So Why are Christians so concerned about Obamacare and Politics?

[Zaac]

Just wondering why there seems to be such vitriol about these things.

 

[Revmitchell]

If anyone thinks the op is actually looking for a genuine answer I have some ocean front property to sell you in New Mexico.

To the op let me go ahead and let you know now. We will post and discuss these issues on this board. No amount of whining will change that.

 

[Zaac]

If anyone thinks the op is actually looking for a genuine answer I have some ocean front property to sell you in New Mexico.

To the op let me go ahead and let you know now. We will post and discuss these issues on this board. No amount of whining will change that.

To the second poster, no one asked for your input so take your anger back to another thread. :wavey:

 

[Salty]

To the second poster, no one asked for your input so take your anger back to another thread. :wavey:

I highly doubt that Rev Mitchell will be going anywhere.

But to answer you question -
Americians dont like being told what to do
ie being forced to buy insurance even if you dont want it. ( and dont give me the bit about car insurance - if you dont know the difference - then there is no sense in wasting anymore my time)

Here is another reason - we are being told that Obamacare will be subsidized - and how will it be subsidized by us WORKING TAXPAYERS!!!!

 

[evenifigoalone]

Christians are like other people--and people often take some interest in politics. I guess it comes out of concern for your country and/or wanting to help it.

As to how the conservative and republican have come to be such a typically Christian position, I'm not entirely sure. (And I say that as someone who leans right myself, except I'm libertarian.) Part of it is for sure that politicians try to appeal to certain crowds in order to be elected, politicians will at least pretend to stand for the things the people whose votes he's trying to get stands for.
Hm...well, I suppose they have to have some sort of name for those who hold to the things conservatives do...it makes sense that most Christians would believe the conservative position to align with the Bible more, I suppose. As far as social issues are concerned, anyway.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I'm addressing your second post first ...

To the second poster, no one asked for your input so take your anger back to another thread. :wavey:

By posting your thread, you invited his comments.

Just wondering why there seems to be such vitriol about these things.

You have gone to great pains the last few days to emphasize preaching the gospel over and above all else, which is exactly what we should be doing. But it apparently has not occurred to you that, through our biblically based sense of what is good, right, and just, we have judged an unfairly administered, financially biased, and essentially socialistic program of "health care" (parenthesized due to its true lack of actually being such a program) to be un-Christlike and therefore worthy of our protests. To be sure, we could include in our posts material that points us back to Christ, rather than toward evil, and I for one will endeavor to do that from this point forward.

We should control ourselves, and I admit that, when I post regarding his actions, I tend to let anger show through. It is not a good thing. But in my defense, just thinking about the sheer arrogance of the man occupying the White House angers me, this man who dares to rewrite laws on a whim, decide some laws will be enforced to the nth degree while others will be ignored, and most importantly is an utter failure at carrying out his duties as commander-in-chief.

I remain convinced he at least knew of, if not listened to, the cries of defenders at Benghazi begging for assistance, and issued the orders to stand down. I base this on 20 years of military experience as a combat officer in the rotary wing forces. No commander would leave his troops -- even civilian ones -- hanging like that, not without direct orders from much higher up than he/she, and even if such orders originated in the Pentagon, most would have ignored them as sheer idiocy. But it is difficult to ignore orders from the commander-in-chief, given what that office represents, regardless of who occupies it. That solidified my total, utter, and absolute disgust and distaste for this man.

Now he dares to put his own "legacy" above common sense. It is obvious the details of the ACA were deliberately hidden from the American public for four years. Only now are we seeing how truly reprehensible this program is, that it is designed to destroy free enterprise (insurance companies) and replace them with what must become, due to costs, bare bones health care plans on the government dime. It is putting doctors out of private practice, as they cannot afford to provide care at the high level to which they are accustomed, due to the fact they will be paid mere pennies on the dollar. That means they cannot afford to pay their own bills, and therefore many are opting out rather than face bankruptcy. The greatest expense in health care is currently malpractice insurance. Doctors have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in premiums for hundreds of millions of dollars of insurance. The ACA does nothing to address malpractice, and the only way I see them handling it is likely to pass a law sometime soon that just bans lawsuits against government programs. That will be unconstitutional, of course, but that doesn't seem to bother the Great Pretender. He liberally and often violates it.

The majority of the American people want this program drastically cut back, or eliminated. That is an undeniable fact. No matter how the liberal media spins its apologies for this fool, they can't escape the fact 56% of the public -- five and a half percent more than voted for him -- want his idiotic program trashed. This nation was founded on the principles of democratic thought as executed through representative republican concepts. Such a governing system requires compromise, "deal-cutting" -- a process that is seen as distasteful recently, even though it has worked well for 223 years. It demands the oppositions talk to one another. Suddenly, the Empty Suit proclaims such activity is "unprecedented." He's is a liar, a manipulator, a cheap politician with no statesmanship talents whatsoever.

So forgive us if we pick on a man you have inexplicably chosen to admire. He is not worth your efforts, and being angry with people because they don't see whatever ethereal mystifying quality you see, is a waste of your time and ours. Yes, we're angry. We have a right to be. The man is destroying this country, one small piece at a time. At the end of his eight years, we will no longer be what we once were, nor will we ever be able to rise to that level again. In addition to the ruin he brings, he will cripple our ability to reverse his damage.

So live with, Zaac. You'll see more of it.

 

[Aaron]

Just wondering why there seems to be such vitriol about these things.

For the sake of the respondents: What is justice? Who are the afflicted, the oppressed and needy, and are the faithful ever commanded to raise their voices for them?

 

[Don]

To echo the previous two posters: Are we not our brothers' keeper? Should we not bear the infirmities of the weaker?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I like Zaac enough, but this is lame. Everyone remembers his campaign against Romney.

 

[Zaac]

I highly doubt that Rev Mitchell will be going anywhere.

But to answer you question -
Americians dont like being told what to do
ie being forced to buy insurance even if you dont want it. ( and dont give me the bit about car insurance - if you dont know the difference - then there is no sense in wasting anymore my time)

Here is another reason - we are being told that Obamacare will be subsidized - and how will it be subsidized by us WORKING TAXPAYERS!!!!

So ultimately this is about money. Which is kinda what I thought. Now forgive me if I'm out of line here. I know we like money and what it affords for us to be able to do. But should we really be making this big of a deal about it to the point that so many CHRISTIANS seem mad about it?

 

[Don]

So ultimately this is about money. Which is kinda what I thought. Now forgive me if I'm out of line here. I know we like money and what it affords for us to be able to do. But should we really be making this big of a deal about it to the point that so many CHRISTIANS seem mad about it?

Would you agree that there are those who don't fully understand the ACA, and need assistance with it?

 

[Zaac]

I'm addressing your second post first ...

By posting your thread, you invited his comments.

I'm pretty sure( though i could be wrong) he has me on ignore:laugh: so he technically invited himself.

You have gone to great pains the last few days to emphasize preaching the gospel over and above all else, which is exactly what we should be doing. But it apparently has not occurred to you that, through our biblically based sense of what is good, right, and just, we have judged an unfairly administered, financially biased, and essentially socialistic program of "health care" (parenthesized due to its true lack of actually being such a program) to be un-Christlike and therefore worthy of our protests.

It has occurred to me that once again because we think something is being unfairly administered, financially biased, and socialistic doesn't make it either unBiblical, unChristlike, bad, wrong, or unjust.

We do tend to naturally see our political positions as being Biblical.

But is there an actual Biblical basis for the protests. Because I must admit, it all sounds like a bunch of folks being led by politics first, and looking for Biblical justification to protest second.

Is it really about the money?

To be sure, we could include in our posts material that points us back to Christ, rather than toward evil, and I for one will endeavor to do that from this point forward.

I agree that we should do this. But be real with me here. Is this really about the money because we've talked about how it's administered, it's financially biased and socialistic. And that all seems to point back to the money.

We should control ourselves, and I admit that, when I post regarding his actions, I tend to let anger show through. It is not a good thing. But in my defense, just thinking about the sheer arrogance of the man occupying the White House angers me, this man who dares to rewrite laws on a whim, decide some laws will be enforced to the nth degree while others will be ignored, and most importantly is an utter failure at carrying out his duties as commander-in-chief.

I know he makes you want to ring his neck. But we must remember that the man is just a puppet. If we can see him, he is NOT the enemy.

I remain convinced he at least knew of, if not listened to, the cries of defenders at Benghazi begging for assistance, and issued the orders to stand down. I base this on 20 years of military experience as a combat officer in the rotary wing forces.

No commander would leave his troops -- even civilian ones -- hanging like that, not without direct orders from much higher up than he/she, and even if such orders originated in the Pentagon, most would have ignored them as sheer idiocy. But it is difficult to ignore orders from the commander-in-chief, given what that office represents, regardless of who occupies it. That solidified my total, utter, and absolute disgust and distaste for this man.

Thank you for your service.:applause: We just lost another 23 year old from our community in Afghanistan.

I think it's incumbent upon us as Christians to set the example on how to respond to the foolishness that comes from our supposed "leaders". Let's just pray for them as God directs and leave the justice to Him because He is not going to let it go on forever.

I think, without a doubt, every time I see something crazy coming out of politics, behind the scenes or off to the side, I can see God allowing Himself to be glorified out of it as He allowed it to take place.

Even in the midst of folks thinking they have gotten away with something, off to the side, glory is being brought to God.

So as you mentioned, let's not let our anger or rage rule us because we're going to continue to see foolishness that we almost can't believe coming out of Washington and our state and local leaders.

But let's not be consumed by it to the point where it makes us look angry about things that ultimately have no eternal value.

Now he dares to put his own "legacy" above common sense. It is obvious the details of the ACA were deliberately hidden from the American public for four years. Only now are we seeing how truly reprehensible this program is, that it is designed to destroy free enterprise (insurance companies) and replace them with what must become, due to costs, bare bones health care plans on the government dime. It is putting doctors out of private practice, as they cannot afford to provide care at the high level to which they are accustomed, due to the fact they will be paid mere pennies on the dollar. That means they cannot afford to pay their own bills, and therefore many are opting out rather than face bankruptcy. The greatest expense in health care is currently malpractice insurance. Doctors have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars a year in premiums for hundreds of millions of dollars of insurance. The ACA does nothing to address malpractice, and the only way I see them handling it is likely to pass a law sometime soon that just bans lawsuits against government programs. That will be unconstitutional, of course, but that doesn't seem to bother the Great Pretender. He liberally and often violates it.

All of that is ultimately about money and power. Those in leadership have abused the same two things since early Bible times. But getting us heatd about the things you mentioned above and other absolute craziness coming from leadership seems to be a quite effective way for the real enemy to get US off message.

The majority of the American people want this program drastically cut back, or eliminated. That is an undeniable fact. No matter how the liberal media spins its apologies for this fool, they can't escape the fact 56% of the public -- five and a half percent more than voted for him -- want his idiotic program trashed. This nation was founded on the principles of democratic thought as executed through representative republican concepts. Such a governing system requires compromise, "deal-cutting" -- a process that is seen as distasteful recently, even though it has worked well for 223 years. It demands the oppositions talk to one another. Suddenly, the Empty Suit proclaims such activity is "unprecedented." .

And what weight does this carry with eternal matters?

He's is a liar, a manipulator, a cheap politician with no statesmanship talents whatsoever

Yet according to God's word he hasn't done anything that we're not all guilty of.

So forgive us if we pick on a man you have inexplicably chosen to admire.

Not hardly. One would almost think that some of you think I voted to elect that man.:laugh:

He is not worth your efforts, and being angry with people because they don't see whatever ethereal mystifying quality you see, is a waste of your time and ours.

If he is lost and on the way to hell, he is indeed worth the effort. If he's a Brother in Christ making one unGodly decision after another, he is indeed worth the effort.

Yes, we're angry. We have a right to be. The man is destroying this country, one small piece at a time.

So you're angry that he's destroying something that time and time again shows itself to be against Christ? You say that as though you expect this country to always be here.

At the end of his eight years, we will no longer be what we once were, nor will we ever be able to rise to that level again. In addition to the ruin he brings, he will cripple our ability to reverse his damage.

Still sounds like a bunch of economics and money.

So live with, Zaac. You'll see more of it.

It is what it is. I believe the country has to economically be destroyed in order for a one world government to step in and seize control.

We can speak against it in the delivery of God's truth. But to be angry about it seems somewhat counterproductive when looking at how Scripture seems to point to things needing to play out.

 

[Zaac]

Would you agree that there are those who don't fully understand the ACA, and need assistance with it?

I would agree that it's a bunch of baloney intended to cede more power and control to the government over people's lives. At 20,000+ pages of legislation, Congress needs assistance with it.

And by now, I think it should be obvious to those who support the Dems and those who support the Repubs that the two sides are in bed together.

Like the Patriot Act, this will have a lot of hidden gems inside.

This is about money, power and control. And the people who are trying to grab all these things don't even realize that they are just pawns to be manipulated.

The ACA isn't the problem.

Preach the Gospel.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

So ultimately this is about money. Which is kinda what I thought. Now forgive me if I'm out of line here. I know we like money and what it affords for us to be able to do. But should we really be making this big of a deal about it to the point that so many CHRISTIANS seem mad about it?

Do you care that this program hasn't even been implemented yet but is being unfairly administered, is subject to change on the whim of the Great Pretender when it inconveniences his political patrons, that he has unconstitutionally made those changes, that it will cost far more than it was estimated to cost at inception, and that such increased costs are counterproductive to reducing the deficit and balancing the budget?

And if you don't, why not? Why should a Christian people not expect accountability from their government?

 

[Zaac]

To echo the previous two posters: Are we not our brothers' keeper? Should we not bear the infirmities of the weaker?

Didn't Obama use the same Scripture to justify Obamacare?

 

[Zaac]

I like Zaac enough, but this is lame. Everyone remembers his campaign against Romney.

:laugh: As well you should. I'll campaign against anyone vying for a position of leadership who is against Jesus Christ.

I didn't need to compromise in order to elect a man against Christ to save the country. I have Jesus Christ who is fully capable of saving anything that needs to be saved.:thumbsup:

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Didn't Obama use the same Scripture to justify Obamacare?

I've thought about that ever since he used it. I've come to the conclusion that 99.99% of us miss it -- myself included -- when "brothers keeper" statements are made. The truth is, Great Pretender and anyone else who uses this as a summary of the story from Genesis, acts out the theological equivalent of dropping his pants with that misuse of Cain's plaint to God.

In looking into this misuse of biblical history, I found an article online by Jerry Bowyer on Forbes' website. Exerpts, with some editing, are below.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybo...-brothers-keeper-if-my-brother-is-my-sheep/2/​

Cain slaying Abel is history’s first homicide and, worse still, its first fratricide. His brother’s blood is still being swallowed by the earth, a significant antithesis to Cain then lying to his Creator. Perhaps his is not the moral compass (another term also not in the Bible) by which we should guide the ship of state. And quoting the father of murderers hardly seems like a good way to illustrate your vision for a compassionate society.

But this is only one side of the coin: This shows what being your brother’s keeper doesn’t mean, but that still leaves us to determine what it does mean, and why it’s found in that part of the Bible. The context suggests pretty strongly that there is a strong element of literary irony here. The story tells us very little about Abel, really only his occupation and how it relates to his liturgical offerings. He was a shepherd.

In the book, The Beginning of Wisdom, Leon Kass observes that in effect Cain sarcastically asks whether he is the shepherd’s keeper. The point is pretty clear in English if we stop and reflect for a moment, but it’s even clearer in the original Hebrew in which Cain asks whether he is the 'shmr of his brother, Shomor. The shepherd is missing and Cain is saying that the shepherd is not one of his sheep. In other words, Cain is being a smart ass.

Cain, in his choice of wording, is also revealing a lot about his interior life and his philosophy of human nature. He thinks of men as being shepherds of other men, who of necessity must therefore be sheep. The old Roman saying that Homo homini lupus est ("man is a wolf to man") is prefigured in the sense that if the first group of men is a wolf to the second group of men, then the second group of men must be sheep to the first. Cain, and his spiritual descendants, think of men as animals, and as that is their being, killing them has no consequence.

Is there some element of social theory in all this? I think there clearly is, though not the one the President is trying to build. The story of Cain provides a backdrop against which Israel is presented with two types of shepherds: Inherent, and Transcendent. Every time Israel assembled before the temple to make sacrifce, they were to be dismissed with the BircatCohenim, the "priestly blessing":

"May the Lord Bless you and KEEP YOU …" ​

‘And keep you’, in Hebrew, v’yshmareka, is nearly identical to the word which Cain had used, shmr. In other words, every time that Israel approached God and reenacted the primordial encounter of Cain and Abel with God, with the offering of grain and livestock, they were reminded that Cain and his spiritual descendants were not their keepers. The Lord is their Shepherd. They shall not want. Neither will we.

The political and economic theology of shepherds starts with the affirmation that the role of provider, shepherd, and keeper of the people does not belong to any imminent human authority, but to the Lord. On this foundation, we see the Bible develop a social theory of equality before the law and of brotherhood among citizens, not "keeper-hood" by the state.

Am I my brother’s keeper? No. According to God, I am not my brother’s keeper, because I am my brother’s brother. The statist, like the Great Pretender, doesn't understand that, as unintentionally revealed by his misuse of the term.

 

[Zaac]

Do you care that this program hasn't even been implemented yet but is being unfairly administered, is subject to change on the whim of the Great Pretender when it inconveniences his political patrons, that he has unconstitutionally made those changes, that it will cost far more than it was estimated to cost at inception, and that such increased costs are counterproductive to reducing the deficit and balancing the budget?

Of course I care that it's a stupid law. But government is always passing stupid laws that cost more than they originally say, etc, etc. You still make it sound like this is about money.

And if you don't, why not? Why should a Christian people not expect accountability from their government?

Is this not essentially what Jesus clarified when asked about paying taxes to Caesar?

21 They said, “Caesar's.” Then he said to them, “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's.” 22 When they heard it, they marveled. And they left him and went away. Matt. 22:21-22

So what is it that we want this government accountable for? Charging the taxpayer more so that they can institute some socialist healthcare program?

It's about the money. The money has the government all over it so I just don't see why we should be angry about them taking it back. I understand a little upset, but angry?

 

[Zaac]

I've thought about that ever since he used it. I've come to the conclusion that 99.99% of us miss it -- myself included -- when "brothers keeper" statements are made. The truth is, Great Pretender and anyone else who uses this as a summary of the story from Genesis, acts out the theological equivalent of dropping his pants with that misuse of Cain's plaint to God.

In looking into this misuse of biblical history, I found an article online by Jerry Bowyer on Forbes' website. Exerpts, with some editing, are below.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jerrybo...-brothers-keeper-if-my-brother-is-my-sheep/2/​

I can't speak precisely to why Obama used the phrase he did. But it appears that he was saying, unlike Cain, that he is responsible for taking care of his brother.

Is there not a Biblical precedent for that principle?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

:laugh: As well you should. I'll campaign against anyone vying for a position of leadership who is against Jesus Christ.

And that's fine, and you shouldn't judge others for doing the same.

I didn't need to compromise in order to elect a man against Christ to save the country. I have Jesus Christ who is fully capable of saving anything that needs to be saved.:thumbsup:

Again, you put up a lot of great stuff here, but it in this case, it just looks like you're saying it's wrong when everyone else does it, because they don't do it like you do.