Hello everyone, here is another worldly monk post idea that isn't as good but still kind of interesting. 

It has to do with God not owing us anything. Having some understanding of that is really helpful, and I mention something like it in my next post. But I want to kind of contradict myself and say that it is really part of his goodness that he loves us and provides for us. So to think that maybe it wouldn't be good if he didn't love you might actually have some truth to it.

I'm just discussing the idea of obligation.  No one is in charge of him but it is part of his holy character that he works with all of us in whatever way he does.  So I just think you can reverse logic some of it to think that of course he loves you.  Why? Because he is good. And why wouldn't he love you? I mean that is actually post christian status because actually everyone does have reason to be cast away. But I am going to have to say that he wouldn't be the same without us.

This can be warped into socialism, but the problems that socialism tries and fails to address are also related to what people are and aren't owed, as compared to how righteous people are in fact supposed to treat each other. I don't subscribe to just saying all the basic needs are human rights.  But God did say to feed the hungry and take care of the poor.  And once he says that, there is an obligation factor and a responsibility that could certainly count as a form of being "owed."

Ok, to revisit the first section. If God doesn't love someone, he is still right.  And if he does love someone, he is right.  So if he didn't love that person that he does love, then wouldn't that be wrong? That is what I am saying and I forgot a good line.  And if people say this is a word game I will say that it has to do with things being the way they are beyond labels.