Conservative Mind Set & Conspiracy Theories

[Tsing Tao]

I've learned long ago that you cannot bring those without religion into religion without some sort of trying experience in their lives. It requires being touched by something - Christians call this something the Holy Spirit. Once touched by it, you can't explain the comfort it brings you. So don't try.

Just smile politely at those who poke fun, or attempt to make humor out of your religion. Don't argue with them. There's no proof they will accept.

 

[bigarrow]

I've learned long ago that you cannot bring those without religion into religion without some sort of trying experience in their lives. It requires being touched by something - Christians call this something the Holy Spirit. Once touched by it, you can't explain the comfort it brings you. So don't try.

Just smile politely at those who poke fun, or attempt to make humor out of your religion. Don't argue with them. There's no proof they will accept.

So are you a christian now?

 

[stu]

Stu you completely wrong and clearly out of context... you left out half the quote....

he said render unto Ceasar what is Ceasar's and onto God what is God's.
that is a very different statement for Jesus' audience.
It puts God ahead of govt and leaves very little for the govt. It was sedition against the big govt but was said in a very clever way.

its why Pilate had to execute him in a clever way.
Big govt does not opposition leaders.
Big govt does not like those who think for themselves.
Socialist govts frequently evolve to eventually kill those who believe in God and inalienable rights.

It does no such thing unless you totally reinterpret words out of their meaning and the whole story out of all context.

How does it put god ahead. If anything it is equalizing god to Caesar. It plainly states.... give them both, big govt and god, their dues.
There's no sedition in it! Hardly clever, but merely a politician's answer, to slide out of what is being portrayed as a trap. Jews trying to get the state to kill another jew. Quite a nasty story if anything but then the Bible is like that.

That's all I'm pointing out. The religious are the first to say it's everyone else who is manipulating this text, whilst all the time they go about turning the so called words of Jesus upside down just to bend it all suit their own ends.

Yet here plain and simple is the Bible Jesus being what right wingers would quickly label as a lefty socialist.

Utter hypocrisy and quite frankly completely dishonest. But there you go, that's religion down to a tee.

 

[Tsing Tao]

So are you a christian now?

I was born and raised Catholic. Why do you say "now" as if I stated otherwise somewhere?

Just because I don't get involved in these discussions doesn't mean I don't have my faith.

 

[Lucrum]

Hidden just below the surface of the liberal media is a barely noticed trend of patronizing contempt: Joe Biden is the Democrats' Dan Quayle, but because he is a Democrat they'll do anything to avoid treating him like they treated Dan Quayle.

The Washington Post trumpeted a new poll recently that showed Hillary Clinton was cleaning Biden's clock in an early poll among Democrats, 73 percent to 12. The Post saw that as great news for Hillary, but not as disastrous news for the man who's currently in his second term as vice president. Try to imagine Al Gore pulling 12 percent in a presidential poll during Clinton's second term.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/#ixzz2t7UG3Wor

 

[jem]

at first you were trying to take half the thought... the complete thought is render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and unto God what is Gods.
now you are trying to argue for an evenly weighted split. That is not in the text at all.

his followers then or now would not take those words to mean Rome or Govt today gets equal consideration.
Even the Marine Corp puts God before country. Throughout history Christians would always put God before country. You are making weak arguments at best... as usual.

if you read the article I posted a few posts ago on this thread you would realize that to a jew in that day that meant just about everything belonged to God. That is not twisting... that is context.
Even to a believer today... that would mean at best pay your taxes but understand govt has much lower standing than God's rules and God's kingdom.

now to a leftist atheist like you... you may wish to give your left nut to Obama....
What Jesus stated is so clever. It is can be seditious without being sedition.

Finally, if you read the Constitution... we the people granted the US Govt limited powers. The govt has some rights to manage some land it may technically own... but that is about it.
So even right now you could say Jesus said render nothing to the govt unless you are drilling on public lands.

It does no such thing unless you totally reinterpret words out of their meaning and the whole story out of all context.

How does it put god ahead. If anything it is equalizing god to Caesar. It plainly states.... give them both, big govt and god, their dues.
There's no sedition in it! Hardly clever, but merely a politician's answer, to slide out of what is being portrayed as a trap. Jews trying to get the state to kill another jew. Quite a nasty story if anything but then the Bible is like that.

That's all I'm pointing out. The religious are the first to say it's everyone else who is manipulating this text, whilst all the time they go about turning the so called words of Jesus upside down just to bend it all suit their own ends.

Yet here plain and simple is the Bible Jesus being what right wingers would quickly label as a lefty socialist.

Utter hypocrisy and quite frankly completely dishonest. But there you go, that's religion down to a tee.

 

[Ricter]

All this Bible interpretation reminds me of Constitution interpretation, it's a slippery slope, people, don't do it. ; )

 

[stu]

at first you were trying to take half the thought... the complete thought in the text is render unto Ceasar what is Ceasars and unto God what is Gods.
now you are trying to argue for an even power split. That is not in the text at all.

I never mentioned the word power, nor does the text even hint at any kind of power split.

if you wish you should read in terms of his followers back then or his followers today.
his followers would not take those words to mean Rome gets equal consideration.

You're manipulating again. Give what belongs to Caesar and give what belongs to God, is an equalization.
That does not say anything about equal consideration. You may consider money and wealth to be of a greater or lesser consideration. Some will have considered Caesar to be of a greater consideration than God or vice versa. Those are different points altogether.

Caesar gets your money. God gets whatever it is God is supposed to be getting. That'll be whatever an imaginary narcissistic megalomaniac gets.

Even the Marine Corp puts God before country. Throughout history Christians would always put God before country.

That's nothing to be proud of

if you read the article I posted a few posts ago on this thread you would realize that to a jew in that day that meant just about everything belonged to God.

Bullshit. The Jewish Church was rich and powerful, full of hypocrisy and pretty much the same as most Churches are today. The story is about a radical lefty 99%'er Jesus that was rebelling against it all. That's a bastard lefty libtard socialist commy to a right winger.

Even to a believer today... that would mean at best pay your taxes but understand govt has much lower standing than God's rules and God's kingdom.

Right, so pay your taxes. End of. That 'bastard lefty libtard socialist commy', Jesus, said so.
Whether you think God has a higher standing is down to your own personal delusions and nothing to do with the Jesus quote or the context.

 

[LEAPup]

I think what you and leap are trying to ask is do I believe in evolution and specifically human evolution and the answer is yes to both of those questions. Where you came up with choice between fish and tadpoles is puzzling, I'm guessing it's bible related.

Ok, then what did your grand kids evolve from? Fish are what the libtards believe, but I just can't wait to read your answer to my question.

 

[Tsing Tao]

All this Bible interpretation reminds me of Constitution interpretation, it's a slippery slope, people, don't do it. ; )

For once, I agree wholeheartedly with Ricter. It is impossible to know the meaning of text written thousands of years ago, in parable form, by an unknown (but supposed) author, in a different language that could have (and probably was) censored, altered and cut up from it's original text in the way the Church would have wanted it (not to mention all the rulers that had access to it, like Constantine, etc).