I think I might be changing my mind about something

[JamesBell]

King James, you said: "everyone has the right to housing, even if it's cheap....if your Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc. MEAN anything."

Now, not to be difficult or anything, but please tell me where the Constitution says anything about a right to housing. Or where it infers that there is a right to housing. I simply cannot see the connection in any way, shape, or form.

Now, if you want to argue from a Natural Law prospective or something, I could see your argument. But to look at the US Constitution and its Bill of Rights and make that claim simply doesn't work for me. I feel confident that the framers never even considered making such a claim.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Gold,

Joseph certainly had the authority, if he had wished to do so, to give it away for free.

Joseph Botwinick

True, and he did for his brothers. Nepotism and compassion has ruined many profitable businesses.

Anyway, my point was that Joseph charging for the grain is more of a reflection of the Egyptian government system than the Jewish theocracy God had yet to institute. That doesn't mean that it is wrong to charge for that grain or that the Jewish system wouldn't do the same thing.

 

[El_Guero]

Joseph,

I would agree except that God commanded that part of the tithe was to take care of the down and out (*) ...

(*) "the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the aliens, the fatherless and the widows"

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

El_Guero,

I am not sure where we disagree. Would you please point that out for me?

Joseph Botwinick

 

[OCC]

JamesBell...I believe it would be the part that says everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Housing would be couched under that.

Joseph, yes I was wrong. I should have said some people, not all.

Bapmom, so you are against kindness to anyone? Helping someone out that is poor and destitute against their own will? I have always wondered why so many people think ALL poor people are that way because of their choice. I'm not even going to defend this because it is a futile attempt. Prideful people will say "look what I have done...you are scum if you can't do the same".

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by King James:
JamesBell...I believe it would be the part that says everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Housing would be couched under that.

I think I am going to start a new thread in the POlitics forum about what the Constitution says, as this thread is really about what the Word of God says, being in the Theology forum, not the Politics Forum.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Helen]

There is enough poverty and need for all agencies to be involved. And all people with something to give, be it money, time, energy, whatever.

That being said, when the church does it, it is usually done more wisely for a couple of reasons

1. They are 'up close and personal' and know who needs what and what continuing help, if any, is needed.

2. The church does not have the paid bureaucracy that sucks up so much money that the government has -- thus more money goes to the people who need it.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Helen:
2. The church does not have the paid bureaucracy that sucks up so much money that the government has -- thus more money goes to the people who need it.

Is this always true? I have seen some corrupt Churches and leaders within the church as well.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[El_Guero]

Joseph

Said what I meant, and meant what I said. I would agree except that your premise stated that you no longer believe it is the role of the church to take care of the less fortunate.

I am not saying that you have to expand your church's services to the poor.

Rather, I find it difficult to give the responsibility to the gov't and say that we can wash our hands ...

 

[Helen]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Helen:
2. The church does not have the paid bureaucracy that sucks up so much money that the government has -- thus more money goes to the people who need it.

Is this always true? I have seen some corrupt Churches and leaders within the church as well.

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Granted, but the government ALWAYS absorbs immense amounts of money, where as crooked churches are not an "always" thing. There are lots of wonderful honest giving churches. Haven't found a government like that yet...

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by El_Guero:
Joseph

Said what I meant, and meant what I said. I would agree except that your premise stated that you no longer believe it is the role of the church to take care of the less fortunate.

I did not say this. As a matter of fact, this is what I did say:

I simply think that God chose the government to do so, along with the Church.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Plain Old Bill]

The church can't do it all that is true.But they should do what they can. Some do and some don't.There is no gleaning anymore for the most part.If you were to get caught gleaning from an orange orchard in California you could be prosecuted.If you were to glean from an apple orchard up in Washington I bet you could be and would be prosecuted.Same probably goes for corn in Nebraska.
Government is God ordained but it is also the least effective place to put our money.Governments should be set up for the peoples benefit within limits.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
I don't see anything about the needy. They are God's ministers of justice and government, not handouts.

When Paul said:

4For he is God's servant to do you good.

what did he mean by "...do you good"?

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Bumping up for Pastor Larry in case he didn't see it. I really would like to know what your understanding of this verse is.

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Pastor Larry]

Is allowing children to starve and families to be homeless upholding justice?

That is irrelevant to what I said. I was commenting on what the passage says, not what other things the government might do are. This passage does not talk about the needy. Period.

We can talk all day long about how the church is the institution for generosity, but let's be honest--the church can't do it all.

Why not? If we enact the biblical principles, that those who don't work shouldn't eat, and that we do good to all men, specially those of the household of faith, I see no reason why the church can't do what the church is supposed to do.

It is the government's job to ensure justice. I consider helping the needy to be a part of this function.

So you agree that the government should not give handouts to those who don't work, seeing as that is unjust?

what did he mean by "...do you good"?

In the context, it is protecting the innocent from those who do evil.

Romans 13:3-4 3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil.

The theocracy that God instituted in the Torah is full of laws about caring for the needy (Deut 15), forgiving debt (Lev 25), leaving grain on the threshing floor for the alien (Lev 19,23), etc.

The theocracy that God instituted in the Torah was for people who lived under the Torah. We do not live under that. Theocracy also happens when God rules. The human government God ordained is explicit evidence that we do not live in a theocracy. That will come when Christ returns.

Larry, that is terrible talk coming from someone who is a PASTOR!

Since when is pointing out what a passage says "terrible talk"? I don't get that. I didn't say anything negative. I merely pointed out what the passage is talking about. Wouldn't you expect that from a pastor?

Either way the money goes, you are STILL giving money to help the needy. Or food. Or cheap housing, because as you know...everyone has the right to housing, even if it's cheap....if your Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc. MEAN anything.

Really?? Everyone has a right to housing? In what section of the constitution is that found? And more importantly, where is that in the Bible? God explicitly says that people who don't work are not entitled to food, and by extension, to those "necessities" of life. I don't find housing to be a right anywhere. I think it is good idea. I have always had one. The vast majority of poor in this country are poor by choice. Not all, but the vast majority are. I routinely talk to people who don't have a job because they won't go find one. They refuse to work. It is easier to live off the government.

Someone said recently that the amount of money promised by the federal government for Katrina response amounts to $400,000 per person. That is unreal ... and unjust.

Since nobody ever addresses my question, I'm hoping you might since you are a pastor. Why did Joseph gather enough food for his people to last through a seven year famine?
*this is about the 20th time I've asked this in the last few months*

I never saw that question. Not sure what it has to do with this topic. The answer is so that people would survive. Not sure why that is confusing, or what the point of it is.

 

[tenor]

The truth for this matter is not either/or but both/and.

In some ways it is both. There are limitations and strengths to both and they can compliment each other.

I am in partial agreement with the statement that many who oppose gov. involvement in charity do even give through the church.

I'm not even convinced that if taxes were reduced people would give more through their churches and places of worship or other charities.

My opinion.

Tim

 

[TexasSky]

Have you ever stopped at look at the figures involved in some of this?

I decided to do a little investigation myself.

Texas Minimum Wage is $5.15 an hour (some companies pay what they call "waiters wage" which is actually lower per hour based on the believe the waitperson will recieve the rest in tips.)

If you worked 40 hours a week, for 52 weeks a year, your monthly gross income is $892.67.

Now, look at the welfare program. I won't list all the requirements about citizenship, age, what property you are allowed to own.

The gross income test is all I'm looking at.

The maximum amount of income you can have and still receive food stamps in Texas is:

1 person Gross $1,009 Net $776
2 people Gross $1,354 Net $1,041
3 people Gross $1,698 Net $1,306
4 people Gross $2,043 Net $1,571
5 people Gross $2,387 Net $1,836

Etc
Now - In our town, the "low income apartments" run $443 a month for a 1-bedroom apartment and $532 for a 2 bedroom apartment. To qualify for one of these, you have to earn less that $18,900 for a family of 2 (1,575 a month), or less than $23,640 (1,970 a month) for a family of 4. Those are "Gross" figures.

Now - Think about what you spend for things like electricity, heating fuel, gasoline for a car, medical bills and imagine working at the jobs no one else wants to work at, living with every single dime you earn going to "existance."

The idea that the poor are lazy is just not true. A huge number of poor are single mothers working at minimum or barely above minimum wage, or they are parents supporting large families at minimum wage.

 

[Pastor Larry]

There are very few reasons why anyone supporting a family has to work for minimum wage. Many of these minimum wage workers are high school dropouts, people who have had 3 or 4 jobs in a year because they won't keep one, people who are high school students. They are people who don't know how to talk properly. They don't know how to dress respectably. They are minimum wage workers for a reason. They are people who live cycle after cycle of poverty because they won't change their situation. We need to help them, not subsidize them. BTW, economists have long said that the minimum wage actually hurts low income people. The politicians disagree, and that is why we have a minimum wage.

But think of it further in terms of macro economics. If you raise wages, you must raise prices, and therefore the wage increase you just got caused your cost of living to increase so you really aren't making more money in real numbers. You are paying for your higher wage with higher COL.

And what in the world is wrong with every single dime you earn going to existence? What else would you use it for?

In the end, there are no easy solutions. Poverty is often systemic. People depend on the government becuase they know the government will bail them out. But oftentimes, bad choices are to blame for people's lot in life, and that is their problem. We don't help them by continually bailing them out.

Why should the government help the never married mom? She should have never had the kids. Why shouldn't she have to accept responsibility for her choices? Why should the government bail someone out who is unwilling to work? That makes no sense to me.

 

[Gold Dragon]

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The theocracy that God instituted in the Torah is full of laws about caring for the needy (Deut 15), forgiving debt (Lev 25), leaving grain on the threshing floor for the alien (Lev 19,23), etc.

The theocracy that God instituted in the Torah was for people who lived under the Torah. We do not live under that. Theocracy also happens when God rules. The human government God ordained is explicit evidence that we do not live in a theocracy. That will come when Christ returns.</font>[/QUOTE]Agreed, we no longer live under the Torah. But it is useful for insight into what pleases God.

Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
Someone said recently that the amount of money promised by the federal government for Katrina response amounts to $400,000 per person. That is unreal ... and unjust.

Agreed, that is probably not enough considering the generations of investment that went into building that region to what it was before Katrina.

 

[TexasSky]

Pastor Larry,

I've never seen a more unChristian attitude from a man who claims to be a man of God.

Nor a more inaccurate accessment of the poor.

First person I ever personally knew who was honest about being a welfare parent was a woman who believed, as many on this board believe, that conception of children should be left in God's hands. She gave birth to seven children, then her husband decided to "run away." He didn't pay child support, didn't pay spouse support. He just left a note saying he couldn't deal with the responsibility anymore and that he hoped she could forgive him.

Second one I knew was a man who DID drop out of high school - because his father died, and he had to go to work to help his mother feed his little sisters.

Another was a Vietnamese Immigrant who had fled to America during the destruction of Hanoi.

As to "What is wrong with every single dime you earn going to existence." Emergencies are what is wrong. The inability to pay for glasses or a doctor visit or those new shoes when the old ones wear out too soon. The inability to have the toilet fixed when it starts pouring waste into your house instead of into the sewer lines.

And - beyond that - Christ TOLD us to take care of the widows, the orphans, the sick, the elderly -- - since a significant number of welfare people ARE widows, orphans, or mothers who were abandoned by fathers - it IS our duty, per Jesus Christ.

 

[Andy T.]

Pastor Larry,

I've never seen a more unChristian attitude from a man who claims to be a man of God.

And I've never seen such an exaggerated, judgmental insult bandied about in such contempt, TS. Get off your high horse. Now.