Look at post 612 and tell me you meant something else.
The thread is still there for everyone to read it, Hoping.
You're too heavenly-minded to be of any earthly good.
I find that an impossibility.
An appeal to incredulity is a logical fallacy.
So living according to Christ isn't "credible"?
|
Where did I say that "living according to Christ isn't 'credible'"?
WHERE?!
Now who is bearing false witness?
You are by defending socialism/theft. You should repent.
I am sure glad they have acted in a Christian manner
Why do you assume they have?
The government has slaughtered over 66 million babies since Roe V Wade was passed. That's "care"?
Oh, and it was funded by tax-payer dollars, so you know.
The government killed how many elderly folk by locking them up in nursing homes during the pandemic?
after having acted so unChristian like in so many other matters.
Governments should act like governments.
Christ was an individual. Governments are not capable of acting like individuals.
Would you prefer they not act Christ-like?
I would prefer that the government ONLY fulfils it's God-given responsibilities of providing/maintaining infrastructure and enforcing justice on criminals.
I would prefer that the government stay out of anything else, because going outside of its role of providing the above goes against God's will for what a government should do.
How would it even be possible?
It's not possible, nor am I saying it is. But trying to be any of those is a sin.
But isn't it possible to be like the Master?
Not for a government, no.
Caring, patient, forgiving, kind, innocent, loving, etc.?
Supra.
I have given my taxes to them as Paul directed in early Rom 13.
Good for you.
Have you also helped the poor and needy in your city? DIRECTLY, I mean, not through the government?
If they choose to do good works with it, who am I to complain.
You're a Christian. That's who. Or at least you claim to be.
You're supposed to stand for what's right. Not go along with evil.
Because they're not doing what they are SUPPOSED to be doing with it, you know, their God given responsibilities...
You seem to be confused...
The confused one is you.
I'm not talking about giving to others, "from my hand to yours" charity.
I'm talking about socialism.
You have confused yourself into thinking they are the same. They're not.
are you or are you not complaining about the government helping the needy?
I'm telling you that the government helping the needy, from cradle to grave, is wrong, because in order to do so, it has to violate God's enduring command "You shall not steal."
You seem to be unaware of what the government does.
I'm well aware of what it does.
I'm also well aware of what God said it should do, and the two don't match.
Oh, I see, if it isn't earned it is out of reach.
Yes. The government did not earn my wages, let alone nearly half of it.
A small tax (say, 5% on personal increase) is enough to fund a government that only does what it's supposed to and nothing more.
The current tax rate is about 50%, overall, because the government is extremely bloated and cannot do anything efficiently, let alone it's God-given responsibilities.
I wonder what the blind man in John 9 would think of that POV.
Clearly not paying attention to what I'm talking about.
Welcome to the long list of folks who complain about taxes and the use of them.
I have no problem with the government taxing its citizens in order to fund itself.
What I have a problem with is overtaxation to fund things the government has no business in doing.
As God provides for my needs, I think it good that He can use our government to provide for others too.
Why do you think God is the one using the wicked government to destroy millions of lives?
What better way for Satan to topple an entire nation than to use "government funded charity" (an oxymoron, in case it wasn't obvious) to destroy people's reliance on their neighbors, and instead rely on their government for help?
Barbara Streisand said it best:
"People who need people are the luckiest people in the world."
When you remove people's reliance on each other, they easily fall.
Look at what happens when a man who is married with kids wins the lottery, a few months later, and he's divorced, estranged from his children, and an alcoholic. He "didn't need" his wife anymore, because he had more money than he knew what to do with, and it cost him everything.
You just seem so unaware of what the government can do.
I've seen what the government HAS done, and I'm not impressed.
I guess when one starts to label government help as socialism, nothing will be pleasing.
You seem to think I'm just making up definitions for these words. Why?
Of course not.
How about "St Vincent dePaul"?
That's the name of a person. So no. Unless you want to claim that names are socialist...
Go look up the term "socialism" in a dictionary. That's what I'm talking about.
It seems that the term "socialism" has left such a bad taste in your mouth
The fact that it hasn't left a bad taste in YOUR mouth is more telling than anything you've said so far.
that even the synonyms for socialism are unacceptable.
Here are the synonyms for socialism. You tell me if any of those are acceptable.
They would include charity, care, and comfort for the downtrodden.
No, they don't.
I am sot so hardened against helping others.
Neither am I.
No thanks, as I fear it will just lead back to more miserliness.
Too bad.
Here's the list, since you apparently cannot count:
The same Bible that says
1) that the government has no business caring for people from cradle to grave, and
2) that theft is wrong, no matter who does it or for what reason, and
3) that you cannot compel charity, else it is no longer charity, and
4) that only tyrannical governments tax their people more than a certain amount. |
Up to you, but please supply a topic, as it was quite a long while ago.
Supra.
Better yet, I have official statistics. Have a look:
moneytransfers.com
I am sure some have "gamed" the system, but I wont deny the truly needy because of the few.
You're still conflating "from my hand to yours" charity with the government robbing Peter to pay Paul.
They are NOT the same thing. One is good, the other is evil.
Don't bother, Clete, as my only "right" is to exhibit the Lord that bought me.
This is what happens when you deny God.
Don't you think you have a valid case?
In a just system, I would.
But you're assuming that our justice system is just.
Newsflash! It's not!
Or have you just been swept up in the net of "Complainerism".
Advocating for what is right is "complainerism"?
Because it's not their God-given responsibility.
Why not with tax dollars?
Because it's a conflict of interest.
Why not follow the example of Christ?
As an individual, you should. Governments are not individuals.
Who was it who said "it is better to give than to receive"?
Guess who he said it to! Individuals persons! NOT the government.
Such naivete!
What are you, a parrot? Answer the questions I asked, or retract your false accusation!
Why limit what or who the elected officials of this republic can help?
Because without limits, the government becomes bloated and inefficient, and incapable of fulfilling its God-given responsibilities.
Is the aid to others only the responsibility of the private sector?
Correct. The private sector, and from citizen to citizen. Not from my paycheck to the government's hands, them taking a portion of it, and then redistributing the rest to everyone else.
If so, they have failed miserably.
Yes, they have. But it's not entirely their fault! I'll explain why below.
I guess that is why the government has to keep stepping in to fill the gaps.
You're putting the cart before the horse.
The government stepping in is the problem, not the solution!
If the government didn't have its proverbial fingers in nearly every proverbial pie, EVERYTHING would be much cheaper, much more affordable, people would have more money than they would know what to do with, and would BE ABLE to help those in need around them.
But because the government DOES have its fingers in the pies, EVERYTHING is more expensive, hardly affordable, and people are forced to rely on the government for help, rather than their neighbor!
Repeating yourself doesn't make you any less wrong.
You hate the fact that the government helps others whom you wouldn't lift a finger for.
Wrong.
I hate the fact that the government helps others whom I CANNOT lift a finger for! And the reason being that the government is robbing me to pay them!
If the government WASN'T in the business of helping others, I COULD lift a finger!
Currently, my hand is being stepped on by the government's boot. No, not just my finger, but my neck too! And everyone else's!
You want to see more people helping others in need? Don't let the government do it for you. Literally. The government programs need to be stopped, so that people CAN help those in need.
