Why are so many Christians conservative when Christ was liberal?

The majority of christians are more followers of judas iscariot.

 

Or, he might have said let he who is without sin cast the first stone

Fact is that both tax collectors and prostitutes likely continued in their profession

Fact also is that somewhere jesus said no one should get married unless they "have" to because of their sexual urges.... Otherwise they should give all that up and follow him
Well, sexual urges are sexual urges. Gay or straight. Seems to me jesus would tell a gay he should settle down and get married if he has these urges

. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let anyone accept this who can.” (Matthew 19:11-12)


There was no word for gay back then, eunuch is pretty much the word they used for effeminate men

 

You truncated what he said.

Matthew 22:21 - "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God, the things that are God’s,"

It is a parable like many others often found in the Bible.

Psalm 24:1-2 - 1 The earth is the Lord’s, and everything in it, the world, and all who live in it; 2 for he founded it on the seas and established it on the waters.

If we rendered unto God all the things that belong to God, there would be nothing left for Caesar.

 

Not JUST tell you not to do it. With the forgiveness one must do their part by turning away from that sin in an act of repentance.

 

I agree. No need to debate clothing. It falls in the same category as homosexual or any other leviticus laws.

- - - Updated - - -

Your claiming it, but offering no proof to back up said claim. So it is just an opinion. Which your welcome to have.

 

It doesn't change anything. What is it that are Ceasar's? Taxes. That is the reference.

This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship between Christianity and secular authority. The original message, coming in response to a question of whether it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations about the circumstances under which it is desirable for the Christian to submit to earthly authority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Render_unto_Caesar

 

How many turn away from wearing clothing of multiple fabrics? Comes from the same set of levitcal laws.

 

You asked me what it meant and I told you.

- - - Updated - - -

At the time Christians did.

 

You did no such thing.

[SIZ=1]- - - Updated - - -[/SIZE]

At what time?

 

I gave you the Biblical answer to your question, if you don't understand it then stop pretending to understand Christianity.

 

Xians were widely hated by Roman authorities because of their refusal to pledge oaths to Emperors and state 'Gods', a requirement for military service and other functions related to 'secular authority', so obviously those 'interpretations' had limits, and the context of that verse you're attempting to use here is clearly wrong. There is no 'interpretation' of it that would have had Jesus supporting something so ridiculously inane as 'gay marriage'.

 

Another example of Xians not being required to simply submit blindly to authority is the driving of moneylenders from the Temple, and in fact pretty much Jesus's entire ministry, a radical one, which went against the prevailing authorities of the Jewish society and organizations of the day.

 

That was liberal in the context of the Jewish authority over the God’s forgiveness, not “liberal,” as in my house is a “castle” when it is a beach bungalow, but actually was conservative in context of the truth of Jesus as the word, as that word never required that forgiveness was an obligatory tax that some simply could not pay. By requiring people to pay for cleansing and forgiveness “the prevailing authorities of the Jewish society and organizations of the day” were assuming a power that only God had. Only God will judge us, but they had usurped that power to their purposes.

Many “liberals” want to be able to say, “The devil made me do it,” and have Geraldine Jones say, “Obama made me buy this dress [tax plan…],” they would like nothing more than to usurp religion for their purposes when it suits their purposes.

We simply cannot leave it here.

These four sentences show a profound lack of understanding not only of what Jesus is reported to have said in the Gospel but of our Constitution:

1) “Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. As President of our country and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day -- (laughter) -- and I will always defend their right to do so. (Applause.)”

2) “We do so because given the power of faith in our lives, and the passion that religious differences can inflame, the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression; it is more speech – the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy, and lift up the values of understanding and mutual respect.”

3) “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

He is not Jesus, nor God almighty over the universe to extinguish the future voices of those that have no choice but to blaspheme MoHamMad, the issue is not calling him “awful things every day,” the issue is the right of not mutually respecting the devil or his false prophet.

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” (John 8:44)

That is Jesus denigrating, which is something the Obamanation has forbidden.

“10 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.” (Luke 12:10)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke+12:10&version=KJV

“31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.” (Matthew 12:31)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+12:32&version=KJV

“28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:

29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.” (Mark 3:28-29) https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+3:28-29

What does this all have to do with liberals and Christianity? We must define the beliefs.

Iranian belief:

“I set a link which shown prophet Mohammad prophecy and the promise for his coming in your book.” (hoorshid)
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=406038&p=1064961183#post1064961183
That link was here: http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=406038&p=1064951270#post1064951270

From the link:

“Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the New Testament:…”
1. John chapter 14 verse 16:
"And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever."
http://www.islam101.com/religions/christianity/mBible.htm/

So the question from all this background material is:

Does the liberal “Christian” Obama, and Hillary Clinton, believe that the prophet of Islam is that “Comforter,” which Jesus said cannot be blasphemed?


Today many liberals are “liberals” like Obama, and Hillary Clinton, who want “liberal” law to be like a religion with obligatory submission like with Islam:

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=408737&p=1065003950#post1065003950

And anyone that speaks out against it, and accuses the false prophet of being false, is to be silenced:

 

I stated no lie you did.

Liberals are not in synch with the views of the Jesus character SBD that is proven fact.

You lie to claim otherwise and that has been proven.

That which was Caesars was the money with his picture on it which you ignore to desperately twist something to save face


You have to save face because you have been made to look very foolish and dishonest.

 

You gave a bible verse. Which is talking about taxes. If you can't comprehend the bible, stop pretending to give christian answers.

 

you can't stop. It is explicitly about taxes. Stating anything else is ignorant.

 

It is explicitly about giving the owner what belongs to him.

Paying taxez is not a liberal idealogy.

Redistribution and central planning is liberal idealogy which the Christ character never mentioned

Yes if is fun making you look foolish over and over

 

Yeshua is against homosexuality, bestiality, incest, murder, theft, lying and I would suggest stupidity. But who ever said Yeshua was a conservative or a liberal? Certainly not the Holy Bible.

 

John 10:10, 11 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly. I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.

If Jesus were here today he could have easily said this about the thugs in Baltimore and Ferguson.