$50 Lesson

LadyJazzer wrote: Yes, when the Supreme Court intelligently took the stance that "promoting the general welfare" allowed for the creation of a safety net to protect it's citizens...

Insert standard " Constitution Party , LawAndLiberty , ReasonOfFreedom , PoliticsOfLiberty , TeaPartyPatriot excursions into what you THINK the Constitution says, or should have said, here: ____________________________________

The Supreme Court interprets, and has done so for a little over 230 years. Their interpretations of what it means are what is important, and not the libertarian nonsense of the radical right. The "general welfare" clause was not "invented", but obviously it has been interpreted to mean something you don't agree with. I could care less.

That particular meaning was tortured from the expression by a court that had recently been told either to get with the program and pull the same line as the other two horses or be replaced by a horse that would. Not exactly what one could call an independently reached decision. If by intelligent stance you mean one that likely staved of a Constitutional crisis erupting if they didn't capitulate to the dictatorial demands of FDR, I would have to agree with you on that matter. If you meant instead a reasoned and rational conclusion, I would again have to point out the circumstances under which the Supreme Court was operating under at the time in dissenting with that conclusion.

Kate wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Is that not your claim as well? That you can see the intentions of Jesus' words in the single line of Scripture you provided? I simply pointed out that your claim to such sight was misted instead of clear and I used the rest of the Scripture surrounding the single line you pulled out to sustain my points. Context, especially in Scripture, is relevant Kate. When you attempt to ascribe meaning after first removing that context any claim to accuracy is severely compromised by that action.

I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

No, you are the one who is spinning what Jesus said to a single person and expanding it without foundation, cause or reason to include everyone who calls themselves Christian. I am simply the one who is pointing out why such an attempt fails when the single line you have chosen is returned to its proper context.

PrintSmith wrote:

Kate wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Is that not your claim as well? That you can see the intentions of Jesus' words in the single line of Scripture you provided? I simply pointed out that your claim to such sight was misted instead of clear and I used the rest of the Scripture surrounding the single line you pulled out to sustain my points. Context, especially in Scripture, is relevant Kate. When you attempt to ascribe meaning after first removing that context any claim to accuracy is severely compromised by that action.

I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

No, you are the one who is spinning what Jesus said to a single person and expanding it without foundation, cause or reason to include everyone who calls themselves Christian. I am simply the one who is pointing out why such an attempt fails when the single line you have chosen is returned to its proper context.

That's not the way I read it, but I suppose you are welcome to your interpretation.

Kate wrote: I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

So, we're making sure we go with an exact literal interpretation? Works for me. Jesus wasn't talking to me, or anyone posting in this thread. He was talking to a single wealthy man that's long since died and become dust. This whole argument has no relevance on those living today, so drop it.

Kate wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Is that not your claim as well? That you can see the intentions of Jesus' words in the single line of Scripture you provided? I simply pointed out that your claim to such sight was misted instead of clear and I used the rest of the Scripture surrounding the single line you pulled out to sustain my points. Context, especially in Scripture, is relevant Kate. When you attempt to ascribe meaning after first removing that context any claim to accuracy is severely compromised by that action.

I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

So I gave you a lengthy explanation and no responce and you are still repeating the same things?

Nobody that matters wrote:

Kate wrote: I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

So, we're making sure we go with an exact literal interpretation? Works for me. Jesus wasn't talking to me, or anyone posting in this thread. He was talking to a single wealthy man that's long since died and become dust. This whole argument has no relevance on those living today, so drop it.

A man walks up to Jesus and asks how to obtain eternal life. Jesus tells him the secret. I would think that would apply to pretty much everyone.

Perhaps the reason that it isn't the way you read it stems from the fact that you are not one who believes in the Scriptures, which would also explain why the interpretations are completely different when viewed from the perspective of one who believes that they are divinely written texts. Your interpretations are not binding upon me anymore than mine are binding upon you Kate. It is for this reason that your attempts to have me and other Christians defend your flawed interpretation that your endeavor becomes completely irrational. I am not bound by your interpretation of the Holy Word Kate. I need not defend an argument bottomed on a flawed foundation. It is sufficient for me to understand how and why your interpretation is flawed.

The Viking wrote: When it says "Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Matthew 19:24. What it means to me is that when people have a lot of money most of the time it is so easy to stray from the faith that Jesus speaks of and turn to money as their God. Many people, even those who claim not to believe will turn to God in times of struggle and when they don't have everything they need to make life comfortable.

What this passage means to me is that when people have a lot of money like the man in this story, it is easy for them to lose sight of God and make money their God. Why do they need faith and love and a reliance on God when money can buy them anything they want? So this is not telling EVERYONE to give up everything they own. He saw into this man’s heart and saw what the most important thing to him was and it was his wealth. And this was proven true by his actions of turning and walking off when he was told of the choice. Just like when God told Abraham to sacrifice the most important thing in his life, his son Isaac so see if his love for God was truely the most imortant thing in his life. He didn't really want him to kill him but he just wanted to see if God was first in his life over everything else. In the other story, the man's money was more important and that parable shows that money is one of the hardest things not to put first over God which in essence makes it your God.

This is not saying that ANYONE with money cannot keep faith and love for God and enter the Kingdom of Heaven. There are many Philanthropists out there who do nothing but take care of others with their money. But it is so much easier to get caught up in the world and material things rather than making God and people as the most important things in this world. And it is easier to think more of yourself and your own happiness rather than those in this world who are struggling. Again, I am not saying that this is that case with everyone, but if people are FORCED to take care of others, then there is resentment towards doing it and they don’t really gets the chance to do it out of love and the kindness in their hearts as Jesus was an example of and wants us to be a shining example of to the world. It defeats the whole purpose.

Interesting how both you and PrintSmith can apparently tell me what Jesus was thinking at that time when he met that man. Again, this is not about forcing people to do something by the government, this is about your individual actions that are either in compliance or not in compliance with what Jesus says to do in order to obtain eternal life.

PrintSmith wrote: Perhaps the reason that it isn't the way you read it stems from the fact that you are not one who believes in the Scriptures, which would also explain why the interpretations are completely different when viewed from the perspective of one who believes that they are divinely written texts. Your interpretations are not binding upon me anymore than mine are binding upon you Kate. It is for this reason that your attempts to have me and other Christians defend your flawed interpretation that your endeavor becomes completely irrational. I am not bound by your interpretation of the Holy Word Kate. I need not defend an argument bottomed on a flawed foundation. It is sufficient for me to understand how and why your interpretation is flawed.

What is amusing here is the gymnastics that Christians go through to justify their life choices which are obviously not aligned with what the scriptures say.

Kate wrote:

Nobody that matters wrote:

Kate wrote: I am not the one spinning the bible and adding my interpretation, PS. I'ts right there in black & white, where it says "sell your...." You are the one that is interpreting that it "actually means that we should....."

So, we're making sure we go with an exact literal interpretation? Works for me. Jesus wasn't talking to me, or anyone posting in this thread. He was talking to a single wealthy man that's long since died and become dust. This whole argument has no relevance on those living today, so drop it.

A man walks up to Jesus and asks how to obtain eternal life. Jesus tells him the secret. I would think that would apply to pretty much everyone.

You're wrong. He was talking to that man, not all of us. We're taking a literal interpretation here, remember? no looking into the mind of Jesus to project like you just did. Your rules, not mine.