Let me know where I lost you...
By - Jibrish
For those who haven't studied that period of history, the Roman occupation of Judea got brutal. When things were peaceful and the revenue was flowing, the yoke was fairly light. When the status quo got threatened, Roman reprisals were horrifying and bloody.
It would take another 100 years before the Romans decided to just kill all of the Jews and take away their homeland, renaming it from Judaea to Palestine.
That’s the price of foreign occupation. Everyone does it.
Even the locals will do it...
Government will oppress, that's what it does.
One quick correction: Can’t the Romans take other people’s money and do it for us?
Jesus commands Christians to be his hands and feet, not to pass that along to some other entity that believed in false gods
look at you, bible study
edit: wasn't a dig
> “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s"
That is a lot of projection of those words. Really it means to many that Caesar only needed or wanted the money. Christians should care about what is more important.
How much money did Caesar and the tax collectors need? Doesn't matter. The government was corrupt to the core.
The teachings of Jesus were somewhat similar to Gandhi. Not a revolution and war. Ignore the dictator. Take care of family, friends and neighbors.
So what do you think Jesus meant when he said...
"why are you trying to trap me?"
Much like Republicans, Jesus got harassed for his “wide stance”.
Very vague please elaborate.
Ceasar doesn't own anything, God does....That's the point...
Nothing disingenuous about it.
Jesus is awesome
Jesus is wonderful
Jesus is spectacular
Jesus is Lord
Jesus is a Jedi master
Okay, I don’t think that quite fits the thread here…
I'll say it once again: you can't be charitable with someone else's money.
That's the trade-off. In general:
* If you're spending your own money on something for you, price matters and quality matters.
* If you're spending your own money on something for someone else, price matters but quality does not.
* If you're spending someone else's money on something for you, quality matters but price does not.
* if you're spending someone else's money on something for someone else, neither price nor quality matters.
Government spends other people's money on things for other people, so neither how much they spend nor what they get for the money is important. It's literally the worst case.
This. We see how well the government does things...
When you’re spending other people’s money on other people, you tend not to care about cost or quality.
Where does this fit in with "refer unto Caesar what is Caesar's?"
People also never seem to reference Romans 13 either in these conversations:
>13 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4 for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, attending to this very thing. 7 Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed.
> it's got 0 to do with conservatism
Judeo-Christian values help form the basis of morality, and Conservatism relies heavily on the virtues of morality. Comments that reference the Bible are relevant here, I think.
That being said, I don’t support either side using biblical verses out of context to sway a political discussion. The verses from Romans 13 above were written by the apostle Paul, who made his career (and was ultimately killed) by refusing to compromise his beliefs to Roman and Judean authorities. This passage is more applicable to being a good citizen in society when conscience is not being challenged.
> a better moral standard
There is no better moral standard independent of the morality taught in the Bible by God, starting with love the Lord with all your heart, followed by the 10 Commandments. Are these the “list of arbitrary rules” you mention? They are far from arbitrary, in fact, they are much more systemically specific than “being good.”
EDIT: On the issue of morality, Reddit has spoken. I see the light now… I’ll throw out 3000 years of Judeo-Christian values, as obviously, The Flying Spaghetti Monster has replaced the Lord. If only the puritans had known of logical determinism- it would have warmed their souls and inspired their dangerous trek to the New World. /s
The Ten commandments were never intended to be exhaustive. They represent categories that encompass all areas of life a d are the center of the Mosaic law but not the law in its entirety.
Any society and moral standard worth anything at all eventually reaches god.
We could get into it but I doubt you’d listen.
At a very basic level, God is the Unknown. I don’t mean a “God of the gaps” where “if you can’t explain something that is God.” I mean that one of the foremost qualities of God is that he is Unknown and Unknowable.
When people think deeply, they eventually reach the idea “What if there are things I do not know?”
This expands into the idea “What if there are things that cannot be known?”
This, in the context of our spiritual and worldly reality, points us towards the beyond and the intangible. That which is unseen yet nevertheless exists and affects our world; think of the collective unconscious or radio signals.
At this point we’re already at God. Nietchze, the most spiritual and intelligent athiest of all time, recognized this. And he even still inevitably drifted in the direction of diefication with the Superman (which if we get down to it is really no different from the search of the philosopher’s stone, aka being in full communion with Christ).
Every single culture and religious tradition, at least that I have encountered, recognizes this. The existence of a “spiritual world” is not denied by any peoples on earth.
Pretty much every single moral standard outside of that piece of mythical, poorly written, trash is better.
Being good can be manipulated and turned into opinion in the hands of men. An agreed upon set of standards is needed to prevent bad people from convincing others that their view is "good".
And majority opinion just doesn't do that. See: The Nazis, Communists, etc, etc. All were majority-supported regimes. All were wrong.
And mind you, this entire nation was built by Christians and founded on Christian moral beliefs. You don't just get to remove that basis and have the whole structure still stay standing.
If a house is built by Christians but then an atheist moves in does the house likewise fall down? You'll need a lot more evidence to prove that any religious beliefs are what make this country stand.
Christ is a much harder road than American politics is capable of understanding. We are called to be servants and kings, to live in a paradox where we have the integrity to take control of any situation that needs it, but to also be able to set aside our pride and take orders whenever it is needed.
> The weird religious shit in this sub is really getting annoying, it's got 0 to do with conservatism.
Sounds to me like you got nothing to do with conservatism. Tell me, who was it that endowed us with unalienable rights?
> Tell me, who was it that endowed us with unalienable rights?
Good question, no one man can be credited with it, only the hundreds of thousands in my country's history who would sooner throw themselves at the arrows of enemies than let themselves be governed by a spaniard or a moor. Christianity had a big role to play, but conservatism isn't about weird evangelism outside of the US, bro.
Atheism is illogical, degenerate, and self-destructive.
nice argument, especially when I didn't even say if I was an atheist lol
I wonder why evangelists get so mad whenever someone isn't a fucking weirdo like they are.
Lol that’s what I assume when u call Christianity “weird religious evangelist shit.”
We get upset because it shows you have put absolutely no effort to understand or love your neighbor. However in this case I’m just stating my opinion
I didn't call Christianity weird religious evangelist shit, I called proselytizing on a subreddit meant for conservatives that, because that's exactly what it is. Politics should avoid the topic of religion at all cost - there is no arguing against this because it's already been proven to be right over many, many years. We have moved past the need for religion as a cultural glue in every country that isn't "diverse".
Hmmm, conservatism is about conserving society and traditional values…..? I wonder what those traditional values are and what form they take…. ?
Yeah sure you can say your tradition is Western rationalism and traditional liberalism, Descartes John Lock etc., But like even that betrays ignorance because Descartes had a week-long spiritual possession before writing his *Meditations* and the Romantic tradition is (while secular) deeply connected to the spiritual experience.
In the West, the people are the governing authority. The government are just the administrators overseeing things. A better argument would be about being all things to all men so that the Gospel may be appealing.
Since Jesus here is saying to take care of your neighbor yourself instead of relying on others to do all the work for you, and your quoted statement is only about paying taxes in general and not where those taxes go to, I'd say the quote doesn't seem to fit in here at all.
Exactly. Give the fiat currency back to the us government and live in a commune as Jesus did and help each other to live.
After all, easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven.
Yup, Jesus wants Christians to be his hands and feet. Being face to face with those in need will allow you to share your testimony and share God’s love
I think charity is more about personal sacrifice than it is loving your neighbor, with the prime example being the parable of the poor widow, but I do agree that people tend to misunderstand, often on purpose, the messages within the Bible.
Whatever the government forces us to do, we should do (with some exceptions).
However, this is a democracy where Christians have the opportunity to shape the government. And so here we are.
He's saying pay your taxes. Taxes and charity are entirely different concepts to anyone other than leftist assholes.
“The question is not whether that which is Caesar’s should be rendered to him, for that is to be done to all men; but who is Caesar, and what doth of right belong to him.” - Algernon Sidney
Who is our just sovereign? We don’t have Caesar. The people themselves are sovereign and so no official has a right to collect taxes without their consent.
[Render Unto Caesar: A Most Misunderstood New Testament Passage - mises.org](https://mises.org/wire/render-unto-caesar-most-misunderstood-new-testament-passage)
Taxes aren’t charity. This is an image of the sermon on the mount. The two have nothing to do with each other.
It’s a trick answer from Jesus IMO because they were trying to stump him. If you believe everything is the Lord’s and all comes from Him, then there is nothing that is “Caesar’s.” Also God would not want us to pay tribute to evil causes such as abortion even if it’s through tax. The golden calf in the Old Testament was made by “taxing” some gold from all the Israelites then making it into the idol. So everyone was complicit in that sin.
Your point is right, but your example is wrong. People were not taxed to make the golden calf. They gave so willingly because that was what they wanted.
The Roman government funded many evil projects, but that wasn’t an excuse to skip taxes.
I’m pretty sure God wouldn’t tell Christians to pay taxes to a government if they were using that money to literally hunt down and kill Christians.
For the calf I use the term “tax” because it just states the amount of precious metals each person was required to give to make it. So it seems like a sort of tax. I’m sure not every single person wanted to do it but went along with it since everyone else was. Things to ask in the afterlife I guess.
And unto God what is God’s.
What does God own?
It's not an argument to not pay taxes. Christ is calling for the individual to live out charity. You can't live out charity when you delegate it. Obeying authority is separate from taking personal responsibility.
The problem is you can’t tell the poor from the helpless.
Help both, problem solved
Governments as an entity have been pretty consistent through history when it comes to what happens to the money they take from the citizens "to help the poor and helpless". They take some of it and pass it on down the line to where they said it was going but then take the rest and hand it out to donors in the form of federal contracts which then gets them a windfall of magically appearing money themselves. Occasionally they add a twist, give our money out as foreign aid but this also has a habit of finding its way back to them and their donors.
Atleast even charities that are wasteful and get used to buy shiny things for the people running them don't have unlimited tax authority along with an IRS to enforce that authority. There was a reason the founders made it explicit that no direct taxation authority would be given to the federal government. They clearly had more accurate history books than Wilson did.
If it's personal charity, that doesn't matter, because you're doing it for God. The status of the other person doesn't come into it.
Are there no work houses? Are there no prisons?
So you would have locked Mary and Joseph and Jesus into a prison?
I’m quoting Scrooge from A Christmas Carol.
Doesn’t matter how many times you repeat it. SMH.
Thank you for not putting vulgarity in the meme. It seems everyone of these I see has to have Jesus dropping an f-bomb.
That is the kind of thing he would have done. He really didn’t like Moneychangers and hated capitalists. He is probably the best example of a Communist or Socialist in history.
Way to show you never read the New Testament. Ever heard of the Parable of the Talents [Matthew 25:14–30]?
All the numbers in your comment added up to 69. Congrats!
Not true, not true at all. Jesus wouldn't support a government entity like Communism or Socialism, nor would Communism or Socialism support him either. Don't forget, Communists and Monarchists aren't exactly on great relationships, remember the Romanovs? I also can't find a single major communist government that kept around any form of religion without persecution.
It wasn't even that he didn't like moneychangers, he just didn't want them doing it inside the temple. It turned it into a den of thieves as he called it. Besides, there were no capitalists at this time, so that point is moot. He most certainly wouldn't support Welfare projects in the vein of Communism either if it had existed at that time.
Besides, as far as moneychangers went, he wouldn't have beaten them if they weren't doing it at (as he put it) 'My Father's House.'
He didn't say they couldn't exist, but don't do what they were doing at his temple and place of worship. Thing is entirely different.
Plus, add in that Jesus wouldn't ask the Romans to help the people. He wanted THE PEOPLE to help each other, not the government. He was far from a communist or a socialist.
And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marvelled at him - Mark 12:17
I have a similar issue with auto pay for tithing. It removes the human element to not give directly everytime.
Churches have auto pay ? 💀
Kind of, but another way to look at it would be that a lot of the really important baseline things in life, I make sure to budget for and auto pay. I think it all just depends on how you view and how you feel about it.
As long as you're aware of it, that's all that matters.
I made a comment back a few months ago when someone suggested we should donate to the state and let them handle charity:
> “Donate to the state” would be the equivalent of donating to the Romans occupying Jerusalem at the time. Jesus said render unto Caesar what is owed to him (ie taxes), but I’m missing the part where he’s saying to trust them with your donations to use accordingly on charity.
Because as we know, the government’s NEVER misappropriated or mismanaged taxpayer funds! 🥸
Another aspect of that story that is often overlooked is that Jesus used a piece of currency to make his point. To paraphrase, if you’re going to play their game, then play by their rules; If you don’t want to play by their rules don’t play their game. So much power of the state rest in their currency. Don’t use their currency and you won’t owe them. Find other ways to manage your trade and your disputes. Other people (the government) stepped in to handle matters that individuals should’ve been handling theirselves.
I suppose that's one way to interpret that story, but that's quite a stretch. It's probably a little off topic for the sub, but I think Jesus was making a point about the separation between spiritual matters and worldly matters.
When he asks whose face and description is on the coin and then says to render to Caesar what a Caesar's, and to God what is God's, he's making the point that people are created in God's image and in the sense belong to him.
Jesus often emphasized the distinction that his kingdom was not a worldly kingdom and would not look like what they thought it would. Taxes being a very worldly issue, he kind of evades the initial question and emphasizes the most important part, which in his teachings is the spiritual.
There is no separation in spiritual and worldly matters as you separate them. That is why God gave us a law to follow. Throughout Christian history the persecution of Christians was not that they had a different God, but that their God was King and His law was supreme.
I think I would disagree somewhat with that. Often persecution came solely because they were different. Sometimes their specific views on God came into play. But in early church history in t Roman Empire, they were persecuted for not participation in worship of the Emperor. What they believed was lately irrelevant to their prosecutors.
We don’t worship the state because our King tells us not to. Our King tells us not to have any gods before Him. This isn’t something new with the advent of the Messiah. Daniel, Esther, Maccabees etc. touch on the fact that God’s people have a different set of rules that they follow than the surrounding culture.
As a front line health care worker you should know better
You might want to read romans chapter 13.
Taxes aren’t charity, but nice try
I take a more general view of Romans 13. If you’re wanting to live in peace with everyone and follow God, then it makes sense to follow the rules of the land. God doesn’t want Christians causing strife or (unnecessary) rebellion. Only if the government went against God and misused your tax money for evil purposes should you refuse to pay them. But, expect to suffer the consequences of doing so. No one gets a free pass from God for being Christian. In fact, Jesus and the apostles say the exact opposite will happen to you when you stand up for Christ. You’ll likely be thrown in prison, attacked, or killed.
Get rid of/ignore the government and live in tribal communes?
Give Caesar back his coin.
Christians are quite annoying liars who will cherry pick a quote to push an agenda. Please shut up.
You seem to be completely missing the point of that quote.
The full thing is “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s.”
The Judaean authorities had been given permission to mint their own coinage because the coins with Caesar’s face were seen as idolatrous (the emperor portrayed himself as a god). The fact that those same authorities were carrying around coins with the Emperor’s face on them calls into question how they got those coins.
Jesus was calling them out for their corruption and hypocrisy. To water it down to a mere endorsement of taxes is just ignorance. After all, everything (including those coins) belong to God.
>The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof, the world and those who dwell therein [Proverbs 24:1]
>Behold, to the Lord your God belong heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth with all that is in it. [Deuteronomy 10:14]
>The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts. [Haggai 2:8]
>Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is yours. Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and you are exalted as head above all. [1 Chronicles 29:11]
>Who has first given to me, that I should repay him? Whatever is under the whole heaven is mine. [Job 41:11]
>For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. [Colossians 1:16]
>For it was fitting that he, for whom and by whom all things exist, in bringing many sons to glory, should make the founder of their salvation perfect through suffering. [Hebrews 2:10]
>Now therefore, if you will indeed obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my treasured possession among all peoples, for all the earth is mine [Exodus 19:5]
You're cherry picking things as well, so I guess the feeling is mutual.
Leftists hear that and think Jesus really means to have the government force ***other people*** to do that for them.
Is it any wonder Leftists are as miserly, cheap, and uncharitable as they are?
Don’t see how mythical creatures intertwine with being a conservative? Separation of church and state please. Or do I need to start from the beginning?
Where does it say that we should take care of the poor and help our neighbor? And why not do it through taxes? It does talk about the wealth of greedy rich folks and how it will be harder for them to get into heaven.
“Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will never fail, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
Are you calling the current administration an occupying state or are you reminding us that Jesus lived in an occupied state?
Correct, Jesus was in an occupied state.
So you must’ve missed the last 5 years of “not my President!” and the entire 2020 election. Nobody in America feels that THE government is THEIR OWN government.
I did not miss the last 5 years. I feel like the American government is my government. Under Trump and under Biden. If I don't like something I speak out and even get angry at times about things that happen. Never do I accuse of it being a foreign or occupying government.
Well good on you, but your understanding of current political thought is in need of an update. A majority of people in both parties right now favor succession in some form. Nobody is loyal to Washington anymore
Actually only 37% of respondents overall indicating willingness to secede. Majority of Republicans that wanted to secede were from southern region, at 66%. For example, of northeast Republicans, only 26% wanted to secede. From Democrat side, highest was from Pacific region at 47%. http://brightlinewatch.org/still-miles-apart-americans-and-the-state-of-u-s-democracy-half-a-year-into-the-biden-presidency/
You mean the administration whose first act in the White House was to surround themselves with a giant fence and tens of thousands of soldiers?
And now sends the FBI to target parents who protest their children being raped in government schools whole leftist school boards cover up sexual assaults?
Is this a systematic problem? Please, site sources so I can learn about it.
How about changing VA law so the school board doesn’t have to report sexual assaults: [https://www.nationalreview.com/news/virginia-democrats-voted-to-allow-schools-to-refrain-from-reporting-sexual-battery-in-2020/](https://www.nationalreview.com/news/virginia-democrats-voted-to-allow-schools-to-refrain-from-reporting-sexual-battery-in-2020/) ?
Too, it appears LCPS may have been reporting zeros when they should have had other numbers instead: https://thefederalist.com/2021/10/15/loudoun-schools-failed-to-report-alleged-sexual-assaults-in-the-district-for-years/
The Democrat run Loudon government school’s rape coverups appear to be systemic, yes.
I'm sorry, it doesn't sound like a cover up. They are also talking about one student. Don't think this can be called a systematic problem. They definitely need to do something with that juvenile. https://wjla.com/news/local/multiple-sexual-assaults-dominate-public-comment-at-loudoun-school-board-meeting
The one they covered up and who went on to sexual assault a SECOND girl?
And then they illegally lied about the assaults to the state?
What happened was terrible, but why are you saying it's cover up? All the students these students have been detained that committed these acts. The one only suspicious one is the TWO incidents one. It's 82k student district. I can imagine troubles happen with so many kids. Saying that there is systematic problem here doesn't make sense. Makes even less sense if we are talking about your original replay "FBI to target parents who protest their children being raped in government schools whole leftist school boards cover up sexual assaults". This is an unconvincing argument.
I think we can safely say that detail got pushed to the side for the sake of analogy. It wouldn't be a perfect comparison regardless.
Interesting you potentially think you’d want the government to act like an occupying state.
It is. Just because your argument got turned around on you doesn’t negate the fact you prefer the government to act like Rome when it occupied Judea.
I guess I fail to see how you come to that conclusion.
Let me dumb it down for you. You want government, occupying or not, to confiscate wealth from its citizens to redistribute it. Hence you prefer the US government to act like Rome did. Not sure I can simplify it more for you.
Thank you for being patient with me. Rome would take a chunk of the wealth to enrich its own citizens not those of Judea. Ultimate beneficiary was that of the Roman interests. I just don't think this is a good meme and it doesn't really make sense.
I don't get it. Do the Romans represent the government?