Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    You will be surprised to hear this but I do believe there is a valid
    argument to the concept of social responsibility.  I believe in well
    maintained, carefully planned executable assistance available to those
    who truly desire to get on their feet and develop a vision for their
    life.  I believe we are ALL subject to the poverty monster, and what
    God uses to keep us afloat is our inert desire to better ourselves. 
    This is why socialism in it's purest form cannot work.  It stifles the
    incentive to better ones self.  
    
    You names this string very appropriately.  Robin Hood was not stealing
    from the rich.  He was actually stealing from those who levied taxation
    on the poor.  The current system we have now is nothing more than a
    harlot.  So it isn't really so much the welfare concept that bothers
    me.  It is the lack of desire to promote indepedence.  Welfare has
    become beaurocaratic oppressor to the poor and those addicted to the
    need for free money.  Welfare has become a blessing to those who
    utilize the system properly!
    
    -Jack

    Yes, but is this sort of giving a "good" thing in the eyes of God? 
    Even if the taxpayer is moaning and groaning and complaining?  Would
    Jesus promote or rebuks a welfare state?
    
    

    Taxation is not charity- regardless of what it is spent on.  
    
    God loves a cheerful giver.  He also expects us to be good stewards of
    our money.  Government forced charity (welfare) is wasteful,
    couterproductive, and untenable from a Biblical perspective.  It is, in
    effect, delegating our God-given responsibility to a (or in reality,
    many) government beauracracy(ies).  
    
    From a social standpoint, this may be acceptable to many, but from a
    Biblical perspective, I do not think that such government programs are
    "charity" in any sense of the word.  Charity is more than simply
    allocating money, it is a personal and thoughtful act of obeying God.
    How you give, and with what kind of spirit, shows what kind of steward 
    you are with the money God gives you (in other words, you should give 
    intelligently and cheerfully).
    
    
    
    If all churches (in the US) adopted three families each, welfare could
    be done away with, and I'm willing to bet that those adopted would be
    made productive citizens much sooner than they would as a welfare
    recipient.
    
    
    -steve   

    The American Heritage defines charity as... "Help or alms given to the 
    poor." and defines alms as... "Money or goods given to the poor in 
    charity". It doesn't say anything about the source.  Neither does it
    mention God.  Maybe your definition is different.
    
    
      

    I was going on what I see as Biblically-defined "charity", so my
    definition undoubtedly differs from the common dictionary definition.

    The question remains...  In the eyes of God, is the act diminished if
    it is non-voluntary?  Does society have the right to take from the
    haves and give to the have-nots?  Is economic stratification a creation
    of God or man?  If a creation of God, should we mess with it?
    
    

RE .0

You will find that provision was made for the not so well off 
in the Law Covenant. This was not optional and the Israelites
had to leave the gleaning in their fields for such ones.

Leviticus 19:9,10 NWT "And when YOU people reap the harvest of
YOUR land you must not reap the edge of your field completely,
and the gleaning of your harvest you must not pick up. Also,
you must not gather the leftovers of your vineyard, and you
must not pick up the scattered grapes of your vineyard. For
the afflicted one and the alien resident you should leave them.
I am Jehovah YOUR God."

Jehovah ensured that the Israelites saw their need for community 
responsiblity, the widow or fatherless boy wasn't left to fend
for themselves.

Similarly, though not under the Law covenant, if the superior
authorities deem fit to have a welfare system then persons should
not question their right to ask for the tax (Romans 13:7, Luke 
20:21-25). At the end of the day, it is the authorities whom will
be made accountable to God on how they use these taxes. 

Ofcourse, this should not stop someone from giving voluntary. One
of the most precious things one can give in these hectic days, is
of their time for others. The best gifts often don't cost much in
monetary terms.

Phil.

Good answer Phil. I liked it.

Leslie

    But didn't Jesus say not to be anxiuos for material things... "the
    birds of the sky"... "the lillies of the fields"...?  Didn't he say God
    will provide?  Doesn't that apply to everyone?  Why should a good
    Christian bother to give alms when Jesus already said that God will 
    provide?
    
    P.S.  I'm not anti-charity... just testing the theology here.
    
    

    
    How do you think God will provide, Dave?  The Bible makes it clear that
    God provides for His own through His people, through their acts of
    charity, which He, by His grace and power, causes to occur.
    
    jeff

    You need to look at the perspective. When Yeshua says, "God will provide,
    why do you worry?", I believe he was stressing an individual's faith and
    trust in God for themself. Nor did it mean, don't work, kick back, you
    don't have to work for a living. One can do things, and not be over
    burdened with worry and anxiety about how God will take care of one.
 
    But not being overly fearful about one's own situation does not diminish
    the call to be generous, compassionate, and hospitable to others.

    Leslie

re Note 1202.6 by CNTROL::DGAUTHIER:

>     The question remains...  In the eyes of God, is the act diminished if
>     it is non-voluntary?  Does society have the right to take from the
>     haves and give to the have-nots?  Is economic stratification a creation
>     of God or man?  If a creation of God, should we mess with it?
  
        In Leviticus 25, we have the example of the Jubilee year,
        which would seem to be "non-voluntary".

        Bob

    ...and if we were a theocracy, we should do the same thing. 

.0

>  In the bible, charity was a voluntary
>  act.  One had the liberty to give or not and, in so doing, fall in God's
>  favor or not.

Where did you get this notion, Dave?

I have to go along with Bob in .12.  I see charity as mandatory.

Shalom,
Richard

    
    > I see charity as mandatory.
    
    Yes, Richard, charity is mandatory for those who follow the spirit of
    Christ. But no one coerced into giving - merely encouraged.
    
    Eric

    >charity is mandatory for those who follow the spirit of Christ.
    
    St Francis was penniless.  He was not charitable because he had nothing
    to give.  Is there an exception here?

    
    > St Francis was penniless.  He was not charitable because he had nothing
    > to give.  Is there an exception here?

    I'm not sure this is a serious question or not, but St. Francis was not
    exempt from helping those less fortunate than he. I didn't mean to
    imply that spending money was the only means by which God recognizes
    charity.

    Eric

.15 Eric Myers

    Yes, Richard, charity is mandatory for those who follow the spirit of
    Christ. But no one coerced into giving - merely encouraged.

Kind of depends on your point of view, i.e.:

The government: Pay taxes (used for charity) or go to jail.
God: Give to the poor or fry in hell.

:^)

Steve

    
    > God: Give to the poor or fry in hell.

    While I believe it's a sin not to aid those less fortunate than we
    are, I don't think it's a damnable offense.

    Eric

Leviticus 19:18  Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the
children of thy people, but thou shalt �love� thy �neighbour� as
thyself: I [am] the LORD.

James 2:8  If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture,
Thou shalt �love� thy �neighbour� as thyself, ye do well:

Galatians 5:14  For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in
this; Thou shalt �love� thy �neighbour� as thyself.

Romans 13:10  �Love� worketh no ill to his �neighbour:� therefore love
[is] the fulfilling of the law.

Luke 10:26-28  He [Jesus] said unto him, What is written in the law? how
readest thou?  And he answering said, Thou shalt �love� the Lord thy God
with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength,
and with all thy mind; and thy �neighbour� as thyself.

 ZZ   God: Give to the poor or fry in hell.
    
    I know there was a smiley face with this!  Unfortunately though, many
    people have this misconception of Christianity.  Like a basenoter said
    over a year ago, Christmas is about receiving, not giving!
    
    -Jack

    Jack 1:1  God loves a cheerful receiver.
    
    Richard
    

    Without a doubt!!!!!!!!

Christian Charity is Love, not giving away money.

One form of love might be giving away money.

However, in some cases, giving away money could be the least charitable
thing you could do!  Handing money to an alcoholic standing outside a
liquor store is _not_ Christian Charity.

/john

Jack 20:35-36  I have showed you all things, how that so labouring ye
ought to look out for yourself, and to remember the words of the
Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more �blessed� to �receive� than to
�give.�  And when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down, and prayed
with them all.

    
    Richard,

    I think Jack is referring to receiving the grace and love of God, not
    receiving material wealth. 

    Eric

		Where children pure and happy
		  Pray to the bless�d Child,
		Where misery cries out to thee,
		  Son of the mother mild;
		Where charity stands watching
		  And faith holds wide the door,
		The dark night wakes, the glory breaks,
		  And Christmas comes once more.

    Ho ho!!!  Eric is right though.  Christmas is about the world receiving
    the savior!!!! 
    
    -Jack

    My apologies.  I guess I was in the wrong topic!
    
    Richard
    

    re: .24
    
    Good point.

    Re .24
    
    > Handing money to an alcoholic standing outside a
    > liquor store is _not_ Christian Charity.
    
    Says who?  I don't recall Jesus instructing his followers to "judge" 
    whether someone's plea for alms is worthy or not.  I do remember 
    something about giving unconditionally and freely.
    
    Are "we" supposed to judge and decide who's worthy of charity and/or
    what's worthy to give as charity?  "Judge and you shall be judged"
    
    -dave
    

Don't misuse "Judge and you shall be judged."

It does not excuse you the responsibility of thinking and not doing
harm to someone.

Buy the drunk dinner, don't give him money.  (He probably won't let you.)

/john

    > Don't misuse "Judge and you shall be judged."
    
    I really don;t think that I did.  I think the passage is about judging
    people, and that would include people asking for money.  The judgement
    part comes in when you asses the person, their situation, their
    probable use of alms, etc... .
    
    > It does not excuse you the responsibility of thinking 
    
    Agreed.  But then again, I'm not an unconditional follower of "Judge
    and you shall be judged." (as a good Christian should be???)
    
    >...and not doing harm to someone.
    
    
    Blaming alchohol abuse on indiscriminate charity It's like blaming
    violence on handguns.  If harm is done, they do it to themselves.  What
    they do with the money is an issue between them and God.  (at least
    that's how I interpret the non-judgemental teaching of the New
    Testament).
    
    -dave
    
    

    
    > Are "we" supposed to judge and decide who's worthy of charity and/or
    > what's worthy to give as charity?  "Judge and you shall be judged"

    No, but we should judge what means we choose to deliver our charity. A
    hungry person *needs* food, not a ten dollar bill. Now maybe that ten
    dollar bill will translate into food, but it is the food that is
    helping this person, not the cash.

    If you found an infant in a dumpster, would you pin a check to its
    diaper and move on? If you found a person stranded in the blizzard,
    locked out of their car, would you give them some a twenty and drive
    on?  Giving money can be charitable, but not all charity is in the form
    of cash. Nor is all giving of cash, charity. 

    Eric

    re: -1
    
    Well said.

    Re .34

    I agree with a lot of what you said Eric.  If someone is hungry, and
    you happen to have food on you, I see a good fit there.  But beggars
    usually ask for money.  I suppose you could query them, determine what
    they really want, make a purchase and then give.  But when they ask for
    money, should you give them anything different?

    I try to recall other teachings of Jesus to shed more light on this.
    The one that comes to mind is the one about "if he asks for your coat,
    give him your shirt as well".  The first interpretation that comes to
    mind in the light of this subject is "give him what he asked for and
    then some".  Extrapolating to a scene where a beggar is asking for
    spare change, shouldn't you empty your pockets into his hat?  Yes? No?

    I dunno.  I try to picture what Jesus himself would do if he was
    walking down a street with a hand full of money and then bumped into
    a beggar.  Would he give him the money and then walk away?  Or give him
    the money with a word of advise on how to use it?  Or suggest that they
    go buy food or clothes or whatever together?  Or would he assess the
    situation and refuse the beggar, saying that he'd probably waste the
    money on booze?  With your understanding of Jesus, what would you say
    he would do?  Whatever that may be, should we do the same?

    If it were Jesus himself standing there in rags with his hand out, 
    would you judge the man before giving him the money?  If I recall, 
    wasn't there another passage which spoke to this?  Something like "when 
    you give to the least of your brothers, you do this to me" (or something
    like that... help me out here).

    From the *debate* I had with Jeff in 1205, I suppose I should have
    thrown a few dozen smiley faces around to keep this light.  I'm not
    trying to be a prick here, just wondering about the validity of using
    judgement when being charitable in light of Jesus teachings and
    actions.  Sometimes they're not easy things to reconcile... 
    *reasonable* actions and Jesus' teachings.  But that's what this
    conference is in part about, right?


    -dave

Hi Dave,

I find that, by and large, most of what's useful in the Bible
is stuff to help us move closer to God.  We don't try to love
our enemies because they're right or for the lofty goal of
world peace.  It it to free us from hate.

Now, we see a begger on the street - what do *we* need to do?
This isn't for the begger's sake or for society's sake, but
for ours. (This goes along with "The sabbath was made for man...")

I must admit I haven't thought about this one.  Perhaps I
*should* give up my coat - that's it's best for me.

Aside from the nebulous "reward in Heaven" what could we
gain by doing such a thing?

More questions...

Tom

    >Aside from the nebulous "reward in Heaven" what could we
    >gain by doing such a thing?
    
    Sometimes it seems that heaven is the proverbial carrot to which we're 
    supposed to be moving.  In a sense, actions aimed at that personal goal 
    are sort of selfish, even if they're very unselfish in appearance.  I 
    wonder if there's anything wrong in that?
    
    Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is within us.  (this concept BTW is 
    the essence and core of Buddhism).  Maybe all the biblical advise is 
    given to assist us in seeing what's already there.  Not a goal to strive 
    for but a given which we fail to recognize.
    
    -dave
    
    
    

>    Jesus said that the kingdom of heaven is within us.  (this concept BTW is 
>    the essence and core of Buddhism).  Maybe all the biblical advise is 
>    given to assist us in seeing what's already there.  Not a goal to strive 
>    for but a given which we fail to recognize.

    I pretty much agree...

    But what good would giving your coat to someone be?

    Tom

    >But what good would giving your coat to someone be?
    
    Maybe holding onto material possessions clouds one's recognition of the
    Kingdom of God?  Or maybe reluctance to do something like that shows
    lack of recognition of who/what the beggar really is.  Sort of like two
    men pulling a heavy cart... one falls... and the other refuses to help
    the fallen man.  If you help the fallen man, you help yourself. Otherwise 
    you've got more weight to pull.
    
    -dave