Is Obama the second coming of Jesus Christ or is he merely Christ-like?

[UncleBuck]

No no, the answer in the second case would be yes. Jesus said render the taxes commanded of you. He did not say he supported the merits of the tax.

Whoops.

so jesus would not support taxes that feed the poor, keep grandma in a warm house, or fix that indigent guy's broken leg?

HERPADERPDEVRYUPREPDERP.

 

[tokeprep]

there was a point during the year when the family had to send their kids to bed hungry, but they aren't poor because they have a telephone. you had to be a baller to afford one of those 125 years ago!

HERPADERPADERPDERPDEVRYUPREPITTECHBLACKKIDSTAKINGMYSCHOLARSHIPDERP!

You do realize kids go hungry because people are financially irresponsible, not necessarily because they had insufficient resources to provide for survival, right?

My parents had problems with drinking, drugs, and gambling. We were evicted from our house/had our electricity shut off/had an exceedingly light dinner so that my dad could blow $1,000 at the casino and my mom could high, not because they lacked the resources to provide. My parents didn't get evicted or have their power shut off because they were poor, it was because their priorities were fucked up.

 

[tokeprep]

so you can go on welfare, but you HAVE to work?

HERPADERPADERPDERPDEVRYUPREPDERP!

I keep telling you the individual case is irrelevant to your statement about the aggregate and yet you are totally fixated on the individual case. Telling, isn't it?

 

[UncleBuck]

You do realize kids go hungry because people are financially irresponsible, not necessarily because they had insufficient resources to provide for survival, right?

My parents had problems with drinking, drugs, and gambling. We were evicted from our house/had our electricity shut off/had an exceedingly light dinner so that my dad could blow $1,000 at the casino and my mom could high, not because they lacked the resources to provide. My parents didn't get evicted or have their power shut off because they were poor, it was because their priorities were fucked up.

there you go again, changing the argument once you've realized how stupid it is.

so is this your latest reformulation of the sentiment that there are no poor people in america?

 

[UncleBuck]

I keep telling you the individual case is irrelevant to your statement about the aggregate and yet you are totally fixated on the individual case. Telling, isn't it?

when have i used the word aggregate even once in this thread?

devryU failed you.

 

[tokeprep]

so jesus would not support taxes that feed the poor, keep grandma in a warm house, or fix that indigent guy's broken leg?

HERPADERPDEVRYUPREPDERP.

Maybe he would, but in those passages he didn't tell us so, so we have no way to know. What we do know with absolute certainty, based on the text, is that Jesus urged the rich to voluntarily give to the poor. That was my whole original point.

 

[UncleBuck]

Maybe he would

ya think? just maybe?

perhaps jesus might be for taxes that feed hungry people? heal the poor?

depends if we're talking racist southern jesus or jesus jesus, dinosaur pony enthusiast.

 

[tokeprep]

there you go again, changing the argument once you've realized how stupid it is.

so is this your latest reformulation of the sentiment that there are no poor people in america?

What argument am I changing? What did I reformulate? All I said in that post is that you are overstating the number of poor people by assuming that they must have lacked necessary survival resources if they were food insecure.

 

[tokeprep]

ya think? just maybe?

perhaps jesus might be for taxes that feed hungry people? heal the poor?

depends if we're talking racist southern jesus or jesus jesus, dinosaur pony enthusiast.

Personally I would say no, Jesus wouldn't support that. You already know why: Jesus wanted altruism to be voluntary, not some kind of compulsion. But since Jesus didn't explicitly say anything on the topic we cannot possibly know for sure.

 

[UncleBuck]

you are overstating the number of poor people

if i claim that there is even one poor person in america, you would say that i am overstating it since you are under the belief that there are no poor people in america.

oh, woops. you backtracked that claim as well once i reminded you that kids go to bed hungry and that having the latest and greatest 1890 technology doesn't change that fact at all.

devryU has failed you. but i bet the black guy who took your place at ITT tech is doing just fine. you poor thing (not literally poor, those people don't exist since we all own radios now).

 

[UncleBuck]

Personally I would say no, Jesus wouldn't support that.

"render unto caesar his poll taxes, but tell him to fuck off if he comes knocking for bread to feed the hungry" - southern jesus while riding a dinosaur (jesus pony), circa 1779.

 

[tokeprep]

if i claim that there is even one poor person in america, you would say that i am overstating it since you are under the belief that there are no poor people in america.

My first post on this subject in the thread explicitly acknowledged twice that there are genuinely poor people in the United States. Obviously I am under no such belief.

oh, woops. you backtracked that claim as well once i reminded you that kids go to bed hungry and that having the latest and greatest 1890 technology doesn't change that fact at all.

How can it be backtracking when it was one of the first things I acknowledged?

 

[tokeprep]

"render unto caesar his poll taxes, but tell him to fuck off if he comes knocking for bread to feed the hungry" - southern jesus while riding a dinosaur (jesus pony), circa 1779.

You're equating Jesus telling people to pay the taxes demanded by civil authorities with Jesus supporting those taxes, as here: "perhaps jesus might be for taxes that feed hungry people? heal the poor?" I already said I thought Jesus would tell people to pay both the poll tax and the welfare tax, if they had both been commanded. That is not equivalent to Jesus saying "I endorse this tax and its purpose--I'm for it!"

 

[nevyn]

"render unto caesar his poll taxes, but tell him to fuck off if he comes knocking for bread to feed the hungry" - southern jesus while riding a dinosaur (jesus pony), circa 1779.

Buck, you still making an ass of yourself I see, I thought you would have given up by now, seems you haven't. Have you learned nothing in the 4 months I have been away? Nothing at all?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Buck, you still making an ass of yourself I see, I thought you would have given up by now, seems you haven't. Have you learned nothing in the 4 months I have been away? Nothing at all?

Yo Nevyn, I was worried about you and thought maybe the black folks rewarded your political leaning with a necklace.

 

[UncleBuck]

How can it be backtracking when it was one of the first things I acknowledged?

so you're pointing out that you acknowledged that there are poor people, then denied that there are poor people, now you're acknowledging once again that there are poor people.

that's just fucking excellent.

 

[UncleBuck]

Buck, you still making an ass of yourself I see, I thought you would have given up by now, seems you haven't. Have you learned nothing in the 4 months I have been away? Nothing at all?

Yo Nevyn, I was worried about you and thought maybe the black folks rewarded your political leaning with a necklace.

i see canna was worried about the white supremacist. i was just kinda hoping the old fucker kicked the bucket.

 

[UncleBuck]

You're equating Jesus telling people to pay the taxes demanded by civil authorities with Jesus supporting those taxes, as here: "perhaps jesus might be for taxes that feed hungry people? heal the poor?" I already said I thought Jesus would tell people to pay both the poll tax and the welfare tax, if they had both been commanded. That is not equivalent to Jesus saying "I endorse this tax and its purpose--I'm for it!"

i'm certain that jesus would be totally against taxes that feed the hungry and heal the poor.

 

[thepenofareadywriter]

Jesus would have been a Democrat. If the Christians are right then all Republicans are Hell-bound.
View attachment 3076164

neither

 

[tokeprep]

so you're pointing out that you acknowledged that there are poor people, then denied that there are poor people, now you're acknowledging once again that there are poor people.

that's just fucking excellent.

I made a clear initial distinction between what was generally true and the exception. It's implicit throughout the rest of the argument. There's no need to hedge my words every single time I bring it up when you already know what I think.

Or are you incapable of comprehending that without being spoonfed?