Why? Is a Christian government supposed to act like Caesar? Is THAT what Jesus would do?
1) We don't have a Christian government.
2) If we did, it wouldn't have a whole lot to go on, since the New Testament doesn't have a criminal code. It does tells people how to voluntarily love each other, but it doesn't tell people how to run a nation. The Old Testament did that.
Yes, I know that, and what you don't seem to understand is that Jesus left the government to a dictator because the dictator had the force of tens of thousands of swords and spears.
Which is pathetic compared to the legions of angels that Jesus could summon at a moment's notice. Jesus said everything he wanted and came down to say. Politics just weren't on the agenda.
Again, if Jesus were to vote for a politician, would he vote for Sarah Palin or George Bush?
Maybe. I don't speculate on that, since I don't believe in re-making God in my own image. Many people do, though - those who insist that Jesus would have been a Communist or a Socialist, or a Fascist, or an Imperialist, or a Democrat, or a Republican, or a Libertarian, or an Anarchist. I refuse to play that game.
Just wondering, of course, because it seems rather hypocritical for Christians, who state that they have Faith in Jesus Christ to send politicians to Washington to make aChristian decisions.
No matter what political stripe somebody is, that's going to happen.
This is fine. You can believe what you want to believe. I think history has proven you wrong.
Then you're probably not reading history. People helping other people close to home is much more helpful than maybe getting a government check or not. Especially when that check is dependent on not improving yourself.
Who is the last Christian person you met that sold off his possessions to break bread with the poor? Hmmmmm?
A Christian individually choosing to do that is far more likely than a government choosing to do the same. Governments don't sell all their possessions and give to the poor. They manipulate the currency to try and pay for it all. Which ultimately robs the poor because their dollars are devalued the most from this manipulation.
That is fine. You can believe what you want to believe, but I know one thing: Jesus Christ was not communal in his helping of the poor. He helped complete strangers with copious amounts of food. It is your Southern State inspired politics that allows you to pass over this painfully obvious action by your so-called Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
This is a self-defeating point - the welfare state is large-scale communal "assistance." Furthermore, governments cannot and do not create or multiply copious amounts of food to give to strangers.
If you want to just help your community, then I would suggest that you stop voting, stop participating in politics, because that is WHAT Jesus Christ would have done. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite, because Jesus did not expect you to act like a Roman pagan in one sphere, and a follower of his wisdom in another.
OK, so you're telling me to stop participating in politics because according to you, that's what Jesus would have done - but at the same time, you're calling for a welfare state which is as political as anything gets. I think you're the hypocrite in this conversation.
No, because you don't rail against dependency while supporting helping the needy through welfare programs makes you a pagan Roman.
Dependency is an inherent part of the welfare state system. Those who are serious about getting rid of dependency must logically support reducing the scope of the system, while finding private solutions to the same problems. This has shown itself to be both more efficient and better for the recipients where it has been implemented. A welfare state will give you a fish a day; a good neighbor will teach you to fish.
Yes, and in the last 2000 years the Catholic Church has made a mockery of it. Giving a bit of change during Sunday Church service is not charity.
Do not assume that I think putting pocket change in the offering plate suffices as "charity" or a "tithe." I make it a point to give 10% of my income to the church. That is more percentagewise than most if not all welfare state politicians give in this country. This is money I am choosing to part with, rather than just being automatically deducted from my checks and forgotten about. This is actual giving. Money I have left over from taxes that is not going to bills is discretionary. That means if God so moves me, it can go to helping a neighbor in need.
Complaining about taxes that help the poor is even worse.
The percentage of taxes that actually do go to helping the poor is much smaller than you would think. And besides, since private charity is more efficient and treats the poor better, I'd rather have that amount of money go to them instead.
Giving away your excess is not Christian. It might be charity in the watered-down Catholic modern way. Sell your possession, dude, sell them. Go to Africa and help the poor.
Of course it's Christian. I already gave you Biblical references as to why it's Christian.
When are you going to sell your computer?
You're the one calling for selling all your possessions; when are you?
There is no doubt that they do a good job, but as the 1940 years before the welfare state has proved, "Christian" "charity" is not enough.
And we have also seen in the years since, that the more the government has a presence in helping poverty, Christians got all the more lazy and stepped back their giving and their service. It literally disincentivizes the very action that Jesus called us to.
WRONG. Most poverty was wiped out in Western countries with welfare states. Sure, poverty continued in the 3rd world.
Welfare states did not wipe out poverty, not even close.
SSI checks counting as taxable income.
Medicaid benefits changing after you've had your surgery done and made retroactive so you're stuck with the bill.
Social workers telling single moms not to work or marry, or else they'll lose their checks.
Government schools telling kids they have a "safety net" to rely on, but when it's time to collect, the government will find every excuse not to pay your benefits.
Horrible. If everyone sells off their possessions, then everyone would have something.
It would still be the end of the welfare state; your stance is self-defeating. Furthermore, there is no guarantee in that statement which states that everyone would have everything they need to make a living.
Also, when did the Bible start supporting usury and loans? Or is that the part of the Bible that you have chosen to ignore.
The Old Testament allowed charging interest on foreigners who were on business. It forbade charging interest on personal loans to your neighbors who were just trying to put a little food on the table. Whenever I lend, I lend freely.
