Could it be said that services to others is the Kingdom? And could giving away wealth also mean putting others before yourself? And if you put others first and yourself last, then is that a perspectival shift that forgoes the ownership of ideas? And then, is that the meaning of "judge not"?
Discussion
Some say in your midst means that the kingdom of God is in you. Others point to the fact that Jesus was present (in their midst) that he was a representative of the kingdom of God.
It’s pretty loaded. There’s many interpretations. You can geek out over it and have fun contemplating the chapter, but at the end of the day your interpretation is neither right or wrong.
I’m starting to think after this long thread, the whole idea of forgoing riches is due to it being an earthly desire. We need to not be attached to our personal desires. It’s okay to have nice things, but that’s not the end all be all.
Very zen like.
Yeah. Possibly all the interpretations are correct simultaneously.
I think its bigger than liberation from desire. That definitely reminds me of Buddhist teachings, though. Desire being the cause of suffering. But I'm not sure liberation from suffering is the same goal as following Christ. Maybe a nice side effect.
99% of what I possess isn't material. I can lose all of my material things and still be "me." I can lose all of my relationships and still be me. But can I lose all of my knowledge and still be me? My opinions could all change, because they'd be based on different suppositions. But then, an opinion is a judgement. If I gave away all the immaterial things I possess, what would I be? Maybe poor in spirit.
Blessed are the poor in spirit.
I tend to think of the kingdom of God as being a little bit more overt. I think we are creatures, subject to creator, and I think at some point that will be realized more clearly.
I think service, in as much as others are Gods children, is justice.
But to borrow from psychology, there is a hierarchy of needs. We have to spend some of our time in some of our places attending to the basic needs of others, food, shelter, etc., but we also have to be working towards giving them truth. It’s complicated but I think that’s why we have community. People have different skills and different abilities. We have an obligation to Steward that community in the best way possible. To meet all of these needs. Which we could never do in one lifetime. Which is why we are also compelled to steward in the next generation. And the generation after that. And there are plenty of passages talking about your grandchildren‘s grandchildren. So we don’t all have the ability to give every resource away during our own lifetime Because that may be shortsighted.
Ideas are that by which we know things. We are made to conformed the truth. It is probably a discussion an order or more past my capability but ideas as non physical , to me, are untethered to the physical world, and therefore there would not seem to be any need for ownership or concept of ownership of the idea? There is nothing precluding everyone apprehending the same idea at the same time in the same way because it does not physical, and so I don’t think ownership the way that I understand it as a necessary component of a physical world applies.?