Dear Mudcatters,

Above it was said "Kent makes a similar point about love - and I don't know what he's getting at either, but I think his implication is that love is a wonderful but impossible ideal, so it can safely be avoided in real-life politics."

I implied nothing of the kind.

Seven times on this thread I have made one point, and yet various posters have responded as if I had said something else.

Here is my point: Acts 4:32-35 provides no information on how we should vote.

1. That is not a "contention…that socialism is necessarily godless".
2. That is not a claim that socialism is "taking things away just for the sake of taking
      things away".
3. That is not a denial that "Governments MUST make decisions that certain parties are
      not willing to make for themselves".
4. It is not an argument against paying taxes, nor an argument for lower taxes.
5. It is not a defense of capitalism.   
6. It is not an attack on regulation, nor a plea for less regulation.
7. It is not a denial that "the early Christian community was well-nigh an ideal
    community, with everyone showing concern for the welfare of all - and sharing their
    resources."
8. It is not a denial that "the ultimate, ideal political system would be a way of living
      that included LOVE being the beginning and end of your motives."
9. It is not a denial that Christ's teaching "has to apply to this life first".
10. It is not an implication that love "can safely be avoided in real-life politics".

It DOES imply that: Acts 4:32-35 provides no information on how we should vote.

The reason Acts 4:32-35 provides no information about how we should vote is that Acts 4 is not about the government. It is about the church. It is not about a government program. It is about voluntary charity. Charity is not giving away other people's money.

Giving away other people's money, be it good, bad, or indifferent; be it a crime or be it an obligation; be it necessary or expedient or democratic or wise or good or peachy-keen, is not charity. Acts 4 is about charity. It does not APPLY to politics.

I didn't say, and I don't think, that Acts 4 supports CONSERVATIVE politics. I didn't say, and don't think, that it opposes socialism. It doesn't apply to politics. It doesn't support OR oppose liberalism or conservatism or Maoism or anarchism or Stalinism or libertarianism or monarchism or feudalism. It isn't about politics. It isn't about government at all. It's about voluntary giving within the church.

Acts 4:32-35 provides no information on how we should vote.

Hoping that this is now clear, I remain,

Humbly Yours,

Kent