Posted on 11/24/2009 6:41:13 AM PST by Walter Scott Hudson
There is a charge among some left-leaning professed Christians that conservative social policies neglect Christ's commission to minister to the poor. Does the parable of the sheep and the goats in Matthew 25 imply Christians should petition their government to enforce "redistributive justice?" Jack Clark thinks so. We excerpt Clark's podcast, Blast the Right, and consider his "equivalent alternative solutions challenge;" it is fine to oppose government programs which provide for the poor, Clark says, but only if you can present an equivalent alternative solution which will help just as many people, in the just the same way, just as fast. Otherwise, by Clark's reading of Matthew 25, you are going to hell. Is he right? Was Jesus a socialist? Consider the arguments in this week's show.
(Excerpt) Read more at fightinwords.podomatic.com ...
Socialism is a theory of government. Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” That’s a serious disconnect. Not to say there is no relevance of Christian belief to government operation, but Romans 13 makes it clear that government’s role is primarily to maintain the civil order, not to own and control everything, as totalitarian philosophies like socialism uniformly try to do. Only God owns everything. Replacing His authority over private souls with the absolute authority that socialism wields over the collective is idolatry. There is no substitute for God.
Jesus was about changing men’s hearts not changing society. If all gave of themselves much of our world would not need laws or social justice. Let Jesus into your heart and he will tell you what needs to be done.
You are correct:
The New Testament keeps the duties of . . . .
1. The Home
2. The State
3. The Church . . .
. . . . Separate.
They are different spheres of authority.
When the state is ceded the responsibilities that belong to the families (which includes caring for our elderly), you get what the Democrats want in America today.
Jesus was the son of God. He had unlimited powers at his behest. Had he wanted us to be Socialists, He would not have given us free will.
Jesus would blast the socialists for making their own rules/laws “of none effect” (the religious of the day had made traditions to get around the [Mosaic] law) and of piling weighty loads onto people yet never lifting a finger to help them (lawyers were the recipient of that one).
>Jesus would be ashamed of the giant bureaucracies that call themselves churches who have captured the soles of millions of poor people by helping them.
Why are these megachurches interested in footwear?
>Give them a crust of bread, some old shoes, turn them over to a huge land owner and then ask them for part of their meager earnings.
Here footwear is mentioned again... why? Is it related to the previously mentioned soles?
“He wasn’t/isn’t a capitalist either. I am sure he is equally disappointed in both.”
Stop confusing corporatism with capitalism
“He wasn’t/isn’t a capitalist either. I am sure he is equally disappointed in both.”
Stop confusing corporatism with capitalism
Private individual, paying his taxes to a government seemed a system unworthy of Jesus’s comment, other than an endorsement of paying ones taxes.
The justification most ‘Christian’ socialists have is they somehow imagine that Jesus said “Render unto Caesar those things which are Caesar's; and Caesar shall render unto the Lord on your behalf.”
They honestly think that paying taxes and being for public policy that could be considered ‘charity’ is THEMSELVES discharging their Christian duty as far as charity and care for the poor.
Sorry. It doesn't work that way.
Also, let it be noted that the Bible states CLEARLY...
“He who does not work, shall not eat.”
That is about as anti-Socialist a statement as one could think of.
You are quite correct. Jesus’ Kingdom is a spiritual one. My husband has stated for years that IF we Christians were adequately responding to the guidance of His Holy Spirit, people would not even look to the government for help.
I certainly agree with you that Jesus' kingdom is a spiritual one. However, I don't agree that people wouldn't look to the government if Christians were adequately responding to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Covetousness and envy are part of the human condition, and if people see a chance to get something for nothing, they will often take it. While Christians might practice "tough love" (for example, providing necessities but not luxuries to people who can and should work for themselves but don't), it's quite natural for takers who see their productive neighbors enjoying the fruits of prosperity to want luxuries for themselves, and maybe even to want their neighbors to be deprived of them. Christians tend to be more concerned with meeting the actual needs of as many people as possible, not propping up relatively few in luxury. Also, when you're able to choose the recipients of your generosity, you tend to give to people you know, which helps you filter out fraudsters and people who are only weakened by free goodies.
It's much easier to lobby the government to force the prosperous to hand over free stuff than it is to stand on one's own feet economically and have to witness other people who, for whatever reason, have more stuff.
Yes, I agree. My previous statement was meant to be more of a generalization. I should have been more clear. ;-)
I don’t believe Jesus would have a problem with capitalism as long as the individual capitalist loved the Lord with all his heart, mind, and strength and loved others as he loved himself.
Socialism has inherent unbiblical (steal from one give to another) properties. Individual capitalists can behave in a non biblical fashion, but I don’t believe that capitalism itself is inherently unbiblical.
You are correct. These early Christians did so by their own free choice. They were not compelled to do so at the point of the sword. And the scripture goes on to say that all their needs were met. I don't know of a single socialist government that even came close to meeting all the needs of its citizens.
Jesus was a capitalist.
Parable of three talents: master gives three men one talent; one buries it, another returns it, the third multiplies it.
other scripture: take care of women and children.
give up your riches and follow me.
bottom line: no where did the ego of State and Gov’t as sole provider ever ever ever replace God.
Communism was a perfect example: the state said we are bigger than god because we can provide for your needs, He can’t.
Socialism is one step towards that...
Really? What means of production did he own?
Our Lord owned nothing except His own life -- which He gave away for the sake of ingrates like me. He was no capitalist.
Though He had a successful carpentry business until He was 30 years old and then changed careers, took His savings, hooked up with a group of commercial fishermen and became a Fisher of Men. I don't recall reading that he lived off of government or foundation grants.
His cloak was of such high quality it had no seam, they cast lots rather than tear such a fine garment.
Owning a business (a concept which did not exist in Biblical times) is not the same as being a capitalist. Business and family were one and the same until the late Middle Ages. Our Lord and Saint Joseph were craftsmen, not capitalists.
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.