Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    "Render under Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the
    things that are God's."

>    "Render under Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the
>    things that are God's."

In light of the question, this response confuses me.  Please explain.

Thanks,
Tom

    There is a place for civil and legal authority as well as following
    civil and legal procedures.

    Assume that you are the authority, that you're a senator.  (We
    *are* being hypothetical here :-)  If Jesus were sitting next
    to you in the legislature, what would he suggest, command or
    ask you to do?

    Patricia:
    
    As God spoke to Moses, ...Welcome the foreigner, the sojourner, the
    traveler...
    
    I believe the following...
    
    -Our country is not monolithic; therefore, we cannot use a church 
     viewpoint as a precedent for immigration.
    -I believe the scribe on the Statue of Liberty will one day be blotted
     out, or should be.  It's hypocritical.
    -I believe that moratoriums on immigration are not only reasonable,
     they have been instituted in the past.
    -I believe that immigrants should respect the laws of the country.
    -Many immigrants come with a vision to better their lives.  This is
     admirable but it must be done legally.
    -Probably most importantly, most who migrate to the US are fleeing from 
     something.  If I were an immigrant, my heritage or customs would take
     a backseat to my desire for assimilation.
    
    I know I didn't answer the question directly but I believe these are
    valid points.
    
    -Jack
    
       

    Jack,
    
    So you believe that Jesus would tell the illegal immigrants to stay in
    Mexico and starve and not impose of the reasonable affluent people of
    the United States.
    
                               Patricia

 Z   So you believe that Jesus would tell the illegal immigrants to stay in
 Z   Mexico and starve and not impose of the reasonable affluent people
 Z   of the United States.
    
    This of course is all subjective and conjecture, since Jesus never
    really got involved politically with Rome.  My guess is that Jesus
    Christ would exhort the church to welcome the poor and hungry.  I don't
    know how Jesus would handle this issue from a political viewpoint.  He
    never really addressed the detestable practices of Rome.  He merely
    called those who were sinners to repentence.
    
    One thing is for sure, God would certainly show no favoritism in rgd.
    to personal wealth...this has been established.
    
    -Jack

>    This of course is all subjective and conjecture, since Jesus never
>    really got involved politically with Rome.  My guess is that Jesus
>    Christ would exhort the church to welcome the poor and hungry.  I don't
>    know how Jesus would handle this issue from a political viewpoint.  He
>    never really addressed the detestable practices of Rome.  He merely
>    called those who were sinners to repentence.

    So what you are saying is that there are appropriate personal
    interests and appropriate corporate/societal interests and
    they are not always the same.
    
    That it is necessary for a Christian to welcome all regardless
    of means, as best they can.  But, depending on the situation,
    it may not be in the best interests of the state to do the same.
    
    Also, if the society is pluralistic, is it then right for a
    Christian legislature to impose their morals on the society
    by burdening it with more mouths that it may have difficulty
    feeding?
    
    Hey!  We could debate this one for years!
    
    Me?  I don't really have an opinion, yet.  I'll wait for Richard
    to tell me what I think :*) :*) :*) :*)  (just clowning around :*)
    
    Tom

    Hi Tom, I guess the answer is yes to a lot of what you wrote.  As far as
    a Christian legislator...yes, this person would have the right, since
    her constituency appointed her that responsibility.  This is what a 
    republic is all about and I would venture to say most of the decisions
    made are based upon ones personal ideologies.
    
    -Jack  

    I cannot imagine Jesus condoning exclusionary policies.  He was a man
    who accepted everyone, especially the poor and needy.  Even though
    there was no specific mention of his vies on this issue, an
    extrapolation of everything else he said and did into this realm is
    valid.
    
    What possible reason could a nation have for excluding immigrants other 
    than selfish ones... the antithesis of what Jesus taught. 
    
    But, like so many other things, Jesus wishes and human practices are
    not always in sync.  This is just one more.
    
    I wonder how Buchanan (running on a strict, conservative and Christian
    platform) justified his exclusionary positions?
    
    -dave 

    Well, as we are all aware, we don't live in a monolithic society...the
    words of God have been all but expelled from our schools and humanism
    has certainly taken its foothold.
    
    As I mentioned yesterday, I believe there has to be accountability in
    the admonition to respect and acquiesce to those in authority over us. 
    Since the United States, a pagan nation by the way, has laws regarding
    illegal activities, to which this is one, one then must ask if this is
    a case where we are to obey God rather than man.  
    
    Let's just say that if I were a Mexican resident, I would at least
    attempt to go through official channels first.  I believe in order for
    one to become a citizen of another country, it is imperative to respect
    its laws regarding immigration.  I know...easy for me to say...I don't
    have three starving children with little hope.  I merely point out here
    the question...are immigrants above the law? 
    
    -Jack

    I agree with a lot of what you say Jack.  But the basenote asks what
    Jesus might have said on this subject.  We're not monolithic, there are
    civil laws which shold be obeyed, etc... .  But what would Jesus have
    said?
    
    BTW, the I believe the US is no more a pagan nation than it is anything 
    else. Sort of like saying that a chess board isn't black.  It is black, at 
    least 50% of it anyway.  Maybe this is just picking at semantics.
    
    -dave
    
    
    

    
    Yeah, but Jack, you didn't answer the question:

    "What would Jesus ask of us regarding illegal immigrants?"

    You say you "guess" Jesus would exhort the church to welcome the poor
    and hungry, but then you equivocate by going on about nationalism and
    federal laws, and immigration problems...

    First of all I don't think Jesus ever asked the church to do anything.
    He asked people to do things. So Jesus would have exhorted those who
    claim to be his followers to welcome the poor and hungry. 

    The US can have compassionate immigration laws without becoming a
    monolithic theocracy, as you seem to imply. I must be misreading your
    notes, but you seem to be suggesting that one must have a monolithic
    society in order to act in a moral and compassionate way.

    Eric 

>    I wonder how Buchanan (running on a strict, conservative and Christian
>    platform) justified his exclusionary positions?
    
 

   Did you ever read a complete Buchanan speech, or better yet, see him make
 one his speeches so as to hear what he really said, or do you take your
 knowledge of him from the soundbites the tv networks wanted you to hear?



 Jim

>   Did you ever read a complete Buchanan speech, or better yet, see him make
> one his speeches so as to hear what he really said, or do you take your
> knowledge of him from the soundbites the tv networks wanted you to hear?

I heard parts of his speeches via radio plus pro/con commentary from the so
called "experts".  If you can shed more light on this and maybe reconcile
his position with the Jesus philosophy of unconditional love for neighbor,
that'd be great.

-dave

 Z   BTW, the I believe the US is no more a pagan nation than it is anything 
 Z   else. Sort of like saying that a chess board isn't black.  It is
 Z   black, at least 50% of it anyway.  Maybe this is just picking at semantics.
    
    Actually, I was just disspelling the myth that the US is a Christian
    nation.
    
    -Jack

    Eric:
    
    Oops...didn't mean to convey that.  When I used the word monolithic, I
    was implying that since we are a nation of many ideologies...and not a
    Christian Nation...or a Jewish nation, the words of Jesus probably
    wouldn't have a whole lot of meaning in a diverse country as ours.  The
    words of God in the Old Testament were in fact part of their theocracy
    and therefore part of the law of the land.  I certainly agree that the
    US could have lighter immigration laws...and it doesn't have to be
    monolithic to do so.  But my guess is that Jesus' words would fall on
    deaf ears.  Here was a man who wept over Jerusalem because they
    rejected him.  How much more would ours.
    
    -Jack

    .10
    
    Oh, I'm sure Jesus would accept them (immagrants).  He would also have
    them working, too (meaning, you are not going to travel here and live
    free off of other people's sweat -- taxes). 
    
    I'm sure he would end the welfare debate once and for all, too.  8^)
    
    It think it is pointless to put Jesus in this small a box, limiting Him
    to advisor.  When He comes back, He will do so to RULE, not make
    suggestions.  Things will be VERY different on all fronts.  He will be 
    fair to all involved.
    
    
    -steve

    
    Jack,

    I may be wrong, but I think you are blurring the distinction between
    ideology and theology. One need not believe in the theology of Jesus to
    accept the ideology of Jesus: selflessness, humility, compassion, love,
    justice... To that extent we as a nation have traditionally embraced
    the ideology of Christianity without legislating the theology of
    Christianity into our nationalism. 

    I think Jesus would want me to give sanctuary to the illegal immigrant.
    I also think I should not snub the law, but work with the system to
    process the requisite red tape to legalize the situation. The latter is
    probably not a concern to God, however.

    Eric

    I think Jesus might expect us to disobey the law and even face
    execution for disobeying rather than turn back the poor and hungry.
    
    If Jesus taught that we should give our cloak to the one who takes our
    coat, I am sure he would tell the well fed to feed the poor on welfare.
    
    Perhaps the parable of the good samaritan could even be changed to the
    parable of the good illegal alien.
    
    

  Z  I also think I should not snub the law, but work with the system to
  Z      process the requisite red tape to legalize the situation.
    
    And that's the ticket...reconciling what Jesus would want us to do
    verses submitting to those in authority.
    
    -Jack

>    I think Jesus might expect us to disobey the law and even face
>    execution for disobeying rather than turn back the poor and hungry.
    
    Jesus didn't break the law, why should we?  He also ministered to the
    poor and hungry, so should we.  Now what do we do when we can't do both
    legally?
    
    I'm a first-generation American.  My wife and her entire family are
    immigrants.  However, they all entered legally.  My wife's family spent
    a fortune (relative to them) and 3 years of their lives going through
    the legal process in Mexico to emigrate here.  It can be done.  Most of
    their hard-earned cash went to corrupt lawyers since bribery is a way
    of life/business down there.  It took 3 years because they had to keep
    working to replace the money they spent of bribes and to pay the costs
    of the actual paperwork.  Anyone motivated enough can do it.
    
    Mike  

    >Now what do we do when we can't do both legally?
    
    I think that a precedence of law would apply.  God first, then your
    neighbor, then the state.  I don't believe Jesus ever said that one
    should never break civil law.  It all depends on what the law is.
    
    When you think of it, civil law is inconsequential in the scope of
    things.  One function of civil law is meant to maintain order (don't 
    kill, steal, etc...).  This is already addressed by obeying religious
    law.  Other functions of civil law regard money and posessions, "stuff"
    which Jesus said is not important.  So you pay you taxes (or better
    yet, give all that you have to the poor) and love God and neighbor.
    
    -dave

   
>    If Jesus taught that we should give our cloak to the one who takes our
>    coat, I am sure he would tell the well fed to feed the poor on welfare.
 
    I can't agree with this, mainly because you default to welfare.  I
    honestly do not believe Jesus would approve of this system, in general.
    It takes us out of the loop too far.  What should be a hands-on job,
    turns into a 'send in your tax $$ and forget about it' deal.  No, this
    is not the way to show compassion (and I won't even get into the abuse
    of said system, nor the way the needy slip through the cracks in the
    system).
       
    
    -steve   

    re .24
    
    YOu echo what the Apostle Paul says.
    
    Those who are in Christ are a law unto themselves. 
    
    The law of God, written in the heart of the Christian supercedes all
    manmade laws. 

    
    I just don't see how the "sin" of the illegal immigrant exempts us from
    Christian charity. Someone got off on a tangent about welfare and
    government, but that has no bearing on our responsibilities as
    individual Christians. 
    
    	Eric

    Point taken Eric...as I believe you mentioned, I wouldn't leave anybody
    to starve on the street.  I would bring them in until something could
    be worked out to reach a legal and fair way to bringing the situation
    to finality.
    
    -Jack

    
    I'm sure you realize I wasn't addressing you specifically, but I have
    the impression that some people focus more on the barrenness of the
    sinner than on their own bearing of fruit. It was just a general
    statement, that's all.

    Eric  

 do you go to the countries from which these illegals enter the US (from
 Mexico for example) and lambast their churches for not taking care of
 those who flee?  There many churches in Mexico, and plenty of foreign
 missionaries.



 Jim

    Jim:
    
    What amazes me even more is there is a segment of our society who seems
    to cling to the very ideals which prompt people to leave their
    homelands!
    
    -Jack

.28
    
>    The Hebrews were held in bondage in a land which they knew not
>    of...four hundred years.  Can illegal immigration be compared to such
>    an example??

I don't think length of duration was something God asked us to consider.

Richard

.32 & .33

Are these responses typical of biblical Christianity?

Richard

    
    re .32
    
    What's your point? It's not your job? They're Mexico's problem? 
    
    Matthew 5:46-47 
    If you love those who love you, what reward will you get?
    Are not even the tax collectors doing that?  And if you greet only your
    brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do
    that?
    
    Matthew 25:43-46
    I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you
    did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after
    me.'  "They also will answer, `Lord, when did we see you hungry or
    thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did
    not help you?'  "He will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did
    not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'  "Then
    they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal
    life." 
    
     

    
    > What amazes me even more is there is a segment of our society who seems
    > to cling to the very ideals which prompt people to leave their
    > homelands!
    
    Like freedom, a living wage, running drinkable water, medical care...
    I'm with you Jack. The last thing I want is for America to be a
    desireable place to live. You don't see anyone breaking down the door
    to get into Burundi. :^)
    

 I have no problem supporting immigrants or anyone else who is in need.  I
 support missionaries all over the world.  My problem is, as a citizen of
 the United States, I see our own welfare system severely taxed (pardon the
 pun) to support those who enter the country illegally, many for the purpose
 of getting the benefits of a welfare system run amok.




 Jim

 Eric/Richard...how about if I (and my kids) enter your house and just walk
 in and expect you to take care of us, and cover the educational expenses
 of my future offspring, to the possible detriment of your own?




 Jim

	Wouldn't Jesus do it? And shouldn't that be what you gauge it on?

    
    > how about if I (and my kids) enter your house and just walk in and
    > expect you to take care of us,

    You've had illegal immigrants break into your house and demand you
    support them? 

    > and cover the educational expenses of my future offspring, to the
    > possible detriment of your own?

    I'm doing that already. Maybe not your kids, by the kids in my town.

    Eric

 ZZ   Are these responses typical of biblical Christianity?
    
    Richard, you are trying to make a political issue in America a faith
    issue.  As I have said...time and time again, I do not support the
    belief of leaving one starving in the street.  It would seem you are
    attempting to villify me here through inuendo.
    
    The statement I made to which you responded is soberingly true. 
    America is still a very large creditor nation.  We have been pouring
    money into economies of some of the most ghastly cultures the world can
    know.  Not because of the people mind you...people are people and we
    all spawned from the same place.  But more because of the horrid
    ideologies, both political and religious in nature.  
    
    In our desire to be politically correct, we have had the dubious honor
    of inheriting alot of political ideologies that have been the very
    cause of immigrants coming here in droves.  My statement a few back is
    neither Christian nor unchristian...it is simply a political
    observation.
    
    -Jack

    It's very interesting how the Bible believers abandon the biblical
    mandates when it is convenient for them to do so.
    
    And look at the dancing to justify.
    
    "It's not my fault I don't want to take care of my sister and brother,
    but its the fault of a welfare system run amok."
    
    But If I feed those who are starving, then I might not be able to send
    MY own kids to an expensive college.
    
    If I pay more taxes to support those on welfare, then I might have to
    eat hamburg instead of steak.
                                
                                
                         

>    It's very interesting how the Bible believers abandon the biblical
>    mandates when it is convenient for them to do so.
 
     It's equally interesting how those who discount the authority of the
     Bible, use it to clang those who do recognize it's authority over the
     head with random verses therefrom.
       
      
   > But If I feed those who are starving, then I might not be able to send
   > MY own kids to an expensive college.
    

    my kids will wind up paying their own way to college, though I wish
    I could help them more.




    Jim                                
                                
                         

|    Like freedom, a living wage, running drinkable water, medical care...
|    I'm with you Jack. The last thing I want is for America to be a
|    desireable place to live. You don't see anyone breaking down the door
|    to get into Burundi. :^)
    
    If people don't currently have a living wage, running water, and
    medical care where they are, chances are great they can't afford to
    move here.  These are the people who are typically found dead in the
    Mexican/Arizona desert trying to walk to the States.
    
    My wife's uncles all work for the local electric company in a small
    town within the state of Coahuila (Mexico).  They have all of the basic 
    needs above plus some I don't (i.e., they all own their own houses free 
    and clear).  They would all like to come to the U.S. but can't afford
    it.  They've been saving for years and are probably at least 2 years
    from their goal.  It's hard but they want to be honorable and follow
    the proper channels.  My wife's family has proven that it is possible
    if you really want it.
    
    Mike

>    If people don't currently have a living wage, running water, and
>    medical care where they are, chances are great they can't afford to
>    move here.  These are the people who are typically found dead in the
>    Mexican/Arizona desert trying to walk to the States.

    And do you have compassion for these people?

    If so, how do you show it?

    I feel sorry for them, but I'm at a loss on what I could do.  Mexico's
    authorities should be telling them about the dangers of the desert and
    trying to cross it.
    
    I reach out and minister to people in my community in whatever
    tangibles ways I can.  I'm one person and do my best.  
    
    Mike

 Z   It's very interesting how the Bible believers abandon the biblical
 Z   mandates when it is convenient for them to do so.
    
  Yes, it must be at that.  I wish I could jump into your imagination so I
    could better grasp where you got this one from.  
    
    And look at the dancing to justify.
        
Z    "It's not my fault I don't want to take care of my sister and
Z    brother, but its the fault of a welfare system run amok."
    
    I assume this is a paraphrase rather than an exact quote.  My guess is
    that you are taking liberty with something here.  In fact, now that I
    read the quote over, I'm sure of it.  Have you not read a thing I have
    written?
        
ZZ   But If I feed those who are starving, then I might not be able to
ZZ   send MY own kids to an expensive college.
    
    I firmly believe there is one of two possibilities here....
    
    A. You are trying to create a further wedge between people of two
       different ideologies...or
    
    B. You have deluded yourself into believing there is a monster behind
       every tree.
    
    This particular claim above is unfounded and would be thrown out of
    court.  It is baseless.
        
ZZ    If I pay more taxes to support those on welfare, then I might have
ZZ    to eat hamburg instead of steak.
    
    Again, this claim is without precedent.  I think you know this.  What
    exactly is your problem with some of the replies here?
    
    -Jack

Z    And do you have compassion for these people?
    
Z    If so, how do you show it?
    
    Tom, just as an FYI, the creators of this black hole we call welfare
    have built this system into a giant government conglomerate.  I have no
    problems with safety nets; however, just remember that the ones in our
    system who decry foul foul are by in large the ones who are writhing
    with the most hypocrisy.  Keep in mind that it was our president who
    "bailed" out the Mexican economy.  In other words Tom, Clinton funneled
    money to the entity running the country of Mexico as well as the big
    businesses involved.  Translation Tom...the people are still fleeing.
    
    Just a friendly reminder...these mean old capitalist republicans that
    Patricia and others are attempting to conjure up in their vivid
    imaginations may end up being your best friend.
    
    -Jack

Jack,

I said:

>Z    And do you have compassion for these people?
>    
>Z    If so, how do you show it?

I didn't say anything about government or Clinton or Patricia.

I believe it's a pretty straight question.

Tom

    
    Mike,

    I admire those who play by the rules. But obviously your in-laws are
    not in the circumstances that I am addressing, so I fail to see the
    connection between my reply and your response. 

    What is it about your views on immigration that makes them uniquely
    Christian and set apart from views held by pagan or humanist? What is
    it in your views that would make people say "he's obviously a
    Christian." 

    I'm not slamming you; you make some cogent points. I'm just looking
    for some idea as to how your faith has help shape these views. 

    Eric

    Well, I brought up Patricia as a few replies back, she implied that
    segments of our society have selfish reasons for not accepting the
    status quo on welfare issues.  Sorry I clumped you in with her.  The
    text of what I said is absolutely correct but your straightforward
    question seemed to possibly lead to provocation.
    
    By the way, what do you think of that hypocritical bunch down in
    Washington DC anyhoo!?
    
    -Jack

    Eric:
    
    Not that your directing at me...I believe acts of kindness and caring
    are universal to most faiths so I don't see there being a Christian
    method of charity as opposed to another.  I see motive and result as
    what distinguishes one act from another.
    
    -Jack

Jack,

I said:

>Z    And do you have compassion for these people?
>    
>Z    If so, how do you show it?

Is it hard to understand?

Can you answer it?

Please?

Tom

|    with the most hypocrisy.  Keep in mind that it was our president who
|    "bailed" out the Mexican economy.  In other words Tom, Clinton funneled
|    money to the entity running the country of Mexico as well as the big
|    businesses involved.  Translation Tom...the people are still fleeing.
    
    The President of Mexico has much more power than our President.  When
    they have the misfortune of a corrupt president (as they have the past
    decade), the problem is magnified.  If any of that money made it
    outside of Mexico City, nobody under the upper class saw it.  They
    still have a major rift between urban and rural people.  there is a
    renewed rift between the few political parties, with some violence. 
    Some political theorists are speculating that they aren't far from
    another bloody civil war/revolution.
    
    Mike

I said:

>Z    And do you have compassion for these people?
>    
>Z    If so, how do you show it?

I'm not talking about presidents.  I'm not talking about countries.
I'm not talking about class warfare.

What part of my question don't  you understand?

Tom

Sure...I'll be glad to answer it...
    
Z    >Z    And do you have compassion for these people?
        
    It would of course depend on who we are speaking of.  If I were a
    police officer in San Diego...chasing after an open truck of illegal
    immigrants going 80 miles per hour, driving to endangerment, flipping
    the middle finger at me, throwing beer bottles at me, etc., then the
    answer is a resounding no!  I would ask the Immigration Services
    Department to send them back in an unairconditioned bus.  Wouldn't feel
    a bit sorry for them.  Good riddance.  
    
    If I were at a forth of July celebration in Southern California and a
    bunch of illegal immigrants were standing across the street...holding
    up signs degrading to America, flipping me the bird and extolling the
    virtues of communism, no...I would have no compassion.
    
    I have alot of compassion for individuals who have a vision for their
    lives and want to become the best they can be.  I have no compassion
    for individuals who lack vision, don't heed common sense, and basically
    destroy themselves and as many as they can around them.  Jesus didn't
    call us to do that.  So there is a mixed bag.  Like anything else Tom,
    you have one group of people spoiling it for those who have honorable
    motives.
    
    Z    >Z    If so, how do you show it?
    
  Other than dealing factually with the situation, dealing realistically
    and soberly, I cannot tell you how I show it since I am so far removed
    from the direct effects of it.  Illegal immigration to me is what
    bussing was in the 1970s to Wyoming and Colorado.  Tell me though, how
    do you show it?
    
    -Jack

    Eric, I'm not sure I understand your question.  My in-laws and wife
    were involved with a mainline Protestant/Pentecostal denomination in
    Mexico before moving to Massachusetts (where we met).  They've been
    Christians for most of their lives, coming to a saving knowledge of
    Jesus Christ at an early age.  Immigration has nothing to do with one's
    salvation.
    
    Mike

    
     > Eric, I'm not sure I understand your question. 

    You have views on immigration and your responsibility or lack of
    responsibility toward those here illegally, specifically the indigent.
    Assumedly the the pagan, humanist, and atheist have views as well as to
    their responsibility, or lack thereof, toward illegal aliens,
    specifically the indigent. My question is: how does your faith as a
    Christian affect your view in this area, in a way that makes your views
    identifiably Christian?

    In .0 two questions were asked. I believe you have answered the first
    but I'm not sure you've addressed the second.

    Eric
                             

    I help the ones in my distant family that I can.  I don't know many,
    but will help the ones I know in a tangible way.  I have a relative
    whose in-laws are here illegally.  The whole family has pitched in to
    find them work, get the kid's in school, etc.  I've helped them with
    their paperwork and helped buy the college-aged daughter a Starion. 
    It's not much, but I help where I am able.
    
    Mike

    
    Thanks, Mike. I wasn't really asking you for an accounting of your
    deeds, rather I was looking for an articulation of how your religious
    beliefs shaped your socio-political views in this matter. While I still
    have a couple of questions I fear that to pursue those questions, even
    in a theoretical way as an theological exercise, could make me appear
    hypercritical of you personally, which is not my intention.

    Peace,

    	Eric

    thanks, I'm not an abstract kind of guy.

    Although it raised several angered responses, Patricia has valid points
    in .44... (IMO)
    
    >It's very interesting how the Bible believers abandon the biblical
    >    mandates when it is convenient for them to do so.
    
    Plain and simple, Jesus taught that you should give someone the shirt
    off your back if he/she wants it.  And as Eric pointed out Matthew
    25:43-46 in .37, Jesus spoke to this quite elloquently...
    
    I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you
    did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after
    me.'  "They also will answer, `Lord, when did we see you hungry or
    thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did
    not help you?'  "He will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did
    not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'  "Then
    they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal
    life."

    There it is.  Especially the part about tending someone in prison. 
    Doesn't even matter if people break the civil law, like "illegal"
    immigrants do, and are in prison.  Be kind to them and Jesus will be
    kind to you in turn.  Tax collectors, prostitutes and prisoners alike.
    
    I won't say that they're easy to follow, but Jesus' teachings are quite 
    clear.  Citing other, non gospel passages to soften this might well be 
    construed as "dancing to justify".  Though following the teachings may 
    mean sacrifice in the area of lifestyle.
    
    It's one thing to admit that we're mere humans and fail to live up to
    the apparent standard set by Jesus.  Maybe that's where Jesus as savoir
    comes in.  It's another thing to deny the standard is what it is.  I've
    yet to meet anyone who's realy lived up to the whole thing. 
    
    -dave
    
    
    
    
    
    

    RE: .58 Jack

    :-)  I guess if you paint an extreme enough picture you can
    justify anything.  What's next?  Abortion?

>    Other than dealing factually with the situation, dealing realistically
>    and soberly, I cannot tell you how I show it since I am so far removed
>    from the direct effects of it.  Illegal immigration to me is what
>    bussing was in the 1970s to Wyoming and Colorado.

    Ahhh... "Sobering facts."  Do you know how horrible tax collectors
    were back in Jesus' time?  Or how heinous adultery was?

    Yes, there are some unsavory immigrants, but I think we can come up
    with a better way of dealing with the situation than to trade nastiness
    for nastiness.

    It doesn't do either us or "them" any good.

    Tom

    Dave:
    
    (By the way Tom, your input is something to surely consider).  Dave,
    what Patricia said is absolutely the case with many people.  I thought
    it was directed at those of us here.  I stated a few times that I would
    take such a person in and care for them until we could get things
    resolved properly.  Dave, there is still this little matter in
    submitting ourselves to those in authority over us.  Now while we are
    suppose to obey God rather than man, I don't see illegal immigration in
    the same light as harboring a fugitive from the Nazi regime.  
    
    I eat hamburger all the time...trust me.
    
    -Jack

    I pray that I never turn my back on someone that God has brought into
    my life for me to minister to them.  I try to be His servant.
    
    I hope the ones making the accusations (i.e., .44) feel the same way. 
    Harsh words better come from those who are walking the talk.

RE .66 (Jack) 

Then what we can do in this society is vote for and promote legislation for
opening borders (or something along those lines).  Matthew 25:43-46 started
out with "I was a stranger and you did not invite me in..."
                                           ^^^^^^ ^^ ^^

Maybe the course of action is to do more inviting.

>I eat hamburger all the time...trust me.

I trust you on this :-)

-dave

Z    Then what we can do in this society is vote for and promote legislation
Z    for opening borders (or something along those lines).  Matthew 25:43-46
Z    started out with "I was a stranger and you did not invite me in..."
    
    As a referendum, I would be open to that.  Now, if we are all required
    by law to bring two people into our home, will you also be willing to
    take on this responsibility?  
    
    See Dave, I'm calling a potential bluff here...for the simple reason
    that talk is cheap.  I would venture to say if I implemented a program
    right in this file that would have each of us support an illegal
    immigrant for just the summer, most would be redisent to participate.
    And I hold nobody in contempt who wouldn't...our personal situations
    are different and our resources don't allow us to do such things at all
    times.
    
    -Jack

Re .69

>See Dave, I'm calling a potential bluff here..

This is exactly what I was talking about.  Would I?  Maybe, I dunno.  I like
to think that I would but until and unless I was confronted with it, we'll
never know.  But then I don't claim to be a believer.  

The larger point I want to raise here is that this is only one of many of
the teachings which I amoung others would find to be too difficult to follow. 
Welcoming in a stranger is one thing.  Selling all that you have and giving it
to the poor is another of Jesus' teachings which is even less palletable.  And
then there's turning the other cheek and loving one's enemies and laying down
your life for another, etc... .  

That's the standard.  

For those who believe the teachings, that's the standard to strive for.  St. 
Francis probably came real close.  Everyone else needs help (salvation?).  
But does the promise of salvation excuse not trying?

I have no reason to strive to this standard.  If I was sure, I mean 1000% 
sure that Jesus = Savior and that there's an afterlife of bliss, etc.., then 
I'd do all of them in a heartbeat, laughing at death the whole time. I cannot 
see why anyone who is THAT sure would not. 

A quote comes to mind...
                                                    
"Oh death where is thy sting?  Oh grave where is thy victory?"
 -Handel


-dave

    Yes.

    Jesus calls us to do just such a thing.  But when the word got
    around that we were providing free room/board/healthcare to anyone
    in the world we would be swamped very quickly.  Our ability to
    provide these things would quickly dissipate.
    
    Finally, some "strong" leader would come along and declare marshal
    law and the christians would again be the oppressed.
    
    How many people could we help then?
    
    I certainly don't have the answers.
    
    For one who has power, as all citizens in democratic nations do,
    is it possible to be a christian?  Are we all the rich man who
    was told to sell all of his belongings and follow Him?
    
    But I have a children, a job, a wife, people who depend on me.
    Should I "Let the dead bury the dead?"  Can we *be* a christian
    and own anything?  He didn't.
    
    *Sigh*

>   For those who believe the teachings, that's the standard to strive for.
>   Everyone else needs help (salvation?).

    Yes exactly Dave! (minus the word 'else' :-)  Unless there is the restored
    relationship with God (through the sacrifice of Christ), which is
    salvation, this IS an impossible standard.  The "standard" (or "law")
    points out our incapacity to fulfill it on our own.  Even after salvation,
    which is the beginning of the Christian life, the Christian walk is a
    process, through the inner working of the Holy Spirit, to become more and
    more like Christ.

    BTW - Handel was quoting the Apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:55) who was quoting
    the prophet Hosea who was quoting God.

    Michael

    Tom:
    
    I believe Jesus was directing that message to those who were going to
    the mission field and to plant churches.  There is nothing anti
    scriptural in settling down in a community and keeping a family
    together in that community.  This means providing for same.
    
    "Woe unto that man who does not provide for his own."
    
 ZZZ   "Oh death where is thy sting?  Oh grave where is thy victory?"
       -Handel
    
    By the way, this is actually from 1st Corinthians 15:55.  Is this a
    line also used in Handels Messiah?  
    
    -Jack

    Re .71 (Tom)
    
    >But when the word got around... we would be swamped very quickly.
    And lose "all that you have",  all if it being "given to the poor".
    Is this not what was clled for?
    
    >Our ability to provide these things would quickly dissipate.
    For me, very quickly  :-)))
    
    >Finally, some "strong" leader would come along and declare marshal
    >law and the christians would again be the oppressed.
    
    Not important.  Have faith in God.  And as for eating, remember the
    story about the lillies in the field.  Have faith tht God will provide.
    
    >How many people could we help then?
    As many as God wants you to.  If he wants you to provide for many,
    you'll have stuff to give.  If not then not.
    
    >I certainly don't have the answers.
    You're talking to the president of that club.  Want a free membership?
    
    >For one who has power, as all citizens in democratic nations do,
    >is it possible to be a christian? 
    I'm dwelling outside my realm here, but I'd guess that even if you
    don't hit the mark, there's still salvation through Jesus.
    
    >Are we all the rich man who
    >    was told to sell all of his belongings and follow Him?
    That's the way I see it.  But my view on this is not the popular one.
    
    >But I have a children, a job, a wife, people who depend on me.
    Then I'd say it's your responsibility to provide for them too.  I don't
    believe tht Jesus ever said that you should not provide for your own,
    just that you should do all that you can for all the others too.
    I know, I know... seems impossible.  But I didn't write the gospels.
    I'd say that the effort, giving it the good-ole college try, is all that 
    matters. You'll never hit the mark. Salvation doesn't require
    perfection.
    
    >Can we *be* a christian and own anything? 
    If a christian = he who believes in Christ (and not necessarily hits
    the standard) then I'd say yes.  
    
    >He didn't
    He didn't have a wife and kids to feed.
    
    
    Re .72
    
    Agreed.  The standard is unattainable.  When Jesus said "Be perfect" I
    think he meant "Try".  But when we're reluctnat to take the
    uncomfortable steps in this walk, we should have the guts to admit it,
    at least in prayer.
    
    >BTW - Handel was quoting the Apostle Paul (1 Cor 15:55) who was
    > quoting
    > the prophet Hosea who was quoting God.
    
    Didn't know that.
    
    Re .73 (Jack) 
    
    >By the way, this is actually from 1st Corinthians 15:55.  Is this a
    >line also used in Handels Messiah?
    
    Yes.  It's a wonderful piece to see performed live at Symphony Hall. I 
    "HIGHLY" recommend it.
    
    -dave
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    >Can we *be* a christian and own anything?  He didn't
    
    God owns everything. ;-)

Handel didn't write any of the words in "The Messiah" himself.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Messiah

Oratorio in Three Parts
GEORGE FRIDERIC HANDEL

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   PART I

1. OVERTURE

                           -----------------------

2. RECITATIVE (tenor) Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God;
speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem; and cry unto her, that her warfare is
accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned. The voice of him that crieth in
the wilderness; Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert
a highway for our God.

                           -----------------------

3. AIR (tenor) Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill
made low, the crooked straight, and the rough places plain.

                           -----------------------

4. CHORUS And the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall
see it together; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.

                           -----------------------

5. RECITATIVE (bass) Thus saith the Lord of Hosts; Yet once a little while
and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, the sea, and the dry land; and
I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come. The
Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple, even the messenger of
the covenant, whom ye delight in; Behold, He shall come, saith the Lord of
Hosts.

                           -----------------------

6. AIR (alto) But who may abide the day of His coming, and who shall stand
when He appeareth? For he is like a refiner's fire.

                           -----------------------

8. RECITATIVE (alto) Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and
shall call his name Emmanuel; God with us.

                           -----------------------

9. AIR (alto) and CHORUS O thou tellest good tidings to Zion, get thee up
into the high mountain; O thou that tellest good tidings to Jerusalem, lift
up thy voice with strength; lift it up, be not afraid; say unto the cities
of Judah, Behold your God! Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the
glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.

                           -----------------------

12. CHORUS For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the
government shall be upon His shoulder, and His name shall be called
Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of
Peace.

                           -----------------------

14a.. RECITATIVE (soprano) There were shepherds abiding in the field,
keeping watch over their flocks by night.

                           -----------------------

14b. RECITATIVE (soprano) And Lo! the angel of the Lord came upon them, and
the glory of the Lord shone round about them, and they were sore afraid.

                           -----------------------

15. RECITATIVE (soprano) And the angel said unto them, Fear not; for behold,
I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For
unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ
the Lord.

                           -----------------------

16. RECITATIVE (soprano) And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude
of the heavenly host praising God, and saying:

                           -----------------------

17. CHORUS Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth, good will
towards men.

                           -----------------------

18. AIR (soprano) Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; Shout, O daughter of
Jerusalem; behold, thy king cometh unto thee. He is the righteous Saviour,
and He shall speak peace unto the heathen.

                           -----------------------

19. RECITATIVE (alto) The shall the eyes of the blind be opened, and the
ears of the deaf unstopped; then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the
tongue of the dumb shall sing.

                           -----------------------

20. AIR (alto; soprano) He shall feed His flock like a shepherd; and He
shall gather the lambs with His arm, and carry them in His bosom, and gently
lead those that are with young. Come unto Him, all ye that labour and are
heavy laden, and He shall give you rest. Take His yoke upon you, and learn
of Him; for He is meek and lowly of heart, and ye shall find rest unto your
souls.

                           -----------------------

21. CHORUS His yoke is easy and His burthen is light.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   PART II

                           -----------------------

22. CHORUS Behold the lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world.

                           -----------------------

23. AIR (alto) He was despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and
acquainted with grief. He gave His back to the smiters, and His cheeks to
them that plucked off the hair; He hid not His face from shame and spitting.

                           -----------------------

24. CHORUS Surely He hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; He was
wounded for our transgressions; He was bruised for our iniquities; the
chastisement of our peace was upon Him.

                           -----------------------

25. CHORUS And with His stripes we are healed.

                           -----------------------

26. CHORUS All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to
his own way; and the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all.

                           -----------------------

42. RECITATIVE (tenor) He that dwelleth in heaven shall laugh them to scorn:
the Lord shall have them in derision.

                           -----------------------

43. AIR (tenor) Thou shalt break them, thou shalt break them with a rod of
iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

                           -----------------------

44. CHORUS Hallelujah! for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. The kingdom of
this world is become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He
shall reign for ever and ever. King of Kings, and Lord of Lords, Hallelujah!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  PART III

                           -----------------------

45. AIR (soprano) I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at
the latter day upon the earth: And though worms destroy this body, yet in my
flesh shall I see God. For now is Christ risen from the dead, the
first-fruits of them that sleep.

                           -----------------------

46. CHORUS Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the
dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

                           -----------------------

47. RECITATIVE (bass) Behold, I tell you a mystery; We shall not all sleep;
but we shall be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last
trumpet.

                           -----------------------

48. AIR (bass) The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised
incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must be put on
incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.

                           -----------------------

53. CHORUS Worthy is Christ the Lamb that was slain, and hath redeemed us to
God by His blood, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength,
and honour, and glory, and blessing. Blessing and honour, glory and power,
be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, for ever and
ever. Amen.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>    God owns everything. ;-)

Ahh.. So he was just borrowing "Dad's".  :-)

>    God owns everything. ;-)

I've always maintained this.  The Caesars are dead and nothing really
belonged to them anyway.

Shalom,
Richard

    Yes, and nobody is denying these commands exist.  So how do we apply
    these in a country where church and state are seperate entities?

>    Yes, and nobody is denying these commands exist.  So how do we apply
>    these in a country where church and state are seperate entities?

I don't imagine it is any more difficult for us than it was for the ancients.

Richard

    Discussions like these are fruitless and talk is cheap.  The question
    is how are we honoring our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with our 
    actions in this area?  No need to respond.  Just do it.

 Z   I don't imagine it is any more difficult for us than it was for the
 Z   ancients.
    
    Au contraire...it is far more difficult simply because we are bound by
    the laws of the republic.  The ancients had far more open rights toward
    worship.  Why not, after all, they were under a theocracy.  
    
    The verses you bring up applied to a nation, not an individual.  It was
    an admonishment toward a collective group of people...somewhat like
    what is scribed on the Statue of Liberty.  The only way we can fulfill
    the passages you mentioned is by changing the laws.
    
    -Jack

.84

>    Au contraire...it is far more difficult simply because we are bound by
>    the laws of the republic.  The ancients had far more open rights toward
>    worship.  Why not, after all, they were under a theocracy.

It is clear that this is your paradigm.  However, I don't believe the ancients
had any more "open rights toward worship" than we do.  And whether they did or
didn't shouldn't affect our carrying out God's benevolence and mercy anyway.

>    The verses you bring up applied to a nation, not an individual.  It was
>    an admonishment toward a collective group of people...somewhat like
>    what is scribed on the Statue of Liberty.  The only way we can fulfill
>    the passages you mentioned is by changing the laws.

I don't believe individuals are somehow exempt from such holy instruction,
as you assert.

Richard

Z    I don't believe individuals are somehow exempt from such holy
Z    instruction, as you assert.
    
    Then the problem is never solved.  Other than collectively changing the
    laws, there is very little an individual can do to usurp the authority
    of laws which stand.  We can individually help individuals...this is
    true and it is something for which we are accountable.  However, you
    are using passages which were directed at a whole nation of people.
    
    -Jack