Today is
Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Google Safe Search


Home > Religion

The Bible: Read it before you thump it!


In a speech before leftist sycophants at Tufts University, Hillary Clinton advocated using the Bible to defeat conservative arguments and advocate the extreme left agenda on poverty.  "No one can read the New Testament of our Bible without recognizing that Jesus had a lot more to say about how we treat the poor than most of the issues that were talked about in this election," she said. Before she starts thumping the Bible, Hillary needs to read it, all of it.


"The left...leaves us this this apparent policy position:  The government is responsible to dole out charity to the poor, using the persuasive force of law to extract money from those deemed more wealthy, and paying it out to the poor."


The left, which in its S.O.P. fails to set forth its detailed position on the issue of poverty, leaves us this this apparent policy position:  The government is responsible to dole out charity to the poor, using the persuasive force of law to extract money from those deemed more wealthy, and paying it out to the poor.  This should extend to free government medical treatment. food stamps, and government subsidized housing.  The extractees have no say in to whom or how much they give.  The left relies upon government to force people of all faiths, and atheists as well, to discharge what is, according to the Bible that Mrs. Clinton claims to wish to use, a Christian duty and privilege.

First, the leftís position flouts Godís principle that giving ought to be done in good cheer: "Consider this: whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows bountifully will also reap bountifully. Each must do as already determined, without sadness or compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." 2 Corinthians 9:6-7.  If the government compels you to give X to the poor, you are not being charitable; you are discharging an obligation under pain of the civil and criminal penalties in the tax code.  If the left think that the Bible ordains that the government ought to help the poor, perhaps that explains that the stingiest charitable giving states are all "blue," and not only that, the richest of the Blue.  Connecticut is the stingiest state in the Union.  Last I visited Geenwich, they canafford to dust off their wallets.  The state with the most charitable citizens is Mississippi, also the poorest state and one of the most devout.  Hmmm.  People can actually be charitable without being forced to be charitable?  Indeed!


"Christians are required in the New Testament to exercise judgment in their execution of charity...But, we have no control over our charitable giving, if even it can be called that, when we see the money go out as part of the Income Tax line of our pay stub and are forever detached from the money or its control from that second forward."


Also, Christians are required in the New Testament to exercise judgment in their execution of charity.  "Neither did we eat any manís bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies." 2 Thessalonians 3:8-11.  It may sound harsh, but God has no intention of funding freeloaders in the name of charity.  But, we have no control over our charitable giving, if even it can be called that, when we see the money go out as part of the Income Tax line of our pay stub and are forever detached from the money or its control from that second forward.  The leftís policy makes it impossible for a Christian to obey God with respect to aid to the poor.

Before Jesus was crucified, expensive ointment was lavished on him. Judas Iscariot said, "It should have been sold and given to the poor."  Judas "had the bag" and it is said in the Bible that he stole from it.  This raises the issue that government-mandated "charity" may be less an opportunity to help the disadvantaged than to line the pockets of the bureaucrats who administer the program.  But I digress.  Pleasenote Jesusí reply:  "For the poor always ye have with you, but me ye have not always." (John 12:8)  Jesus was teaching that this is not the time to solve the worldís poverty.  If it had been the time to eradicate poverty, Jesus could easily have done so.  Until the date when Jesus returns and He does indeed erase poverty from the planet, the job is ours on a case by case basis.  "The King will reply, íI tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.í " Matthew 25:40.


"It is not the job of the government to usurp the Christian charity obligation."


It is not the job of the government to usurp the Christian charity obligation.  Mrs. Clinton, the Bible does not advocate that the government do the personís job.  The only example of your idea is the socialism of the Church in Jerusalem, where it is recorded in Acts that they shared amongst themselves and had all in common.  Later on, in the epistles, it is apparent that the Jerusalem church is in dire financial straits.  To this writer, it appears that God taught us a lesson about the utter failure of socialism.

So, should you decide to thump that Bible, Mrs. Clinton, read it.  You are an attorney and know how to read carefully.  So read the entire Bible.  From cover to cover, not in carefully-selected snippets.  Read it over and over, front to back, putting time aside for a few chapters every day.  In fact, if you commit to read a part of the Bible every day repeatedly going from cover to cover for the rest of your life, you may be the successful presidential Candidate in 2008 -- for the GOP, as the ultimate convert to the Christian Right!  If that were to happen, I can guarantee that there will be a serious party among the angels in Heaven.  Why?  Luke 15:7.


John gratefully acknowledges his brother, Joel A. Tamburo, who wrote a piecem which will make it up to Conservativity soon, on this subject.  Without Joelís perspective, this article would not be possible.