Obamacare vs Christianity, as blogger sees it--

Originally posted by KellyJay
May not seem like a valid claim to you, it isn't you that is making it, to those of
us that are making it, it is a very valid claim that goes against much of what
defines us.
Kelly

Do you advocate some sort of a line item veto system for each taxpayer?

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you find someone complaining about Medicare and their first amendment
rights I suggest you go talk to them. People have complained bitterly that they
did NOT want tax dollars going towards anything that killed unborn children, the
government NOW is doing that and more! Car insurance is only forced upon those
of us who want to drive, not those of us t ...[text shortened]... eover, it is a state law too not a federal one
that mandates that if I'm not mistaken.
Kelly

Yes but they, like you, are morons.

There is no federal tax money in the USA going to fund abortions because it has been multiply
redundantly banned. The republicans like regularly re-banning it just to make sure.

Abortions have to be paid for privately and are not paid for by the federal government.

Anyone claiming otherwise is lying and an idiot.

Of course abortions should be covered by the state just like all other healthcare but
that's a separate issue.

If we are talking about how things are now, and you are just flat out plain wrong and lying.

Stop watching fox news, it's rotting your brain and you didn't have much of one to start with.

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you find someone complaining about Medicare and their first amendment
rights I suggest you go talk to them. People have complained bitterly that they
did NOT want tax dollars going towards anything that killed unborn children, the
government NOW is doing that and more! Car insurance is only forced upon those
of us who want to drive, not those of us t ...[text shortened]... eover, it is a state law too not a federal one
that mandates that if I'm not mistaken.
Kelly

If you find someone complaining about Medicare and their first amendment
rights I suggest you go talk to them.

Wow.. you really don't even get the concept of a hypothetical do you?

People have complained bitterly that they
did NOT want tax dollars going towards anything that killed unborn children, the
government NOW is doing that and more!

No, it's not. If you want me to believe you then backup your statements with facts.

! Car insurance is only forced upon those
of us who want to drive, not those of us that just live their lives, you don't want
to drive you do not have to buy it; moreover, it is a state law too not a federal one
that mandates that if I'm not mistaken.

This isn't something being forced on just those of you just living your lives, it's a regulation just like others on people who choose to run businesses.

It's completely irrelevant whether it's the state or federal government. The state governments aren't allowed to violate the first amendment either.


Even if I don't agree with you, I understand if you come from this from the perspective of simply disliking government regulations. You have put this before in the framing of a violation of church state separation (the first amendment of the constitution) and that's what I'm getting at.


I'm going to repeat my request which you haven't addressed. You suggested that since I see a grey area and you don't that it is black & white to you what the line is that the government can't cross when it comes to the first amendment and regulations that affect religion.

Can you please define that line in the sand that you would draw?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes but they, like you, are morons.

There is no federal tax money in the USA going to fund abortions because it has been multiply
redundantly banned. The republicans like regularly re-banning it just to make sure.

Abortions have to be paid for privately and are not paid for by the federal government.

Anyone claiming otherwise is lying and an i ...[text shortened]... top watching fox news, it's rotting your brain and you didn't have much of one to start with.

"Yes but they, like you, are morons. "

We are done talking to one another.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
May not seem like a valid claim to you, it isn't you that is making it, to those of
us that are making it, it is a very valid claim that goes against much of what
defines us.
Kelly

Did you lose track of the context of my post? This is what I was responding to:

Did the govenment force anyone into buying or selling anything? All of us can
complain about what the government spends money on (with good cause), but
forcing you to spend money out of your own pocket, is another thing all together.
Forcing people to buy things they want nothing to do with is also another thing
as well, this administration has taken things to a whole new level.

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes but they, like you, are morons.

There is no federal tax money in the USA going to fund abortions because it has been multiply
redundantly banned. The republicans like regularly re-banning it just to make sure.

Abortions have to be paid for privately and are not paid for by the federal government.

Anyone claiming otherwise is lying and an i ...[text shortened]... top watching fox news, it's rotting your brain and you didn't have much of one to start with.

You are a Brit, what do you know about abortion in the USA? Stop paying attention to the lying liberal Democrats.

One can only wonder if those who see this as a "freedom of religion" issue would support someone who demanded his "right" to own and beat slaves which is clearly condoned in the Bible.

Let's examine your criticism closely.

Exodus 21:26-27 is a law concerning the RELEASE of injured servants. Please show me the instruction endorsing injuring the servant. A law concerning the release of an injured slave is not an endorsement to injure the slave in the first place.

In the passage the master is an employer. If the master accidently gouges out the eye or knocks out the tooth of the servant, the servant (male or female) is to go out free.

Is God telling the master to knock out the tooth? Of course not.
Is God telling the master to gouge out the eye? Of course not.

If an injury should occur, the instruction teaches, THIS is how it should be dealt with. The servant goes free. (Masters will lose their tempers).

Is God commanding masters to lose their tempers? No.

Because this is a discussion forum post and not a book chapter my comments are brief here. No bodily abuse of servants was permitted. If an employer's (master) discipline resulted in the death of his servant, that employer (master) was to be put to death (Exodus 21:20)

Is this a command of God to go forth and kill the servant? Of course not.
Is it a divine command to punish a servant? No it is not.
It is instruction what to do should such a thing HAPPEN.

The word for "punish" in the passage is very strong and connotes the death penalty. "And if a man strikes his male servant or his female servant with a rod, and the servant dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished." (Exo.21:20)

Is this a command of God to a master to go forth and strike his servant? No.

By contrast Hammurabi's Code permitted the master to cut off his disobedient servant's ear. In other ANE law codes masters, not slaves, were the ones financially compensated for for slave injuries. In the Mosaic law masters are held accountable for the treatment of their own servants, and not simply for treatment of another's servant.

As seen in Exodus 20:21 the injury of a servant unto death was treated by God's law as capital murder. Compared to other ancient Near Eastern codes of law the law of Moses was a move toward greater social justice.

By the way in Israel the servants were released every seven years unless the servant wanted to stay. The code of Hammurabi prescribed masters to release slave women and her children (sired by the master) if the master decided not to adopt them.

Slavery, like divorce and warfare with its POWs, is something that God knew was likely to occur in the world. If I had to be a slave, it would be better to be one in the theocratic nation of Israel.

You want to take your chances with the Hittites or the Assyrians? Better not.

Originally posted by sonship
Slavery, like divorce and warfare with its POWs, is something that God knew was likely to occur in the world. If I [b]had to be a slave, it would be better to be one in the theocratic nation of Israel.[/b]

Putting the Hebrews "in the theocratic nation of Israel" to one side for a moment, what about Christians owning slaves in the present day? Is it permitted by God?

Originally posted by FMF
Putting the Hebrews "in the theocratic nation of Israel" to one side for a moment, what about Christians owning slaves in the present day? Is it permitted by God?

Putting the Hebrews "in the theocratic nation of Israel" to one side for a moment, what about Christians owning slaves in the present day? Is it permitted by God?

I think the question is a little bit loaded. The simple form in which you put it could be misleading.

The New Testament speaks to a person who should find himself in the situation of slavery, WHAT should be his attitude as a Christian disciple. The implication is that as the Gospel goes forth in the world people will respond to it in various circumstances and walks of life.

Is this God's permission of this or that as a social policy ? I don't see why.

Some people will become believers after a divorce or during one.
So does God "permit" divorce ?

Some people will turn to Christ while owning slaves. Otherwise it is hard to see why one whole book in the NT, Philemon , deals with a runaway slave.
So does this prove God "permits" slavery?

Now I would answer you this way. God "permits" many things in His permissive will. Instances of slavery, abortion, divorce, prostitution, etc. will occur. I do not expect that in each situation suddenly the sky will split and God will suddenly come down and stop what is going on. The NT is written anticipating that people will turn to Jesus while in all manner of human conditions. The point is that Christ is greater for them as a salvation in whatever state they may find themselves.

His permissive will has allowed this or that to occur. In 2013 God's permissive will see the sin of slavery occur somewhere.

Having said that I think that a more mature seeker of God should ask "What is God's perfect will?" rather than "What can people get away with?" or "What will God LET happen?" or "How much can we DO?" I think the better question is what does God want in terms of His perfect will.

"What will God let happen in the world?" I think is the shallower question.
"What is the perfect will of God ? What does God want rather than what will He let happen?" is, I think, the more relevant question to the disciple of Christ.

Originally posted by sonship
"What will God let happen in the world?" I think is the shallower question.
"What is the perfect will of God ? What does God want rather than what will He let happen?" is, I think, the more relevant question to the disciple of Christ.

So if a contemporary Christian were to own slaves it would not be sinful, is that what you're getting at? It would not be ideal, but nor would it be actually wrong or sinful?

Originally posted by sonship
The New Testament speaks to a person who should find himself in the situation of slavery, WHAT should be his attitude as a Christian disciple. The implication is that as the Gospel goes forth in the world people will respond to it in various circumstances and walks of life.

I am not talking about a Christian finding "himself in the situation of slavery". I am talking about a Christian owning slaves. Is it not forbidden according to the New Covenant?

So if a contemporary Christian were to own slaves it would not be sinful, is that what you're getting at? It would not be ideal, but nor would it be actually wrong or sinful?

I think the contempory Christian, upon reading the Bible and growing spiritually, will come not to be at peace within himself concerning most forms of slavery.

This especially of the type in which 21rst century man is most familiar with. Simply by taking in the New Testament, I think I would see that should bring my every practice before God.

Are you thinking about getting some slaves? You seem very occupied with this matter. lol

Originally posted by FMF
I am not talking about a Christian finding "himself in the situation of slavery". I am talking about a Christian owning slaves. Is it not forbidden according to the New Covenant?

I am talking about a Christian owning slaves. Is it not forbidden according to the New Covenant?

What do you think ?

Be bold. Take a position. Stand for a position and say "This is what I believe."

Originally posted by sonship
Are you thinking about getting some slaves? You seem very occupied with this matter. lol

This is the forum on which this matter should be discussed, is it not? During the 28 years I considered myself to be a Christian I never once heard a fellow Christian claim that Christians were permitted by God to own slaves. robbie laying out the case as he has done on the other thread is the first time I have heard any Christian try to justify slavery and argue that it is permitted under the New Covenant. I think it is an interesting topic. It has also interesting to see how much invective has been directed at me for raising it.

Originally posted by sonship
I think the contemporary Christian, upon reading the Bible and growing spiritually, will come not to be at peace within himself concerning most forms of slavery.

A Christian owning slaves: sinful? Yes or no?

A Christian owning slaves: forbidden by scripture? Yes or no?