[God was so
concerned that people not give money to the government system, that He even
forbid the Temple tithe from being money. If a person could not get their grain
and animals to the temple, they were to be sold for money, and spent by the
individual.]
Where does it
say that God forbid the Temple tithe from being money?
[Because if you
read the Old Testament carefully, you will find that it distinguishes the two.]
Are you trying
to suggest that the secular is to be separated from the sacred? If you are,
that distinction is a false distinction. It seems like you are trying to read
into the Bible what you want, with a spirit of humanism, causing you to
interpret the Bible using a carnal mind.
Critic's comment in brackets, my response interspersed.
[Religious laws
which are a person's individual responsibility and carry no punishment, and
laws which the government is responsible for enforcing. You wouldn't pass a law
that people should have to pray, would you?]
It is true that
Jesus said give to Caesar what is Caesar’s. However, this does not mean that He
is saying government law should override that of God’s. All authority
government has comes from God, whether they accept or realise this. To using forcing
people to pray is an example to demonstrate the “ridiculousness” of God’s Law
being complied with by
government is to impose humanistic thinking on the
Bible. Governments are to comply with God’s Law, or else God will see their
authority as illegitimate.
And then take away people's house, if they
didn't? Same thing with taxing for the poor.]
Again, this is
an example that detracts from the real issue.
[Giving to the
poor is a voluntary act of religious worship, like singing Psalms or praying.]
Giving to the
poor is not necessarily done by people to glorify God. Neither is singing
Psalms or praying. God was not impressed with the Israelites who gave
sacrifices at the Lord’s Temple, but then at the same time worshipped other “gods”.
[And such
worship requires capitalism ...]
Really???? Worship
of God is against capitalism.
[I feel
obligated to give. And I do.]
Giving should be
done freely. God loves a cheerful giver, not one who feels like giving out of “duty”.
You sound very legalistic.
[But how and
when you give should be left up to each individual, not mandated by government
enforced laws (i.e. "welfare")]
The statement “how
and when you give should be left up to each individual” is of the spirit of
individualism. While it is indeed true that government enforced laws should not
be basis for giving to others, as one should give cheerfully, nowhere in the
Bible does it say that giving welfare is wrong. In fact, it says give freely.
The true Christian should be glad to give to the poor, not begrudged like this
person appears to be .
[Capitalism
is biblical.]
No it is
not. It is anti-Christian.
[The only
alternative to capitalism, is government theft of property.]
There is no
such thing as an economic dichotomy. A system can be non-capitalist, and
involving no “government theft of property”. Such examples are the distributive
system and the civil market of the Medieval era.
[Jesus'
command not to serve mammon, and that individuals should give to the poor,
assumes that one has control over one's property, over one's money, and can choose to do with it what he wishes.]
How dare you
twist the Bible? Giving to others means to not be possessive of one’s
money and possessions as you reveal yourself to be. To choose to do as one
wishes is satanic which is what you are promoting. Yet you accuse me of
sponsoring “theft” and tell me to repent of “serious, serious error”?
[The
government taxing people, and giving that money to others, is theft.]
Just as
government authority is from God, “your” money is from God.
[ It is
forbidden in the Old Testament; the tithe for the poor was to be given directly
from the individual, to the poor, with no governmental or legal involvement. ]
How is taxes
forbidden? Tithes and taxes are different. Tithes was giving to God. Whether government
or law is involved has nothing to do with the current discussion with is about private
property.
[You are in
serious, serious error, and I urge you to repent of your sponsorship of
governmental theft. ]
You are the one is serious, serious error for justifying
capitalism, and twisting the Bible to do so. Yet you accuse me of being in
error. You are the one who needs to repent.
Comments
Post a Comment