Have a Hobby Lobby Christmas...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Patiently...

Well-Known Member
You know, I never thought of it in that way. Obamacare really will force Christians out of business. I don't know why I never put two and two together. :whisper:I'm usually a little sharper than that.
Hmm. may have to check out Hobby Lobby.
 

Lily

Looking Up
This is really painful to watch.

God will reward for their faithfulness.

Father, please help all those who are about to lose their jobs. :pray:
 

Carl

Well-Known Member
I can only come to the conclusion that the president and his whole cabinet are anti Christian 24 hours a day.
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
Do people really think a point of Scriptural law used against women who don't serve the Lord in the first place outweighs the hundreds of people Hobby Lobby is ready and willing to put out of work over this??? :twitch Slay the innocent with the guilty over your closely held beliefs??? Is that how the church perceives the command to love your neighbor as you love yourself? Of course the owner of Hobby Lobby is quite wealthy, he won't suffer, but what about all the people he intends to lay off? Better taxpayers pay all those people unemployment and food stamps than David Green ask forgiveness for bowing to a law with which he disagrees??? :doh: :twitch :eek:scar:

2 Corinthians 3:5-6 (NIV)

5 Not that we are competent in ourselves to claim anything for ourselves, but our competence comes from God. 6 He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
 
Last edited:

mattfivefour

Administrator
Staff member
I think the issue is not bowing to a law with which he disagrees, but paying for the murder of children. This is a tough one.

David Green has ALWAYS put the welfare of his staff above his own. He has viewed their well-being as a duty to God and has acted accordingly, even though it was not "good business" in the world's eyes. And God has blessed him as a result. And the wealth that God has poured out on David, he uses to help others. So I am pretty sure that he does not look with any lightness on the possibility of laying off hundreds of people. But it comes down to this crux: is his duty to continue to care for the people? Or to ensure that he in no way contributes to the murder of millions of defenseless children?

I am glad I do not have to make that decision. But if I did, I know what I would HAVE to do ... and then trust God to look after the others.
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
I personally would keep the people employed, placing the well being of those already alive above the consequences of unrepentant sin of those who rebel against the Lord. The tone of that video tells me the atheists are mocking the Lord with enthusiasm. There is far more Scriptural weight to care for people than there is to defy an unjust ruler because you don't like his demands.
 

mattfivefour

Administrator
Staff member
Not to be argumentative for argument's sake, but this is a transcendent absolute moral issue in God's eyes. Surely this is not an issue of principle in terms of obeying a ruler? We are to obey our rulers except when they demand we violate a commandment of God. Surely the requirement to pay for the murder of children, literally by the millions, is such a demand? Surely that trumps the well-being of anybody? Including employees?
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
OK, so I will back Green exactly when he sells everything he has and makes provision for all the mothers and their dependent children who lose their jobs because of his stance on principles.
 

mattfivefour

Administrator
Staff member
So does an employer owe an employee permanent employment? Or does a good wage paid for a good job done satisfy any responsibility the employer has before God?

But this is missing the point, surely? Is the point not man's (in this case David Green's) responsibility to God not to violate His laws? And that comes before any responsibility not to violate man's? Yes, the employees are caught in the middle of this, but they are not his responsibility if, in attempting to care for them beyond any employer-employee standard, he is violating his responsibility to God's law.
 

Robert

Well-Known Member
Not to be argumentative for argument's sake, but this is a transcendent absolute moral issue in God's eyes. Surely this is not an issue of principle in terms of obeying a ruler? We are to obey our rulers except when they demand we violate a commandment of God. Surely the requirement to pay for the murder of children, literally by the millions, is such a demand? Surely that trumps the well-being of anybody? Including employees?


No, it does not, because we cannot support one tenet of scripture by breaking others.

"If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law according to the Scripture, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF,” you are doing well. But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all. For He who said, “DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY,” also said, “DO NOT COMMIT MURDER.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but do commit murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty. For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment." (James 2:8- 13, NASB, emphasis mine)

We cannot support one moral tenet by declaring that the murder of the unborn is wrong, then turn around and leave to the cold and brutal turns of the world those who will be unemployed by this move. If its' wrong to kill the unborn, is it not also wrong to throw employees to the wolves? It's easy to say "God will provide"; it's much harder to say "yes Lord" when He asks us to participate in that provision. A great many say they are saved and have the Spirit, but how many have quenched the Spirit when the Lord has asked and asked repeatedly for them to do His will and they have refused?


Is it "David Green would rather go out of business rather than be forced to provide the 'morning after pill'", or is it "David Green would rather go out of business than pay a fine each day?"


God has been asking, and asking, and asking.

So does an employer owe an employee permanent employment? Or does a good wage paid for a good job done satisfy any responsibility the employer has before God?

But this is missing the point, surely? Is the point not man's (in this case David Green's) responsibility to God not to violate His laws? And that comes before any responsibility not to violate man's? Yes, the employees are caught in the middle of this, but they are not his responsibility if, in attempting to care for them beyond any employer-employee standard, he is violating his responsibility to God's law.

Then let me present you with this:

"Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries which are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments have become moth-eaten. Your gold and your silver have rusted; and their rust will be a witness against you and will consume your flesh like fire. It is in the last days that you have stored up your treasure! Behold, the pay of the laborers who mowed your fields, and which has been withheld by you, cries out against you; and the outcry of those who did the harvesting has reached the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. You have lived luxuriously on the earth and led a life of wanton pleasure; you have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. You have condemned and put to death the righteous man; he does not resist you." (James 5:1-6, NASB, emphasis mine)

Tell me what these employees did to deserve being let go from their jobs. If David Green does this, then he is breaking scripture. And I cannot in good conscience (and in prayer to the Lord over this) agree with this. If it is wrong to abort children, then it is wrong to let people go in order to avoid paying a daily fine. if these people are to trust in God to provide for them for losing their jobs, then is not also David Green to trust in the Lord to provide for him in standing up to an unjust law?


Or have we all quenched the Spirit?


It seems to us that it's okay when scripture says something we agree with, but not okay when it says something hard that we don't agree with. If scripture is a fabric that we cannot pull one thread on without ruining the whole and throwing the whole out of balance, then how can we say that supporting the morning after pill is wrong, but throwing people who have done no wrong out of their jobs is not?

Indeed the Lord spoke truth when He told Isaiah:

"Who is this who comes from Edom, With garments of glowing colors from Bozrah, This One who is majestic in His apparel, Marching in the greatness of His strength? “It is I who speak in righteousness, mighty to save.” Why is Your apparel red, And Your garments like the one who treads in the wine press? I have trodden the wine trough alone, And from the peoples there was no man with Me. I also trod them in My anger And trampled them in My wrath; And their lifeblood is sprinkled on My garments, And I stained all My raiment. For the day of vengeance was in My heart, And My year of redemption has come. I looked, and there was no one to help, And I was astonished and there was no one to uphold; So My own arm brought salvation to Me, And My wrath upheld Me. I trod down the peoples in My anger And made them drunk in My wrath, And I poured out their lifeblood on the earth.” (Isaiah 63:1-6, NASB, emphasis mine)

It is because of the stiff-necked attitude of those who claim to serve Him that the unbelievers have opportunity to mock the Lord and those in need are left to wither and die. They are indeed of a church, but it is of a church of their own making and a scripture of their own choosing, and not that of the Lord.


Are we the Lord's prisoners, or His he ours?
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
So does an employer owe an employee permanent employment? Or does a good wage paid for a good job done satisfy any responsibility the employer has before God?

But this is missing the point, surely? Is the point not man's (in this case David Green's) responsibility to God not to violate His laws? And that comes before any responsibility not to violate man's? Yes, the employees are caught in the middle of this, but they are not his responsibility if, in attempting to care for them beyond any employer-employee standard, he is violating his responsibility to God's law.
Whose rights count most? The wealthy man's right to dwell in his wealth? The Pharisee's right to justify himself by his tithes? The businessman's right to refuse to compromise? The citizen's right to hasten the progression of the socialist state by dumping even more needy people into the already overtaxed system? Sure Green doesn't owe his employees for their sake, but what does he owe the Lord? Is he to stuff all he has been given into Swiss bank accounts to ward off a rainy day? The most widespread deception defeating the church today is the wealth of the status quo at the expense of anyone unable or unwilling to compromise whatever is necessary in the pursuit of extreme wealth.
 

mattfivefour

Administrator
Staff member
First, to Meg: that is quite a judgment against this man (stuffing his riches into Swiss Bank accounts? Really?). My dear sister, I know you do not mean it this way in the least, but your post sounds more like a Marxist diatribe than a Christian argument. To judge that Mr. Green's wealth is being selfishly amassed and hidden away at others' expense is quite a condemnation. I presume there is evidence of this? So we have proof that Mr. Green is just another Christian-in-name hypocrite? We would need that in order to be able to say such things against him. Or, perhaps you spoke in the passion of the moment in your rightful concern for all of his employees. If so, I understand. You have a greatly compassionate heart!

To my brother Robert, I most respectfully disagree in the application of scripture. Since when does one person owe another a duty of employment? I see that nowhere in Scripture.

Further, as Christians we know our employment and our sustenance come from the hand of God, not from the hand of those for whom we happen to work. I always recognized this and therefore was able to surrender my hard feelings toward my employer when I was terminated a year and a quarter ago. I believe it to be absolutely true that God will provide for His people. Therefore, whatever may cause their unemployment I believe God will care for those employees who are His. He will, possibly (as He has with me), use the circumstances to cause them to draw closer to Him, to be forced by the lack of any sustenance in the wilderness to lean entirely on Him. But He WILL care for them.

I agree that David must love as Christ loved: but, that does not extend to providing employment to people at the cost of human lives. As I said above, their lives are in God's hands. David's duty is first to God, then to man. The greater of the two commandments is to love the Lord thy God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. This is inviolate Yet I also believe that no application of this commandment will violate the second. God is not divided. Therefore it comes down to what is loving one's neighbor? Is it guaranteeing them employment as long as they want it? I do not think it is. Our human nature thinks that way but I do not think God does. Certainly, the only thing regarding employers and their responsibility that is condemned in Scripture is the failure to pay fair wages and the taking advantage of those who work. I would also suggest, based on his past performance, that should David be eventually forced (remember this case is not yet dealt with) into a situation where he has no choice but to close his business in order not to be forced to violate God's first commandment to mankind—thou shalt do no murder—he will give as much as is possible to his employees to tide them over until they find other employment. My prayers are with him as he deals with this situation (which, as I said, has yet to play out) ... and also with his employees with whom I greatly sympathize, as I know first hand the pressures and the pain of unemployment.

And my prayers are with both of you as you deal with your own unemployment and the difficulties of your current situation.
 

Momof3angels

Well-Known Member
Whose rights count most? The wealthy man's right to dwell in his wealth? The Pharisee's right to justify himself by his tithes? The businessman's right to refuse to compromise? The citizen's right to hasten the progression of the socialist state by dumping even more needy people into the already overtaxed system? Sure Green doesn't owe his employees for their sake, but what does he owe the Lord? Is he to stuff all he has been given into Swiss bank accounts to ward off a rainy day? The most widespread deception defeating the church today is the wealth of the status quo at the expense of anyone unable or unwilling to compromise whatever is necessary in the pursuit of extreme wealth.
Just because David Green is wealthy doesn't necessarily mean he is evil or that he will forsake his employees for the sake of pursuing wealth. Nor is he obligated to share his wealth with others.

I also don't see how an employer is morally obligated to provide his employees with work for the rest of their lives.

Yes, I believe we are to help those in need, but I am troubled by the notion of condemning a man's soul simply because he has money. If that were the case, we, who are blessed to live in the United States and Canada would be condemned by rest of the world. And wouldn't we, by the very nature of our wealth, be obligated to share everything we have with the rest of world?
 

Robert

Well-Known Member
First, to Meg: that is quite a judgment against this man (stuffing his riches into Swiss Bank accounts? Really?). My dear sister, I know you do not mean it this way in the least, but your post sounds more like a Marxist diatribe than a Christian argument. To judge that Mr. Green's wealth is being selfishly amassed and hidden away at others' expense is quite a condemnation. I presume there is evidence of this? and tha we have proof that Mr. Green is just another Christian-in-name hypocrite? We would need that in order to be able to say such things against him. Perhaps you spoke in the passion of the moment in your rightful concern for all of his employees.

To my brother Robert, I most respectfully disagree in the application of scripture. Since when does one person owe another a duty of employment? I see that nowhere in Scripture.

Further, as Christians we know our employment and our sustenance come from the hand of God, not from the hand of those for whom we happen to work. I always recognized this and therefore was able to surrender my hard feelings toward my employer when I was terminated a year and a quarter ago. I believe it to be absolutely true that God will provide for His people. Therefore, whatever may cause their unemployment I believe God will care for those employees who are His. He will, possibly (as He has with me), use the circumstances to cause them to draw closer to Him, to be forced by the lack of any sustenance in the wilderness to lean entirely on Him. But He WILL care for them.

I agree that David must love as Christ loved: but, that does not extend to providing employment to people at the cost of human lives. As I said above, their lives are in God's hands. David's duty is first to God, then to man. The greater of the two commandments is to love the Lord thy God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength. This is inviolate Yet I also believe that no application of this commandment will violate the second. God is not divided. Therefore it comes down to what is loving one's neighbor? Is it guaranteeing them employment as long as they want it? I do not think it is. Our human nature thinks that way but I do not think God does. Certainly, the only thing regarding employers and their responsibility that is condemned in Scripture is the failure to pay fair wages and the taking advantage of those who work. I would also suggest, based on his past performance, that should David be eventually forced (remember this case is not yet dealt with) into a situation where he has no choice but to close his business in order not to be forced to violate God's first commandment to mankind—thou shalt do no murder—he will give as much as is possible to his employees to tide them over until they find other employment. My prayers are with him as he deals with this situation (which, as I said, has yet to play out) ... and also with his employees with whom I greatly sympathize, as I know first hand the pressures and the pain of unemployment.

And I see nowhere in scripture where employees should be penalized for something they did not do. Or are we to obey God in one aspect at the risk of sinning in another. Okay, so they owe no one employment? Fine. Then they have sinned against the Lord by cheating them of their wages through firing them for no cause.

BTW: Hobby lobby makes 2 billion a year; the fines for a year would total 474 million.

And no: Meg's comments were not a "Marxist diatribe". But if what you are saying is the case, then it breaks scripture and God cares not for the poor.



And with that, I am finished with this forum. I cannot believe what is being said here, and I have the Lord to answer to when I stand before Him. I seriously fear for this forum.
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
mattfivefour said:
First, to Meg: that is quite a judgment against this man (stuffing his riches into Swiss Bank accounts? Really?). My dear sister, I know you do not mean it this way in the least, but your post sounds more like a Marxist diatribe than a Christian argument. To judge that Mr. Green's wealth is being selfishly amassed and hidden away at others' expense is quite a condemnation. I presume there is evidence of this? So we have proof that Mr. Green is just another Christian-in-name hypocrite? We would need that in order to be able to say such things against him. Or, perhaps you spoke in the passion of the moment in your rightful concern for all of his employees. If so, I understand. You have a greatly compassionate heart!
OK, so the remark about the Swiss accounts was out of line, but that is the only crack I intend to retract. Do you really think Green will be willing to pay taxes if he can possibly avoid it? But any company that is grossing 2 Billion a year can afford to take care of the employees that make those stores hum on a daily basis. Is that Marxism? What of simple justice? How does love fit? That is the one issue that has been ignored here, compassion, stewardship, empathy. Is the secular wisdom that "an employee is someone you use" somehow correct? Or does that only apply to the least of us? You seem to have forgotten that we don't have the socialist safety net here that you do in Canada. You are only tasting for the first time in your life what is a daily threat to millions of Americans. One thing goes badly enough wrong, and they'll bury you in a paupers grave, at least until the paupers outpace the expense of the graves as has happened in SC. I once met a young man who had suffered back injuries at 2 different jobs. He was trying to figure out the formula for making Meth and testing the experiments on himself. He was about 27. This is the sort of thing that happens when there is no work and no hope. Those are the stories they don't tell you, but the Lord knows... Lets stop trying to answer complex questions with oversimplified answers that find desperation so easy to ignore.
 

Meg

Well-Known Member
And I see nowhere in scripture where employees should be penalized for something they did not do. Or are we to obey God in one aspect at the risk of sinning in another. Okay, so they owe no one employment? Fine. Then they have sinned against the Lord by cheating them of their wages through firing them for no cause.

BTW: Hobby lobby makes 2 billion a year; the fines for a year would total 474 million.

And no: Meg's comments were not a "Marxist diatribe". But if what you are saying is the case, then it breaks scripture and God cares not for the poor.



And with that, I am finished with this forum. I cannot believe what is being said here, and I have the Lord to answer to when I stand before Him. I seriously fear for this forum.
I am sorry, but I will have to join my husband. I will remember those of you who have asked for prayer.
 

mattfivefour

Administrator
Staff member
Well, that truly breaks my heart.

I must confess, however, Robert, that I am confused over why the fear for this forum? We stand against FUD. We stand against heresy. Now we do discuss scriptural issues and prayerfully try to determine the practical application of them. Seems to me that is what a church fellowship does. Now not everybody is going to have the same determination as to what is correct. However, we can respect each other's opinions, as long as the opinion does not directly violate God's Word. Given that latter proviso, there is no need for mature Christians to break fellowship over disagreements of interpretation or application.

I believe there has been too much rapid reaction here without prayerful submission. If this issue continues to be divisive to the point of people acting out of emotion and frustration, I will be forced to lock this thread. A discussion of views is fine; but let's keep it to that, please. Our witness is at stake.
 

caligal

Well-Known Member
I have read this whole thread and I am shocked almost beyond words at the incredible turn it has taken. I love you guys and appreciate you here, but in this matter I think you are wrong. Please step back take a breath and think about this, and pray before you do anything else. I thought yall were having an interesting discussion when suddenly you took offense and said you were leaving!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top