The comment trails that follow blog posts often veer off into unexpected and fascinating directions. So it was with the discussion between mastersamwise and Keith DeHavelle. Their discussion was on topic, but still quite odd. did not argue for Socialism per se. Yet he often sounds like he is doing exactly that. Therefore, argued in favor of the free market, and that riled .
What exactly favors with respect to government is not entirely clear. That produce a problem for him. No one knows precisely what he is arguing for. That also produces a problem for those who are uncomfortable with what does make clear. Since we don’t know exactly where stands, we don’t exactly know how to respond to his statements. That I think explains this response from .
Wow, I don’t know how this keeps happening but for some reason, whenever I talk about economic Justice, it is immediately interpreted as “create giant welfare state.” (continued here)
‘s words are oddly reminiscent of the speeches of many politicians. What these politicians propose sounds good, at the end of the speech those with some discernment are left scratching their heads wondering. “So what exactly does he intend to do?” However, I don’t think intends to deceive. Even though is an excellent writer, I don’t think he knows how to express what he wants in words.
Think upon the Kingdom of God. Have any of us the words to describe it? We know it how right the Kingdom of God would be. We long for the Kingdom of God. We pray for it (Matthew 6:9-13), but here and now we cannot make it happen. How could we? We can’t even describe it.
‘s stance, however, is relatively obvious. is a fan of the founders of this nation and the free market. Therefore, debated by turning his own words against his arguments. Here is an example.
@mastersamwise, who wrote:
Ah, I see the disconnect. I believe that each person is bound by common humanity to aid his fellow man in an active and direct way.
And you propose to force him to do so. Your system is “charity at gunpoint” which has always been heavy on the force while the charity corrodes away.
You would have each “individual” build up his own wealth and if scraps happen to fall off his table, then the poor can fight the dogs for it. Genius.
As much as you intended this as sarcasm, the recognition of this reality centuries ago really was genius. But despite your acidic description, things work a little differently. This is especially true now that we are, for the moment, not in an age of serfdom. (continued here)
What was the genius? Each of us really does not know how to love our neighbor, not as we should. , I suspect, pines for the day each of us does know how to love as we should. Like any man, he is a bit frustrated when the world does not behave as it should. , on the hand, has learned to accept that this is the world, not the Kingdom of God. Therefore, he is more prepared to accept people as they are, and it is an observable fact that only few people love their neighbor as they love their self.
How we should tackle the problem of poverty? Is there any hope a government program will work? No. Every government program to redistribute he wealth is eventually overcome by an inherent conflict. We cannot trust the same people who are suppose to protect our property rights with the power to steal from us and give what we earn to others.
So what is the solution? Love.
Long ago the Apostle Paul wrote about cooperation and love. If we wish to achieve anything that bears any resemblance to our notion of the Kingdom, then we must each voluntarily choose to love our neighbor. Nothing else we can do has any hope of working.
1 Corinthians 12:12-13:13 New King James Version (NKJV)
Unity and Diversity in One Body
12 For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. 13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 14 For in fact the body is not one member but many.
15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body,” is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where would be the smelling? 18 But now God has set the members, each one of them, in the body just as He pleased. 19 And if they were all one member, where would the body be?
20 But now indeed there are many members, yet one body. 21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; nor again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 No, much rather, those members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary. 23 And those members of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow greater honor; and our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, 24 but our presentable parts have no need. But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, 25 that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another. 26 And if one member suffers, all the members suffer with it; or if one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it.
27 Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually. 28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, varieties of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Are all workers of miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healings? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? 31 But earnestly desire the best gifts. And yet I show you a more excellent way.
The Greatest Gift
13 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass or a clanging cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, but have not love, it profits me nothing.
4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether there is knowledge, it will vanish away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.
13 And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
Can we love perfectly? No, but love is the greatest gift we can share, and no government program can tax love and equitably redistribute it.
The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were and ask “why not?”. — John Fitzgerald Kennedy (from here)