Ah, it's so nice to see my brother posting.

Interesting. If that's Beck's address from a politcal stance, to the collective Church, I think what he said is wrong. Perhaps their definitions of and practices on social justice differ, politically.

They both seem to be concerned for the poor and the economical welfare of the country -- one speaks from a purely poiltical stance(Beck)and the other associates politics with theology(Wallis). each is patriotic in his own 'way'.

Clearly, “Social justice” is an emotionally-laden phrase that can stand for an anti-capitalist, critical of the free enterprise system(as oppressive and exploitative), left wing and Gvt enhanced agenda. Marvin Olasky, would confirm that the phrase, “social justice,”  was used by both the Nazi Party and the Communist Party of the C 20th, as a promotion of Gvt power.  Once upon a time  he was instructed to use it as a member of the  Communist Party USA.

But the fact that “social justice” is a biblical concept, goes without saying.  The true disciples of Jesus, will be willing to visit prisoner, give drink and food to the needy (Mat 25:31-46) will have concern for the poor (Amos), and will consider and be sensitive to genuine human need (Jam. 2:14-26).

In reading God’s Word one will see that the devastating effects of sin break God’s heart -- those effects include hunger, poverty and disease.  We are to be people whose priorities are God’s. So  social justice is a biblical concept, a part of God’s kingdom and not someone’s political agenda.  I think makes for all the difference in the world.

I think Mr. Beck wasn't fair enough to what Scriptures say even though Christians shoul watch against false gospels. Pastor Wallis has espoused what the Gospel doesn't herald -- and this is where probably Beck is calling him on -- even though our God is a just God, who cares for the poor. When we bring God in, I think it's appropriate to uphold what he truly says, regarding this, crucial  matter.  

Liberation Theology is something different though -- it doesn't stand up to the biblical stricture. It’s Humanism at work, with man borrowing from God bits and pieces in trying to help himself while  denying his sole need of God and the ways to attain salvation the way God has intended. It’s a false promise of salvation at the core, though outwardly it has a mantle of the “love your neighbour as you love yourself”/power/social justice. It's a 'salvation' which begins at a view from below, in order to save mankind.

Man has always been his own most vexing problem since the fall of Adam. How would man save man? Liberation Theology points man to man as a saviour other than Jesus Christ. I’m not saying one should condone oppression or stop helping the poor and needy, yet, one can be free though in physical captivity or limited possibilities. Liberation theology seems to negate this, offering ways, to free one physically in order to attain Freedom/liberation. Just to name a few.

It(Liberation  theology) comes to God’s Truth to squeeze an agreement with its cause rather than listen to let God’s Truth give answers to what matters to its cause.

I think Gvts will go abt their tasks differently depending on a number of things, which of course shouldn't neglect their constitutions/core values, the rule of Law and the rights of their own people.

Rev. Wallis may be dismayed to find out that the answer to, "Let's go back through the bible, verse by verse, and look at what in fact God says about justice," indeed doesn’t use the term “justice” as if it were synonymous with coercion. It’s better for individuals to give their assistance to the poor and the downtrodden by choice rather than by dictate.

 But such as his claims are a  result of subjective interpretation. A detailed biblical review  doesn’t call for a gvtal role in charity. Gvts aren’t subjects of the Gospel’s appeal to charitable actions. The reverse describes a fallacy which takes the commands given by Jesus(or even derived from the OT), applying to the Church/believers and apply them to Gvts. Is the Gvt capable of love?

A perusal of his site elicits how the  "biblical call"  according to him is to be answered -- by spreading the wealth through taxation, by means of a Gvt-directed redistributive effort, and of course, by force. I think this kind of misguided observation shows the side of social justice which is/can be ugly.

For the Christian though, I think this calls for a question/re-focusing on what the Gospel is all abt, how/what is to be done with the care of the poor(and other social concerns per se), and how one is to participate and uphold(what) in the political arena.

Instead of exchanging wrath, It'd be good to discuss this matter in civility, and listen to each other -- because the poor are there and it is ours to help these. This is godly no matter where it is to be applied.

Two cents and me.

NEWMERCIES

  maybe its a ploy to build Mormon membership. LOLOL!

I say....ditch the opinions of man...feed the hungry, clothe the naked, strengthen, care for, the widow and orphans....this is true and pure religion.   As we have done to the least of these....we have done unto Christ! 

I had barely heard of this Jim Wallis so looked on  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Wallis.    I appreciated what NewMercies and Ramone said and what was said by JLB (I first wrote JOB, a good reminder of a good man).

So true.....now let me start a war here....

Wouldn't it be interesting if smokers, druggies, drinkers, gamblers, even sex offenders, (i.e. sex outside of marriage) any vice that costs money or its results cost money, were denied government funding to the poor?  and, if they were found indulging afterwards, their government help was CANCELED! oh! and family/friends who hide them were served a hefty fine! ......Just sayin'...

LET THE WAR COMMENCE! 

Why would anyone take Glen Beck seriously anyway? Comedians aren't to be taken seriously last time I checked. Right?

Yes it is easy to be a philosopher or an idealist when something doesn't hit home but when someone finds themselves in the middle of a situation or bondage and there is help available from the government then one's attitude can change dramatically.

There is NO Way Lav that I would ask the government to offer support to my drug addict child. In fact I would be angry if they did and it aided their addiction. I just don't believe in supporting dysfunction. Sorry, but I would handle this myself, first in the prayer closet. Getting God on their case if a far greater system with lasting results, which I'm sure you know also. I do not expect some elses tax dollar to aid my child in their abuse.

Steve do you assume we have not had something hit home that we could have called the government to aide? The government is not our source or answer.