Taxes as tithes?

[ageofknowledge]

I agree there should be adequate fiscal accountability in religious churches and organizations regarding what and how their income/donations/tithe/money in/whatever you want to call it is spent. I'm with you there. Sorry about the vacation remark. You're right. That doesn't sound like you.

What I described I see a lot though. I call it bubble Christianity.

[BavarianWheels]

Further, you are a perfect example of what I am so angry at the church about. It is a crying shame that your church or general community of believers feels no need to help you in your particular situation. And the sad fact is that a lot of people probably can't, but not because they don't have the income, but because that income has been taken away by car payments and large mortgages and credit payments and what not. And where did they get all that debt from? From buying things they couldn't afford. In other words, by being selfish. In so doing, they have robbed both themselves and you the blessing of giving.

Sounds like you want some kind of Socialistic culture where everyone lives EXACTLY the same...or as "Christian" as you do apparently.

I don't believe anyone should be made to feel guilty for, FIRST, God's blessings on them, and SECOND, their own drive to be and live better.

Where is the line drawn? One should feel guilty because of being able to afford a MBZ or BMW but cannot afford to bail out everyone in their church from financial crisis?
.
.

[Jac3510]

Socialism, by definition, is a governmental philosophy. I'm talking about individual lifestyles. Therefore, I cannot, by definition, be charged with supporting anything like socialism. If you want to drop the inflammatory language and have a real conversation, I'd be more than willing to do so. But I'm not about to talk with you if your method of discussion is going to be to use veiled ad hominems.

[zoegirl]

Conidering that Jac has posted several threads concerning capitalism (right? I am remembering corerctly, yes ), I would be very surprised if he cam out with socialist talk.

He is talking about the responsibilities we have as CHristians towards one another. Since this stared out as taxes as tithing, really, it should be a joy for u to give. Ithink we have found it so burdensome and frustrating to deal with the government and taxes that sometimes hearing people talk of "giving to one another" we immediately think of socialism or a commune.

[BavarianWheels]

Conidering that Jac has posted several threads concerning capitalism (right? I am remembering corerctly, yes ), I would be very surprised if he cam out with socialist talk.

He is talking about the responsibilities we have as CHristians towards one another. Since this stared out as taxes as tithing, really, it should be a joy for u to give. Ithink we have found it so burdensome and frustrating to deal with the government and taxes that sometimes hearing people talk of "giving to one another" we immediately think of socialism or a commune.

I agree. It should be a joy to give. It should be a joy to serve God. It should be a joy to love God with all your heart. It should be a joy NOT to misuse God's name, yet there is a law that states it is law. Does having a "law" about tithing make tithing unloving?

Socialism is just how I view the direction of Jac's comments. Forgive me if that offends you and/or he. It also *sounds* like unless you do as Jac does, you're doing nothing at all or doing it all wrong.

You say you're talking about individuals, but Jac brings in the Church...yet seems to be guilting individual wealth. Help me understand if I'm not seeing the point.
.
.

[BavarianWheels]

Double posted somehow...sry.

[Jac3510]

Yes ma'am, you are quite correct. I am a hardcore capitalist, and yes, I do think it is a shame that every time we think about helping those "less fortunate" (oh, Boortz would HATE me for using that phrase!) than ourselves people immediately use the dirty S word.

edit:

Socialism is just how I view the direction of Jac's comments

Until I start talking about the government, there is no direction towards socialism, and until you recogize that basic fact, you and I can have no further conversation here.

[BavarianWheels]

Yes ma'am, you are quite correct. I am a hardcore capitalist, and yes, I do think it is a shame that every time we think about helping those "less fortunate" (oh, Boortz would HATE me for using that phrase!) than ourselves people immediately use the dirty S word.

edit:

Socialism is just how I view the direction of Jac's comments

Until I start talking about the government, there is no direction towards socialism, and until you recogize that basic fact, you and I can have no further conversation here.

LOL...you think I've labeled you a socialist, when I simply see the views you express as a leaning towards socialism? You're so easily angered and when someone confronts your points who has already asked for clarification you end the convo.

I simply disagree and don't see that anyone should feel guilty for having more than others and not be in a position to help EVERYONE without being put on the spot for having "luxury".
.
.

[Jac3510]

I don't think you've labeled me a socialist, Bav. I think you are saying my view is socialistic. What I am trying to tell you is that my view can neither be nor trend toward socialism of ANY kind, and to suggest as much is to imply a profound misunderstanding of socialism on your part. If you don't understand socialism, then it is simply impossible for us to have a conversation about my views, thinking, as you do, that socialism can have any relationship to the Church.

Angered? Hardly. I'm just not interested in defending my views to someone who wants to use silly, inflamatory language in the place of civil, rational conversation.

[BavarianWheels]

I don't think you've labeled me a socialist, Bav. I think you are saying my view is socialistic. What I am trying to tell you is that my view can neither be nor trend toward socialism of ANY kind, and to suggest as much is to imply a profound misunderstanding of socialism on your part. If you don't understand socialism, then it is simply impossible for us to have a conversation about my views, thinking, as you do, that socialism can have any relationship to the Church.

Angered? Hardly. I'm just not interested in defending my views to someone who wants to use silly, inflamatory language in the place of civil, rational conversation.

It's obvious we're not talking about some governmental system here, but as I said, IT SOUNDS like you would have something like everyone being equal in worldly worth where the Church spreads the wealth evenly and according to needs.

It SOUNDS like you're making the point that having luxury is sinful when there is suffering in the world. My question is where does one draw the line on luxury?

You mentioned you have a problem with a Christian paying $1 Mil for a home. Have you seen some of the million dollar homes in So. Cal.? Most are not "million dollar" homes. Simply average homes in good neighborhoods with the better school systems. What monetary value of a home is too much for the Christian that God has blessed with great success in their business? Let's say a Christian owns a paper company (I happen to know one here in Los Angeles) and his income is in the high 6 figures yearly. What is his limitation on a home? Is he robbing his fellow Christian because he can afford a multi-million dollar home and a few luxury cars?

Jac, you've obviously given this some thought. I'm trying to figure out your rate of giving and gifting and your rate of need and luxury is and how you have come up with it.
.
.

[jlay]

It's obvious we're not talking about some governmental system here, but as I said, IT SOUNDS like you would have something like everyone being equal in worldly worth where the Church spreads the wealth evenly and according to needs.

Wheels, I thinkn you are putting words in Jac's mouth.
Redistribution of wealth through the goverment is socialism. A community of believers surrendering their wealth to serve the needs of the community is quite a different thing.

So. Cal may be the exception regarding million dollar homes, but for most of this country and the free world, that is extremely excessive. A friend of mine took some inner-city kids golfing. A place with $$$ homes. One kid asked, "how many families live in those homes?" Our country is full of greed. There is little denying that truth. People have built monuments to themselves. Lavish, opulent homes that would qualify as palaces in many parts of the world.

Let's say a Christian owns a paper company (I happen to know one here in Los Angeles) and his income is in the high 6 figures yearly. What is his limitation on a home? Is he robbing his fellow Christian because he can afford a multi-million dollar home and a few luxury cars?

I hope that person would have an abundant life of giving. Charites, orphanages, etc. Jesus did say, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." Luke 12:48
The question is not whether that person can have a nice house, but whether those things impeed them from walking in all of the light God has given them. Do they live behind a gate, cut off from the world, immersed in luxuries and out of touch from reality?

[BavarianWheels]

It's obvious we're not talking about some governmental system here, but as I said, IT SOUNDS like you would have something like everyone being equal in worldly worth where the Church spreads the wealth evenly and according to needs.

Wheels, I thinkn you are putting words in Jac's mouth.
Redistribution of wealth through the goverment is socialism. A community of believers surrendering their wealth to serve the needs of the community is quite a different thing.

So. Cal may be the exception regarding million dollar homes, but for most of this country and the free world, that is extremely excessive. A friend of mine took some inner-city kids golfing. A place with $$$ homes. One kid asked, "how many families live in those homes?" Our country is full of greed. There is little denying that truth. People have built monuments to themselves. Lavish, opulent homes that would qualify as palaces in many parts of the world.

Let's say a Christian owns a paper company (I happen to know one here in Los Angeles) and his income is in the high 6 figures yearly. What is his limitation on a home? Is he robbing his fellow Christian because he can afford a multi-million dollar home and a few luxury cars?

I hope that person would have an abundant life of giving. Charites, orphanages, etc. Jesus did say, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." Luke 12:48
The question is not whether that person can have a nice house, but whether those things impeed them from walking in all of the light God has given them. Do they live behind a gate, cut off from the world, immersed in luxuries and out of touch from reality?

I'm not trying to put words into Jac's mouth, but just relaying what I'm hearing. Instead of getting offended at what I'm hearing, he (or zoegirl) simply need clarify how they (since Jac says she's expressing him correctly) are coming to these numbers that to me seem biased by their own positions...thereby making me think everyone in their eyes should be at the same levels of prosperity.

I would agree! To the person that is given much, much is expected. It SEEMS to me Jac is wanting to limit God's giving. I would simply assume in my ignorance that my friend's blessings come from God (him being a good Christian in my own "warped" human view). He has a multi-million dollar home and does have luxury cars, is able to take lavish vacations, wear expensive suits...I know of some of his recent gifts to ministry and I cannot say he's cheap when it comes to giving back to God. But Jac put a specific dollar amount on exessive for a Christian. I'm simply trying to find his method of labeling.

[zoegirl]

Further, you are a perfect example of what I am so angry at the church about. It is a crying shame that your church or general community of believers feels no need to help you in your particular situation.

This is what prompted your complaint. Where in the world are you getting that he wants everthing leveled?

And the sad fact is that a lot of people probably can't, but not because they don't have the income, but because that income has been taken away by car payments and large mortgages and credit payments and what not.

Again, where is the statement that would indicate that Jacwants to level the playing field? This is a horrible problem in the US rght now. People who are house poor, in debt, feel the need to buy things that they don't need. And I am certainly not a socialist but I see this as grossly negligent stewardship. And because of their greed, they cannot help those in the CHURCH who need help.

And where did they get all that debt from? From buying things they couldn't afford. In other words, by being selfish. In so doing, they have robbed both themselves and you the blessing of giving.

again, where in the world is the socialist thinking?

The biggest issue here is the heart of the people invovled. YOu can have very wealthy greedy people and very moderate greedy people....you could have very greedy poor people but one supposes that this is a smaller percentage. YOu can have very giving wealthy people and very giving moderate people. If we are to care for others in thechurch, it includes our time, our talents, our resources (mowing lawns, helping clean, making dinners), and yes, our money.

THis is not a governmental policy issue. Everybody should be free to pursue making money. Again, in the New Testament you have Lydia, who was a merchant of purple cloth. This would make her rather wealthy, but she is portrayed in a positive light. Ananias, on the other hand, died because of his greed.

As far as Numbers go, I don't think anybody here has established any numbers. I struggle, between medical bills and mortgage payment and, of course, taxes. There have certainly been times when I haven't even hit the 10%. If you add up all of the Old Testament giving requirements, it certainly comes to more than 10%

[BavarianWheels]

Further, you are a perfect example of what I am so angry at the church about. It is a crying shame that your church or general community of believers feels no need to help you in your particular situation.

This is what prompted your complaint. Where in the world are you getting that he wants everthing leveled?

And the sad fact is that a lot of people probably can't, but not because they don't have the income, but because that income has been taken away by car payments and large mortgages and credit payments and what not.

Again, where is the statement that would indicate that Jacwants to level the playing field? This is a horrible problem in the US rght now. People who are house poor, in debt, feel the need to buy things that they don't need. And I am certainly not a socialist but I see this as grossly negligent stewardship. And because of their greed, they cannot help those in the CHURCH who need help.

And where did they get all that debt from? From buying things they couldn't afford. In other words, by being selfish. In so doing, they have robbed both themselves and you the blessing of giving.

again, where in the world is the socialist thinking?

The biggest issue here is the heart of the people invovled. YOu can have very wealthy greedy people and very moderate greedy people....you could have very greedy poor people but one supposes that this is a smaller percentage. YOu can have very giving wealthy people and very giving moderate people. If we are to care for others in thechurch, it includes our time, our talents, our resources (mowing lawns, helping clean, making dinners), and yes, our money.

THis is not a governmental policy issue. Everybody should be free to pursue making money. Again, in the New Testament you have Lydia, who was a merchant of purple cloth. This would make her rather wealthy, but she is portrayed in a positive light. Ananias, on the other hand, died because of his greed.

As far as Numbers go, I don't think anybody here has established any numbers. I struggle, between medical bills and mortgage payment and, of course, taxes. There have certainly been times when I haven't even hit the 10%. If you add up all of the Old Testament giving requirements, it certainly comes to more than 10%

Zoe, to each comment specifically, none exactly, but on the whole, AGAIN, it just seems to ring of limits on luxury and THAT to me is socialistic thinking where everyone is given the same. Jac definitely does use numbers and only uses the 10% that God originally asks in the OT (which Jac finds no relevance for today). I agree with him on tithing being limited to 10%, but not that we should surrender ALL. In context of surrendering ALL is in the whole life of a person surrendered to God. I would argue that a person that surrenders ALL to God would be blessed beyond the means of simply living in a $80k condo and a $50k income. If God blesses one with a million dollar salary, can that person not enjoy the life a millionaire and still give to God and be blessed? It SOUNDS to me like Jac may think it's impossible to be wealthy and be a Christian. The Bible certainly alludes to it being difficult, but it's not impossible.


I apologize for rendering equality / limits with Socialistic thinking. I didn't realize it was a "four-letter word" and am happy to leave the "S" word out and leave it as all being equal.
.
.

[zoegirl]

Further, you are a perfect example of what I am so angry at the church about. It is a crying shame that your church or general community of believers feels no need to help you in your particular situation.

This is what prompted your complaint. Where in the world are you getting that he wants everthing leveled?

And the sad fact is that a lot of people probably can't, but not because they don't have the income, but because that income has been taken away by car payments and large mortgages and credit payments and what not.

Again, where is the statement that would indicate that Jacwants to level the playing field? This is a horrible problem in the US rght now. People who are house poor, in debt, feel the need to buy things that they don't need. And I am certainly not a socialist but I see this as grossly negligent stewardship. And because of their greed, they cannot help those in the CHURCH who need help.

And where did they get all that debt from? From buying things they couldn't afford. In other words, by being selfish. In so doing, they have robbed both themselves and you the blessing of giving.

again, where in the world is the socialist thinking?

The biggest issue here is the heart of the people invovled. YOu can have very wealthy greedy people and very moderate greedy people....you could have very greedy poor people but one supposes that this is a smaller percentage. YOu can have very giving wealthy people and very giving moderate people. If we are to care for others in thechurch, it includes our time, our talents, our resources (mowing lawns, helping clean, making dinners), and yes, our money.

THis is not a governmental policy issue. Everybody should be free to pursue making money. Again, in the New Testament you have Lydia, who was a merchant of purple cloth. This would make her rather wealthy, but she is portrayed in a positive light. Ananias, on the other hand, died because of his greed.

As far as Numbers go, I don't think anybody here has established any numbers. I struggle, between medical bills and mortgage payment and, of course, taxes. There have certainly been times when I haven't even hit the 10%. If you add up all of the Old Testament giving requirements, it certainly comes to more than 10%

Zoe, to each comment specifically, none exactly, but on the whole, AGAIN, it just seems to ring of limits on luxury and THAT to me is socialistic thinking where everyone is given the same.

NO, it's a CHRISTIAN issue. Jac has no proble,m with the governemtn establishing the rights of people to make as much money a they want. I absolutely agree with this. The government should stay out as much as possible from how much we make or whether we can make money.

The issue, all along, is the *CHristian's response*, not the government's. I think that has been clear enough. We aeno talking about legslating the amount of money people can make or the amount of money people should give. THis is about the heart of a CHristian's towards those that are hurting, those that need help.

Luxury is all fine and good if the person's heart is in the right place. There are those that have an excess and misuse it, mainly because I think most people are irresponsible with their money. FOr instance, spoiling their children, spoiling themselves. (I am so sick of hearing 15-16 year olds getting brand new expensive cars, it's rapant and suddenly it's expected). Jesus spoke of it "It is easier for the camel to go through the eye of the needle than a rich man..."

On the other hand, I have seen very generous people willing to donate their time and their money.

Again, its the heart that's the issue.

Jac definitely does use numbers and only uses the 10% that God originally asks in the OT (which Jac finds no relevance for today). I agree with him on tithing being limited to 10%, but not that we should surrender ALL. In context of surrendering ALL is in the whole life of a person surrendered to God. I would argue that a person that surrenders ALL to God would be blessed beyond the means of simply living in a $80k condo and a $50k income. If God blesses one with a million dollar salary, can that person not enjoy the life a millionaire and still give to God and be blessed? It SOUNDS to me like Jac may think it's impossible to be wealthy and be a Christian. The Bible certainly alludes to it being difficult, but it's not impossible.


I apologize for rendering equality / limits with Socialistic thinking. I didn't realize it was a "four-letter word" and am happy to leave the "S" word out and leave it as all being equal.
.
.

I'll let Jac address this. I will say this. The issue we have with the socialist word is that you are just wrong wit your assertion. And it's just plain incorrect. Saying that we as CHristians shouldn't be greedy and live irresponsibly is far from saying that the governement should work to make everything equal for everyone.