Methodist Vs Pc USA (or really denominational differences)

RGacky3 said:

In EVERY system those who legally aqure what they have are entitled to it ... that isn't capitalism, that's EVERYTHING, the question is what is the legal framework, what is the system, the bible is Clear on what it thinks about systems where the wealthy prosper and the poor suffer, and it's also Clear about what systems and legal frameworks it supports, which is always communal and egalitarian.

Click to expand...

We simply have different ideas about what capitalism is then. There is nothing in capitalism to suggest that people cannot choose communal living, but it is voluntary, not mandated. There is nothing in capitalism that suggests lack of concern for the poor, but the Bible is clear that such, including the tithe, is a voluntary act and not something that people are forced to do. And capitalism is certainly egalitarian, most especially in a system in which rights are secured. But there is certainly nothing in the Bible to suggest that people are not supposed to prosper, that people are not expected to look to their own prosperity, that those who are able are not supposed to work for what they have, or that the people expect the government to provide for them. There is instruction in the Bible that the people are to obey those in authority, pay their taxes, and don't cause trouble - even slaves were ordered to submit to and obey their masters. BUT. . .if the government orders us to disobey God, we are to obey God and not government.

Bringing the train back onto the tracks here, I think many mainline churches are declining because they distort the core elements of Bible teaching that is from top down (i.e. a God to the people) concept. They promote a leftwing social gospel in which people decide what is right or wrong and the church becomes unimportant in that. God's law gets lost in the shuffle. A theology based on people law instead of God's law becomes empty and pointless after awhile, most especially when Jesus the Christ as Lord and Savior becomes less and less relevant and important amidst other teachings. Those who enjoy the social contacts their church offers them will stay, but many will fall away. And while I grew up in the Methodist church and attended the Presbyterian church all during my college years, sadly both have somewhat fallen victim to that mainline church phenomenon and I think both, along with other mainline churches, have suffered the consequences of substituting an ecumenical social gospel for a strong message of salvation.

AlbqOwl said:

We simply have different ideas about what capitalism is then. There is nothing in capitalism to suggest that people cannot choose communal living, but it is voluntary, not mandated. There is nothing in capitalism that suggests lack of concern for the poor, but the Bible is clear that such, including the tithe, is a voluntary act and not something that people are forced to do. And capitalism is certainly egalitarian, most especially in a system in which rights are secured. But there is certainly nothing in the Bible to suggest that people are not supposed to prosper, that people are not expected to look to their own prosperity, that those who are able are not supposed to work for what they have, or that the people expect the government to provide for them. There is instruction in the Bible that the people are to obey those in authority, pay their taxes, and don't cause trouble - even slaves were ordered to submit to and obey their masters. BUT. . .if the government orders us to disobey God, we are to obey God and not government.

Bringing the train back onto the tracks here, I think many mainline churches are declining because they distort the core elements of Bible teaching that is from top down (i.e. a God to the people) concept. They promote a leftwing social gospel in which people decide what is right or wrong and the church becomes unimportant in that. God's law gets lost in the shuffle. A theology based on people law instead of God's law becomes empty and pointless after awhile, most especially when Jesus the Christ as Lord and Savior becomes less and less relevant and important amidst other teachings. Those who enjoy the social contacts their church offers them will stay, but many will fall away. And while I grew up in the Methodist church and attended the Presbyterian church all during my college years, sadly both have somewhat fallen victim to that mainline church phenomenon and I think both, along with other mainline churches, have suffered the consequences of substituting an ecumenical social gospel for a strong message of salvation.

Click to expand...

Well, in a sense Capitalism requires lack of concern for the poor within the institution of Capitalism, case in point was when a Blue Cross executive was fired for saying that the Insurance Company should not use pre-existing conditions as a way to fleece patients out of Insurance coverage, she was hurting the bottom line With he concern for the poor. Now in one's personal life you are absolutely free to show concern, but institutionally, profit is the only thing that does and can matter. So the point is the institutions, and the principles behind them, which in capitalism, are in opposition to biblical principles.

The social gospel has been in play in the churches from the very begining, from the times of their biggest Growth, to today.

The Social Gospel IS NOT, and HAS NEVER BEEN, moral post modernism, or "People deicde what is right and wrong," I'm sorry that's not what it is, that's not what it has NEVER been.

That's called theological liberalism .... NOT the Social Gospel. Unfortunately in the United States the 2 have sometimes been intertwined. However elsewhere, Latin America for example, Europe for example, the strongest defenders of the Social Gospel, are the conservative Christians who oppose theological liberalism.

RGacky3 said:

Well, in a sense Capitalism requires lack of concern for the poor within the institution of Capitalism, case in point was when a Blue Cross executive was fired for saying that the Insurance Company should not use pre-existing conditions as a way to fleece patients out of Insurance coverage, she was hurting the bottom line With he concern for the poor. Now in one's personal life you are absolutely free to show concern, but institutionally, profit is the only thing that does and can matter. So the point is the institutions, and the principles behind them, which in capitalism, are in opposition to biblical principles.

The social gospel has been in play in the churches from the very begining, from the times of their biggest Growth, to today.

The Social Gospel IS NOT, and HAS NEVER BEEN, moral post modernism, or "People deicde what is right and wrong," I'm sorry that's not what it is, that's not what it has NEVER been.

That's called theological liberalism .... NOT the Social Gospel. Unfortunately in the United States the 2 have sometimes been intertwined. However elsewhere, Latin America for example, Europe for example, the strongest defenders of the Social Gospel, are the conservative Christians who oppose theological liberalism.

Click to expand...

I don't define the social gospel as it is expressed in the Bible as the people deciding what is right or wrong. Conversely, the Bible stands very firm on what IS right or wrong and expresses that there are consequences for ignoring it. We all experience the consequences of the society we create--the rain falls on the just and unjust. That has never been more true than in modern times. But the social gospel preached by most of the mainline Church is more of the gospel preaching by modern American liberalism that the problems in society are the result of imbalances of wealth and power and lack of concern for the poor rather than choosing sin over good.

When I teach the social gospel, I usually turn to the book of Amos who I deem the prophet of social justice. Here the powerful were exploiting and oppressing the poor and weak and there would be consequences for that. It is our choices as people that determine the destiny of our nation. But is it the capitalists who are doing the exploiting? Or those who profit themselves by pretending to care for the poor while pushing policies that keep people poor?

Capitalism oppresses nobody as it depends on the prosperity of all to produce the most benefits. There is no advantage to keeping people poor because those who are not poor are the ones who make capitalism work. And yes, those participating in capitalism are looking to put their own dinner on the table, (borrowing from Adam Smith), but in so doing also enable others to put dinner on their own table. One can be a pure capitalist and be completely moral, just, compassionate, and help the poor a great deal. And one can be a capitalist and be a greedy, selfish, asshole. But it is not capitalism that creates one or the other, but rather the choices individuals make re who and what they are.

Also it is the choices the socialist and/or communist makes that determines whether he/she is good or evil, but under socialism or communism there is far less opportunity and choice of how we will live our lives or accomplish good for the world.

The churches preaching a modern social gospel pretty much take God out of the equation and give the impression that the people themselves have the power to fix the problems of society. And because that rings hollow and impotent to so many, those churches are declining. Those preaching Jesus' gospel of looking to God for salvation and accepting His guidance for what is expected of them are thriving. And not one of them is preaching against capitalism.

AlbqOwl said:

I don't define the social gospel as it is expressed in the Bible as the people deciding what is right or wrong. Conversely, the Bible stands very firm on what IS right or wrong and expresses that there are consequences for ignoring it. We all experience the consequences of the society we create--the rain falls on the just and unjust. That has never been more true than in modern times. But the social gospel preached by most of the mainline Church is more of the gospel preaching by modern American liberalism that the problems in society are the result of imbalances of wealth and power and lack of concern for the poor rather than choosing sin over good.

Click to expand...

When I talk about the "social gospel" i'm not talking the lowest common denominator of liberal mainline Churches ... I mean they arn't really serious theologically, you have to go to actual serious theologians and biblical churches to understand it.

I'd say right now many in the Anglican tradition in the Uk, (inlcuding very many conservative orthodox anglicans), are going the right direction when it comes to the social gospel, as well as Latin American Evangelicals.

When I teach the social gospel, I usually turn to the book of Amos who I deem the prophet of social justice. Here the powerful were exploiting and oppressing the poor and weak and there would be consequences for that. It is our choices as people that determine the destiny of our nation. But is it the capitalists who are doing the exploiting? Or those who profit themselves by pretending to care for the poor while pushing policies that keep people poor?

Click to expand...

I go to Amos as well, Amos, Isaiah, James, Deuteronomy/Leviticus, Micah, in fact all over the bible.

But I would say those who push policies keeping People poor, while benefiting the Rich, as well as Capitalists who profit from the desperation of the poor ....

Capitalism oppresses nobody as it depends on the prosperity of all to produce the most benefits. There is no advantage to keeping people poor because those who are not poor are the ones who make capitalism work. And yes, those participating in capitalism are looking to put their own dinner on the table, (borrowing from Adam Smith), but in so doing also enable others to put dinner on their own table. One can be a pure capitalist and be completely moral, just, compassionate, and help the poor a great deal. And one can be a capitalist and be a greedy, selfish, asshole. But it is not capitalism that creates one or the other, but rather the choices individuals make re who and what they are.

Click to expand...

Capitalism DOES oppress the poor, since the very structure of it entails the owners of Capital profiting from Capital and labor, i.e. a constant upward redistribution, Money makes more Money, of course it needs the poor to make Capitalism work, which is a major problem in capitalism, (which is why it's constantly pushing the poor into debt).

Lets put it this way, in Capitalism it makes sense economically, for a Health Insurance Company to charge poor People MORE for Health Insurance, while delivering less to them, and do so on the basis that they have very little economic recourse, in a system where the Health care is not run on a for profit basis it is NOT economically rational to do so.

it doesn't matter HOW compassionate the Health Insurance executive is, in his role, he has to make the decision that will mazimize profit, even if that ends up With People loosing their life.

That is an immoral system.

Also it is the choices the socialist and/or communist makes that determines whether he/she is good or evil, but under socialism or communism there is far less opportunity and choice of how we will live our lives or accomplish good for the world.

The churches preaching a modern social gospel pretty much take God out of the equation and give the impression that the people themselves have the power to fix the problems of society. And because that rings hollow and impotent to so many, those churches are declining. Those preaching Jesus' gospel of looking to God for salvation and accepting His guidance for what is expected of them are thriving. And not one of them is preaching against capitalism.

Click to expand...

First of all, Capitalism or the Soviet Union is a false Choice.

second of all, the biblical social gospel PUTS God into the Equation, saying that God's commands and principles have a Place in Our economic system, it's those who are economic liberals (pro-capitalists) who want God out of the system.

I am not defending the mainline liberal churches when I talk about the social gospel ...

RGacky3 said:

When I talk about the "social gospel" i'm not talking the lowest common denominator of liberal mainline Churches ... I mean they arn't really serious theologically, you have to go to actual serious theologians and biblical churches to understand it.

I'd say right now many in the Anglican tradition in the Uk, (inlcuding very many conservative orthodox anglicans), are going the right direction when it comes to the social gospel, as well as Latin American Evangelicals.



I go to Amos as well, Amos, Isaiah, James, Deuteronomy/Leviticus, Micah, in fact all over the bible.

But I would say those who push policies keeping People poor, while benefiting the Rich, as well as Capitalists who profit from the desperation of the poor ....



Capitalism DOES oppress the poor, since the very structure of it entails the owners of Capital profiting from Capital and labor, i.e. a constant upward redistribution, Money makes more Money, of course it needs the poor to make Capitalism work, which is a major problem in capitalism, (which is why it's constantly pushing the poor into debt).

Lets put it this way, in Capitalism it makes sense economically, for a Health Insurance Company to charge poor People MORE for Health Insurance, while delivering less to them, and do so on the basis that they have very little economic recourse, in a system where the Health care is not run on a for profit basis it is NOT economically rational to do so.

it doesn't matter HOW compassionate the Health Insurance executive is, in his role, he has to make the decision that will mazimize profit, even if that ends up With People loosing their life.

That is an immoral system.



First of all, Capitalism or the Soviet Union is a false Choice.

second of all, the biblical social gospel PUTS God into the Equation, saying that God's commands and principles have a Place in Our economic system, it's those who are economic liberals (pro-capitalists) who want God out of the system.

I am not defending the mainline liberal churches when I talk about the social gospel ...

Click to expand...

Sorry friend but I hate chopped up posts and won't post in that style except when it is clearly expedient or necessary to do so. For me it disrupts the context and makes the flow of conversation more difficult and much more tedious.

We will just have to agree to disagree on capitalism because I believe capitalism, with all its inherent flaws, is the most just, most free, lease oppressive, most Godlike, and most beneficial system there is for both the rich and the poor.

But I think at this point we are hijacking the thread and should stop doing that. Maybe take this discussion to a different thread?

AlbqOwl said:

Sorry friend but I hate chopped up posts and won't post in that style except when it is clearly expedient or necessary to do so. For me it disrupts the context and makes the flow of conversation more difficult and much more tedious.

We will just have to agree to disagree on capitalism because I believe capitalism, with all its inherent flaws, is the most just, most free, lease oppressive, most Godlike, and most beneficial system there is for both the rich and the poor.

But I think at this point we are hijacking the thread and should stop doing that. Maybe take this discussion to a different thread?

Click to expand...

Fair enough, we can make another thread if you'd like.