david starling
Well-known member
You're Blackbery's therapist!
"How many therapists does it take to change a lightbulb?"
Ans: "Only one, but the lightbulb has to want to change.".
The liberal message of Jesus
- Thread starter waybread
- Start date
You're Blackbery's therapist!
"How many therapists does it take to change a lightbulb?"
Ans: "Only one, but the lightbulb has to want to change.".
david starling
Well-known member
Does this mean that landlords who are Vegans will be forced to rent to meat-eating barbequers???
That barbeque smell can stink up the entire block, especially when petroleum based charcoal lighter is used!
Meat-eating is a religion, and should enjoy protected status. But, so is Veganism.
What a dilemma!
And what about landlords who are Orthodox Jews or Muslims? Should they be forced to rent to tenants who eat bacon and pork sausages?
Should religions that practice animal sacrifice be permitted to perform that ritual? The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled they can.
Should religions that use drugs such as peyote, psilocybin, and cannabis in their ceremonies be allowed to use them, even though they're prohibited by law in all other instances?
Last edited:
leomoon
Well-known member
The Supreme Court may have to answer those quesitons someday as they did for the Gay couple wanting to buy a cake from a baker who refused them based on his views of his religion! 
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...y-baker-refused-make-wedding-cake-gay-n826706
Supreme Court gives in a narrow ruling, the right to the Baker - in this particular case!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946
Much of Tuesday's 80-minute argument involves what-ifs. If a cake is a form of expression, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked, what about flowers, the invitation or the wedding menu? Justice Elena Kagan, in the same vein, asked what about the make-up artist or the hairdresser?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...y-baker-refused-make-wedding-cake-gay-n826706
Supreme Court gives in a narrow ruling, the right to the Baker - in this particular case!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946
Cary2
Banned
There is a conspicuous effort to be blind to relevant issues in this matter.
What matter? If Jesus were alive today, would he vote liberal?
It is immensely speculative and it strains to ignore the Biblical evidence that is contrary and uncomfortable to Waybread's agenda.
Waybread has made claims about herself that I do not believe.
Liberals and progressives are fleeing the Democratic Party in large numbers. Waybread has ignored that fact.
There are so many examples, but in the interest of brevity, I will include only the testimony of Dave Rubin. The Rubin Report established itself as a progressive blog, and Rubin called himself a progressive, but he has turned away from that ideology because it is now "regressive" as he sees it. Rubin has now begun to call himself a classical liberal in order to avoid the confusion of the Democratic Party.
Rubin is a gay, Jewish, married man who has always considered himself progressive until about 2017.
https://www.prageru.com/video/why-i-left-the-left/
Jordan Peterson is another classical liberal who is despised by Democrats and called a spokesperson for the far right. Waybread has ignored the development. She has joined the voices who dismiss Peterson, a classical liberal. She's really as Left as they come.
The entire effort is disingenuous probably because it is an effort to re-live political discourse from the early 1970's. This is not your dad's liberal movement, however. All of Waybread's arguments are dated and oddly peculiar.
There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus, if he were alive today, would not side with the Left or with Waybread's peculiar axe-to-grind.
What matter? If Jesus were alive today, would he vote liberal?
It is immensely speculative and it strains to ignore the Biblical evidence that is contrary and uncomfortable to Waybread's agenda.
Waybread has made claims about herself that I do not believe.
Liberals and progressives are fleeing the Democratic Party in large numbers. Waybread has ignored that fact.
There are so many examples, but in the interest of brevity, I will include only the testimony of Dave Rubin. The Rubin Report established itself as a progressive blog, and Rubin called himself a progressive, but he has turned away from that ideology because it is now "regressive" as he sees it. Rubin has now begun to call himself a classical liberal in order to avoid the confusion of the Democratic Party.
Rubin is a gay, Jewish, married man who has always considered himself progressive until about 2017.
https://www.prageru.com/video/why-i-left-the-left/
Jordan Peterson is another classical liberal who is despised by Democrats and called a spokesperson for the far right. Waybread has ignored the development. She has joined the voices who dismiss Peterson, a classical liberal. She's really as Left as they come.
The entire effort is disingenuous probably because it is an effort to re-live political discourse from the early 1970's. This is not your dad's liberal movement, however. All of Waybread's arguments are dated and oddly peculiar.
There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus, if he were alive today, would not side with the Left or with Waybread's peculiar axe-to-grind.
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
I think Jesus would be in favor of the stimulus package that just passed the Senate with a coalition of (mostly) Liberal Democrats, along with Progressive Democrats.
david starling
Well-known member
The Supreme Court may have to answer those quesitons someday as they did for the Gay couple wanting to buy a cake from a baker who refused them based on his views of his religion!
Much of Tuesday's 80-minute argument involves what-ifs. If a cake is a form of expression, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked, what about flowers, the invitation or the wedding menu? Justice Elena Kagan, in the same vein, asked what about the make-up artist or the hairdresser?
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...y-baker-refused-make-wedding-cake-gay-n826706
Supreme Court gives in a narrow ruling, the right to the Baker - in this particular case!
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...-gives-victory-baker-who-refused-make-n872946
Tolerance for the intolerant.
Oddity
Well-known member
The Supreme Court may have to answer those quesitons someday as they did for the Gay couple wanting to buy a cake from a baker who refused them based on his views of his religion!
Following up here: Did the baker flat out refuse to serve someone for being gay, or did he refuse to bake a particular cake celebrating a gay wedding? If he was happy to let them buy anything in the shop that was already made, it's not a problem and he's not unduly discriminating. If he refused to bake a particular type of cake celebrating a gay wedding, he's still (at least for a little while) protected if that is against his religion.
If Equality passes, and if there are not a tonne of religious exemptions to it, things are going to go very badly in the US.
david starling
Well-known member
I thought the objection was a request for figures of two grooms on top, instead of a bride and a groom.
Or, as Evangelicals would relate it to, "Adam and Steve, instead of Adam and Eve".
Best solution for the baker would have been to bake a wedding cake without "toppers" which the customers could have bought on line to suit themselves.
david starling
Well-known member
How is this different from prohibiting discrimination at "lunch counters", or at clothing stores, based on race, religion, or MAGA hats?
Sure sounds like a Civil Rights violation.
Oddity
Well-known member
david starling
Well-known member
Is Equality a religion? More like an ideology, correct?
Last edited:
david starling
Well-known member
The Supreme Court decision about a Florida municipality forbidding the religious practice of animal sacrifice, was based on whether it was essential to practicing the religion.
Is denying business services to those who don't follow the religious beliefs of the business owners essential to their religious practices?
"Thou shalt not bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage"?
Is denying business services to those who don't follow the religious beliefs of the business owners essential to their religious practices?
"Thou shalt not bake a wedding cake for a same-sex marriage"?
david starling
Well-known member
Amazon and Twitter based their discriminatory policies against those promulgating unproven claims about widespread, result-changing Election-fraud, on the assumption that such claims are fomenting violence against the government.
Nothing about violating religious beliefs.
Nothing about violating religious beliefs.
Oddity
Well-known member
Off for lunch. But if you believe that questioning the validity of an election is going to lead to violence....well...that might only be true if the election is actually fraudulent, no?
What are they so afraid of?
IOW if you actually believe that discussion would lead to violence ... *shakes head*
What are they so afraid of?
IOW if you actually believe that discussion would lead to violence ... *shakes head*
david starling
Well-known member
They weren't discussing it. They were claiming it, just because one particular candidate lost the Election.
If that one particular candidate in 2020 had won, they'd be perfectly satisfied with the legitimacy of the results.
And, that particular candidate called on his MANY followers to "FIGHT LIKE H*LL" against the results.
The Arizona Republican Party asked that particular candidate's followers if they were "willing to die" to overturn the results of the 2020 Presidential Election.
Them's fight'n words.
Last edited:
Cary2
Banned
This is a very shallow understanding of Jesus.
It is an effort to blackmail someone based on select Bible verses.
Jesus was not meek or goody-goody. He was not mild or retiring.
Jesus warned his disciples of the scribes and the Pharisees who were very prestigious people in their day. They had political power and religious power which were very much mixed in that day. Here he speaks of the Pharisees and the teachers of religion.
The teachers of the law and the Pharisees were some of the most prestigious people in Jewish society.
From Matthew:
13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. [14]
15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
16 “Woe to you, blind guides! You say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gold of the temple is bound by that oath.’ 17 You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 You also say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gift on the altar is bound by that oath.’ 19 You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 Therefore, anyone who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. 21 And anyone who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. 22 And anyone who swears by heaven swears by God’s throne and by the one who sits on it.
23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.
25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!
33 “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. 35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. 36 Truly I tell you, all this will come on this generation.
People have been putting words in Jesus's mouth ever since he died.
leomoon
Well-known member
AND after Herod Antipas had John killed, (his cousin the Baptist) in Jerusalem, and Jesus was traveling near there, he said to some who warned him that he would be next:
“On that very day some Pharisees came, saying to Him, “Get out and depart from here, for Herod wants to kill You.” And He said to them, “Go tell that FOX, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected’.” (Luke 13: 31 & 32)
This is an interesting perspective since it's also Jewish:
https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/2667/#:~:text=Jesus%20called%20Herod%20Antipas%20a%20fox%20(Luke%2013:32),,saying%20something%20very%20different%20to%20his%20Hebrew-speaking%20audience.
In otherwords, they imply it was a put-down of Herod, the son of Herod the Great called Antipas.
From the natal Chart I use based on EC's reading - he has Mercury & Saturn both in Aries although the Sun in the last degrees of Pisces.
So, no he wasn't a pushover,
IF he had been in a prior lifetime, the protege of Moses, Joshua; then perhaps the Aries is from that lifetime of strength as a warrior.
Kirk Nelson used the same chart I used - from the readings; and he also related a lifetime as Joshua (listed on pg. 121 from a list of lifetimes) not all, but some of them..mentioned by Cayce.
EC went on to say, that Jesus although he had no need to return, also by choosing to do so - "learned by the things he suffered" i.e. patience & tolerance.
“On that very day some Pharisees came, saying to Him, “Get out and depart from here, for Herod wants to kill You.” And He said to them, “Go tell that FOX, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected’.” (Luke 13: 31 & 32)
This is an interesting perspective since it's also Jewish:
https://www.jerusalemperspective.com/2667/#:~:text=Jesus%20called%20Herod%20Antipas%20a%20fox%20(Luke%2013:32),,saying%20something%20very%20different%20to%20his%20Hebrew-speaking%20audience.
In otherwords, they imply it was a put-down of Herod, the son of Herod the Great called Antipas.
From the natal Chart I use based on EC's reading - he has Mercury & Saturn both in Aries although the Sun in the last degrees of Pisces.
So, no he wasn't a pushover,
IF he had been in a prior lifetime, the protege of Moses, Joshua; then perhaps the Aries is from that lifetime of strength as a warrior. Kirk Nelson used the same chart I used - from the readings; and he also related a lifetime as Joshua (listed on pg. 121 from a list of lifetimes) not all, but some of them..mentioned by Cayce.
EC went on to say, that Jesus although he had no need to return, also by choosing to do so - "learned by the things he suffered" i.e. patience & tolerance.
Last edited:
waybread
Well-known member
I didn't say whether I thought Jesus would vote at all. I suggest that the messages of Jesus are more in keeping with liberal values about looking after the vulnerable members of society.
Also, I agree with David. Nothing in the NT that I am aware of prohibits abortion. I think it comes from post-biblical doctrine of specific denominations.
I can truly understand if someone believes that life begins at conception, and that all life is sacred regardless of how that conception occurred. But then I would fully expect such a person to be a pacifist, opposed to the death penalty, and pro-various safety regulations designed to prevent needless death. (As in, make sure your car passengers wear their seatbelts.) If all life is sacred, than so are the lives of people after they are born.
Wrong again, Cary.
Having a liberal social conscience is by no means identical with membership in the Democratic party of the USA. For one thing, Jesus' messages are more universal and global. For another thing, most registered American voters today are Independents, by far the largest voting block in the US at 41%.
According to the latest Gallup poll, Republicans are at 26% and Democrats are at 32%, which is an uptick.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx
Sorry, Cary, but you've got the situation reversed.
I don't think Jesus would align with anybody. I'm attempting to interpret the sayings attributed to Jesus in the NT.Sorry, Cary, but one man on a hard right web site is interesting anecdotal evidence. As you know, American Jews vote all across the political spectrum, although they are majority liberal and a majority voted for Biden in 2020.
Jordan Peterson is not a "classic liberal," sorry. Back when his 12 Rules book and his controversy at the University of Toronto broke, I looked into Peterson's positions extensively. He's done some good work in encouraging young adults to take more responsibility for their lives. He's a psychologist, not a historian; and his historical research is deeply flawed in some areas. Peterson's views on feminism and trans people are antediluvian. Some of his ideas are simply nuts, like his saying that postmodernists have taken over the Canadian education system.
In what way am I redoing 1970s liberalism? ???
I had to laugh at your comment about "my dad's liberal movement." You didn't know my dad. As a self-made and self-employed man, he consistently voted Republican.
waybread
Well-known member
There is a lovely sentiment that I have heard expressed by gay Christians, that no one is beneath, or unworthy of God's love.
Luke 7:1-10 is worth a read in the King James version. It concerns a Roman centurion whose servant was dying, and the centurion prevails upon Jesus to heal the servant.
There is some thought that the original Greek for "servant," pais, also carries the connotation of a gay relationship. These were normed in the Greek and Roman armies; often between an officer and a young man. One of the verses reads, "And a certain centurion's servant, who was dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die." The Wycliffe translation says the servant was "precious" to the centurion.
After the faith healing, Jesus praises the centurion for his faith. This despite the condemnation of homosexuality in the OT commandments.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_the_New_Testament
I think a certain amount of anti-gay sentiment is not in the NT so much as in post-biblical doctrines.
[The Bible Gateway site has all of the English editions of the Bible on-line.]
david starling
Well-known member
You're talking about crazy Nancy right?
With her over 100 Million dollars she stole from the taxpayer while in Congress for decades?
Or Obama who went into the WH with nothing & now he's worth about 100 Million too.
Beijing Biden? In fact, the entire Biden family has gotten very wealthy thanks to China & the Ukraine.
Same with the Clintons.
China Mitch.
Sure, they 'earned' it. No corruption or criminal activity involved.
Nothing to see here people. Move on.
What's it look like when ALL Republicans in the House and Senate voted AGAINST the Stimulus Bill?
Does this mean that Republican Party voters should refuse to accept the money for their own personal use, and instead donate it to Trump's 2024 campaign?