Thread: Good News -- Jesus is on OUR side

I know I keeping saying this, but the pro-illegals that break the law have brought Jesus into this -- according to Hill-liar Clinton, Jesus and the good samaritan would be charged with a felony -- that is not true

Jesus said " we don't want to offend these people." . . . but illegal aliens and Congress OFFEND the citizens of the states

FIRST, Jesus told disciples to GO into all nations to spread the gospel, not bring foreigners to the nations where the citizens are caused to suffer.

Luke 10:25-37

On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

"What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?"

He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'[a]; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'"

"You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live."

But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?"

In reply Jesus said: "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.'

"Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?"

The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him."
Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

this parable is referring to 'a neighbor' and never states the injured man was a foreigner. The GOOD Samaritan put the man on his OWN donkey and paid for his care with his OWN money, and told the innkeeper he would "reimburse you for ANY EXTRA EXPENSE you may have."

All of these churches doing the work of the Lord at the expense of the CITIZENS and the STATES is not being a "good Samaritan" at all . . . Jesus never said the man was in violation of the laws of the nation, nor did he ever say the good Samaritan broke the law to care for the man.

SECOND, these pro-illegal groups claim these 'immigrants' pay taxes -- BIG deal, they knew this country had taxation when they crossed the border -- perhaps the border states need to set up toll-booths and collect duties at the border.

below are two versions of the same scripture

Good News for Modern Man

4: When Jesus and his disciples came to Capernaum, the collectors of the Temple tax came to Peter and asked, "Does your teacher pay the Temple tax?"

25. "Of course," Peter answered. When Peter went into the house, Jesus spoke up first: "Simon, what is your opinion? Who pays duties or taxes to the kings of this world? The citizens of the country or the foreigners?"

26: "The foreigners," answered Peter. "Well then," replied Jesus, "that means that the citizens don't have to pay.

27: "But we don't want to offend these people. So go to the lake and drop in a line; pull up the first fish you hook, and in its mouth you will find a coin worth enough for my Temple tax and yours; take it and pay them our taxes."

The New Testament in the Language of the People
by Charles B. Williams

When they reached Capernaum, the collectors of the temple tax came to Peter and asked, "Does your Teacher pay the temple tax?"

He answered, "Yes."

When Jesus reached home -- He got there ahead of Simon -- He asked him, "What do you think about it, Simon? From whom do civil rulers collect duties or taxes, from their own citizens of from aliens?"

He answered, "From aliens."

Jesus said to him, "So their own citizens are exempt, but still, that we may not influence them to do anything wrong, go down to the sea and throw over a hook. Pull in the first fish that bites, open its mouth and you will find in it a dollar. Take it and pay the tax for both of us."

Some History of the Gaspee

The following is an interesting but little known fact of pre-revolutionary American history which is based upon Matthew 17. The British schooner, the Gaspee, plagued Rhode Island. The colonists burned it and the justification for doing so was based upon this Biblical admonition. The following is a short explanation of the destruction of the Gaspee:

"The taking of the schooner Gaspee, eight guns, commanded by Lieutenant Duddington, at Gaspee Point, R.I., on June 9, 1772, has been held to be the first assault against the crown, but erroneously, for it in nowise differs in principle from the act of firing upon the schooner St. John in July, 1764; the seizure of the Maidstone's boat at Newport in May, 1765, or the scuttling of the British armed sloop Liberty at Newport, in 1769. All were directed against the vessels of the British navy carrying the king's colors, but they were directed against the particular vessel that suffered on account of real injuries to the participants or to the community, and not from any uprising against the general authority of Great Britain. Arnold states in his account of the destruction of the Gaspee that 'Lieut. Duddington, the commander, had practiced every arrogance upon vessels in the bay, detaining them often without a colorable pretext, stopping even market boats, and in some cases plundering people on shore.' "

The following are several excerpts from John Allen's "An Oration, Upon the Beauties of LIBERTY, of the essential RIGHTS of the AMERICANS" delivered "at the Second Baptist Church in Boston, Upon the last Annual
THANKSGIVING."

"My Lord, I hope I need not remind your Lordship of the inquiry that the divine Messiah made to Peter, when they required a tax, or tribute, from him. Of whom, says CHRIST, to Peter, do they gather tax, or tribute, of the children, or of strangers? And Peter said of strangers. Then, says CHRIST, the children are free. Now, the Gaspee schooner, my Lord, was a stranger; and they should, if it was in their commission, have gathered tax from strangers: But instead of which, they would have gathered it from the children. They forgot that children were free: Therefore, my Lord, must it certainly be, that Gaspee schooner has committed the transgression & broke the laws, of the freedom of this country. No doubt, my Lord, but they have a right to tax the strangers, that come to dwell in their country; but to tax the children, which are free in their own native country, this will not do! Nature forbids it; the law of GOD condemns it. And no law, but that of tyranny, can desire it.

"And therefore it was, my Lord, that the children (who are by the law of GOD, and the law of nature free), looked upon the Gaspee schooner as stranger, as such they treated her; but when the schooner as a stranger, attempted to gather tax of the children who are free then they looked upon her, as a pirate, who took away their property without their consent, by violence, by arms, by guns, by oaths and damnations: This they thought looked so like piracy, that the children did not like it; and they thought their behavior as strangers, was very unpolite, that they could not so much as pass by these strangers, but the children must bow to them, and come to them; this, the children being free, did not like, and they thought was best for the children, and the strangers, all to be free: And therefore, one night, my Lord they went and set the strangers (who, by the way, were all prisoners), free-free, they burnt their prison. Now, my Lord, would it not be hard to hang these poor men for it?

" * * * That kings are made for the people, and not the people for them. Was not David made a king for the people? Was not Saul? Was not Solomon? Then let not kings think too highly of themselves; for the GOD of heaven never intended they should be any more than the servants of the people;....

" * * * my dear Americans, you think hard to pay duties for teas, imports, clearances, entries, etc. etc. But what will you farmers and landholders think, of paying a fixed tax for every acre of land you enjoy? for every apple tree you rear? for every barrel of cider you make, for every pound of candles you burn? for every pound of soap you use, for every pair of shoes you wear, for the light of the morning, and the sun that a kind heaven gives you; what do you think of paying a continual tax for all these? this is contain'd in the mischievous design. Stand alarm'd, O ye Americans."

ome interesting cases regarding taxes imposed in the insular possessions:

DeLima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1, 21 S.Ct. 743 (1901), and Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244, 21 S.Ct. 770 (1901).

Please examine Form W-7, which is used to obtain a "taxpayer identification number." There are only 3 such forms, one in Spanish, another for adoption of children; both of these are irrelevant for a domestic American. The third and final form can only be used by one who is not a citizen.

http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/matthew.htm

* * * That kings are made for the people, and not the people for them. Was not David made a king for the people? Was not Saul? Was not Solomon? Then let not kings think too highly of themselves; for the GOD of heaven never intended they should be any more than the servants of the people;....

I think I'll send this to Frist and others that have got it a**backwards!

Amen, Mamie!

Notice also in the Old Testament that when the people remained in the lands God appointed for them and gave to them, there was peace. It was when they invaded others' lands that the troubles started.

To me comments like "Jesus is on our side" are designed to drive away non-Christian supporters of the ALIPAC cause. Therefore to me comments like this are divisive to our cause, and therefore help the pro-amnesty supporters.

It's like NumbersUSA supporting extremely vicious attacks on Democrats. They are in essence helping the pro-amnesty supporters, because there are 5-6 Senate Democrats voting against amnesty for illegals.

I admit you do have this Catholic Cardinal saying that Catholic members of Congress could not "in good faith" vote against amnesty, or whatever. However that's ultimately the Pope's problem to deal with.

Originally Posted by illegals_out_now

To me comments like "Jesus is on our side" are designed to drive away non-Christian supporters of the ALIPAC cause. Therefore to me comments like this are divisive to our cause, and therefore help the pro-amnesty supporters.

I don't think Mamie meant to drive anyone away. Perhaps "scripture is on our side" is less offensive?

How softly do we have to step, though, when a title offends someone?

We're all in this for the same reason .. to preserve the America we grew up in and to prevent it from turning into a third world country.

Even Hillary has tried to "lean on Jesus" lately. But truly those who believe and live by the scriptures know that we are commanded to "obey the laws of the land."

Doesn't get any simpler than that.

Most people, regardles of their spiritual beliefs, "obey" the laws of the land because they know there are consequences to not doing so.

But the illegals have no respect for our laws or us, for that matter! There's a cartoon down in the pictures section that illustrates that quite well.

for me, the point is challenging any argument put forth ... illegal is now undocumented, an alien is an immigrant. Instead of taking the jobs of Americans, they are doing the jobs the American people won't do -- they are matching willing workers with willing employers. Lawbreakers are good samaritans and the rights for illegals is compared to the blacks 'civil rights' movement of the 60's -- I'm sorry I offended anybody.



Senator Hillary Clinton

'It is certainly not in keeping with my understanding of the Scriptures, because this bill would literally criminalize the Good Samaritan and probably even Jesus himself.'"

__________


Jesus would aid and abet illegal alien employers and their scofflaw workers, says Hillary Clinton

By Tony Dolz
March 24, 2006

In December, the House of Representatives passed, by a large margin, House bill HR4437. HR4437, also known as the Sensenbrenner Bill, plugs the holes that have allowed between 12 to 20 million illegal aliens to violate our borders and crooked employers to break our laws and cheat on their taxes without fear of prosecution since 1986.

1986 was the last year that America toyed with amnesty for law breakers. It was the amnesty that would end all amnesties. It was the cure for the 3.5 million illegal aliens in the country at that time. Sure!

Amnesties don't work. HR 4437 fixes the problems that followed America 's experimentation with the 1986 amnesty for immigration law breakers. Sadly, amnesty rewards criminal employers who have put out of business millions of law abiding employers. HR 4437 rewards good employers who comply with the law, pay their taxes, pay a living wage, provide their workers with health coverage and carry workman's compensation insurance to protect workers that get injured on the job. HR4437 protects American workers (who refuse to work for an illegal alien's wage) and legal immigrants who have patiently complied with the law.

Our Senate, the best one that money can buy, wants to go easy on their campaign contributors, the crooked employers addicted to cheap illegal alien workers. The Senate Judiciary Committee will reveal their new and improved Guest Worker Amnesty on Monday, March 27 th . The new Guest Worker amnesty would legalized 12 to 20 million illegal aliens and this will ensure that for every American seeking a job at a just wage there will 12 desperate foreign workers to do it for less, much less. Hillary will be happy with that.

As Hillary sees it, the Good Samaritan would not pass judgment on criminals.

That settles the matter for me as a Christian. I will read the scriptures on my own and skip Hillary's spin.

Tony Dolz

National Security Analyst
Candidate for California 41 st Assembly District
Santa Monica, California

www.dolz.com

__________

New York Times Editorial
The Gospel vs. H.R. 4437

Published: March 3, 2006

It has been a long time since this country heard a call to organized lawbreaking on this big a scale. Cardinal Roger Mahony of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles, the nation's largest, urged parishioners on Ash Wednesday to devote the 40 days of Lent to fasting, prayer and reflection on the need for humane reform of immigration laws. If current efforts in Congress make it a felony to shield or offer support to illegal immigrants, Cardinal Mahony said, he will instruct his priests — and faithful lay Catholics — to defy the law.

The cardinal's focus of concern is H.R. 4437, a bill sponsored by James Sensenbrenner Jr. of Wisconsin and Peter King of New York. This grab bag legislation, which was recently passed by the House, would expand the definition of "alien smuggling" in a way that could theoretically include working in a soup kitchen, driving a friend to a bus stop or caring for a neighbor's baby. Similar language appears in legislation being considered by the Senate this week.

The enormous influx of illegal immigrants and the lack of a coherent federal policy to handle it have prompted a jumble of responses by state and local governments, stirred the passions of the nativist fringe, and reinforced anxieties since 9/11. Cardinal Mahony's defiance adds a moral dimension to what has largely been a debate about politics and economics. "As his disciples, we are called to attend to the last, littlest, lowest and least in society and in the church," he said.

The cardinal is right to argue that the government has no place criminalizing the charitable impulses of private institutions like his, whose mission is to help people with no questions asked. The Los Angeles Archdiocese, like other religious organizations across the country, runs a vast network of social service programs offering food and emergency shelter, child care, aid to immigrants and refugees, counseling services, and computer and job training. Through Catholic Charities and local parishes, the church is frequently the help of last resort for illegal immigrants in need. It should not be made an arm of the immigration police as well.

Cardinal Mahony's declaration of solidarity with illegal immigrants, for whom Lent is every day, is a startling call to civil disobedience, as courageous as it is timely. We hope it forestalls the day when works of mercy become a federal crime.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/03/opinion/

Friday, April 7, 2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
The 'B' word and immigration reform
By Hal Lindsey
------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted: April 7, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern


I'm not anti-immigration. I'm not a bigot. I don't believe I am better because my parents got here before somebody else's did. That said, I am an American and this is my only country. I don't have another to go back to. Just this one, whatever it becomes.

That is not bigoted, selfish, racist or nationalist. It simply is.

America is my home and my homeland. In my home, I have a lock on my front door to keep out uninvited intruders and a doorbell that I use to screen potential entrants.

I didn't put it there because I hate people of any particular color or creed. I don't screen people based on their race or place of national origin. I put a lock on my door to protect from intruders, and I screen entrants to my home according to my chosen living environment.

If a crack-head rang my doorbell and asked if he could use my bathroom to smoke some cocaine, I would refuse him entry because a) I don't want to risk my family's safety and b) I don't permit drug abuse within my chosen living environment.

Imagine all of the local crack-heads getting together and marching up and down my street demanding I let them use my bathroom and it will convey some of the sense of outrage I felt watching the immigration demonstrations over this past week.

In a 1919 letter to the American Defense Society, former president Teddy Roosevelt wrote:


In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American.

There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile ... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language ... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.

The demonstrators marching against immigration reform weren't marching under Old Glory. They were marching under the various flags of their respective homelands. They were shouting anti-American slogans. They were threatening economic boycotts with an aim toward damaging America. It was as if the organizers took Roosevelt's definition of an American immigrant point by point and turned each on its head.

There are, by some estimates, more than 11 million illegal aliens now residing in America. Those opposing immigration reform claim that the vast majority of illegal immigrants are honest, hard-working people.

So what is wrong with registering them and weeding out the minority who aren't? Who would oppose that? What is wrong with expecting immigrants to assimilate into America, embracing our customs, our language and our history?

It has become fashionable to use the word "bigot" as a weapon to skewer anybody who dares to favor the right of America to put a lock on her own front door and screen potential entrants in order to preserve America's chosen living environment.

But I notice that the sales of front-door locks haven't gone down.


© 2006

Regards,

Martin

Martin,

Good article. Thanks for posting it.

If I came home to an intruder in my home, would I welcome him and make him a pot of coffee or offer him a sandwich and a cold one and term him an "undocumented visitor?"

this is all kinda funny when you think about it. The Senate wants to criticize the house bill and the America people for wanting 'secure' borders and 'legal' immigration. But Ted Kennedy, one of the major cheerleaders for 'illegals' and others most likely live in gated communities or compounds isolated from those around them.

But unlike Kennedy, Kerry and others, the average American can't afford security guards to protect themselves and their property.

Mamie, we have an obligation to obey the laws of the land. I have always been told by our pastor that even if you can get away with breaking a law, even a minor one, it is still breaking the law and therefore wrong.

You know that old saying "when in Rome do as the Romans do", that has always been used in reference to customs, yet, people come here and do not even acknowledge our laws, let alone our customs.