugees, it is not hard to imagine that they would much prefer to be at home, rather than forced to flee to another country where they are not "living," but simply trying to survive.
God bless.
It appears you do not understand my statement. A person who says they are pro-life but do not support measures to help the living, who do not support giving them a chance at a good life, is not pro-life. They are simply pro-birth.
We have had many, many more acts of terror committed by native-born Americans than from refugees. Percentage wise such acts of terror by foreign-born folk is much lower.
Farook, remember San Bernardino was a native-born US citizen.
Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeea was born in Kuwait, but was brought to this country as an infant.
Dylann Storm Roof was born in South Carolina.
Jerad and Amanda Miller were both born in the US.
Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were both brought to he US as children.
Walter Michael Page was born in Colorado.
Nidal Malik Hasan was born in the United States.
So, where are all the acts of terror you allude to in accusing refugees of being dangerous?
If you are not pro-refugee, pro-poor people, pro-elderly people, pro-ill people you are not pro-life.
If you are not pro the people Christ talked about in Matthew in describing the last judgment, then you are not pro-life.
I understand your statement just fine.
What you do not understand is that desiring to liberate people from the oppression they face in their own country...
...is Pro-Life.
It's simple math, CTB.
Could you tally the death toll for the nutcase criminals of the US and compare that with the death toll of both Christians and Muslims in the Middle East please?
Secondly, CTB...
...would you show me where the nutcases of the US have created a refugee situation and forced many people to flee their homes?
That is my point.
You want to use band-aids and I would like to see surgery performed.
...would you show me where the nutcases of the US have created a refugee situation and forced many people to flee their homes?
Show where I even intimated...refugees are committing acts of terror or that they are who I am speaking of?
That is one of the problems of political obsession...it blinds people from hearing what those who disagree with them are even saying.
What part of...
...do you not understand?
Where do I call the refugees themselves terrorists?
I am not anti-refugee, I am for ending the ambitions of those who...make refugees.
And that is a far superior goal than overlooking the cause of why there are refugees than trying to get comfortable in treating the symptoms
That is far more Pro-Life..
You view my position as "not pro the people?"
First, that is a false assumption (another evidence of political obsession), and secondly, reads right our of a cheap sixties movie about "revolution."
Power to the people, brother...
God bless.
False comparison. We are talking about people here, terror here. The acts of terror have been committed by people who were either born here or were brought here as children. So, again, where are all the acts of terrorists in the US by refugees that you allude to?
I am pro-life ~ I enjoy living!
I am pro-life ~ I would want everyone to submit unto the Lord and have FOREVER life!
I am not pro ~ Constitutional Lawful ~ law breakers!
I am not pro ~ being COMPELLED (forced) for one to PROVIDE for an other!
I am not pro ~ corrupt lawmakers, making laws outside of their jurisdictional boundaries.
I am not pro ~ refugee.
I am not pro ~ poor people.
I am not pro ~ ill people.
I am not pro ~ abortion
I am not pro ~ theft
I am not pro ~ lying
I am not pro ~ cheating
Never would I want a person to be unsafe in his own country, or poor, or ill, or discard gifts from God.
I am pro freedom of choice ~
I am pro ~ that a man can choose to help whom he wishes, a man can do as he wishes, and a man can reap the benefits of what he does, and a man can be blessed as a consequence or suffer as a consequence of his choices.
If you are pro refugee ~ YOU pay their way to YOUR home and YOU provide their needs.
If you are pro poor people ~ YOU dig in YOUR pockets and provide for THEM.
If you are pro ill people ~ YOU tend to their NEEDS, with YOUR skills and YOUR funds.
AND allow me to DO as I choose as I am most willing to allow YOU to aid another according to YOUR skills and funds.
As far as ABORTION ~
....That also is A woman's right to end a pregnancy.
....That also is A physician's right to assist the woman.
I do not agree with the Government passing such a LAW.
I do not believe the Constitution provided a measure for the Congressional body or Supreme Court to allow such a measure.
However it is a law and individuals have a right to make their own decisions and themselves be subject to the consequences of a blessing or suffering for their actions.
I am adamantly Against compulsion (forcing) of the people at large to be subject to financially supporting Abortion, poor people, ill people, illegal law breakers, homosexuals, certain races, certain genders, certain age groups, homeless, refugees, and any other wishy washy group who thinks themselves exalted to being special with a name tag that purportedly gives them a "right" to be a "forced" burden on the public at large.
Its not a false comparison, because we look at the reason why there are refugees to begin with.
In our country, when these nutcases arise...our Law deals with them.
In their countries...it is "the Law" imposing the hardships usually.
While I would agree with that, it seems you are not grasping what I have said, and just not sure if that is intentional or if it is a matter of inability.
Not relevant, in the least...to anything I have said.
Please read the posts.
God bless.
According to the world, yes.
According to Scripture...no.
According to the Law of the land, yes.
According to the Law of God, no.
Murder is never going to be okay from a Biblical perspective.
God bless.
- Status