I'm aware that this isn't a nice thing to say, but are you really disputing that the sentence stands alone as a fact?
You know Mark and Deuteronomy. Do you know Matthew? "You shall know them by their fruits." And: "[T]hen will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Christ himself would not call these men Christian. Why should you or I take them at their word when they call themselves so?
I said fucked up theology (among other possibilities) is a reason people would intentionally prevent poor people from helping themselves
Can we compromise on "heretical corruption of Christianity"? I should think that'd be imprecatory enough for just about anyone - it certainly has more and sharper teeth than inaccurate and mere milquetoast 'theology'! - and it has the added virtue of not perpetuating a condition in which one such as myself finds it every bit as difficult and trepidatory to come out as Christian as, in an earlier time, he did to come out as gay. Perhaps that's not something with which you feel any need to concern yourself, even to this quite literally nominal degree; I can't say that isn't fair enough, but I would esteem it a kindness if you did.
>“Just like Jesus said, ‘The poor will always be with us,’” he said. “There is a group of people that just don’t want health care and aren’t going to take care of themselves.”
>Pressed on that point, Marshall shrugged.
No seriously, some people have a really fucked up reading of "the poor will always be with us" and some of those people are actually in charge of things.
for some context on that particular bible quote: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2017/03/03/ignorant... Jesus is solid on this one, that doesn't mean people don't build their beliefs on some weird interpretations of what some one once told them Jesus said.