Widows

But Joseph, Russell55 is a young widow who needs that income to survive. The money her husband put in went to support your grandparents and the money you pay to support her could just as well be supporting your own wife and baby if something tragic happened to you. I know you don't begrudge her that money.

We have a number of women, like Abiyah and Sue, who lost their husbands while VERY young. Sue had a house full of babies and was only 27 when her husband died. Should she starve to death or give her children away or accept social security? The poor girl worked so many menial part time jobs to keep her children fed and clothed. Remember, what you receive is based on what you've paid in and a young man has very little built up.

We've paid in to social security now for 40 years and should be able to retire someday. Think of it as a forced savings plan.

We could go a step further and say home schoolers or people with no children in the school system shouldn't have to pay any school / educational taxes but THOSE are the homeowners and without THEIR money... the teachers would not be paid. It all goes round in circles.

Diane

 

As I have said,

I chose to pay my tithe to the Church. I do think there is a part in Acts where the Bible talks about the Church taking care of the widows and the down trodden. I don't see anywhere that says the government should do this by forcing people to pay into something they would not do otherwise. The major problem as I see it is that the churches in my area are more interested in building bigger mansions and keeping up with the Jones'es than they are teaching the Bible and taking care of the widows and the poor. This seems to me to be a spiritual problem.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Don't tell anyone, but after seeing the years of wasted tax dollars not being spent on the children, I am just about to the point where I would agree. Of course, there is another thing the Church used to do and have given over to the government.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I made my contribution to my country over the years. I receive my social security and other senior benefits gladly and with thanks. Oh, I still contribute income taxes, property taxes and all the other taxes that everyone in the country pays....this is how society goes round.

When the churches failed, and they did, the government was forced to take up the slack.

An interesting note of fact. IF EVERY member gave his/her tithe, no church in the country would lack for funds, and could do all those things it should be doing in the name of the Lord.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Exactly Jim1999!

Diane

 

Another interesting note of fact: Most Churches have more than enough money but choose to spend it on themselves and bigger buildings / palaces instead of the ministry of God. Further, there are more than enough rural Churches where their membership has 100% tithing going on and they still wouldn't equal the amount of money I make in one week. But, there are more than enough Churches who could, if they wanted to, do the work of God. The question is, are we satisfied with the status quo of the government doing what the Church should be doing, or, are we ready to get back to doing what God called us to do as a church, possibly with a little bit smaller building?

Joseph Botwinick

 

Well, no, since I'm Canadian.....

Whether people should be required to pay into it or not is not really the point. The point is that my husband was required to pay into SI for all of the 30 years or so that he was employed, whether he liked it or not, and now I'm collecting. If he was required to pay in, then I'm entitled to collect if I meet the criteria. That's what its there for. Why would I pass it up or feel guilty about taking it? I won't and I don't. I feel extremely blessed to have it, and I feel it is part of God's way of taking care of me and my son.

So are pensions, life insurance, mortgage free homes, gardens, etc. etc.

Everyone has different circumstances. Some live in places where the climate is relatively temperate, the land is productive, and self-sufficiency is a real possibility. That's a real blessing they ought to be thankful for, and ought to take advantage of, and if they are sure they have no need of pensions, insurance, whatever, I have no objection.

But surely, we can't expect all Christians to live in places like that, do we? Shouldn't there be churches in downtown Chicago, too...or in the north of Canada where you can't grow much, and can't have wells, need to heat from September through May--and where the basics of living are expensive?

If you expect there to be churches there, then you are either going to have to expect people to pay into pensions or buy into life insurance, or expect for a substantial amount of the churches funds to go out just to take care of church members in need.

 

Please do not hear me as condemning you for benefitting from what your husband paid into. This is more a condemnation of the spiritual condition of the Church that they will not do what God has called them to do by taking care of people like you. Don't you think it would be great if God brought a spiritual revival to our Church and they were to do what the Bible tells them to do? Don't you think it would be great if your husband hadn't been forced to pay into SS? Don't you think it would be great if this upcoming generation were not forced into paying SS, but instead, in obedience to God, took care of the elderly, widowed, and ill through the Church?

Joseph Botwinick

 

That, Joesph, takes care of the Christians, but leaves the rest of society out in the cold.

Sorry, I don't buy that, and I don't think scripture intended that.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Jim,

Spiritual revival in the Church and doing what the Bible says leaves the world out in the cold? What in the world are you talking about? I don't think scripture teaches that either.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I wish the church did more, but can we expect them to do everything--pay member's catastrophic medical expenses, support all their widows, give to the needy in the community?

Is my elderly dad's little country church--with only maybe 30 members altogether--going to pay his medical expenses when he had to be in intensive care for 2 weeks?

Who would have supported my husband's family when his dad died and left a non-churchgoing wife with 8 dependent children? Is some church going to take them on?

I've lived in Canada all my adult life. I'm happy to pay my taxes and happy to get my benefits. I'm not so sure the instructions in the pastoral epistles are a blanket statement that the government should never get involved in these things. I think what they are really saying is where there is no provision for someone--whether through remarriage, or children's support, or whatever--then the church is responsible to provide.

I know this is a different opinion than that of most Americans. It's a different opinion than that of most of my relatives (who are American)--until they visit me.

Anyway, these sorts of discussions are not really my favorite thing--I just have to agree to disagree with most of my American friends and relatives.

 

Well, I'm glad that my children didn't live at home for us to support them until they saved enough money to buy a house. I can see it now....My children, Ed's children, grandchildren all living with us forever!!!! I love all of them, but I think they should have their own homes.

As to Social Security and retirement, I think that retirement is certainly worth working for. I am enjoying my retirement. I am thankful and grateful for the income that God has provided me. I like all those Senior Citizen benefits I get, too. You know the discounts that stores give. My son loves to kid me about that I don't need those discounts, he does, HE says!

 

I agree with you, Russell55 and I am an American!!!!

I don't mind paying taxes!! I am glad that we have money to be taxed!! Oops, did I say that?

You will hear me groaning when we get our taxes back from the accountant.

 

I wish the church did more, but can we expect them to do everything--pay member's catastrophic medical expenses, support all their widows, give to the needy in the community?

Is my elderly dad's little country church--with only maybe 30 members altogether--going to pay his medical expenses when he had to be in intensive care for 2 weeks?

Who would have supported my husband's family when his dad died and left a non-churchgoing wife with 8 dependent children? Is some church going to take them on?

I've lived in Canada all my adult life. I'm happy to pay my taxes and happy to get my benefits. I'm not so sure the instructions in the pastoral epistles are a blanket statement that the government should never get involved in these things. I think what they are really saying is where there is no provision for someone--whether through remarriage, or children's support, or whatever--then the church is responsible to provide.

I know this is a different opinion than that of most Americans. It's a different opinion than that of most of my relatives (who are American)--until they visit me.

Anyway, these sorts of discussions are not really my favorite thing--I just have to agree to disagree with most of my American friends and relatives. </font>[/QUOTE]I certainly understand your feelings. However, I would like to respond to your question about small Churches with a quote from my earlier post:

Yes, there are small rural Churches, who by themselves, would not be able to do very much, even though they can provide help that is sometimes more valuable than money (i.e. labor, food, etc...). On the flip side of that coins, there are many multi-million dollar Church buildings here in the Little Rock area wasting space when they could have pulled together their resources and done more ministry. How many multi-million dollar Church buildings do you think there are here in America? Probably a lot. Perhaps we could do with a little more humble Church building until we meet our Biblical requirements first.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Yes, I agree. My dad's little church is a great church, and they really watch out for him. Now that he can't drive, they even come 12 miles to pick him up for church and drive him home afterwards. But they are all poor farmers or loggers. There is just not much money.

Where I come from (northern MN) almost all churches are small, and only the Lutheran ones have fancy buildings... Where I live now, in northern Canada, they are pretty small, too--and I don't know of any with fancy buildings. Big churches with big programs are just not something I have ever really been exposed to.

Anyway, I must say I appreciate the tone of this thread. These are touchy subjects. I grew up a pastor's daughter in little independent fundamental churches--so I have pretty thick skin, but not every one does.

 

She didn't say they do this. She said they would.
It wouldn't be an example for someone who is doing it already, so it must mean you don't.
But you feel you need to preach it to the rest of us.
Is that like talking it but not walking it.

 

You ought to see the 10-15 million dollar palace Immanuel Baptist Church just built for itself here in Little Rock. WOW! What a site. But, somehow, I don't think God is too impressed.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Walls: "Do you recommend young men
under the age of 23 getting married
and going into debt?"

Mortgaging a house & property
is not "going into debt".

I have a rental property. I have to
charge more than what it costs me
to make the mortgage payment (i.e.
the profit). It costs more to live
in a rental property than to mortgage
the same property. You get some
of the mortgage payments back
(the equity). When you rent you get
no money back. Yes, i recommend under
23s getting a mortgaged property.

It is better to marry than to burn.

Walls: "My Grandpa always said if you can't
pay cash for it, you don't need it.
How many Americans use that same
philosphy today? "

Amen, Brother Grandpa -- no "going into
debt"