Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

David Bokovoy

Acts 4:32-35

Recommended Posts

And just how is that done AFTER you have given all to the church?

That was given before the institution of the communal order of the post-resurrection church.

Share this post


Link to post

That's a magnificent strawman you've managed to pummel. I'm not sure who it was supposed to look like - certainly it wasn't based on anything anyone posted in this thread.

You were having so much fun pummeling your stawman, I thought I would try it.

Share this post


Link to post

That was given before the institution of the communal order of the post-resurrection church.

So, then WHY was it used in a discussion of Acts 4?

Share this post


Link to post

And yet the Parable of the Talents presupposes investment and profit motive, even though the slaves involved were supposed to be investing wealth on behalf of their owner.

Have you by chance read what Benjamin F. Johnson believed that Joseph Smith implied about that parable?

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, no contention at all on my part. Perhaps the discomfort you're feeling is a result of confronting the fact that traditional conservative American political values often times prove incompatible with Jesus' scriptural mandates. This can be an uncomfortable awakening, but it's well worth the spiritual journey. Each of us has to give up our worldly perspectives in order to come unto Christ and that sacrifice of our will for God's can prove a bit challenging.

Free lunch tastes better than a lunch that you have worked hard for. I guess I need to go vote for Obama then huh? Because untraditional American leftist views are exactly what Jesus and His apostles had inmind when they said what they said.

Share this post


Link to post

Have you by chance read what Benjamin F. Johnson believed that Joseph Smith implied about that parable?

I am sure that by the age of 25, Benjamin F. Johnson fully understood what JS REALLY implied about that parable. :P

Share this post


Link to post

So, then WHY was it used in a discussion of Acts 4?

Because the author of Acts is also the author of the Gospel of Luke and the passage provides further evidence that

Share this post


Link to post

Have you by chance read what Benjamin F. Johnson believed that Joseph Smith implied about that parable?

LOL! Way to change the subject from the poor and needy to plural marriage, you dirty dog!

Share this post


Link to post

Because the author of Acts is also the author of the Gospel of Luke and the passage provides further evidence that

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps the discomfort you're feeling is a result of confronting the fact that traditional conservative American political values often times prove incompatible with Jesus' scriptural mandates.

Yes I believe that's true David, but the fairness in me also demands that the same holds true for the other side of the isle as well. The fact is, that there is not, nor ever has been a socio-political/economic system that can adequately equate to the celestial law/way of God. Else, why would he need to reveal His Law afresh?

Share this post


Link to post

The basis of capitalism is that it is based on two basic principles. One is that those who have the gold make the rules, and number two is that you can buy anything in this world with money.

Share this post


Link to post

The basis of capitalism is that it is based on two basic principles. One is that those who have the gold make the rules, and number two is that you can buy anything in this world with money.

That is why I prefer FREE ENTERPRISE and the rule of constitutional law!

Share this post


Link to post

So, then WHY was it used in a discussion of Acts 4?

Obviously it's related. Jesus taught individuals to be generous and give money to the poor - even in some cases to give ALL of it to the poor. The apostles later took it a step further with their Christian commune.

Share this post


Link to post

Else, why would he need to reveal His Law afresh?

I suspect that some feel like he did, to Marx. :P

Share this post


Link to post

Free lunch tastes better than a lunch that you have worked hard for. I guess I need to go vote for Obama then huh? Because untraditional American leftist views are exactly what Jesus and His apostles had inmind when they said what they said.

You know better than to bring up politicians. The topic makes you uncomfortable because Christ's teachings do not fit with your personal beliefs, so you've decided to end your cognitive dissonance by trying to get the thread closed.

Share this post


Link to post

Vance:

As long as there is a disparity in income. ""Free" enterprise" is a oxymoron. IE. How willing are you to work 12 hrs a day for 25 cents a day?

Share this post


Link to post

Yes I believe that's true David, but the fairness in me also demands that the same holds true for the other side of the isle as well. The fact is, that there is not, nor ever has been a socio-political/economic system that can adequately equate to the celestial law/way of God. Else, why would he need to reveal His Law afresh?

I agree, and it's never been my intent in these threads to provide scriptural support for a specific American political party, candidate and/or agenda. They're all corrupt in one way or another.

Share this post


Link to post

Free lunch tastes better than a lunch that you have worked hard for. I guess I need to go vote for Obama then huh? Because untraditional American leftist views are exactly what Jesus and His apostles had inmind when they said what they said.

The topic of this thread has nothing to do with any specific American political figure. We're exploring whether or not the primitive church existed as a community without private ownership and if so, what this perspective might reveal regarding early LDS attempts to eradicate poverty by restoring the early Christian order.

Share this post


Link to post

I suspect that some feel like he did, to Marx. :P

I suspect that no one posting here would be among such. ;)

Share this post


Link to post

Vance:

As long as there is a disparity in income. ""Free" enterprise" is a oxymoron. IE. How willing are you to work 12 hrs a day for 25 cents a day?

What a bunch of whooey!!!!!!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post

Vance:

Then simply answer the question. How willing are you to work 12 hrs a day for 25 cents a day?

Oh, look at that, TSS just threw the parable of the talents and the law of the harvest under the (insert negative political philosophy) bus.

Share this post


Link to post

There is some good money to be made spinning strawmen into gold....

Share this post


Link to post

Vance:

Then simply answer the question. How willing are you to work 12 hrs a day for 25 cents a day?

I have used my agency to improve myself to the point that I can produce more than 25 cents worth of wealth in 12 hours.

Why, I can even afford to give more that 25 cents worth of wealth per day away, greedy Free Enterpriser that I am.

Share this post


Link to post

It's a parable. It's not about money, any more than the parable of the lost sheep is about being a literal shepherd.

It presupposes a world where people are property and where the economy must be greased by investment and not hoarding: remember, it's only the guy who hoards his master's cash who gets condemned; the guy who ventures and loses is blameless, since everybody knows that sometimes you win and sometimes you lose.

The world works in certain ways, and there are always going to be poor among us. If there are poor, there will be those with wealth. How both react to this is the measure of what they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...