A comment in another thread got me thinking...

 

How would Jesus define greed?

 

I don't want to know how you define it, but what scripture says that defines it.

A comment in another thread got me thinking...

 

How would Jesus define greed?

 

I don't want to know how you define it, but what scripture says that defines it.

 

TB you should really read "Everything Must Change" by Brian McClaren. Not b/c of this post, but from others I have seen you make.

 

As to Greed . . . it is not Jesus but Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians

 

13ff "I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it s a question of FAIR BALANCE BETWEEN YOUR PRESENT ABUNDANCE AND THEIR NEED so that their abundance may be for your need in order that there may be a FAIR BALANCE. As it is written (and I think this is very powerful considering how opposed this board is to wealth redistribution) The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little.

 

That is just awesome.

TB you should really read "Everything Must Change" by Brian McClaren. Not b/c of this post, but from others I have seen you make.

 

As to Greed . . . it is not Jesus but Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians

 

13ff "I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it s a question of FAIR BALANCE BETWEEN YOUR PRESENT ABUNDANCE AND THEIR NEED so that their abundance may be for your need in order that there may be a FAIR BALANCE. As it is written (and I think this is very powerful considering how opposed this board is to wealth redistribution) The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little.

 

That is just awesome.

FWIW, those of us who are opposed to wealth distribution are opposed on the grounds of what it does to our country, not disdain for the poor. I will concede that a few posters on here have a lot of hatred for poor people, but very few. In the long-run, wealth distribution will hurt the rich and the poor.

 

I bet you every single person on this board against wealth redistribution (but a few who seem to have a vendetta against the poor) donate large amounts of money to organizations that fight poverty.

The Gospel does not simply ask us to give money to charity, it asks us to bring God's Kingdom to earth, and to do that Poverty must be eradicated. Poverty cannot be eradicated without some wealth redistribution.

 

One person lives under a bridge and 1 person buys a 1.4 million dollar car - that is certainly not what Jesus envisioned.

 

It is not about what I can give, and what I do give it is about the steps I am taking to get rid of systemic poverty. It is what I do to bring social justice to the poor and oppressed.

 

In this same chapter, Paul lauds those who give beyond their means.

FWIW, those of us who are opposed to wealth distribution are opposed on the grounds of what it does to our country, not disdain for the poor. I will concede that a few posters on here have a lot of hatred for poor people, but very few. In the long-run, wealth distribution will hurt the rich and the poor.

 

I bet you every single person on this board against wealth redistribution (but a few who seem to have a vendetta against the poor) donate large amounts of money to organizations that fight poverty.

I don't think anyone on this board has disdain for or a vendetta against the poor at all. There are plenty, me included, that have a major problem with th many that take advantage of the system because of their own laziness. I can't think of one single poster on this site that fits your description. I donate, as I'm sure most of us on here do.

The Gospel does not simply ask us to give money to charity, it asks us to bring God's Kingdom to earth, and to do that Poverty must be eradicated. Poverty cannot be eradicated without some wealth redistribution.

 

One person lives under a bridge and 1 person buys a 1.4 million dollar car - that is certainly not what Jesus envisioned.

 

It is not about what I can give, and what I do give it is about the steps I am taking to get rid of systemic poverty. It is what I do to bring social justice to the poor and oppressed.

 

In this same chapter, Paul lauds those who give beyond their means.

There is wealth redistribution along with charities. Often the person that lives under the bridge is mentally ill.

The Gospel does not simply ask us to give money to charity, it asks us to bring God's Kingdom to earth, and to do that Poverty must be eradicated. Poverty cannot be eradicated without some wealth redistribution.

 

One person lives under a bridge and 1 person buys a 1.4 million dollar car - that is certainly not what Jesus envisioned.

 

It is not about what I can give, and what I do give it is about the steps I am taking to get rid of systemic poverty. It is what I do to bring social justice to the poor and oppressed.

 

In this same chapter, Paul lauds those who give beyond their means.

You have to understand- a lot of us simply don't believe that poverty can be eradicated, and the means that some want to take to do so will only cause more poverty (more taxes, bigger government)

 

You have to understand, I have not always been a conservative. It was the day that I realized that those 3rd-world countries that are doing well right now (or at least are on their way up) are the ones that A) had less government control and B) emphasized private property rights. It was then, when I began to believe that low taxation, small government, that I truly became a hardcore conservative.

 

I am not a conservative out of spite or greed, I am a conservative because I truly believe smaller government will eliminate much of the poverty in our country. However, I don't think it can all be eliminated, and that is part of the reason why I donate much of the (very, very little) income that I have.

You have to understand- a lot of us simply don't believe that poverty can be eradicated, and the means that some want to take to do so will only cause more poverty (more taxes, bigger government)

 

You have to understand, I have not always been a conservative. It was the day that I realized that those 3rd-world countries that are doing well right now (or at least are on their way up) are the ones that A) had less government control and B) emphasized private property rights. It was then, when I began to believe that low taxation, small government, that I truly became a hardcore conservative.

 

I am not a conservative out of spite or greed, I am a conservative because I truly believe smaller government will eliminate much of the poverty in our country. However, I don't think it can all be eliminated, and that is part of the reason why I donate much of the (very, very little) income that I have.

 

What you believe can or cannot be accomplished has little relevance to what we are asked to do. The whole question is about greed. When we accept a system that allows one to have un"Godly" wealth and others to be homeless then we are not living up to our calling as christians.

What you believe can or cannot be accomplished has little relevance to what we are asked to do. The whole question is about greed. When we accept a system that allows one to have un"Godly" wealth and others to be homeless then we are not living up to our calling as christians.

I don't believe making a lot of money is sinful. What you do (or don't do) with it can be, but making money is not sinful.

Greed = New York Yankees

When we accept a system that allows one to have un"Godly" wealth and others to be homeless then we are not living up to our calling as christians.

What about accepting a system that insists upon the separation of church and state, essentially forbidding the inclusion of God and spiritual matters in our courtrooms and governmental institutions?

 

When we have a truly "Christian" government, I'll get on board with your premise. Until then, it is not only absurd, but severely reckless to expect a "non-Christian" government to do what Christ calls each of us to do individually.

 

I don't know where you get the idea that we humans are to eradicate poverty. I certainly think that's a noble ambition, and absolutely something we should aspire toward, but Jesus made it very clear, "The poor you will always have with you..."

 

How about this little tidbit from Paul?

 

"For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat."

 

Again, I have no problem assisting those who genuinely need help. But I have a huge problem enabling a lifestyle that permits healthy people capable of working and supporting themselves to be dependents of our government.

 

We have spent over one trillion dollars since LBJ initiated the "war on poverty" in the 1960s, and yet, we have as many poor today, both in number and by percentage as we did 40 years ago.

Luke 12:15, "And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth."

 

Isaiah 56:11, "Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough, and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way, every one for his gain, from his quarter."

 

Proverbs 21:25, "The desire of the slothful killeth him; for his hands refuse to labour. He coveteth greedily all the day long: but the righteous giveth and spareth not."

 

Luke 11:39, "And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and the platter; but your inward part is full of ravening and wickedness."

I will go out on a limb and say most wealthy people have no issues helping those less fortunate than themselves. Its just that we see these days more and more people in "unfortunate situations" unwilling to even attempt to help themselves. Instead there are people out there who only look for handouts and put forth no effort. I think this over time has turned people away from charity for the poor, and more towards scientific research and medical research charity.

Jesus nor Paul nor any of the prophets talk about whether people deserve help or not. they simply say that we help them.

 

You can justify in many ways having tons of money, but the scripture says not to let the one who has much have too much and the one who has little have too little. Given the people that I work with everyday, I know that my much is too much and their little is too little.

 

What does this have to do with praying in the schools. Heck fire I pray everyday and I think there are many students who do as well. We have not taken prayer out of schools, we have taken government lead prayer out of schools.

 

And why is it that we want to hang the 10 commandments in our court houses. Jesus said all commandments hang on these things Love God and Love your neighbor. Why is that not the one we want hanging around?

 

You vote for a government that lets the free hand of the market - which has not moral compass - guide our economy and I'll vote for the one that tries to take care of the least of our citizens. It is prett simple. We have a choice, you make yours and I'll make mine and I will work for the government that cares the most.

"

Jesus nor Paul nor any of the prophets talk about whether people deserve help or not. they simply say that we help them.

 

You can justify in many ways having tons of money, but the scripture says not to let the one who has much have too much and the one who has little have too little. Given the people that I work with everyday, I know that my much is too much and their little is too little.

 

What does this have to do with praying in the schools. Heck fire I pray everyday and I think there are many students who do as well. We have not taken prayer out of schools, we have taken government lead prayer out of schools.

 

And why is it that we want to hang the 10 commandments in our court houses. Jesus said all commandments hang on these things Love God and Love your neighbor. Why is that not the one we want hanging around?

 

You vote for a government that lets the free hand of the market - which has not moral compass - guide our economy and I'll vote for the one that tries to take care of the least of our citizens. It is prett simple. We have a choice, you make yours and I'll make mine and I will work for the government that cares the most.

If that makes you or others feel more noble go for it. As far as that goes, there’s nothing preventing you from giving everything you earn and own to the poor. IMO you seem to be applying the instructions Jesus and Paul gave to us as individual believers and followers of Christ to a secular government that demands payment in the form of taxes in order to redistribute finances from higher to lower levels with no (or at least not enough) balances requiring some effort on the part of the recipients.

 

I disagree with your assertion that, “Jesus nor Paul nor any of the prophets talk about whether people deserve help or not. they simply say that we help them.” Paul makes it very clear that, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat."

 

He goes on in Timothy to state that, “If anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for his immediate family, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.”

 

Why do we want a government that renders fathers worse than unbelievers?

 

Why do we want a government that basically steps up and takes the place of fathers... allowing them to essentially donate their share of biological material and then run off with no strings attached?

 

The fact that my government can imprison me for not paying my "fair share" removes the whole Christian "grace" element from the equation. By rendering unto Caesar (government) what is Caesar's when Caesar is attempting to supplant God in our lives and charitable giving, how are we to have any to give God what is God's?

 

I am for smaller government and lower taxes. Thomas Jefferson was particularly eloquent on the problem of government debt and taxes:

 

'To preserve (the) independence (of the people), we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty, or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the twenty-four, give the earnings of fifteen of these to the government for their debts and daily expenses, and the sixteenth being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now do, on oatmeal and potatoes, have no time to think, no means of calling the mismanagers to account, but be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow-sufferers.'

 

WOW.

 

Considering that this was a bunch of guys who went to war over a hike in the tax on tea, I’d say the founding fathers never imagined, much less intended a federal tax structure and bloated buracracy like we have today. I’m convinced that by lightening the governmental requirements, you would see charitable “Christian” giving rise exponentially.