Wealth

This was part of what I read this morning in scripture...It made me think. I thought I would share.

When Matadormus heard this, his countenance fell. He arose and went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. This wealthy young Pharisee had been raised to believe that wealth was the token of God's favor. Jesus knew that he was not free from the love of himself and his riches. The Master wanted to deliver him from the love of wealth, not necessarily from the wealth. While the disciples of Jesus did not part with all their worldly goods, the apostles and the seventy did. Matadormus desired to be one of the seventy new messengers, and that was the reason for Jesus' requiring him to part with all of his temporal possessions.
Almost every human being has some one thing which is held on to as a pet evil, and which the entrance into the kingdom of heaven requires as a part of the price of admission. If Matadormus had parted with his wealth, it probably would have been put right back into his hands for administration as treasurer of the seventy. For later on, after the establishment of the church at Jerusalem, he did obey the Master's injunction, although it was then too late to enjoy membership in the seventy, and he became the treasurer of the Jerusalem church, of which James the Lord's brother in the flesh was the head.
Thus always it was and forever will be: Men must arrive at their own decisions. There is a certain range of the freedom of choice which mortals may exercise. The forces of the spiritual world will not coerce man; they allow him to go the way of his own choosing.
Jesus foresaw that Matadormus, with his riches, could not possibly become an ordained associate of men who had forsaken all for the gospel; at the same time, he saw that, without his riches, he would become the ultimate leader of all of them. But, like Jesus' own brethren, he never became great in the kingdom
Page 1803
because he deprived himself of that intimate and personal association with the Master which might have been his experience had he been willing to do at this time the very thing which Jesus asked, and which, several years subsequently, he actually did.
Riches have nothing directly to do with entrance into the kingdom of heaven, but the love of wealth does. The spiritual loyalties of the kingdom are incompatible with servility to materialistic mammon. Man may not share his supreme loyalty to a spiritual ideal with a material devotion.
Jesus never taught that it was wrong to have wealth. He required only the twelve and the seventy to dedicate all of their worldly possessions to the common cause. Even then, he provided for the profitable liquidation of their property, as in the case of the Apostle Matthew. Jesus many times advised his well-to-do disciples as he taught the rich man of Rome. The Master regarded the wise investment of excess earnings as a legitimate form of insurance against future and unavoidable adversity. When the apostolic treasury was overflowing, Judas put funds on deposit to be used subsequently when they might suffer greatly from a diminution of income. This Judas did after consultation with Andrew. Jesus never personally had anything to do with the apostolic finances except in the disbursement of alms. But there was one economic abuse which he many times condemned, and that was the unfair exploitation of the weak, unlearned, and less fortunate of men by their strong, keen, and more intelligent fellows. Jesus declared that such inhuman treatment of men, women, and children was incompatible with the ideals of the brotherhood of the kingdom of heaven.

Opine

Everyone has an opinion. I don't know that I ever lacked one. I was just encouraged not to share it. I oft wonder if that was due to my gender, the religious expectations set upon me, or just that my Father wanted me withhold my effervescence. Could be a combination of all three.

I am, as of late, surrounded by quite the abundance of opinion. And, I've learned over the years, that keeping one's council is probably the best course of action. In polite conversation one does not engage another in certain topics. The current debates being just such types of topic.

While I was averse to lend my thoughts, it seemed that no one around me was thus. Everyone wanted to share what they thought and I found myself listening to some interesting conversations. My most frequent thought being, "Who told you this?"

We all seem to speak with such authority on matters that, in reality, we have no quality information on to begin with. We ascribe to unknown authority to shore up claims that we've only heard; from the neighbor, our clergy, a colleague or a magazine or news paper. Yet, none of us really knows. Not for certain. How you translate or interpret is not necessarily correct.

In such quandaries, I sometimes choose to consult a trusted friend. I know that responses are well thought, deliberate and not without research. Even if it includes the elusiveness of scripture. He may not be right, but his words are always food for thought. I am fond of repeating a line that he shared with me some fifteen years ago as we discussed our religions interpretation of a subject that was not shared by academia. He said, "It is often hard to admit, that your revelation, is not my prophecy." Difficult as it may seem, what is given to us in revelation by one deemed "prophet" is not always prophecy. Good advice is different from direct instruction.

To true. What is revealed to one, is not direction for me. A difficult thing to admit, especially when voting. Voting for laws, legislation or politicians who do not share a view point. What I believe is good for me, may not suit the masses. Armed with this idea I voted contrary to what many would have believed was best. I encouraged loved ones in other States to vote contrary to what they may believe. Because the Doctor was, and still is right. How you live your life, does not determine my path to salvation.

Do I like it? Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. I've yet to find the wrong answer when led by God, though. It is thus, I don't think you should engage in relations outside of marriage. If you do, and you find yourself with an unwanted, unplanned pregnancy, then you are at liberty to terminate that pregnancy. I think that's wrong. But, just as God gave me the free-agency to choose, so he gave you. You will have to live with the consequences, not me. And I do not think, beyond counseling you to choose otherwise, that a governmental system is set in place to enforce my way of thinking.

There are many issues that we saw on ballots across the country that could be placed in just such a context. They make us sad, angry, uncomfortable, queasy. Again, bodily response may be your revelation, but it is not mine. Aristotle had it right, "The law is reason free from passion." And my savior said it best "This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."

In the days that followed some ballot decisions, the most poignant sound bite? "Get your church, out of my State." Hear, hear!!

Friendship

The enhanced defense against all evil. Personality association and mutual affection is an efficient insurance against evil. Difficulties, sorrow, disappointment, and defeat are more painful and disheartening when borne alone. Association does not transmute evil into righteousness, but it does aid in greatly lessening the sting. Said your Master, "Happy are they who mourn"--if a friend is at hand to comfort. There is positive strength in the knowledge that you live for the welfare of others, and that these others likewise live for your welfare and advancement. Man languishes in isolation. Human beings unfailingly become discouraged when they view only the transitory transactions of time. The present, when divorced from the past and the future, becomes exasperatingly trivial. Only a glimpse of the circle of eternity can inspire man to do his best and can challenge the best in him to do its utmost. And when man is thus at his best, he lives most unselfishly for the good of others, his fellow sojourners in time and eternity.