I will concede the first scripture, although I think using that assumes that the poor in the world are that way by choice and not because of the system we have set up. I would venture to say that the poor in developing countries work much harder than some of the wealthy in this country, so I am not going to buy the premise that we do not work to change the system because there are a few anecdotal stories of some who take advantage of it. For if we were to scrap all systems based on the fact that some take advantage, then Wall Street should come down now. Lets destroy it, b/c we know that there are those who take advantage of insider information - to the detriment of the little people. If one taking advantage is bad and means the system does not work, the the other as well.

 

As to the second scripture, I think you have misqouted . . . it is actually "provide for relatives" not "his" relatives. This is in regards to widows and comes much closer to making my point than yours. When you know someone is hurting and in pain, you are worse than an unbeleiver if you do not provide for them and their relatives (I would guess this means children and not aunts and uncles.) So, I will not concede this scripture as evidence that Jesus wouldn't work to help the poor. On the contrary.

Rich young ruler comes to Jesus and wants to follow him and he tells him to sell all of his wealth and then come and join him. He turns away and leaves and Jesus knew this would happen.

 

He also brags about the poor widow who put her last two coins into the offering.

So, I will not concede this scripture as evidence that Jesus wouldn't work to help the poor. On the contrary.

While I admire your zeal, I am baffled at how you draw some of the conclusions you reach.

 

I never have said, nor will ever say that Jesus wouldn't work to help the poor. He has done more for the poor than any man in history... especially when you consider the absolute poverty of spirit every single human on the face of the earth is in without Jesus Christ. The Bible, from Genesis to Revelations is the most amazing love story every composed between a King in true glory and splendor who willingly chooses to set aside his riches to live in squallor to win the hand of a destitute bride. Loving her enough to lay down his life for her.

 

As Christians, we are to emulate the selflessness of our Lord and Savior. Absolutely, by all means.

 

I merely point out that IMO you make a mistake in assuming that the U.S. government should in any way assume the calling and role of Christians in our society. BIG difference.

Forgot one.

 

• Big government and welfare led to the demise of great civilizations.
  
• The free market led to the demise of great civilizations.
  
• A lack of a Christian government led to the demise of great civilizations.
  
• Foreign wars and overextended militaries led to the demise of great civilizations.
  
• Immigration led to the demise of great civilizations.
  

 

My, what an odd set of civilizations foretell our doom.

Rich young ruler comes to Jesus and wants to follow him and he tells him to sell all of his wealth and then come and join him. He turns away and leaves and Jesus knew this would happen.

 

He also brags about the poor widow who put her last two coins into the offering.

 

 

Love this story out of Luke

:thumb:

 

I think though that this is a condition of the heart which answers the question how would Jesus define greed. If anyone places more importance on something (in this case money) than the 2 commandments that we are given, then we are in the wrong. Now the real question becomes this, is it better to teach a man to fish or is it better to give a man a fish, which one is real love?

While I admire your zeal, I am baffled at how you draw some of the conclusions you reach.

 

I never have said, nor will ever say that Jesus wouldn't work to help the poor. He has done more for the poor than any man in history... especially when you consider the absolute poverty of spirit every single human on the face of the earth is in without Jesus Christ. The Bible, from Genesis to Revelations is the most amazing love story every composed between a King in true glory and splendor who willingly chooses to set aside his riches to live in squallor to win the hand of a destitute bride. Loving her enough to lay down his life for her.

 

As Christians, we are to emulate the selflessness of our Lord and Savior. Absolutely, by all means.

 

I merely point out that IMO you make a mistake in assuming that the U.S. government should in any way assume the calling and role of Christians in our society. BIG difference.

 

If this is a nation that supports the ideas of the populus, and the populus is christian and the United States was founded upon the Mosiac Law, then do we not have an obligation to say we are Christians this is what we believe and try to change those laws to fit our lifestyles, or do we accept the fact that the majority has no rights and that everything should be equal?

 

I am just ask since this is a government of, for, and by the people? This much more fundamental question then just greed!

This much more fundamental question then just greed!

Agreed.

 

The problem is, we might have 90% saying they believe in God, but when it actually comes down to the god they believe in, he/she/it do not have a whole lot in common with the God described in the Bible. For some it seems, it's the god they see in a mirror. For others, it's the god they fashion in their heads and hearts... a god that is gentle, warm and fuzzy, who just loves everybody, and can't wait to have them all move into his house. For others, it's a god they blame for every destructive act of nature, or use to add pepper to their curses and profanity.

 

IMO, when you get right down to it, less than half of all people in the U.S. are willing to believe in God as He describes Himself in the Bible. Fewer still actually worship and follow Him as He tells us we should. It seems to me folly to attempt to legislate charitable giving and servitude, which in the beginning was a personal choice entered into by individuals. This only serves to illustrate just how far we've drifted from the Gospel.

 

I do not see the IRS and enforced payment of up to half of my income in the form of one tax or another as Christian charity.

 

Jesus gave the young rich ruler a choice... the IRS does not.

 

I certainly do not wish to serve a government acting as god.

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.

 

Luke 12:13-21 might be a good place to start.

Agreed.

 

The problem is, we might have 90% saying they believe in God, but when it actually comes down to the god they believe in, he/she/it do not have a whole lot in common with the God described in the Bible. For some it seems, it's the god they see in a mirror. For others, it's the god they fashion in their heads and hearts... a god that is gentle, warm and fuzzy, who just loves everybody, and can't wait to have them all move into his house. For others, it's a god they blame for every destructive act of nature, or use to add pepper to their curses and profanity.

 

IMO, when you get right down to it, less than half of all people in the U.S. are willing to believe in God as He describes Himself in the Bible. Fewer still actually worship and follow Him as He tells us we should. It seems to me folly to attempt to legislate charitable giving and servitude, which in the beginning was a personal choice entered into by individuals. This only serves to illustrate just how far we've drifted from the Gospel.

 

I do not see the IRS and enforced payment of up to half of my income in the form of one tax or another as Christian charity.

 

Jesus gave the young rich ruler a choice... the IRS does not.

 

I certainly do not wish to serve a government acting as god.

 

 

This is where we probably have our biggest difference - I don't serve this government, it serves me - I don't work for this government, it works for me, and my goodness if I allow it, this government will sin for me. When we allow the government to create situations that allow so much poverty, and encourage greed and oppression then we are allowing it to sin for us. Helping those who are poor, without working to remove the systemic genesis for the poverty does nothing other than provide a band-aid.

 

As to the "teach a man to fish" parable, I would go with that if I was assured that the man could afford a fishing pole and bait and that when he got to the river that there were plenty of fish to be caught, and they were not extinct b/c of the greed of the fisherman who did it for money and not sustenance. Or that they had died b/c the community was so worried about producing enough food for its obese population that it polluted the water with chemicals. Teaching him to fish is certainly a good thing, but it does not guarantee that he will not go hungry.

I don't serve this government, it serves me - I don't work for this government, it works for me...

From this statement alone I deduce that you are either fabulously wealthy and feel guilty about it, or you are young, unmarried, without children, do not own your own home, are not earning over $40,000 a year, and are very likely still in school.

 

You sound a bit like I did 30 years ago, and I've never been truly wealthy.

 

I'm not calling you out here, I'm just saying that the only people I know who argue for greater government involvment in our lives, while at the same time asserting that government works and serves them, are either young and yet to earn a significant amount of money (requiring them to pay a significant amount of local, state and federal taxes), or are in some way dependent upon government (or would like to be dependent upon government) to provide for them, or are absolutely insanely wealthy individuals who will never have to work another day in thier lives, and can protect their massive nest eggs from virtually any tax increase.

I don't serve this government, it serves me - I don't work for this government, it works for me...

From this statement alone I deduce that you are either fabulously wealthy and feel guilty about it, or you are young, unmarried, without children, do not own your own home, are not earning over $40,000 a year, and are very likely still in school.

 

You sound a bit like I did 30 years ago, and I've never been truly wealthy.

 

I'm not calling you out here, I'm just saying that the majority of people I know who argue for greater government involvment in our lives, while at the same time asserting that government works and serves them, are either young and yet to earn a significant amount of money (requiring them to pay a significant amount of local, state and federal taxes), or are in some way dependent upon government to provide for them, or are absolutely insanely wealthy individuals who will never have to work another day in thier lives, and can protect their massive nest eggs from virtually any tax increase.

From this statement alone I deduce that you are either fabulously wealthy and feel guilty about it, or you are young, unmarried, without children, do not own your own home, are not earning over $40,000 a year, and are very likely still in school.

 

You sound a bit like I did 30 years ago, and I've never been truly wealthy.

 

I'm not calling you out here, I'm just saying that the majority of people I know who argue for greater government involvment in our lives, while at the same time asserting that government works and serves them, are either young and yet to earn a significant amount of money (requiring them to pay a significant amount of local, state and federal taxes), or are in some way dependent upon government to provide for them, or are absolutely insanely wealthy individuals who will never have to work another day in thier lives, and can protect their massive nest eggs from virtually any tax increase.

 

You need to work on your skills a bit;)

 

41, married, wife works, two kids 11 and 7, mortgage on my only home, own 1car paying on another. So, I am neither truly wealthy nor dependent on the government for my well-being, but certainly comfortable enough that I need to be worrying about the well being of others and the systems that allow the most prosperous country in to have people who do not have a place to live, or have to rely on a food pantry for food, or can't afford reasonable health care or have no way of getting enough $$ to see someone about their mental health issues. The sytem is truly broken when these conditions exist.

You need to work on your skills a bit;)

 

41, married, wife works, two kids 11 and 7, mortgage on my only home, own 1car paying on another. So, I am neither truly wealthy nor dependent on the government for my well-being, but certainly comfortable enough that I need to be worrying about the well being of others and the systems that allow the most prosperous country in to have people who do not have a place to live, or have to rely on a food pantry for food, or can't afford reasonable health care or have no way of getting enough $$ to see someone about their mental health issues. The sytem is truly broken when these conditions exist.

Wow... I guess I need to get out more. :lol:

 

That just brings me back to my original point, which is, "Why do you think we need a bigger more bloated government, (which is one of the most inefficient ways of getting things done) instead of a grassroots, genuine Christian effort to make an impact on our communities where we live?"

You need to work on your skills a bit;)

 

41, married, wife works, two kids 11 and 7, mortgage on my only home, own 1car paying on another. So, I am neither truly wealthy nor dependent on the government for my well-being, but certainly comfortable enough that I need to be worrying about the well being of others and the systems that allow the most prosperous country in to have people who do not have a place to live, or have to rely on a food pantry for food, or can't afford reasonable health care or have no way of getting enough $$ to see someone about their mental health issues. The sytem is truly broken when these conditions exist.

Wow... I guess I need to get out more. :lol:

 

That just brings me back to my original point, which is, "Why do you think we need a bigger more bloated government, (which is one of the most inefficient ways of getting things done) instead of a grassroots, genuine Christian effort to make an impact on our communities where we live?"

If this is a nation that supports the ideas of the populus, and the populus is christian and the United States was founded upon the Mosiac Law, then do we not have an obligation to say we are Christians this is what we believe and try to change those laws to fit our lifestyles, or do we accept the fact that the majority has no rights and that everything should be equal?

 

I am just ask since this is a government of, for, and by the people? This much more fundamental question then just greed!

 

 

 

Really. I don't recall the Deuternomical laws or Levitical laws in the Constitution. Did I miss the shellfish ban?