Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by 4His_glory, Nov 3, 2008.
America, here is what a socialist agenda and economic policy gets you.
For those on the fence this is a good article to read. For those of us on the right we already knew this.
In your opinion, does a Christian have any responsibility in sharing his/her wealth with needy people they meet in the normal affairs of their life?
Is this one reason Christians should save, so they can help people in need that God brings into their life?
Not via the government. Not mandated by law.
And we have begun this already.
Crabby, there is a difference between helping the poor and enabling the poor. Welfare, for the most part, perpetuates poverty, rather than lifting people up out of it. Socialism doesn't help people to help themselves. It enables poverty in that it teaches them that the government is the answer to all their problems.
Thats people God brings into our lives, not the government, but people God gives to us personally, no place in that equation for the government.
A welfare system tells people they are not responsible for taking care of themselves, no need of education, no need of a job, the government will take from the rest of us to give to them, they never need worry about having to bother themselves with work. And they raise their children to beleive the samething, and generation after generation this continues. Obama wants to make it even worse then it is.
Not to mention, it is the personal responsibiblity of each christian to help the poor, not by giving to the governement for wealth redistribution , which is not biblical, the bible never tells us to give to the poor by giving to the governement, and any chirstian who believe it should work that way has thrown out their resposability to God, and the oppertunity to witness the love of Christ. You really think the governement is going to be concerned about witnessing the love of Christ to anyone? Nope not ever. Thats ur resposability, and we give that oppertunity away to the governement.
There are those who argue against convoluting their scriptural world view with politics but then work to make a case for government interference in our lives.
As I've read on this board, there are some here whose world view comes from the world and not scripture. They have totally ignored God in their view of the world.
So what percentage of your gross income do you give to the poor?
Don't include money donated to your church since that pays for salaries and utilities and so forth.
It varies from year to year, but almost always at least a tithe. Remember I am talking about people brought into my life, not contributions to charities.
How about you?
Here is my personal philosophy on savings. A Christian saves for at least two reasons, one so they will not become a burden on their families or anyone else when they are elderly; two, so they can help others in need that God brings into their lives. I see no great personal merit in doing this. I simply believe it is following Christ's teachings on caring for others.
Here is my personal philosophy on money:
1. Title [gross tithe]
2. Save at least the next 10% or more and invest it ... for the reasons stated above.
3. Live beneath your means.
4. Never go into debt for something that you know will depreciate in value ... say an automobile.
At least a tithe? You mean at least 10% of your gross income is given to others in need?
About 15% of gross.
If Obama is elected I won't give another nickle to those in need in America. Why...Obama will get it from my taxes through my hard earned labor. In addition, I still owe money on my school loans that got me the job I have. So, until those are paid off, and the socialists get their fingers off my paycheck, I consider the federal governement in debt to me...if some poor, non-working lazy bum wants a handout they can seek it from uncle Obama...not me.
Crabby, I don't always agree with you but if everyone followed your personal philosophy concerning money there would be a whole lot less poor people and not nearly the amount of personal debt out there today.
I should help meet another persons needs as I can, especially those "of the household of faith". But never should a government force someone to share their wealth with others. That has happened in Argentina in the past and is going to continue to happen is as the article states "legalized plundering".
Secondly what is better than sharing my "wealth" (as if I have much)? Sharing the gospel. This is the Christian's primary responsibility and everything else pales in comparison.
The pragmatic outcome of not sharing is???
We try to make tithing my basic pension to our local church a minimum and also support other charities on a semi regular basis including the Everett (WA) Symphony. My person experience with trying to help personal friends on a personal basis is that "no good deed goes unpunished."
THE ALTERNATE to sharing is what? Not sharing? In the history in the history of the last 2 or 3 thousand years hasn't not sharing the been the world norm and how has it worked out for, say, 75% or 80% of the population? Is there any reason to conclude that the same sorts of results of not sharing would change in the next 100 years?
The local church should take precedence over all other giving.
So because 80% of the population is poor (not necessarily an accurate number) I need to give what I have so they can live a better life in this world? Here is a revelation- God does not give a person wealth so that he can make someone else wealthy. He gives them wealth so that they can glorify Him and He is glorified when others here the gospel and are saved, not when they have more "stuff".
Besides- I don´t share, I am not a communist.:laugh: (That is entirely sarcastic in case someone thinks otherwise).
If I am forced to share my income, then I won't them to be forced to share my personal debts also. FAIR???????? Share and share alike!!
God created us but Col. Colt made us equal? Something like that. Exactly how do you prevent the 80% from confiscating some of your wealth? Start by nuking India, Africa, and Asia?