Punkin eater
Favorite Answer
Brilliant poster.
Anonymous
Easy.
1. The benefit programs aren't feeding the hungry as much as they're feeding the politicians and their cronies.
2. Healthcare has always been available to all. Tell me what hospital denies you if you're in a car accident? What paramedic refuses a call to someone with a heart attack? What medical bill has the same terms as a credit card? Sure, paying for it is a b*tch, but at least the more I pay the better my service will be. The Democrat way is to pay more for less and less service.
3. Which Republican are you thinking about? Certainly not Bush, not Rubio, not Kashich, not Chris Christie. Trump is a plant by the Democrats.
But the bottom line is it is anti-Christian to impose weak programs so that someone else can take care of the problems. If you really want to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, and console the sick the Christian thing to do is to sacrifice your own time and money to do such things.
Sagan Ritual
You must be thinking of the modern, fluffy version of Jesus. The guy in the Gospels, when viewed without any protective gear, is about as pro-rich, pro-aristocracy, casually ok with brutal slavery, and indifferent to the needy as they come. Right-wing Christians struggle to keep up with him.
It's really strange, considering all the sermons I've heard and all the books I've read that hang on every single word Jesus says, and every single word he doesn't say. No one notices all the stories he tells where a righteous rich aristocrat gets the better of some wicked commoner. Or the filthy rich employer who rubs the commoners' noses in his right to do as he wishes with his money. No one notices the parable about the misbehaving slave who is brutally murdered by his righteous master. Everyone loves Jesus because he encouraged forgiveness, but they don't notice that his means of encouragement is the story of a king having a citizen hideously tortured--no laws broken, just an angry whim on the part of the king.
(That particular story is a great encouragement to those who think the needy should pay more taxes so they have some "skin in the game", those who think the "game" is working as well for the poor as it is for us lucky ones. The king is rich; he and his children will eat tonight no matter how many debts he forgives. He doesn't ever ask the unforgiving commoner whether it was hunger, or his children's hunger, that hardened his heart.)
No one notices that Jesus' very small handful of comments concerning the needy aren't really about the needy at all, but always about those who have something to give and their relationship with God. The needy are incidental.
(Two glaring examples: first, the first few verses of Matthew Chapter 6. Looks like it's about the needy. It's not. It's about you and God. No one notices. Second, Matthew 10:8, where Jesus sends his disciples out as missionaries. He gives them authority to perform various kinds of miracles, like healing and exorcism. But think about it: you care about the needy, of course. What's something Jesus is really good at that the needy could really benefit from? Something to do with food? The miraculous power Jesus gave his disciples was intended only to serve as credentials. He wasn't thinking about the needy.)
Anyway, you get the idea. The guy in the Gospels is a much darker character than today's happy hippie.
The Goat Nose
Good one.
I think it s simple formula:
Calvinism, divided by Mark 12:17, multiplied by a the Rise of Anti-Intellectualism.
?
We should have implicit faith, unshakable belief and unflinching devotion and we should follow Bible or the Masters in letter and spirit. We are not supposed to criticize.