~candice~ Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 Perhaps though, it would be meritious to look at the tithing system of the Israelites while under the theocratic reign. Those tithes were not voluntary, and they did take a portion of it to look after "social needs" for want of a better word. Israel did not operate under a socialistic government. In ancient Israel, you enjoyed the fruit of your own labor on your own personally and privatelly owned property. The tithing system was not socialism, although it did provide for the widows, and the poor who had no one to care for them. Otherwise, you took care of your own. Yes, and . I never claimed they had a socialistic government. You basically said what I said. There was a portion of mandatory tithes that went to helping genuine social needs (which you have called the widows and poor who had no one to care for them). We agree, do we not . That depends. Are you citing that aspect of ancient Israeli culture as a defense of socialism?? No, I am not citing culture as a defense of socialism, in the true definition of the word. However, it is true that mandatory giving, to care for those in genuine need (the bible defines this for us), is found within the pages of the bible. It was not an option to harvest your crops in a circle. It was not an option to tithe, a portion of which went to those in genuine need. This notion of only giving by choice is wrong. However, it is hard to match that mandatory tithe, and harvesting practices (for example) with anything we have now. We are not structured the same way now as they were then. There was no wealth redistribution in ancient Israeli culture, but there was mandatory giving for those in genuine need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted May 25, 2010 i give up! Hey - I'm not attacking. I'm asking to draw out discussion. Really, if you asked me if I believe the church was doing it's job to help the poor and needy, I would agree it is lacking. And as I said, I'm not a fan of mega churches. But to get at the heart of the matter takes more than blanket statements and needs some nitty-gritty details. If the church were "doing it's job" how much of a dent truly would be made against poverty? That really is debatable. I was on a mission trip to Appalachia in Tennessee, and I've been to the Navajo nation for a college course (which included researching Native Americans in general). My brother works with Inner City youth. I've seen churches working in such places. But there is only so much they can do. And Mega churches are no where near these places! All this is to say I'm not convinced the church "doing its job" would eliminate the need for government intervention. I actually believe the best solution is for families to come back together and support each other - and I mean extended family, not the "nuclear family." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~candice~ Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 All this is to say I'm not convinced the church "doing its job" would eliminate the need for government intervention. I actually believe the best solution is for families to come back together and support each other - and I mean extended family, not the "nuclear family." AMEN!!! And that kind of regeneration is only going to be possible by the power of the Holy Spirit. My question is, what solution are we going to use until this happens . I have NO problem with government socialised support services for those who the bible declare to be in genuine need until this is achieved. I long for the day in which we return to the Lord's model, where those in need are not at the mercy of the government. Even more, I long for the day in which there is no lonely widow, no sick child, no homeless family. Perhaps this will happen before the regeneration, infact I'm quite convinced of it. Come Lord Jesus, come! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 No, I am not citing culture as a defense of socialism, in the true definition of the word. We are dealing with socialism as a political/governmental concept. Socialism has done nothing beneficial for the world. However, it is true that mandatory giving, to care for those in genuine need (the bible defines this for us), is found within the pages of the bible. Only to the nation of Israel and only when Israel was under a theocracy. Even then, it was not confiscated by the priests, but was given by the people. It was not socialism in the sense of redistribution of wealth and trying to bring everyone on an equal in terms of income level or quality of life. It was not an option to harvest your crops in a circle. It was not an option to tithe, a portion of which went to those in genuine need. This notion of only giving by choice is wrong. Actually, the NT offers no mandatory commandment to give any certain amount. The NT standard is to give according to how one felt according to thier conscience. There was no wealth redistribution in ancient Israeli culture, but there was mandatory giving for those in genuine need. You cannot use that a standard to apply to New Testament believers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~candice~ Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 Shiloh, please reread, I never defended socialism in the sense of wealth distribution. I AM making a case that Israel under theocratic reign, had obligatory giving that went to the poor. And I AM making a case that this does set a standard for us today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted May 25, 2010 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Shiloh, please reread, I never defended socialism in the sense of wealth distribution. I AM making a case that Israel under theocratic reign, had obligatory giving that went to the poor. And I AM making a case that this does set a standard for us today. Our giving is not based on a mandatory statute, but on the moving of the Holy Spirit on our hearts to give as we feel led. Most Churches do an incredible amount of good all over the world. However you cannot apply what was given to Israel under a theocracy to NT Christianity. If you do, then you have to be consistent across the board and begin stoning adulterers and disobedient children. You cannot selectively apply such standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~candice~ Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 5 Topic Count: 955 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 11,318 Content Per Day: 1.89 Reputation: 448 Days Won: 33 Joined: 12/16/2007 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 But I am not applying what Israel did to us now. I am saying that it set a standard, something from which we can learn. Just as all the other Mosaic laws that do not apply to us, we still learn from and can form standard from. I don't suggest that all farmers start harvesting in a circle. I do suggest that we read the OT, specifically their tithes and the way they allowed for the poor, and let it speak to us about the way we give. Not just randomly as we "feel" it, but in a systematic way that ensures the poor and genuinely needy are cared for. The bible doesn't teach pure socialism, but it doesn't teach pure capitalism either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgedrw81 Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 1,823 Content Per Day: 0.33 Reputation: 36 Days Won: 2 Joined: 04/10/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 Humans start with good intentions but they loose their way eventually. Brilliant ideas can only work with God in mind. Therefore when an idea is failing then humans say it is either God's will or it is in the Bible or both. For some reason in the US private initative is working well whilst in other countries socialism works. They are not interchangeable. Blessings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e lansing Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 895 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 9 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/23/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted May 25, 2010 The churches priority is to make disciples of Christ. The poor, sick, hurting, will alway be here, they where here when Jesus walked the earth and are still here. Come to think of it, Jesus did His job well and there was still sickness, death, poor, hurting, all kinds of evil, before and after Christ walked the earth. The real issue is sin! The solution, the Gospel! Lets try to redistribute the Gospel of Jesus and really put a dent in sin, which is the real reason behind poverty, sickness, and everything that is wrong in the World! Btw, I agree, there is no socialism in the Bible!!! e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted May 25, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted May 25, 2010 Biblically, giving to the poor and needy is not about "wealth redistribution." This is one of those cases where terminologies and how one words the principles makes a huge difference in the final outcome. In the OT giving tithes and providing means for the poor to glean one's fields was about obedience and honoring the Lord. The Lord never commanded a "redistribution of wealth." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts