Actually, PT, Christians like my daughter are more common than biblical literalists.
Yeah .... but does she and those types really believe in a “sky daddy” and if so aren’t they suffering from an acute case of cognitive dissidence?**
BTW ... This is what happens when you bring your personal issues to the table to score a few minor points. We have no need to not address them once you dump them here.... get over it already.
I sure am glad that I don't have any relatives who drink and who might subject me to ridicule from moderates.
Yeah ... Like we would need that as a reason to LOAO at you or Obama’s lying a^^.
at least when I post, it is about the issue. Unless its calling out your BS. Which seems to have happened a lot lately.
Do you ever check your history? Of your last 30 posts only about 2 or 3 even slightly reference the issue depicted. Admit it you're just a troll, like the rest of us, trying to score points against your poster opponents. Climb down off you high hobbyhorse already.
WWWTW - 2:52
St John Chrysostom, commenting on I Timothy 6:1-5 and other biblical mandates for human slavery, quoted from Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History. Helen's book is a great read - it puts a lot of things in perspective.
Looks like you sub-out everything but the lies ... which are home made goodness ... right?
What's wrong with the world is that people sufferng from religion-induced paralysis of the mind will continue to quote dolts like Chesterton.
"The slave should be resigned to his lot, in obeying his master he is obeying God." More pearls of wisdom from ole' G.K.
Are you sure?
“Tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect; they are not to talk back, not to pilfer, but to show complete and perfect fidelity, so that in everything they may be an ornament to the doctrine of God our Savior.”
“The slave should be resigned to his lot, in obeying his master he is obeying God.” -- St John Chrysostom commenting on the above.
It’s not that you don't know ... it’s that what you know is B.S.
Obviously some of us need more time.
Or some readers are too short ... Right?
But is it the contemporary reason it "is" a season of celebration? After all it is so 10,000 BC ... Civilization has been there, done that, got the shirt and out grew it already
By John Hayward:
History has shown us no evidence that government redistribution reduces the level of poverty in any society. On the contrary, poverty walks hand-in-hand with socialism, because the private sector inevitably shrinks as government grows, leaving fewer opportunities to be exploited by free people. Those at the lower end of the income ladder tend to find themselves most deprived of opportunity.
And the invariable result of socialist economic policy is a smaller, richer elite lording over a more impoverished population. ”Income inequality” gets worse under the rule of people who claim they are dedicated to eliminating it, as has occurred in the United States under the administration of President Barack Obama.
The Obama years have been mercilessly tough on the poor and middle class, but rather profitable for rich people with a lot of assets and money to play the stock market. Travel further down the road Obama walks, and you’ll find socialist tyrants who proclaim themselves “men of the people” from the high balconies of palatial estates.
The opposite of tyranny is freedom. Capitalism is the practical and constructive expression of freedom. Free markets, secured by just and limited government, are the best way to reduce poverty, and generate the wealth necessary to afford charitable assistance to those who cannot make a good living. It’s not just practically superior, it is morally superior.
How can proper respect be shown to any man or woman without respecting their rights to own property, sell their labor, engage in voluntary transactions for mutual benefit, and provide for their families? ”Thou shalt not steal” is a commandment that should not be suspended for those who claim they have big plans to improve society with their plunder.
From Human Events:
The Pope charges autonomous marketplaces with creating a “new tyranny,” but tyranny is an exercise of compulsive power. It is not subtle, or invisible. Private corporations can certainly become willing partners in tyranny. The Twentieth Century is filled with mournful examples of such relationships.
Large private enterprises often grow eager to purchase the anti-competitive power sold by corrupt politicians. But the government has a monopoly on the coercive force necessary to create tyranny, a word that has a very specific meaning.
A private individual might be criticized for indifference to the suffering of the poor, but such indifference is not tyrannical. Monopolistic power can assume the trappings of tyranny in the way that it crushes those who seek opportunity in a controlled marketplace, but the nations of the West already recognize the accumulation of monopoly power as a crime, which governments are charged with preventing. (In practice, they’re more apt to become willing partners in creating monopolistic conditions, as in the sealed labor markets they create for the benefit of powerful unions.)
It seems to me that the abusive situations Pope Francis has spoken out against, such as unsafe sweatshop exploitation, are more properly understood as forms of corruption, which is a failure of government. Not to let those who buy corrupt politicians off the hook, but the vendor in such sinful transactions is the one who makes it possible.
The modern Left has invested great effort in making corruption respectable, conditioning citizens to accept it as standard operating procedure. The ideal of small, clean governments equally and impartially defending the rights of all has been replaced by activist super-States with busy agendas, perpetually in search of private-sector “partners” (with thick campaign checkbooks) to carry them out.
It would be better to focus on the immense costs inflicted by such corruption, especially in the huge, politically dominated economy of the United States, where the government routinely wastes enough money to feed every hungry person in the world. Billions of dollars vanish in waste and fraud, under the stewardship of a lavishly compensated bureaucracy that sure isn’t missing any meals.
Genuine poverty and suffering have been conflated with the frustrated ambitions and desires of the lower middle class, for the political profit of leftists, but the resulting redefinition of the welfare state – which, in the absurd regime of ObamaCare, is now paying welfare subsidies to families that make over $60,000 per year – leaves fewer resources to help the people that really need it. It has always been immoral to confuse charity with social engineering. There’s a big difference between feeding the hungry, and subsidizing an indolent lifestyle.
By Matt Welch:
I don't wish to stand in the way of people enjoying other people's prejudices, but Pope Francis's hyperbolic rants (In the Evangelii Gaudium) about the role and allegedly dictatorial power of free markets are embarrassing in their wrongness. To take one papal passage out of dozens:
“Today everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest, where the powerful feed upon the powerless. As a consequence, masses of people find themselves excluded and marginalized: without work, without possibilities, without any means of escape.”
More people have escaped poverty the past 25 years than were alive on the planet in 1800. Their "means of escape" was largely the introduction of at least some "laws of competition" in endeavors that had long been the exclusive domain of authoritarian, monopolistic governments.
Here's The Economist:
“In 1990, 43% of the population of developing countries lived in extreme poverty. By 2000 the proportion was down to a third. By 2010 it was 21% . The global poverty rate had been cut in half in 20 years.
The country that cut poverty the most was China. Between 1981 and 2010 it lifted a stunning 680m people out poverty. This cut its poverty rate from 84% in 1980 to about 10% now.
In Africa, inflation-adjusted per capita incomes rose by an astonishing 97 percent between 1999 and 2010. Hunger in India shrank by 90 percent after the country replaced 40 years’ worth of socialist stagnation with capitalist reforms in 1991.
To look upon the miracles of this world and lament the lack of "means of escape" is to advertise your own ignorance. To call it a "tyranny" is to do violence to any meaningful sense of that important word. And to make such absolutist statements as "everything comes under the laws of competition and the survival of the fittest" is to admit up front that you are not primarily interested in spreading truth, but rather in exciting popular passions.
It's a free world; Pope's gonna Pope & all that. I don't go to the Vatican for global economics, and Catholics probably don't seek out Reason for spiritual guidance.
Liberals who congratulate themselves on mocking creationists while co-signing factually laughable claims about the world they actually live in are not exactly demonstrating a consistent adherence to the Scientific Method.