9 thoughts on “Christianity And Redistribution”

  1. Exactly. Charity was supposed to be administered by the local church, for accountability; both of the church and of the recipients. The enforced “charity” through taxation was never God’s intention.

    When the church began lobbying government to take over that function, it surrendered both its obligation, and its rights.

    What many christians don’t realize is that, even if our intentions are good, God holds us accountable for the actual results of our actions. He expects us to acknowledge and clean up our messes.

  2. If you really want to see these Christian Socialists spit pea soup outta their spinning heads, quote them this from the New Testament.

    For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

    2 Thessalonians 3:10

    It’s enough to make a Southern Baptist drink.

  3. Der Schtumpy
    Nah. They’ll just whine and say “but they can’t work, they can’t find work…blah,blah,blah.”

    The socialists always have an answer. It always turns out to be the wrong one, but they never understand that.

    That’s why I don’t waste my time talking to them.

  4. If 10% of your earnings is good enough for God, it should be more than good enough for the government.

  5. Not only is charity not to be coerced, it is supposed to be so secret that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing…which means I get a tax deduction for listing charitable contributions, but nothing from God, for I have received my reward. 🙁

    So…if charity is supposed to be secret, how can you have a third party (the govt.) administer it for you and still be obedient to God?

  6. “Render unto Caesar that which is Casear’s; render unto God that which is God’s.”

    How about a separation of tax and tithe? 🙂

  7. Big D, I think you’re onto something. What is the welfare state but an attempt to codify Christian charity and make it compulsory? In fact, the effort to argue that Christianity demands redistribution through the use of law and government, should be enough — in a day and age where a memorial cross displayed on private land surrounded by public land is deemed unconstitutional — to overturn federal entitlement programs as a violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment clause.

  8. “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

    If only our welfare programs followed that principle we’d have far less demand for the public dime.

Comments are closed.