>>21120519 (pb)
>there is no virtue in poverty in itself unless that poverty came from being faithful and doing what is right in the eyes of the Lord = Self Sacrifice then it is virtuous.
>Which proves that if therre is a way in, logical thinking would tell you, that there is a way out. Understand?
I understand. You're describing the exploited technicality. "Being faithful" is also highly vague. You make it sound as if people can give away their wealth to get into heaven as if that's all it takes. Everybody has given away their wealth already through 100+ years of inflation, taxation, and fees in exchange for heaven on Earth, and think it's the path to heaven in death. You say you agree that there is no virtue in poverty, but you cling to the idea that promotes it and normalizes it.
If Jesus holds so much sway over you because of miracles he did, how do you not see that movies perpetrate the same thing artificially but with the same influence? If the elite use movies to deceive atheists and religious people alike into embracing being poor, shouldn't you take another look at what being faithful to the point of poverty means?
You've given your money to Israel and scam foundations, and where did it get you? How many children were killed with your dollars you spent to get into heaven?
Having wealth is a responsibility, and it has been in the hands of sociopaths because of selfishness. A perverted concept of greed where greed is the accumulation of wealth. Who's to say that wasn't corrupted and that poor people are greedy for the prime real estate in the afterlife.