G
graceandtruth
Guest
T-Bone said:
What is with the victim stuff. Crazy off base comments......... (twilight zone theme music)
It is real simple. In Scripture grace is best demonstrated by Jesus giving His life for those of us who did not deserve this gift. If we are lead by the Spirit of Christ then we should find ourselves laying down our lives for the undeserving as God reveals His grace to people through us. This does not comply with capitalists ideals or with american individualism but fits perfectly with the biblical ideas of family, community, generosity, spending and being spent, etc.
We are all responsible for our sinfulness yet Jesus is gracious towards us with His life. Isn't there something wrong with us saying we are following Jesus but refusing to be gracious with material goods because someone is responsible for the hardship they are experiencing?
We must learn to read Scripture not as either/or but as and/both. God says people should work but he also says those who work should give to those who do not have and he doesn't qualify it with a reason why they don't have. If we are to be like our God then we should not seek "balance" but faithfulness to the divine nature. God is not balanced but an extravagant lover of people. God is not balance but extravagantly gracious towards people deserving damnation. God is not balanced but extravagantly compassionate towards those who have made their own lives difficult.
We would do better to partake of the divine nature than to seek means to excuse our selfishness and fear of giving more than we get.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
graceandtruth said:
Here's how to do it.
Government should tax enough to perform its basic services, mainly protecting the country. Stop confiscating money from taxpayers to give to the needy (read: buy votes). Instead of taking that money, let me keep it and I'll give to the needy as I see fit. And you give to the needy as you see fit. Problem solved.
graceandtruth said:
Your argument is not with me, but with the Paul who you initially quoted. Certainly he taught and lived by the grace of God. Never an excuse for laziness, nor an excuse to be bad stewards of what God has given. And not an excuse for those in power to take from one group to give to another group...which is what my original quote is about. That you have no idea about my giving habits, nor the amount I give to those in need puts you in the category of judging another without knowledge and refusing the grace to another, which you say is so important. Never have I said we are not to give...I give as I am led by the Spirit, and I believe the Word of God is balanced in truth and application. Doubt very much that you have sold all you have and given all to the poor...I mean if we are talking about the full measure of grace, you certainly would do that.
G
graceandtruth
Guest
I would like for the government to take their hand out of my pocket as well. We are in agreement on that one.
I also agree that none of us are as gracious or generous as we could be including me.
I am simply saying that because a person is not working does not free us from the obligation to be gracious to them. I think if we read the text we will find that Paul's statement is addressed to believers that are not willing to work not non-believers. I would think our first obligation to the non-believers would be to show them grace in a graceless world.
I also agree that none of us are as gracious or generous as we could be including me.
I am simply saying that because a person is not working does not free us from the obligation to be gracious to them. I think if we read the text we will find that Paul's statement is addressed to believers that are not willing to work not non-believers. I would think our first obligation to the non-believers would be to show them grace in a graceless world.
Roses are red,
Violets are of no use,
Can you all stop being so obtuse!!
Sorry,
Violets are of no use,
Can you all stop being so obtuse!!
Sorry,
graceandtruth said:
And I have no problem with anything you said in your last paragraph...nor did I say anything to the contrary. Personally I love grace and am extremely glad for it from God first and then from others. I am also grateful for those who spoke truth into my life so I would never intentionally take advantage of another's gifts of grace. Agreed, that to the lost we need to show grace...but that has nothing to do with my original statement about someone taking what you have worked for and giving it to someone who will not work. With that I think we have thoroughly exhausted this, whether or not we have come to full agreement!
Hope you have a blessed grace filled day!
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Recovering IFB said:
Violets are of use. I used to eat the leaves in a salad. Very good.
I am of the opinion that when the government started funding "social programs" many "historical givers" in the church shifted their thinking to something like this: "I pay taxes for needy people to get benefits. So let them get their benefits from the government." And needy people also shifted their thinking to something like this: "I don't need to have a church family. The government will provide for me."
I haven't done any sort of a study, but I simply have a gut feeling that that single point in time changed the dynamic of "charity" in our nation. And more's the pity. We've forgotten the importance of extending grace.
My church is located on a major thoroughfare. We get lots of travelers asking for money for fuel. And we also get lots of people calling us on their cell phones looking for rental or utility bill assistance. It became overwhelming. We chose to partner with a local charitable group who specializes in helping the needy. But it's not a perfect system, by far. Sometimes, it seems to me that we are only "passing the buck" and not showing the love of Christ...but I'm not sure how we can resolve this.
We do much better with the needy associated with our church. And I suspect this is true of many congregations. Relationship does make a difference.
My point of this post?...Well, I guess it is that even though our government has provided a sort of "safety net" to many people, it is still important to have a relationship with a local church. As the congregation gets to know and love someone, they are much more likely to stand in the gap for them. I'm not saying this is necessarily correct thinking, but I do think it is common thinking.
As for myself, when I have been at the church alone, with no one in an authoritative position to make an "executive" decision, I've often turned away "travelers" with the true statement, "we're not allowed to give out cash"...and I have given them the name, address and phone number of our charitable partner...even as it caused me to question myself as to the state of the "agape love" I was showing. But on the other hand, I have paid out significant amounts of money (for me) from my own pocket to people who I knew where struggling. How did I know they were struggling? ...Because they had a relationship with my church...
I hope this post doesn't seem like I am presenting myself as more generous or charitable as anyone else, because I don't mean it in that way at all. What I do personally is most likely far less than what I should/could be doing.
I haven't done any sort of a study, but I simply have a gut feeling that that single point in time changed the dynamic of "charity" in our nation. And more's the pity. We've forgotten the importance of extending grace.
My church is located on a major thoroughfare. We get lots of travelers asking for money for fuel. And we also get lots of people calling us on their cell phones looking for rental or utility bill assistance. It became overwhelming. We chose to partner with a local charitable group who specializes in helping the needy. But it's not a perfect system, by far. Sometimes, it seems to me that we are only "passing the buck" and not showing the love of Christ...but I'm not sure how we can resolve this.
We do much better with the needy associated with our church. And I suspect this is true of many congregations. Relationship does make a difference.
My point of this post?...Well, I guess it is that even though our government has provided a sort of "safety net" to many people, it is still important to have a relationship with a local church. As the congregation gets to know and love someone, they are much more likely to stand in the gap for them. I'm not saying this is necessarily correct thinking, but I do think it is common thinking.
As for myself, when I have been at the church alone, with no one in an authoritative position to make an "executive" decision, I've often turned away "travelers" with the true statement, "we're not allowed to give out cash"...and I have given them the name, address and phone number of our charitable partner...even as it caused me to question myself as to the state of the "agape love" I was showing. But on the other hand, I have paid out significant amounts of money (for me) from my own pocket to people who I knew where struggling. How did I know they were struggling? ...Because they had a relationship with my church...
I hope this post doesn't seem like I am presenting myself as more generous or charitable as anyone else, because I don't mean it in that way at all. What I do personally is most likely far less than what I should/could be doing.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
lnf said:
I think it probably had very little if anything to do with a change of mind about giving. I'm pretty sure people still give generously (at least conservatives do, and I'm not saying that as a dig -- statistics support that claim).
The shift probably had more to do with voters discovering they can vote themselves money out of the public treasury, and politicians realizing they can get elected by appealing to those voters. Once they let that cat out of the bag, it was all over.
It probably started with The New Deal, welfare and social security, and then exploded with Medicare. Few people remember that the USA managed quite well before there were government programs like welfare, food stamps, medicare, etc. The government-led war on poverty has accomplished virtually nothing.
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
aleshanee said:the good old days prior to the great depression and all this government intervention.... .... where lower income parents worked 12 to 16 hour days while their unschooled children ran around like rogues in the street.. or worked in factories as grease monkeys at risk to life and limb.... the fact is... some churches did great work in those days in their efforts to help and make a difference.... but most failed miserably ....... that is why the government stepped in.... .. for some the american dream was starting with nothing and working their way to something... for others it was getting rich off the cheap labor of those trying to start with nothing and work....... i think the biggest thorn in the side of many rich people today is that the government has made that second part of the american dream harder to do.... that;s why so many american companies have gone to foreign countries looking for cheap labor... so they can once again force people to work 12 to 16 hour days, for low pay, then hire their children to do menial jobs around dangerous machinery at risk to life and limb again....... ..
unless the heart of man changes..... nothing else about him will........
that was a quote from my dad by the way.... don;t know if someone else said it first.... but he;s the person i ever heard it from....
You (or your father) make some excellent points. I didn't mean to paint pre-welfare days as golden days (although there were some golden days during the roaring 20s, I hear).
But, as with all well-meaning liberal programs I know of. they bumped up against the law of unintended consequences that made things worse. Thanks to the federal government tax incentives (social programming), Medicare, etc., the cost of medical care is far higher than it should be. For example, when you can rely on your employer-given medical insurance to pay 90% or more for all your drugs, the cost of drugs skyrocket. The drug is $300? Why should you care, when the insurance company pays for most of it, anyway, and all you have to pay is $20?
I know of several people who started companies based on making it easy and profitable for doctors to do nothing but petition Medicare for reimbursements for everything. Got a pimple? No problem, we'll find a way to categorize it so that we can bill Medicare.
If government had left medical care alone, and instead focused on things like tort reform (like makek the plaintiff pay if the suit is ruled to be frivolous), we'd still have doctors making house calls and cheap meds.
The problem is that it's too late to fix most of these things. And Obamacare only makes it a gazillion times worse. Well, maybe not a gazillion. Maybe a trillion times worse. Or several trillion times worse. Somewhere in there.
Same thing with welfare -- good intentions that turned into an incentive not to look for a job. In fact, I just read that people who get ALL the government benefits allowed make the equivalent of something like $30 per hour MORE than the AVERAGE worker. Equivalent -- not cash, but equivalent stuff, like food, housing, etc. Why would anyone (without a conscience) want to work when they're already doing better than if they got an average job?
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
aleshanee said:but since he pays most of my bills... and my sister pays the rest of them... i don;t really argue with either of them all that much....[/font]
Smart lady!My daughter never learned that, though. I recently cut her off from all help, because no matter how much I sacrificed for her she always whined. She is learning a very good lesson, but not the one I wanted. I wanted her to appreciate me. Instead, she's amazingly self-sufficient, self-motivated, and a hard worker. So she makes her own money and never talks to me anymore. Oh, and she does occasionally get money from her mother, who abandoned her at 8 years old, took off for Europe, and never contacted her until recently. Well, I figure, it's about time her mother contributed a bit, so I don't argue. (I only know this because for some reason I get email copies of all my daughter's bank activity.)
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
"Everybody has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth...."
Mike Tyson
Mike Tyson
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
-- Groucho Marx
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
-- Groucho Marx
-- Groucho Marx
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
-- Groucho Marx
C
Castor Muscular
Guest
subllibrm said:
No thanks, especially if you're moving them.
