Republican AND Christian...? How?

Clearly you are playing with words you don't understand. "Rhetoric" is a noun, not an adjective.

 

Not sure what you had in mind of the Republican beliefs that is intrinsically anti-Christian.

But, since I have a guess as to what you're thinking of, let me say this much: Jesus said, "give unto Caesar what is to Caesar, and give unto God what is to God." He said to sell your own possessions and give to the poor. I don't recall him saying to go to Caesar, ask Caesar to take your neighbor's stuff and sell it, and give it to the poor.

Which, along those lines, conservatives consistently give more to charity. This is one such old article on the matter. Here are some highlights:

-- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).
-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.
-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

- - - Updated - - -

It sounds to me here you nearly mean "those who believe the government shouldn't do anything to address income inequality"


-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

 

And my "Rhetoric" works, I've obtained exactly what I expected. At this point, it would be easy to comment that you share this lack of awareness [since you evidently don't know American Republicans ...].

 

"Appointed by a Republican President" and "Republican" are not the same.

 

1) what is it you obtained other than a correction?
2) what lack of awareness have I demonstrated by correcting your misuse of a word?
3) I don't know any American Republicans?! Where do you live again?

 

On this forum someone made me note that usually Jews answer with questions ... [I do that too].

A part this note:

1) Your attention [and oriented as I wanted]
2) Correcting my misuse of that word you haven't demonstrated a lack of awareness [you have underlined a failure of mine!], your lack of awareness is about how you know US Republicans.
3) It's not about knowing, but about how knowing. [For accuracy and for the chronicles, I live in Italy for real, I'm not cloning an Italian IP, operating from somewhere in US, don't mind about].

 

Sorry, I'm not Jewish.

. You needn't resort to posting nonsense to get attention. You're unlikely to enjoy the type of attention you'll get by making a fool of yourself.

You are not qualified to determine what I do or do not know.

Clearly English is your second language...
Have you ever lived in the US?

 

--- Digression ---
Curiously enough, you're not noting that I've totally diverted, not only your attention, but also the thread ... which is becoming curious itself.
--- End of digression ---

Ok, this is generally sharable when not such a behavior is embedded in a communication strategy.

Since I cannot demonstrate to be "qualified", in this case it would be useless to discuss about this point. Anyway I'm entitled, as anyone, to express my opinion regarding what you do or do not know.

Lived? No I have never lived in the US, on the other side of the ocean there are the British Isles, you know ...

 

You overstate your accomplishment... Nobody has been able to answer the OP with anything resembling rational discourse, and you are a temporary entertainment.

Those words are English, but your sentence makes no sense.

Ok, you've expressed your opinion... Now, as the world's only subject-matter expert regarding the extent of my knowledge, I can inform you that your opinion is invalid.

So you've never lived in the US, English is your second language, and you claim I am the one with limited knowledge of American Republicans?!

 

That sure as hell proves they are not Democrats.

 

So, by you're understanding, Chuck Hagel and Robert Gates are Democrats, and so is Jon Huntsman?

 

Irrelevant as they are not in the Supreme Court.

 

Well if all the well to do followed what Christ said to do, there would be no need for using taxes to care for the poor. Since we are greedy, and the only entity that can feed the poor lies with gov't, it is natural that this is what we do. To feed the poor, since charity was never big enough, we must force greedy men into doing the right thing, by using a part of their taxes for humanity.

But greedy selfish men don't care for the poor, and so gov't steps in to keep their greed from killing people from starvation or exposure. And the greedy selfish men don't like it. Which is expected.

 

Fact is, a conservative follower of Christ is an oxymoron. But you can be a conservative Christian, for Christianity is not following Christ, but just fire insurance. Christianity has nothing to do with Christ.

 

Yeah, I'll ignore the false dichotomies and other fallacies and misinformation here and just say that it's not a response to what I said.

Yeah, I asked in the post you previously quoted why it's an oxymoron, what about the two are inherently separate - neither you nor anyone else has come up with a response to the actual question.

 

Perhaps you could read one of the many posts in this thread that illustrate the direct contradiction between the ideologies, rather than rehashing ground that's long since been covered.

 

Sell all you have and give it to the poor.

Practice peace with all men.

Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.




Not too many Republicans out there who practice real Christianity.

 

A handful of posts or posters online are not representative of 2/5ths of the country just because they are given the same label.

 

What does that have to do with anything, much less the OP, question you asked or response I provided?

 

It should be readily apparent. You assert that it is an oxymoron to be a Christian and a conservative, and rather than answering my question about why the two are inherent contradictions, you said, "Perhaps you could read one of the many posts in this thread that illustrate the direct contradiction between the ideologies..." Two things: 1) it's odd that you couldn't produce any one such post, and 2) we're not talking about "Joe PF Poster", we're talking about two fundamental beliefs/ideologies being at odds. "Joe PF Poster" doesn't do jack to change the inherent relation between those two beliefs.

 

So, what you're saying is that you want to be spoon-fed the information that I already provided in this very forum; and will claim it doesn't exist unless it is handed to you on a silver platter. That's pretty lazy.

If you want me to be more specific, feel free to read the following posts: #28, #69, and #70. These clearly reference Biblical scripture on which Christianity is founded and the lack of correlation with Republican ideologies.

 

#28: not an inherent contradiction. In fact, it's not really much of a point. You say one 'political group' (let's just skip the airs and say conservatives) want to cut food stamps, and Jesus fed the poor - I'm sorry, but did Jesus say, "thou shalt support food stamps and other Roman systems that create systemic dependence on the state?" No. He said for you to give to the poor, not to demand that Caesar give to the poor. And as I pointed out, in #127, conservatives do that (give out of their own wallet) far more than liberals do. The rest of your 'points' in #28 are of the same kind of mistake.

But let's cut this short. I asked which conservative tenets are intrinscially in contradiction with Christianity. You failed to answer that in #28. You failed to answer that in #69. Same in #70.

And it goes back to what I pointed out already, which I guess you didn't read because I didn't present it on a silver platter, but it comes to this: Jesus didn't say "go unto Caesar and tell him to do these things." He told the followers themselves to do "these things". Conservatives do "these things", more than liberals do. And, again, I ask you the question you've still failed to answer from post #1: what about Republican ideology and Christianity are intrinsically incompatible?

 

What a crock. Jesus clearly preached that people have a moral obligation to assist the poor. Our government (made up of individuals elected by us to represent us) gives billions of our tax dollars to subsidizing corporations, but the deafening whine from conservatives is that we collectively take steps to ensure the poor don't starve... and you want to pretend this aligns to Christian mythos?

You seem to have missed the following:

Please demonstrate how this relates solely to individual requirements rather than societal ones.

Please provide some source indicating that conservatives give more than liberals do - discounting funds given to religious organizations so that they can build megachurches and lobby for limitations on the rights of anyone that doesn't follow their dogma.

Asked and answered. The fact that you don't like the answer is immaterial.

 

Pretend? Look, Jesus never said, "go ye and make Caesar do this and that." He spoke specifically to his followers - and conservatives do donate far more to charity. That they don't demand that the government make everyone do it is like, oh, I don't know... them not demanding that the government make everyone tithe. Or is that something that you think the government should do? Collect tithes for the Church?

^_- really? First, you're citing the Old Testament, second you're citing the parts that are historical records. These aren't commandments, these are records of instructions given to the Hebrews. When they were with Moses.

Just because there is an imperative statement in the Bible, doesn't mean it applies to all people for all time.

Like I said, third time now in direct response to your posts, Post #127.

No, you haven't. Do you understand what is meant by "intrinsically incompatible"?

 

Amusing that conservatives believe religious beliefs should be legislated when it comes to dealing with non-Christians, but don't want their representatives following their allegedly heartfelt beliefs when it relates to generosity and giving... unless the taker is a corporation. Almost as if the only real conservative value is hypocrisy.

Really?! You think the Old Testament is not relevant to Christianity?! I suppose all the religious objections to gay marriage can stop then, not to mention any of the 10 commandments that Jesus didn't reference directly... right?

You keep saying that conservatives give more to charitable organizations, but have yet to illustrate how much of that giving relates to religious organizations for the funding of megachurches....

Being a selfish (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) is not compatible with the teachings of Jesus, yet all conservative policies boil down to "screw you, I got mine." That is a pretty damn good example of intrinsic incompatability.