The problem isn’t figuring out how to dance out of the difficulty of this challenge. The problem is that I don’t have even a fraction of the faith required to do it. My lack of faith, however, doesn’t mean Jesus didn’t really mean that I should give everything away. NOT jumping into the huge, gaping, scary, dark abyss is my cowardly choice. A choice I think he understands. But he still hasn’t revoked the invitation.]]>
I prefer to discuss how to live the Gospel in practical terms, not super-simplistic, unrealistic hypotheticals.
Exactly. Spot on. Word.]]>
How is the problem easily solved in a discussion about economics? The question, it seems to me, is not about the money that is invested or given to charity. The question is, does David really need $100,000 to live on? Couldn’t he live on $90,000 and then give that additional $10,000 to charity or investments towards future charities? Wherever we draw the line in what we allocate towards ourselves, we could always be giving a little more.]]>
But maybe I’m seeing it that way because that’s kinda how I deal with my own guilt—practically. There is just no way I’m going to feel guilty about every single hardship that every single person on this earth deals with when that is not something Christ wants me to feel guilty about. I prefer to discuss how to live the Gospel in practical terms, not super-simplistic, unrealistic hypotheticals.
But that’s just me. It appears there are many on that thread who appreciate it, so, I hope the best for them.]]>
Since Christ, through God, continues to be the ultimate authority on morality, I would say that He’s the one to decide if it’s a dilemma.]]>
You are really missing the mark with this post. You are trying to make it about economics and practical consequences when the original post is about guilt.]]>
Hint: he should continue making all that money!]]>