Re: Fw: The Left Hand of God or "is God a socialist"

If anyone is still interested in the Jubilee issue, I found the article I
had mentioned a ways back in Faith & Economics: Kurt Schaefer and Edd
Noell, Contract Theory, Distributive Justice, and the Hebrew Sabbatical,
Faith & Economics 45:1 (2005). The authors are professors at Calvin and
Westmont Colleges, respectively. The authors provide an exhastive survey of
the Biblical jubilee laws, and conclude that they were primarily designed to
provide a safety net underlying private contract law for debtors who
suffered catastrophic loss (akin to the theory of modern bankruptcy law)
rather than as a means of centralized governmental wealth redistribution.

On 3/10/06, Donald Perrett (E-mail) <donperrett@theology-perspectives.net>
wrote:
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> *From:* asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]*On
> Behalf Of *Pim van Meurs
> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 07, 2006 02:48
> *To:* asa@calvin.edu
> *Subject:* Re: Fw: The Left Hand of God or "is God a socialist"
>
>
>
> *"Matt \"Fritz\" Bergin" <fritziematt@yahoo.com>* wrote:
>
> I don't see any Biblical reason to have jubilee and I don't see how
> capitalism is destructive to faith. People are free to give what they want
> to others or the church in a capitalist society. If you want to redistribute
> your wealth to other people then by all means go ahead.
> PvM: Jubilee seems an interesting biblical concept. I guess we are free to
> accept and reject biblical teachings whenever appropriate? Why is capitalism
> destructive to faith? Because it focuses on materialism, which places more
> emphasis on possessions than on the religious relevance of Christmas for
> instance.
> [Don Perrett]
> Sorry Pim wrong again. You are describing consumerism not
> capitalism. Lets try to use words that mean what they say. The US has
> become a consumerist nation and that is bad. It may in fact be evil. When
> people focus on their wants they loose sight of their needs and they can
> cause themselves and others to suffer. If they focus on the needs only and
> the needs of others, then all of Gods people will have their needs met. But
> again this is NOT capitalism. The fact that I put my money together with
> someone elses in order to make the pie grow so that I can then help the
> people who don't have pie is not evil by any stretch of your imagination.
> Capitalism leads to saving, and sometimes hording. One is good and one is
> bad. But like all things in life. It is not what you do, it is why you do
> it. In moderation and balance, wealth, resources, politics, etc can be used
> to create a society which perhaps God had intended. But going way out in
> left field, or right field, and taking all the resources and then hording
> them from the people just so that you have control over them does not work
> to the purposes of God. The only way to ensure that the resources and power
> are not corrupted and reside only with a few is to ensure that each
> individual has the power within them to make a conscious decision to control
> the flow of the resources.
>
> Capitalism doesn't mean that no one can help or gets help. There are also
> other ways of giving besides money. Maybe you can give your time working to
> make a quilt for the homeless or work at a place that collects stuff that
> people want to give to the poor that they don't need anymore. My church has
> a program for giving your old vehicles to be fixed up and given to single
> parents and those that need vehicles.
> PvM: Those are good programs although they do not really address the
> underlying problem. Still charity is a good start.
> There are also many different food shelters and places that give poor
> people the things they need. I don't see why with all of this that we need
> to redistribute wealth.
> PvM: To those who have, the idea of having to redistribute wealth may seem
> 'scary' but look at it from the jubilee perspective and things may look
> quite differently.
> The other problem is that many poor people have lots of problems that
> giving them money will not solve like drug addictions, alcohol problems, no
> schooling, mental problems, or bad choices that they made.
> PvM: Sure but those are often more symptoms rather than causes. Inequity,
> poor schooling, poverty all add to their problems. Drugs, mental problems
> etc are seldomly direct causes.
> [Don Perrett] So just curious, have you ever been poor? Or is this
> conclusion based on your perception of poverty? I have been poor.
> Welfare certainly came in handy when I was a kid, but without the proper
> incentives and regulations, it can create a welfare mentality
> where people either become comfortable being handed out or give up since the
> way up is harder than staying in the gutter. I've lived it first hand. The
> only out for me was a swift kick in the ...... when I woke up and decided to
> join the Army at 17. Had it not been for the military, I would have ended
> up like many of my friends who chose to stay in the welfare system, in
> prison or dead.
>
> It probably seems like the problem is just money but its far more than
> that and I don't see how these socialist utopian solutions will solve the
> problem or help the people in need. These people need a more personal and
> real answers to their problems. Like in the case of the drug addict giving
> them money will not help them because they will just use it to further their
> addiction. I think we need to be more aware of their individual problems
> which a collectivism doesn't recognize.
>
> PvM: What if addiction is a symptom of poverty and redistribution could
> help alleviate these problems? Giving money to a drug addict is not going to
> help but giving opportunities to someone who may become a drug addict may be
> a solution.
> [Don Perrett] And what if the person isn't poor? Never heard of a rich
> man on cocaine? I personal know a woman who makes $400-500 a day selling
> drugs just to support her own habit. She could wake up one day and still
> sell but quit the habit and then in a year she'd be able to buy a house and
> car cash and maybe even an education to get out of it all together. But her
> addiction keeps her in it. If she were just given money, even at
> Massachusettes welfare rates she would still continue to sell and use. It
> would just mean that she would have more to use. She is happy with what she
> is doing. She didn't come from a poor family like I did. Neither did she
> come from a rich family, but like so many, made the mistake as a youth or
> starting and hasn't stopped since.
>
> I always thought that Santa Claus was based on a real guy (Saint Nick) who
> gave gold to poor families...I don't remember the details. If Santa is a
> tradition that recognizes that then I see no problem with it. There are a
> lot of people that give in the holiday season to things like Toys for Tots
> and the Salvation Army. The whole point of Christmas and gifts is to give
> (as a way of recognizing God's gift to us)...but someone has to receive what
> you are giving...if thats materialistic then I don't know what to say.
>
> Indeed, the history of Saint Nick is hardly as materialistic as the
> holiday it has turned into. Look at the advertising, the hype, the amount of
> money, the pressure on parents to deliver... Christmas has turned into a
> major materialistic holiday where the meaning of Christmas or Santa Claus
> have been totally lost.
>
> What exactly is the religious right concentrating on anyway?
> PvM: Good question... What should they be concentrating on is an even
> better one.
> Is the religious right just a pawn in the hands of the political right?
> Should the religious ri ght abandon its foundations for political short term
> gain?
>
>
Received on Mon Mar 13 14:12:10 2006