Wisdom of Solomon ignored by Christians Today?

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,887
126
63
You sound like O'Bama; telling lies.
The Bible tells the wealthy to give their wealth to the poor. But rich Republicans have no moral scruples about keeping all that money to themselves. I wonder why this is never discussed by Republicans.



April 1, 2008 1:00 AM

Barack as Scrooge?
Charitable priorities.

By Arthur C. Brooks

As Barack Obama found out last week, when you run for president you can’t even get away with being a lousy giver to charity. After Mr. and Mrs. Obama released their tax returns, the press quickly noticed that, between 2000 and 2004, they gave less than one percent of their income to charity, far lower than the national average. Their giving rose to a laudable five percent in 2005 and six percent in 2006, with the explosion of their annual income to near $1 million, and the advent of Mr. Obama’s national political aspirations (representing a rare case in which political ambition apparently led to social benefit).



According to an Obama spokesman, the couple’s miserly charity until 2005 “was as generous as they could be at the time,” given their personal expenses. In other words, despite an annual average income over the period of about $244,000, they simply could not afford to give anything meaningful.



Before we dismiss this explanation, it is worth noting that this is not an uncommon upper-income excuse for not giving. According to 2000 data from the Independent Sector (a trade group for nonprofit organizations), among people with above-average incomes who do not give charitably, a majority actually say it is because they don’t have enough money.

You’d think that the only Americans with the nerve to use such an excuse for not giving would be the poor. But in fact, it is the poor — specifically the working poor — who can most teach upper-class misers a charity lesson. The working poor are America’s most generous givers when we measure giving as a percentage of income. Most studies have shown that the working poor tend to give away between four and five percent of their incomes, on average, while the rich give away between three and four percent. (Both groups give away significantly more than the middle class.)

The Obamas got rich in 2005. Their income increased sevenfold from 2004 to 2005, mostly because of Mr. Obama’s book royalties, and stayed very high in 2006 for the same reason. In 2005, another wealthy political couple with significant book royalties was Mr. and Mrs. Cheney, who had a combined income of $8.8 million, largely due to Mrs. Cheney’s books and the couple’s investment income. Just how much did the Cheneys give to charity from their bonanza? A measly 78 percent of their income, or $6.9 million. (No, that is not a misprint.)
 
Last edited:

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,887
126
63
The Bible tells the wealthy to give their wealth to the poor. But rich Republicans have no moral scruples about keeping all that money to themselves. I wonder why this is never discussed by Republicans.
Joe Biden and American Charity
What his tax returns mean.

By Byron York

It has become a common practice, when a presidential candidate releases his or her tax returns, for reporters and pundits to examine how much the candidate gave to charity. In September 1992, for example, when the Washington Post reported that Al Gore, then the Democratic candidate for vice president, had released his tax returns, the second paragraph in the story noted that out of income of $183,558, Gore “donated $1,727 — less than 1 percent — to charity.” Other stories about other candidates routinely included figures on charitable giving.

Last Friday, Sen. Joseph Biden, the Democratic candidate for vice president, released his tax returns for the years 1998 to 2007. The returns revealed that in one year, 1999, Biden and his wife Jill gave $120 to charity out of an adjusted gross income of $210,979. In 2005, out of an adjusted gross income of $321,379, the Bidens gave $380. In nine out of the ten years for which tax returns were released, the Bidens gave less than $400 to charity; in the tenth year, 2007, when Biden was running for president, they gave $995 out of an adjusted gross income of $319,853.

Here is a chart of the Bidens’ giving for the years covered by the tax returns:
Adjusted
Gross Income Charity
1998 $215,432 $195
1999 $210,797 $120
2000 $219,953 $360
2001 $220,712 $360
2002 $227,811 $260
2003 $231,375 $260
2004 $234,271 $380
2005 $321,379 $380
2006 $248,459 $380
2007 $319,853 $995
Total $2,450,042 $3,690
To take Biden’s worst year, 1999, one percent of his adjusted gross income would have been $2,100. One half of one percent would have been $1,050. One quarter of one percent would have been $525. One eighth of one percent would have been $262. And one sixteenth of one percent would have been $131 — still a bit more than the Bidens gave.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
The Old Testament makes it clear that Moses was neither a Hebrew nor an Israelite. Exodus 2:19 specifically refers to Moses as "an Egyptian".

Read more: Was Moses an Egyptian Pharoah? Ahmed Osman Believes the Biblical Story Describes Akhenaten | Suite101.com

Moses is described in the Old Testament as being "an Egyptian" and "slow of speech" in the language of the Israelites. Ahmed Osman believes that Moses was in fact the Pharoah Akhenaten. Akhenaten introduced monotheism and closed the temples making himself extremely unpopular. He was later forced to abdicate and banished from Egypt. He returned to lead his supporters out of Egypt to a new life.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,887
126
63
The Bible tells the wealthy to give their wealth to the poor. But rich Republicans have no moral scruples about keeping all that money to themselves. I wonder why this is never discussed by Republicans.



[SIZE=-1]From the issue dated November 23, 2006[/SIZE]​


Charity's Political Divide

Republicans give a bigger share of their incomes to charity, says a prominent economist
By Ben Gose
It's been a tough month for conservatives, with the Republican Party losing control of both houses of Congress, but a new book being released this week may help brighten their spirits.
In Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism (Basic Books), Arthur C. Brooks finds that religious conservatives are far more charitable than secular liberals, and that those who support the idea that government should redistribute income are among the least likely to dig into their own wallets to help others.
[SIZE=-1]HOW POLITICS AND CHARITABLE GIVING MIX[/SIZE]
Voting Patterns in 2004

Charitable Giving Trends in 2001


[SIZE=-2]SOURCE: Who Really Cares (Basic Books) [/SIZE]​
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
You are a kick! Show us the differences please.

Sorry bluedog, but we have discussed this issue many times (you were not involved in the discussion, of course). Just Google for Ten Commandments and you will get a listing of Catholic, Jewish and Protestant Ten Commandments. They are all slightly different.

The main difference is that Catholics do not have the Commandment about not making a graven image, that is something Martin Luther inserted on his own. Catholics have no problem making graven images, one sees images of Jesus and Mary all the time.

In order to make up for the one Commandment that Catholics are short, they break up one of the Protestant Commandment further down the line into two. Or more accurately, Martin Luther combined two Commandments into one, to still give him the magic number of ten.

As I said, Google for it. If you cannot find it, let me know and I will find it for you.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
***********************************************

Why use a spiritual term for your legal opinion?
Why not the word "crime", as in criminal, a person who commits an offense or an act of missing that mark against social law?


We are referring to spiritual laws. Clearly, you admit you are not.:fish:

And what is wrong with using spiritual references? In fact I use Biblical imagery in my posts many times, there is nothing wrong with that.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Wiki does a pretty good job of displaying the differences between the 10 commandments versions:

Ten Commandments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyway, I'd like to point out that the fabled wisdom of Solomon escapes most people most of the time, not just Christians.

Thanks Anna. I knew it was fairly easy to locate, I have done it myself before (as I said, we have had this discussion before, in this very forum). I just wanted bluedog to work for it.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Wiki does a pretty good job of displaying the differences between the 10 commandments versions:

Ten Commandments - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anyway, I'd like to point out that the fabled wisdom of Solomon escapes most people most of the time, not just Christians.
So the concept of there is an exception to the rule, is absolute?
God gave His wisdom in more than one book, apparently things have to progress at a certain pace since the fall in Eden.
Here is one question about the relationship between God and Christ and the Holy Spirit.
(for this spiritual experiment the Holy Spirit is the voice that comes from the Throne(s) in Heaven, he/she/it is what puts God's spoken words manifest on a human timeline)
What goes on in this place is basically known as in Heaven so be it on the earth. In the matter of sinners 1/3 of the former angels are expelled to the realm the original sinner (satan) dwell along with all his laws. Same as from the first murder in all of time, between men at any rate. Duh, create a place called the grave that is never visited. What is wisdom in the most basic form about the grave. Mostly that if you were born you will die (at current course and speed).
Christians do have the right to expound and clarify issues originally mentioned in the the OT. Know of any writings that can claim to know the wisdom in this 'chat that was not written down'

Lu:24:27:
And beginning at Moses and all the prophets,
he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

What He did was highlight the passages (maybe even just a few words).
If you tend to want to view Christ's return as flowery then the first day is not going to impress you in any way shape or form.
In our world the verse below would mean what to you at today's first thought?
Some time ago
2Co:12:2:
I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago,
(whether in the body,
I cannot tell;
or whether out of the body,
I cannot tell:
God knoweth;)
such an one caught up to the third heaven.

Our astronomy buffs have yet do decide entirely if multi-verses can exist. Yet this is a casual reference rather than something that is exclaimed throughout the land with great vigor.
 
Last edited:

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
******************************************

You are a kick! :lol: Show us the differences please. :p
Moses was Moses God is God now and forever Amen!!
Phrasing could be different with each translation but the core remains the core. No really link us up with this claim.

Like NOW!! lol !!!!:fish:
Cliffy your extensive studies put you where on this statement?
(Oh ya Cliff, I wanted an honest personal discussion with Christians men and women or people of faith actually. That is why I posted it here...
for a wee bit less, ummm, sidetracking?:smile:

SirJoe is right, there is a difference between catholic and KJ versions of the commandments and many other parts and interpretations. Books and passages have been added and removed, translations have altered (just look at the JW version. It bares little resemblance to either catholic or KJ versions.) There are so many new translations that it is hard to see any consistancy at all.

I also like the way believers gloss over contradictions and then deny there are any. The NT contradicts the OT almost in its entirety so I fail to see why they even bother with the OT. It is not even accurate history.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Almost forgot, this applies to Christ's people and their appearance in the lives of others.

1Pe:4:12:
Beloved,
think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you,
as though some strange thing happened unto you:
1Pe:4:13:
But rejoice,
inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings;
that,
when his glory shall be revealed,
ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
1Pe:4:14:
If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye;
for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you:
on their part he is evil spoken of,
but on your part he is glorified.
1Pe:4:15:
But let none of you suffer as a murderer,
or as a thief,
or as an evildoer,
or as a busybody in other men's matters.
1Pe:4:16:
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian,
let him not be ashamed;
but let him glorify God on this behalf.
1Pe:4:17:
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God:
and if it first begin at us,
what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
1Pe:4:18:
And if the righteous scarcely be saved,
where shall the ungodly
and the sinner appear?

Lexicon busybody or go with your guts initial traction. Those traits bring rejection from men as well as God.
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
36
48
Toronto
so your saying Cliffy that all Christians are following a false God because the Bible had a lot of stuff removed which changed the true meaning?
 
Last edited:

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta
The Bible tells the wealthy to give their wealth to the poor. But rich Republicans have no moral scruples about keeping all that money to themselves. I wonder why this is never discussed by Republicans.

Rich Democrats have no moral scruples about keeping all that money to themselves. I wonder why this is never discussed by Democrats.
 

MHz

Time Out
Mar 16, 2007
41,030
43
48
Red Deer AB
Phrasing could be different with each translation but the core remains the core. No really link us up with this claim.
Who is holding the wisdom of God in proverbs:8

Proverb:8:33: Hear instruction, and be wise, and refuse it not.
 

Cannuck

Time Out
Feb 2, 2006
30,245
99
48
Alberta



April 1, 2008 1:00 AM

Barack as Scrooge?
Charitable priorities.

By Arthur C. Brooks....

Joe Biden and American Charity
What his tax returns mean.

By Byron York......



[SIZE=-1]From the issue dated November 23, 2006[/SIZE]​


Charity's Political Divide

Republicans give a bigger share of their incomes to charity, says a prominent economist
By Ben Gose.....


Ummmm Gopher....

 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
so your saying Cliffy that all Christians are following a false God becaise the Bible had a lot of stuff removed which changed the true meaning?
Partly. Much of what is in the present version is pure fabrication. There were many early christian writings that didn't even get considered because they did not fit with the formation of an authoritarian, patriarchal church. The Gnostic Gospels probably come closer to the truth than the version Paul put forward, as if you read what Jesus had to say, you can only conclude that he was against organized religion in the first place.

The deification of Jesus did not occur until 300 years after his death. Until then he was considered a holy man and prophet. He was a rabbi and as such he would have had to be married and thus it is believed that the wedding where he turned water into wine was his own marriage to Mary Magdeline. According to the other apostles (their gospels are found in the Gnostic Gospels) it was Mary who was the head apostle and it was she that was to spread the word after his death.
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
36
48
Toronto
yeah that sounds right but the big question is that will ultimate truth ever be revealed and if it is will the Christians accept it or will it be status quo
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
The truth is rather subjective so in the end people will believe whatever they feel like believing. The truth hasn't gotten in the way of belief yet. Why would it change anything?
 

gopher

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 26, 2005
21,513
66
48
Minnesota: Gopher State
Walter the Obama hater conveniently forgets that Bush gave away trillions in corporate welfare to the rich while his Bible indicates that the wealthy are to give all their wealth to the poor.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
Walter the Obama hater conveniently forgets that Bush gave away trillions in corporate welfare to the rich while his Bible indicates that the wealthy are to give all their wealth to the poor.
In politics, amnesia is a prerequisite.