Foxy Lady Prof Says "Covet Neighbor's Goods" - But, Will She Share Her "Goods?"

The beautiful Caroline Heldman is a Professor of Politics at the very lib Occidental College situated on the left coast. Occidental is one of many institutions of liberal lower learning that started out as a sort of seminary - this one by the Presbyterians in 1887. How lib is it? Occidental guided President Obama during his formative years, and shaped him very well to go on to Columbia, which is itself so liberal, that Columbia Professor David Epstein is now defending himself for sleeping with his daughter.

Back to that cutey, Caroline, who has made many appearances on the O'Reilly Factor - because she is blond, and quite a looker. Unfortunately, whenever Prof Caroline is posing on The Factor her entire repertoire consists of demanding that people who have money be forced to offer assistance to those who have not. She never offers any constitutional reason for her coveting other people's money to redistribute to those in need. Even Presbyterians at Occidental should know that, "Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Goods."

I sent the following letter to Prof Caroline, wondering if she understands, that when she demands others to give up their property, that she sending very real signals that her personal "property" is also up for grabs.

"Dear Professor Heldman: Unfortunate for socialists is that they forget that the command "Do Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Goods," was pronounced to protect - even socialists like yourself.

When you and your friends demand, via government fiat, the coveting and distribution of other peoples wealth to give to still other people, you are encouraging others who are less prosperous than you to take what is yours.

I am saying that you are opening doors for people who do not have a significant other as beautiful as you to covet you. Why not? What is there to restrain some bum from wanting to covet you - your body, included?

This is not a wacky thought, because if you are licensing others to take from "the haves," such as you, your liberalness has opened the door for others to not respect your person, including your personal territory, as well as possessions.

Why cannot the proverbial thug approaching you in the proverbial alley demand that you give him - you? I mean, why cannot Professor Heldman be distributed, freely to whomever? The law is not able to stop this attitude and behavior as we can see from sociological studies. You social engineers cannot stop it - you only encourage it with your Share the Wealth (Share the Heldman?) constructs.

The next time you see a lonely male student on campus, he may have been taught by you to covet you. "Oh, there's Heldman, she has to share."

Here is a post I did last week, that got alot of positive responses via thread and e-mail:

“I don’t care how much you make. It’s none of my business, or anyone else’s”.

As we moved farther and farther away from biblical values, this attitude has also gotten farther and farther away.

The Bible tells us we shouldn’t covet. And YET “Christians” look at what others have all the time. Unfortunately, most “Christians” seem to think coveting ONLY MEANS wanting what someone else has. Whats the difference between, wanting to take something of someone elses for yourself, and wanting to take something of someone elses so that they don’t have it, just like you?

When we WERE a Christian nation, or at least God fearing, people would look at what they had as GODS PROVIDENCE. Because of that outlook about themselves, it also becomes natural to view that in others. That what THEY HAVE is also Gods providence.

We viewed God as SOVEREIGN, and that he could bless those he chose to bless.

We also lived our lives and viewed life through a Biblical perspective. The Bible talks about wealth and money/materials more than any other single subject, besides Gods love toward us.

The Bible gives us principles for aquiring wealth and using wealth. First and foremost it talks about wisdom. Aquiring it and THEN using it. Likewise, it talks about a fool and his folly.

Today, “churches” focus on a “social gospel”, on the works of a “social justice”, and yet, conveniently leave out ALL the verses pertaining to wise living.

What would happen to our nation, if the churches alone, would get back to preaching and living the ENTIRE Word Of God, instead of todays feel good pablum?

Instead of preaching entire sermons of the rich man, they should be preaching entire sermons on wisdom and folly, and the fruits there of. They should also be preaching on the sovereignty of God.

Instead, we have people in churches that no longer preach of Gods sovereignty, but on ones rights and entitlements. That the rich man (ALL rich men) choose to hoard their wealth, and that they have an “obligation” to the poor. And thus, since the rich man has an “obligation” to the poor, the “poor” see that as an entitlement.

We look at what others have, and “appear” not to be doing, but fail to look at ourselves. Or if we do, we have a overvalued sense of self importance. We view our righteousness based on OUR value, and our view or value of others righteousness. Instead we should be looking strictly at ourselves against the righteousness of God, and HIS standard for OUR OWN lives.

When we look at our own lives compared against Gods standard, we have no energy (or desire) to look at OTHERS lives, and whether they are living up to Gods standard.

Instead, we would much rather look at others, and look at their failures, or even more so, OUR perception of their “perceived” failures. We no longer use Gods standards, except of course when it comes to comparing OTHERS.

Oh well...enough of my sermon :)

The whole problem with the “social gospel/ social justice” movement is that it takes TRUE focus off of God, and puts it on ourselves. Onto the WORKS that MAN does, and not onto THE GOOD NEWS of CHRIST.

The TRUE Gospel (Good News) is offensive. It tells us that ALL MEN are fallen, sinful, horrible beings. That no matter how much good work we do, its filthy and worthless.

It also tells us that there is ONLY one way to God, and that is HIS way. NONE of our ways are good enough.

That is the GOSPEL part.

Now the SOCIAL part is tricky. As christians, are we to help the poor? Most definetly. BUT...BUT...That IS NOT to be our main focus while on earth. We are to tell the world and show the world of Gods love for us, and tell them the Good News of how we all CAN come to God, through the attoning sacrifice of Christ.

But the problem that “christians” who fall into the “social gospel” camp fail to realize is that the Church was called to take care of its own. When Paul instructed the NT church to take care of widows and the poor, it was to be the widows and poor in the church. The Church was so help others in other churches as well.

Next, what the “social gospel/ social justice” crowd fail at, is seeing Gods SOVEREIGNTY. And that is what I was pointing out in my FReepmail. When WE look for “social JUSTICE”, the first thing one must realize is that if MAN is to create “social JUSTICE” that must mean there is INJUSTICE. Which, of course, there is. BUT...what exactly is “injustice”. Where do we allow Gods soveREIGNTY to REIGN?

Our society blindly sees a rich man and a poor man, and screams injustice. Never ONCE looking towards a sovereign God, or allowing God to be sovereign. Why is the rich man rich? Why is the poor man poor? We don’t care if the rich man diligently followed Gods precepts for life and material. We don’t care if the poor man foolishly disregrded them. We take both men and put them under the blanket of what WE call JUSTICE.

By doing this we remove Gods sovereignty, of him blessing whom HE CHOOSES to bless, or blessing those he finds faithful.

With that, all I can think of is the story of Job. When I think of those who scream and wring their hands about “social justice”, I hear Satan confronting God on Job and his faithfulness being tied to his blessings. The “social justice” crowd are no different. They also point to the blessings of the faithful as a reason for being faithful. THEY ALSO infer that the poor would be faithful if so blessed.

In the beginning of Job, Job is ALREADY a blessed man, who found favor with God.

How would have todays “social justice” crowd viewed pre trial Job? He was already blessed. Obviously more than most around him.

How would the “social justice” crowd have viewed mid trial Job? I’d suggest the same way Jobs “friends” did.

And lastly, how would the “social justice” crowd have viewed Job post trial?

Post trial, God DOUBLED everything that Job had before his trials, and he was already blessed by God then. We also know that God took exception to Jobs faithfulness, so I think its safe to say that Job was probably a very generous man already.

So where does the story of Job fit into “the social gospel”? How does the “social gospel” fit with Gods sovereignty and blessings?

When I hear the terms “social justice” or “social gospel” I hear Satan accusing. Accusing the BLESSED FOLLOWERS of Christ, of not DOING enough. That their blessings aren’t blessings at all and should be disgarded.

There is a fine line between having and hoarding and giving and disgarding, and the only way to traverse this is through prayer and faithfulness. Which is what God wants from us in the first place, in everything we do. Its what brings blessings in the first place, and is whats needed to fully appreciate AND use those blessings.

And it CANNOT be dictated by others (society).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.