Acts 4:34-36
“For there was not a needy person among them, for all who were owners of land or houses would sell them and bring the proceeds of the sales and lay them at the apostles’ feet, and they would be distributed to each as any had need.”
They mean this Christianity, right???
Somehow that translates to you have to give 10% of your income to Pastor Brian. Any other form of charity is great but you should still give Pastor Brian his 10% because he’s doing a lot by telling you to give him 10% of your income.
The vast majority of pastors are volunteers or bi-vocational. And yes there are abuses. But also lots of them giving their time and resources to care for the under-resourced. My church’'s sr. pastor is going from full time to bi-vocational this year because inflation hit the church and his family. But our church distributed 12 million pounds of food since covid
Ok? So now he’s earned 10% of my income?
The tithe doesn’t go to a pastor, it goes to fund the whole ministry. People working full time deserve a living wage, he’s no different. Most Christians don’t tithe anyway, it’s usually 15% of the people giving 85% of the funds.
Our church distributed those millions of pounds of food on a $350k total budget each year which includes still paying mortgage on an under-maintained property. The total payroll and benefits for two full time and four part time staff was $165k last year. I don’t think they’re robbing people who chose to support that.
I really not sure your point. Does acts tell you that God requires you to give 10% of your income?
Your church sounds like an outlier. Many of the church I’ve seen have been seeded by larger churches and ministries which they are then indebted to. Most of which would not be so forthcoming with their financials.
Thats not the question though. Why is it a church would say that tithing 10% of your income is a requirement?
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” – sounds familiar 🤔
Oh yeah there’s a reason a chunk of early communists were Christian pacifists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Day
edit =sorry about the mix up
Thanks for adding those links.
It’s annoying how many people are ignorant of the history of the Left.
here’s the actual link :
Silly me.
Christian communism is a theological view (with some historic precedent) that believes Jesus and his apostles were the first communists, so the overlap is clearly there.
Not THAT Christianity. The war hungry, blood thirsty, brown people hating, brainwashing Christianity!
Ah, yes, the Crusaders. Using religion to further the state since the HRE.
So, Judaism?
But seriously, most of the bloodthirsty bits of the Christian Bible are bits carried over from the Torah. Hell, a lot of them are specifically about Joshua conquering everyone around.
In many historical societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, and Islamic societies, usury meant the charging of interest of any kind, and was considered wrong, or was made illegal.[3]
BTW chrishitery should be the next capitalist McCarthyism. Muhh! red hats!
- Deuteronomy 23:19-20 – “19 You shall not charge interest to your countrymen: interest on money, food, or anything that may be loaned at interest. 20 You may charge interest to a foreigner, but to your countrymen you shall not charge interest, so that the Lord your God may bless you in all that you undertake in the land which you are about to enter to possess.”
- Exodus 22:25 – “25 If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, you are not to act as a creditor to him; you shall not charge him interest.”
- Deuteronomy 15:1-3 – “1 At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release of debts. 2 And this is the regulation for the release of debts: every creditor is to forgive what he has loaned to his neighbor; he shall not require it of his neighbor and his brother, because the Lord’s release has been proclaimed. 3 From a foreigner you may require it, but your hand shall forgive whatever of yours is with your brother.”
This sounds good in theory, but is relatively bad in practice. Without interest, no one will loan the government money. Municipalities would need to rely on huge tax increases to fund large projects, instead of bonds funded by small tax increases over time.
No one will loan money to businesses either, and you are not getting any money to buy a house. It would favor those who already own established businesses, as they can just use profits from one to invest in another one.
You realise that the government can (and does) just make new money? There is no need for the government to borrow any money (but it does it anyways for other more complex reasons). And if done in moderation the resulting inflation is in effect identical to taxes, except that it automatically “taxes” the rich more and incurages further investments.
And with sufficient inflation, businesses will have no problem to attract investments as people will want to have investments that retain their value, no interest needed.
Similarly, investing money in houses is sound business when inflation is relatively high, both individually and for housing companies.
But the real problem is anyways not basic interest, but compound interest that forces the borrower to repay the lend amount many times over and still be in debt afterwards.
I think the idea is that you give loans to the needy, and do so out of generosity, hoping to get your money back but not relying on it. It’s one of those things where the law does not work without the spirit.
That would mean rich donors end up “lending” money to the government for “no interest”. I’m sure in return they would receive zero favors or benefits of any kind.
Like a lot of things in the Bible, it may work for goat herders lost in the Bronze Age desert. But it definitely doesn’t literally work today. It didn’t even work under the Romans during Jesus’s time.
He was like “not a word shall be changed”, but also don’t worry about tiny details. Regarding keeping Kosher He said, “it’s not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, but what comes out.” The point is to keep yourself clean, not details about shellfish.
That would mean rich donors end up “lending” money to the government for “no interest”. I’m sure in return they would receive zero favors or benefits of any kind.
That can happen under just about any system.
Yes, but you don’t want to make it a primary source for government funding.
Right, that’s what taxes are for.
Exactly, and no it can’t “just happen under any system”. Right now the US government is giving out 5.1% interest on risk free Treasury Bills. There’s literally no way to bribe the Treasury with free money because everyone and their dog is rushing to lend the government money at those rates.
And prevent anyone from being really rich.
And prevent banks from getting too big.
And be hospitable to refugees.
And a whole lot of other things that Y’all Qaeda don’t want.
Ha… this is an obligation in Islam. I rather my tax dollars help the needy than help my nation and or other nations bomb nations.
this is an obligation in Islam.
Obligation doesn’t mean they’ll ever apply it. They only ever mention such when it’s convenient, to make themselves look like better people. All Abrahamic religions are this way(doesn’t mean any other religion’s any better either). I live in a muslim country, it’s just another tool of the state & the ultra rich to control people.
Uhm… what. Zakat is one of the pillars of Islam.
There are five key practices that all Muslims are obligated to fulfil throughout their lifetime. These practices are referred to as pillars because they form the foundation of Muslim life. The five pillars of Islam are Shahada, Salah, Zakat, Sawm (fasting), and Hajj. Four categories of people do not pay Zakat: the poor, the indigent, the debt-ridden, and the unfree.
And charity is one of the virtues. Their point is that almost allreligions, and definitely the abrahamic ones, say that charity and altruism are core doctrine. Nobody actually follows through tho unless it’s convenient.
That’s sad if true. There’s no way to track that data unfortunately.
No, no this is the part of Christianity where we convert heretics. With heavy automatic weaponry
"I say the whole world must learn of our peaceful ways.
By force!"
Oh lord, he’s made of wood.
… As a Christian, I approve.
The idea that the government should run off of some merciless view that the principles of free market capitalism dictate who eats and who doesn’t is completely bizarre.
I have nothing against capitalist Christians who think that the principles of capitalism are generally fine and that, otherwise, we have an obligation as Christians to feed the poor and it just so happens to not be the role of government, but any explicitly Christian state has to feed the poor.
Narrator:
They didn’t
Huh, I wouldn’t expect to see a Christian on Lemmy.
I don’t consider myself Christian purely because of the word’s connotation, but I am absolutely on board with everything Yeshua taught… including full-blown pre-Marx communism.
There are dozens of us!
That’s accurate.
“You don’t actually read the bible, you just cherry picked some bits out of the atheist meme book” - actual response I’ve gotten when I’ve brought this up.
This is funny and it makes me feel good. But you know as well as I do, that it doesn’t matter what any religious text says is right or wrong. Fascism and capitalism will take control and health care will be a personal problem.
It should be given freely, not because you were forced to. It doesnt mean anything if you were forced.
Is the point of charity to feed the hungry or to let rich people feel good about themselves?
It doesn’t matter to the hungry person if the food they eat was paid for by taxes or voluntary charity. Food is food.
Ultimately to help people, but if you’re forced to, that doesnt mean anything. It just means you figured paying taxes was easier than going to jail
It doesn’t mean anything to whom?
Cause I bet it means a lot to the people who need food and shelter.
I’m not so sure. That smells a bit of entitlement if I’m being honest. If an unhoused person or a single parent in a food insecure household get food assistance/school meals for example, I’m sure the help meant a lot to them. It doesn’t seem like it means anything to you because you have the luxury/security to worry about ethics and other more abstract things. But if you’re hungry, food is food. Help is help. And if you were forced to give the food…those people still get to eat at the end of it all
It absolutely means something, it means the poor suffer less. That’s the point, not your moral absolution
It’s still meaningful because it is helping people, but it’s probably not going to count in your favor spiritually. Unless you’re supporting getting the system set up or keeping it in place I guess.
Exactly! Paying taxes doesnt make you a good christian, helping people voluntarily does.
Jesus’ version or Roman version?
Obviously spanish version.
(To be fair, the Bible doesn’t say you should force other people to do those things, it just says you should do them)
The meme says “force you via taxes”. And Jesus Christ Himself told people to pay their taxes.
