Jesus has already given us the process to deal with injustice and charity: We are to engage in personal and collective acts of mercy as the Christ-instituted church. Now, if we are talking about government involvement in alleviating poverty, the discussion takes on a different shape about political solutions of which there is much discussion and debate. In addition, I give other monthly contributions to charities and sponsoring impoverished children overseas.
Through the condescension, arrogance, and hypocrisy demonstrated here, I have a hard time believing that you actually give much a damn about human beings. No and no again. I would argue that it is a concoction of Marxism and is now re-packaged as Neo-Marxist in that it is no longer just focused on economic transformation in the original Marxist idea of dialectical materialism. Neo-Marxism is an artificial framework superimposed on reality that itself is not real.
Who is the perpetrator of this injustice? Who is the victim? And what method of inquiry is used to identify who is who? Can the victims count the cost? Can the perpetrators measure the benefit? Are these people even consciously aware that what they do is even violating these unseen invisible standards of abstract justice? Of course not. The motive is love and compassion and Christ-likeness.
But social justice says, force the rich to become less rich and use the coercive power of the state to punish the haves in the name of the have-nots. Divine justice is about God loving us and us loving others as an act of worship to him. It is about the glory and majesty of the creator. Social justice is about retribution. It is about punishing and shaming the haves and using coercive government power to take from one and give to the other.
It is not motivated by love but by hate. After all, as Joel McDurmon, of all people, points out, white supremacists in the post-Reconstruction South rarely wore their white supremacy on their sleeves. Instead, they hid behind flowery principles, which, upon closer examination were little more than self-serving BS. As Cal and I have noted above, the Marxist argument is wholly specious.
And, as the authors note, Christianity is nowhere opposed to social justice generally. It may be opposed to certain means of achieving social justice, but it is not opposed to the concept as a whole. To the contrary, any reasonable reading of Scripture suggests that social justice indeed is something that should concern Christians.
One has to infer it. Amen, Mitch. Your thoughts will now be deemed worthless and bigoted.
You will now be dismissed as the oppressor you are. Ahhh…Social Justice intertwined with the Gospel…tearing us apart. Seems consistent with the teachings of our Lord and Savior. Or maybe not.
I have 1 intersectionality point — I wonder if I can repeat your thoughts and get them the creditability they deserve. What if we found someone with 3 intersectionality points? Would they listen to reason then or dismiss them? If you lived in the Soviet Union, communism was the conservative position, and advocating perestroika was outside of the standard thinking.
These positions are constantly changing; 50 years ago it would be a political norm to argue for segregation, abolishing social security, financial regulation along Glass-Steagall terms,, etc. But not anymore. If talking about social bodies as organizing powers that frame and determine individual action, then Burke is a Marxist. And every country has practiced redistribution. The question is what gets distributed, to whom, and how much. I certainly fall far short of the love that Christ calls me to, but I am eternally thankful that he has paid for my sins, every one…including my theological inaccuracies, impatience, and hypocrisies.
Best wishes dude. I am a Puerto Rican, but often wonder how my straight, white, Christian male brothers compete based on merit?
Add an overdose of common grace to the old social gospel premises, sprinkle with passionate rhetoric, stir briskly and bake in the heat of current political and social frustrations among Christians. Learn more about how Verizon Media collects and uses data and how our partners collect and use data. Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly, and whoever sows generously will also reap generously. Wherever there were Scots, there were Presbyterian churches as well, although this was in fact a number of fractious denominations that only converged around the time of Confederation. David Dickson. The church, they say, exists for this purpose. A way to measure success.
Why is that ironic? Never mind that there were professing Christians among the founding fathers; their ideals predated them. Among those ideals are natural law and individual rights, and they were indeed philosophized by Christians such as John Locke. It is based on utility and an ethic that subjects individuals to the rights of the collective. So, even forgetting that fact that Marxism produces much suffering, it is certainly much further from a Christian ethic than that of founding.
The New Evangelical Social Gospel - Kindle edition by Roger Smalling, Dianne Smalling. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or. $ 9 Used from $ 6 New from $ In An Evangelical Social Gospel, Tim Suttle shows how the exaggerated individualism of American culture.
My friend, liberation theology can scarcely be called Christian…. Neither are orthodox in Christian belief. Hands down, individual natural rights. The whole point of a counterfeit is that it is almost identical to the original. You could probably be served by reading the wikipedia page, and click on various figures associated with the broad constellation of ideas.
O cute… condescension. I know quite well what Marxism is. Please, explain. And, please explain how advocating for a utilitarian economic system as the primary means of charity is not a counterfeit gospel. Haha, wow you left-leaners sure do get salty about this stuff.
nttsystem.xsrv.jp/libraries/45/gujo-software-handy-pc.php I hope you are more charitable in your personal life than your words are, but I digress. Some left-leaning Christians do absolutely use Marxism as a counterfeit gospel. The liberation theology mention below is a prime example. However, many Marxist Christians strongly make the case that a large welfare state is the ONLY means of charitable Christianity outworking in the economy. Marx would say that property is the right of all, and what he means, is the collective.
Good day to you sir. Marx was more sanguine about the individual than some later Marxists would be. Classical liberalism can be equally as utilitarian as Marxism see Bentham and Mill. In Marxist scheme, a piece of land is property whereas my car, my toothbrush, my bed, my house with qualifications , is not. James understood all too well. You clearly know more about Marx than me…alot about Marx. It leaves that to religion. Marxism, on the other hand, deposes God from the means and the ends. And you guys try to shame Mitch for ideological bias?
Sympathetic to Marxism means criticizing the Founders?
And if you want to posit the idea of free-market capitalism as the idea that has never been tried, then give the benefit of the doubt to the Marxists too. All laws are ultimately patterned after the nature and character of God. Deism is not a complete counterfeit to Christianity because it lacks a coherent moral philosophy. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. He was recognizing that good government alone could create and sustain positive conditions and rights for the people a deist conceit.
He implicitly acknowledged the ongoing work of God as a necessary condition of the success of the American experiment. This is completely contrary to the presuppositions of deism. This is the same conceit of the deist, who thinks that getting the politics right is the key to everything. It is the same fallacy as Marxism, which is to believe that we are ultimately in control of our own destiny as humans and we can make ultimate justice occur in our lifetimes if we just get the right political system.
For what is your life? Only God knows the future and we are ignorant. All we can do is remain humble and obedient. We pursue justice but only as God leads us, not as social trends dictate. Members of the proletariat are every bit as sinful as members of the bourgeoisie or aristocracy. American history over the past hundred years has revealed the flaws of individualized expressions of faith, and Suttle is right to point them out. But we have also seen the flaws of the Social Gospel and in many cases, its failures to truly transform church or society in positive, lasting ways.
We might look for signs of life in Africa, Asia and Latin America, for instance, where churches continue to spring up in new and dynamic forms. Christians in these places are embracing the gospel, are experiencing both individual and community transformation, and are continuing to work out faithful and contextual expressions of the faith in their churches and beyond.
All of us would do well to learn from brothers and sisters in various parts of the world who can reveal to us our cultural blind spots and provide correctives to any polarities that are more reactionary than biblical. Your mission is the person next to you, wherever you may be.