The ecclesiastical idea of a
servant of God is not Jesus Christ’s idea. His idea is that we serve Him by
being the servants of other men. Jesus Christ out-socialists the socialists. He
says that in His Kingdom he that is greatest shall be the servant of all. The
real test of the saint is not preaching the gospel, but washing disciples’
feet, that is, doing the things that do not count in the actual estimate of men
but count everything in the estimate of God. Paul delighted to spend himself
out for God’s interests in other people, and he did not care what it cost. We
come in with our economical notions – “Suppose God wants me to go there – what
about the salary? What about the climate? How shall I be looked after? A man
must consider these things.” All that is an indication that we are serving God
with a reserve. The apostle Paul had no reserve. Paul focuses Jesus Christ’s
idea of a New Testament saint in his life, viz.: not one who proclaims the
Gospel merely, but one who becomes broken bread and poured-out wine in the
hands of Jesus Christ for other lives. – Oswald Chambers, My Utmost for His
Highest, 2/25
We need to be very careful here! To equate Jesus with a modern political and economic theory produced by atheists with no love for Christianity that assumes man is essentially good is not Christian. Below is a Wikipedia definition of Socialism It is by nature authoritarian, anti-Christian and it doesn't work. I have an extensive library of socialism, Communism etc. all of them written by communists or socialists if you want titles I can send them to you. People on the Internet recite words and ideas they know little about. This is causing massive errors that confuse more than they help.
ReplyDelete(Wikipedia) Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterized by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;[10] as well as the political ideologies, theories, and movements that aim to establish them.[11] Social ownership may refer to forms of public, collective, or cooperative ownership; to citizen ownership of equity; or to any combination of these.[12] Although there are many varieties of socialism and there is no single definition encapsulating all of them,[13] social ownership is the common element shared by its various forms.[5][14][15]
The socialist political movement includes a diverse array of political philosophies that originated amid the revolutionary movements of the mid-to-late 1700s and of a general concern for the social problems that were associated with capitalism. [13] In addition to the debate over markets and planning, the varieties of socialism differ in their form of social ownership, how management is to be organized within productive institutions, and the role of the state in constructing socialism
By the late 19th century, and after further articulation and advancement by Karl Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels as the culmination of technological development outstripping the economic dynamics of capitalism,[34] "socialism" had come to signify opposition to capitalism and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production.[35][36] By the 1920s, social democracy and communism became the two dominant political tendencies within the international socialist movement.[37] Today, some socialists have also adopted the causes of other social movements, such as environmentalism, feminism
They draw heavily on liberation theology and while it is Christian in some of the things they support I.e. the help for the oppressed it is essentially dictatorial in nature.
Terry, Thank you for the comment. In response, I would say that in our time the term, socialist, has been used to label anyone who cares for the poor. Sometimes we have to get people's attention. I think that Oswald Chamber's got yours. Ron
ReplyDelete