i love this one..can i steal it?
And Jesus said to them, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." And they were amazed at Him. (Mark 12:17)I don't remember Jesus waiting around for the Roman Empire to pass legislation setting up programs for the sick, the homeless and the hungry."We're gonna do everything we can to help you ... I'll have my staff talk to you after the town hall." -If Jesus returned as Barack ObamaRemember Henrietta Hughes at the Fort Myers, FL town hall in February 2009?While Ms. Hughes and her son were waiting for the government to provide them with housing, Chene Thompson, wife of Republican State Representative Nick Thompson, offered the Hugheses a house to live in for as long as they needed.Just offhand, which would you say was the more Christlike thing to do?
CT, since your so good at always digging up the opposite side of any story. Go find a story where a "Democrat" provides housing to somebody. Shouldn't be very hard. What a pointless example / counterpoint. There is a huge difference between trying to create systems that will help hundreds of thousands (millions maybe) and offering ones personal assistance. Some problems are to big to just rely on the random kindness of strangers (there just isn't that much kindness).As to Jesus and the Roman Empire, you don't remember it, because you weren't there. We have little, if any proof that he even existed.
CT- I'm no theologian, but it sounds like the Bible verse you quoted refers more to separation of church and state than anything else. Also, it would have been pointless for Jesus to wait around for the Roman Empire to "pass legislation" for social reform, seeing as how the government of Rome was a Republic, not a democracy like ours. See word "Empire" in "Roman Empire." It's like comparing apples and oranges. I don't think the editorial cartoon was aimed at the Republican party as a sweeping stereotype either, so don't take it personally if you are a Republican.Glenn Beck is an idiot, it's science.
Chris,I'm sure there are numerous examples of generous Democrats that would put us all to shame (myself included), just as the example of Chene Thompson does.Generosity and selflessness transcends political affiliation and religious persuasion (or the lack thereof). As Anonymous rightly pointed out, the cartoonist didn't frame it as a Republican/Democrat thing; that was Ted's take on it by virtue of the title he chose for the post. I was merely pointing out that it ain't necessarily so. The Democratic Party doesn't have the market cornered on compassion.As for the Jesus angle, people throughout the centuries have been trying to remake Him into their own image: social revolutionary, hairy thunderer, cosmic muffin, libertine, dope-smoking hippie, racist, White Anglo-Saxon Protestant, motivational speaker - the list goes on and on. I've studied the teachings of Jesus most of my life, but I would never be so presumptuous as to claim I've got Him all figured out. But this much I do know: a big focus of His teachings is on interpersonal relationships. A good synopsis of this is His Sermon on the Mount (found in the fifth through seventh chapters of the Book of Matthew).The problem I see with relying too heavily on government programs to heal the sick, shelter the homeless and feed the hungry (necessary though they may be) is that doing so lets us off the hook in the area of those interpersonal relationships. As my brother (who's politically a Democrat and spiritually a Deist) once told me: "I do my part; I pay my taxes." (as if he had a choice in the matter!) Why can't we do both? If you're "over-taxed" by the government (as many of my conservative friends claim), you can still lend your time and talents to those who need it. I know there's a lot more I could do in that area. Hmmm, maybe that's what Jesus meant when He said to "[r]ender to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." Like I said, I'm still learning things about Him!As far as the proof that Jesus existed, I'd direct you to 1) "The case for Christ: a journalist's personal investigation of the evidence" by Lee Strobel, with Jane Vogel; 2) "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell; and/or 3) "Mere Christianity" or "Surprised by Joy" by C.S. Lewis.As far as the fact that I wasn't there so how could I know, I'd be careful with that one, Chris. I've heard people use the same argument against evolution.
Mat. 25:34 "Then I, the King, shall say to those at my right, 'Come, blessed of my Father, into the Kingdom prepared for you from the founding of the world. Mat. 25:35 For I was hungry and you fed me; I was thirsty and you gave me water; I was a stranger and you invited me into your homes; Mat. 25:36 naked and you clothed me; sick and in prison, and you visited me.' Mat. 25:37 "Then these righteous ones will reply, 'Sir, when did we ever see you hungry and feed you? Or thirsty and give you anything to drink? Mat. 25:38 Or a stranger, and help you? Or naked, and clothe you? Mat. 25:39 When did we ever see you sick or in prison, and visit you?' Mat. 25:40 "And I, the King, will tell them, 'When you did it to these my brothers you were doing it to me!'
Yes, Rome was a republic. But the United States is also a republic. Republics are governments in which elected officials pass legislation, whereas in a democracy all citizens pass legislation, rather than having officials do it for them. The United States is a democratic republic because it lets all citizens elect the officials who will be making the decisions for them. So comparing the two isn't completely apples to oranges.
Jesus didn't run for an office. When people were hungry, he expected his followers to pick up the slack, not Cesar. Even a boy's lunch of fish and bread.When He said, "Sell everything you have and give to the poor." Notice he didn't say."Ceasar (the government) should take our money by force and give it to the poor."(wasting millions in the process due to unnecessary bureaucrats.)
Why is the arguing going on, Jesus isn't real.
"Why is the arguing going on,..."It's been over six months since anyone posted any comments on this thread. I wouldn't call that ongoing. I also wouldn't categorize it as "arguing." I'd call it "discussing.""...Jesus isn't real."Assuming arguendo that you're correct, why shouldn't there be a discussion about this allegedly fictitious character? If He isn't real, He's certainly a well developed literary figure, based on the "stories" of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The philosophy derived from these accounts has inspired artists, composers and philosophers to create some of the most uplifting works known to man (e.g. DaVinci's The Last Supper; the cantatas of Johann Sebastian Bach, the apologetics of C.S. Lewis, etc.). Hospitals, schools and homeless shelters have been built in His name. I've personally seen lives turned around for the better as a result of embracing the teachings of Jesus. Not bad for someone who isn't real.A lot of "arguing" has gone on in recent years over the characters of John Galt (from Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged") and Holden Caulfield (from J.D. Salinger's "The Catcher in the Rye"). Do you find that activity equally as fruitless, or do you just have a bone to pick with Jesus?If so, why?
ANONYMOUS COMMENTS WILL NOT BE PUBLISHED. And neither will racist,homophobic, or misogynistic comments. I do not mind if you disagree, but make your case in a decent manner.