We disagree. What else new?
Mine is already pretty high. Will you chip in for mine?
When a majority of the US population believes we should have universal health care, and feels strongly enough about it to let it guide their vote, we will have it. Its about maintaining power. Nothing moral about it.
I think a related questions (just two for brevity) are do we ever see things like …
- Does God in Scripture telling Israel to set up a body of regulators to go around with measuring sticks to make sure no one harvests too deeply into the corners of their fields or else make sure no one goes back over the gleanings?
No, He did not.
To do so would mean establishing a governing body of men to require of others how they follow the commandments rather than leaving their obedience to things like their own gratitude towards God or their own generosity.
- Do we see Christ commanding disciples to love each other or do we see Him establishing a third party to take care of that?
To cut to the chase when the early Christians were extravagantly generous with their means because of the needs of their fellows that does not reflect any form of compulsion as if they actually considered an abolishment of property. Rather, it was without compulsion of any form. An attitude, not a policy.
You may note that with Ananias the sin was NOT holding back part of the price but in the lying about it. Peter twice told him that his property was under his control (before it was sold and the money after the sale). So either Peter was lying about it being under his control or was Peter telling the truth and there was no compulsion in giving?
(there IS compulsion in giving with progressivism, I might add for comparison)
Ananias sought to get the approval of men. Had he simply said “here’s some money” or “here’s part of the price of the land” he and the missus would have been fine. After all his property was under his power to dispose of as he saw fit, per Peter.
Ananais’ sin may parallel the offering of Cain for that reason. We aren’t told that God ever asked Cain and Abel for a sacrifice. Was Cain seeking a pat on the back from his folks where Abel’s reaction was “what a neat idea!”?
1 Like
This is not just a matter of disagreeing.
The very idea of a social contract as used by the Left is one in which voluntary participation is off the table. A contract where one Party is forced to submit may be called a contract but it is really only a form of vassalage, an arrangement suitable to subjects rather than citizens.
A forced contract is a form of servitude.
The Constitution sets forth certain Powers of the federal for which this was deemed proper and necessary. Universal health care – which is a matter of individual welfare – is not among them.
Though, as I’ve often pointed out, because of the deliberate hewing out of legislative Power for Congress with respect to what became D.C. the federal COULD lawfully operate a “National Hospital” within D.C. proper (contrived along lines similar to old County Hospitals) where citizens could go to receive means tested health care. That we could bulldoze a bunch of worse than worthless law and lobby firms to make way for what would surely be a massive eyesore to blight the skyline would be a side benefit. This wouldn’t work in a Terrotory because in those Congress’ extra Powers only relate to writing Rules and Regulations, neither of which is Appropriations.
No you don’t.
Wow…that was impressive.
But…
I am not a believer.
I like a lot of what Jesus “preached”.
But then again, I am not convinced, that “Jesus” as depicted in the bible, actually existed.
If you can produce any non biblical document, mentioning Jesus, during his lifetime…that might sway me.
Only in a world of nothing but rainbows and unicorns.
Sorry we’re still civilized and still a society.
It fails when some are subjugated to others. Something he pointed out and obviously you missed.
We are neither, no matter how you " feel ". The US is made up of a multitude of societies, each with their own views, opinions and beliefs. And do you even bother to keep up with the crime stats, despite the laws? Civilized my ass.
Besides the gleaming and edges of the field there were other laws about helping the poor. If you read Isaiah part of what was going to bring their judgment against them was their treatment of the poor and weak.
We were created to as social creatures to thrive in societies. The family, the church the planet Earth. Society fails when individuals put themselves before others in their social settings be it the family church neighborhood.
No it doesn’t. Are children not subjugated to their parents?
When at work is a person not subjugated to their employer?
Jesus was neither demanding we provide free medical care for all nor providing it himself.
The only such expressed biblical obligations were to provide for your own families and to provide for those who could not provide for themselves. “Poor” and “Destitute” are not synonyms. The Destitute are without hope or ability to provide for themselves.
Indeed he did.
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
And Jesus said, “He that believeth in me and is baptized shall be saved”.
1 Like
Deuteronomy 15:7 If one of your brothers becomes poor among you in one of your cities of the land that Jehovah your God is giving you, do not harden your heart or be tightfisted toward your poor brother. 8 For you should generously open your hand to him and by all means lend whatever he needs or is lacking. 9 Be careful not to harbor this evil idea in your heart, ‘The seventh year, the year of the release, has approached,’ and hold back your generosity toward your poor brother and give him nothing. If he calls out to Jehovah against you, it will be a sin on your part. 10 You should generously give to him, and you should not give to him
and you should not give to him grudgingly, for this is why Jehovah your God will bless your every deed and undertaking. 11 For there will always be poor people in the land. That is why I am commanding you, ‘You should generously open up your hand to your afflicted and poor brother in your land
1 john 3 : But whoever has the material possessions of this world and sees his brother in need and yet refuses to show him compassion, in what way does the love of God remain in him?
God has always expected those who worship him to help others in need.
And again “the poor” in this context are the destitute, those with no way to provide for themselves.
The “brother” was also a fellow Jew in this context.
The poor was someone in need. If you read you would have seen it mentioned the seventh year. God also had a system to prevent great wealth gaps.
So you would help the person and they were to pay you back you would forgive them anything that they owed you or put up as surety.
There was neither Jew nor Greek in the Christian congregation.
And again, at the time “the poor” as we call them today were actually the destitute, those with no ability to provide for themselves or their own.
There were no Christians in the OT Era.
