Were early Christians socialists?

[Phoenix]

On another message board I'm on, an atheist keeps claiming early christians were socialists. I've searched the net and can't find anything about early Christians being socialist other than on atheist websites. Does anyone have the facts?

Here is his argument.

"2 Corinthians 8:13-15 "For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened:But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality:As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack."

Acts 2:44-45 "And all that believed were together, and had all things common;And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need."

Now lets quote Karl Marx, the father of Communism: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" The simularities are striking, aren't they!

So why do Capitalist Christians condemn socialists so much? Why is socialism such an affront to the Christian Capitalist? Christains, after all, were the first people to practice socialism!!!"

[puritan lad]

The Early Church were not socialists. Socialism is of the Devil.

The early church did have all things in common, but this was not the normal way things are to run, unless your church finds itself bombarded with 8,000 Christian immigrants at its doorstep like theirs did. The early Christians did not give all their money to Caesar. They gave it to the church. (If some socialist tries to use this passage to promote Socialism, point this fact out to them and they will go nuts.)

No one, not even the government, has the right to take a person's property (See 1 Kings 21). The Bible defines clear duties for civil governments. The redestribution of wealth is not one of them. The government has the right to collect taxes (Matthew 22:16-21), but also compares anything over 10% to be tyranny (1 Samuel 8:15-17).

This, of course, does not mean that Christians have no duty to help the poor. They do. But is also means that the poor have a duty not to steal from the rich via civil government.

Socialism is built upon the premise that "I have the right to as much money as I can vote out of my neighbor's pockets". The Bible is adamantly against such nonsense.

Exodus 20:17
“You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor's.”

Socialism is built on coveteousness, which is a serious sin against God. Socialism seeks to ban private property. The Bible, over and over again, adamantly demands respect for private property, as made clear by the many laws against theft. Christians worship the true God. Socialists worship the state (John 19:15). The two beliefs are not compatible, as history has shown time and time again.

[Blacknad]

The 'Year of Jubilee' was about redistribution of wealth.

This law is ascribed to the legislation on Mount Sinai (Leviticus. 25:1). It was to come into force after the Israelites should be in possession of Canaan, Israel. "When you come into the land which I give you" (ib.). The law provides that one may cultivate his field and vineyard six years, but "in the seventh year shall be...a Sabbath for the Lord," during which one shall neither sow nor reap for one's private gain, but all members of the community — the owner, his servants, and strangers — as well as domestic and wild animals, shall share in consuming the natural or spontaneous yield of the soil.

The fiftieth year, i.e., that following the last year of seven Sabbatical cycles, is the jubilee; during it the land regulations of the Sabbatical year are to be observed, as is also the commandment "You shall return every man unto his possession" (ib. verse 10), indicating the compulsory restoration of hereditary properties (except houses of laymen located in walled cities) to the original owners or their legal heirs, and the emancipation of all Hebrew indentured servants whose term of six years is unexpired or who refuse to leave their masters when such term of service has expired (Gen. 18:6).

What is giving to the poor, unless it is about redistributing wealth and resources?

But the political ideology called socialism is about marxist thought that the redistribution of wealth is a means of taking away man's need for religion. Not very Christian.

Regards,

Blacknad.

[puritan lad]

The 'Year of Jubilee' was about redistribution of wealth.

No it wasn't. It was about the forgiveness of debt and the return of private property to the original owners.

"You shall return every man unto HIS possessions"

What is giving to the poor, unless it is about redistributing wealth and resources?

The STATE (civil government) is not to "give to the poor". It is for individuals, not governments. Giving in the Bible is commanded, but not enforced by the state. Besides, state redestribution of wealth doesn't help the poor. It enslaves them.

But the political ideology called socialism is about marxist thought that the redistribution of wealth is a means of taking away man's need for religion. Not very Christian.

Marxism has to take away religion. In order for the state to rule supreme, it must somehow trump God.

Blacknad, I see that you live in Europe. You, of all people, should know how socialism always fails. How's that healthcare system doing over there?

[Forge]

Christianity is about giving, Socialism/Marxism is about taking. 'Nuff said.

[Blacknad]

The 'Year of Jubilee' was about redistribution of wealth.

No it wasn't. It was about the forgiveness of debt and the return of private property to the original owners.

"You shall return every man unto HIS possessions"

- Because land was one of the most important aspects of wealth, the Jubilee was certainly about redistributing wealth every fifty years. This was to be practised from the time the Iraelites came into Canaan. At this point there would likely be some kind of parity as land was initially distributed (and probably livestock).

The Jubilee would have returned everything back to its original families every 50 years. This would have prevented anyone from accumulating unchecked wealth. You would not have had your Rockefellers etc. This would have provided as near as possible an even distribution of wealth.

The point is that obviously God agrees with the socialists that there should be parity of resources between people.

The main difference is the method of achieving it.

What is giving to the poor, unless it is about redistributing wealth and resources?

The STATE (civil government) is not to "give to the poor". It is for individuals, not governments. Giving in the Bible is commanded, but not enforced by the state. Besides, state redistribution of wealth doesn't help the poor. It enslaves them.

True, but the Bible also recognisees that individuals are innately selfish and will often do everything within their power to hold onto wealth and privilege. So who would have enforced the Year of Jubilee? The leadership (State).

Marxism has to take away religion. In order for the state to rule supreme, it must somehow trump God.

Never disagreed with this. I was talking about the basic principles of wealth distribution/redistribution.

The problem with Socialism is that (unlike the Year of Jubilee), it does not reward hard work, risk or entrepeneurs. The Year of Jubilee did not prevent this reward, but acted as a check twice a century to mitigate the gradual expansion of the gap between rich and poor, by returning land and freeing slaves etc.

Blacknad, I see that you live in Europe. You, of all people, should know how socialism always fails. How's that healthcare system doing over there?

Of course Socialism always fails. Never stated that it was effective.

The Health Service is a different matter and should not be confused with the Ideology of Socialism. It is based upon the principle that medical treatment should be available for all (free at the point of need) despite people's ability to pay for it.

It has worked well for decades but is in crisis because of 16 years of conservatives slowly introducing market forces by the back door and massively underfunding it.

Another issue is that it now funds things like Viagra and Gender Dysphoria (Sex Change).

There is also the problem of advancing science and the ever greater amount of treatments it can offer. There needs to be a massive justification exercise.

The NHS is a good in it own right and should not be seen as a part of socialism.


Regards,

Blacknad.

[Canuckster1127]

Keep in mind with this discussion,

Socialism has some very specific connotations today that do not translate to what some would like to project into the past and into the Biblical text.

1. Old Testament year of Jubilee was in the context of an agricultural society, a theocrasy with priestly leadership and tribal territory clearly defined which was restored regularly to keep that social context intact.

2. The early Church grew under prosecution and worked together for survival in many instances.

3. It was voluntary in the NT Church. (Note Ananias and Sapphira's judgment was for lying about their gift, not keeping part of it back which they had the right to do.)

4. Socialism ideologically today involves state ownership and distribution, not private ownership coupled with voluntary generosity.

Attempting to portray Biblical generosity and the OT system as the equivilant of modern socialism is ludicrous and an intellectual construct which is disingenuous at best and propaganda at worst.

The root of the distinction falls to human nature. Socialism today assumes man is inherently good and that the state will not fall prey to corruption and further people will be motivated by their desire to provide for others over their own indulgence. This is biblically not true. Further, history has demonstrated time and time again, such an idealist system which fails to account for the consistent evil of man, cannot work.

The bible is clear about the nature of man and the systems presented in the Old Testament are designed to reset the playing field periodically to prevent that selfish nature from resulting in a fuedal type system with a few controlling or enslaving the majority.

In the New Testament, the system comes out of the change in heart that occured in the Christian Community and their willingness to elevate others needs as equal to their own based upon their love for Christ and acceptance of His teaching and example of sacrificial love. A coercive government played no role, nor could it.

Orwell's Animal Farm is the classic literature that helps illustrate this from the opposite direction, in terms of the nature of man and what that does in a system where power is concentrated for the "common good."

Very different animals being discussed here.

[puritan lad]

[The Jubilee would have returned everything back to its original families every 50 years. This would have prevented anyone from accumulating unchecked wealth. You would not have had your Rockefellers etc. This would have provided as near as possible an even distribution of wealth.

Oh Boy. You've been reading too much Ron Sider

Unchecked wealth? Tell that to King Solomon, or Abraham. There is NOTHING in the Bible about an even distribution of wealth. In fact, the Bible praises lawful gains and profits.

The point is that obviously God agrees with the socialists that there should be parity of resources between people.

Scripture please.

1 Samuel 2:7
"The LORD makes poor and makes rich;He brings low and lifts up."

Can't quite see your premise in this scripture. Please explain.

Envy is rottenness to the bones. Thou shall not covet.

True, but the Bible also recognisees that individuals are innately selfish and will often do everything within their power to hold onto wealth and privilege. So who would have enforced the Year of Jubilee? The leadership (State).

You want to return to the law of the year of Jubilee, Blacknad? Fine. First, you will have to go back in time and find out who originally owned all of the land on planet earth. (Good Luck). Then you will have to get the state (I assume a world state) to make sure that all of this land is returned to their proper families. Of course, those who disagree will have to be dealt with severely by the proper authorities, so that would make it a world police state. That is what the Jubilee would result in, Blacknad. Not "parity of resources between people", but an all-powerful police state "redistributing" wealth by force (minus 70% for administrative purposes). Blacknad, you scare me. Maybe you need a basic economics lesson. Maybe you study the role of civil government in the Bible. I don't know.

I was talking about the basic principles of wealth distribution/redistribution.

Not Biblical (or practical). Please do not covet.

Of course Socialism always fails. Never stated that it was effective.

Then why are you defending it?

The Health Service is a different matter and should not be confused with the Ideology of Socialism. It is based upon the principle that medical treatment should be available for all (free at the point of need) despite people's ability to pay for it.

It has worked well for decades but is in crisis because of 16 years of conservatives slowly introducing market forces by the back door and massively underfunding it.

Another issue is that it now funds things like Viagra and Gender Dysphoria (Sex Change).

There is also the problem of advancing science and the ever greater amount of treatments it can offer. There needs to be a massive justification exercise.

The NHS is a good in it own right and should not be seen as a part of socialism.

Too much nonsense here to deal with, but you brought forth an interesting point with the Sex change/Viagra deal. What should the government (or actually it's servants) pay for? Who is going to decide what should and should not be covered? Sex change? Chapped Lips? Splinters? Ingrown Toenails?

How much money should doctors be allowed to make? Where in the Bible is their a limit placed on wealth? WHo is going to make sure that the state stays in check, since you want to give them authority over the "Jubilee"?

What is the result of a State Redestribution of wealth? See links below (I left out obviously bad socialist regimes such as Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy):

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=na ... ots+france

http://www.freedomsnest.com/rummel_soviet.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/lect/mod10.html

Safe to say that Government Redestribution of wealth cannot succeed. History shows us that. The Bible condemns it. The lives of hundreds of millions of people testify to it's failure (as do you). Why would any sane person defend this?

[Blacknad]

Where do I start.

You may want to try to understand what I am trying to say in its entirety, instead of running from point to point.

You have obviously misunderstood what I am saying if you think I am defending the Ideology of Socialism. Even though what you seem to be attacking has more in common with Marxist Communism than contemporary socialism.


With your comment about Ron Sider, I presume you have no issue with rich Christians in an age of hunger. Do you think Capitalism works?

The American Christian embrace of consumerism and capitalism is completely anti-biblical.

And as for scripture:

It's interesting that Christians who take a lot of the Bible literally don't do that with our Lord's words to the rich young ruler: 'Go, sell all you have and give the money to the poor...' (Mark 10:21).

And here Jesus (amongst other things) was proclaiming his own poverty...

Mat 8:20 Jesus said to him, "Foxes have dens, and the birds in the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."

There is NOTHING in the Bible about an even distribution of wealth. In fact, the Bible praises lawful gains and profits.

On the contrary 'Go sell all you have and give your money to the poor' is exactly about moving money & resources from those who have more to those who have less. This is redistributing wealth, and yes is done by individuals and not the state.

I was never talking about the method of doing it, I was talking about the commonality of the basic principle.

I was not even saying the basic principle was on an equal footing between Socialism and Scripture.


And you keep mentioning covetousness. What has that got to do with anything? Are you really saying that a socialist who believes that money should be taken from the rich and redistributed to the poor, only thinks that out of envy.

It couldn't possibly be that he just thinks it is more just. No of course not - he is demonic - your favorite label. (e.g. Judaism is a demonic cult etc.)

And is your attack on 'anyone drawing a general comparison between the socialist desire for redistribution of wealth and any likewise biblical principle' based upon a need to defend modern day Christians greed.

Well as you seem to have so little respect for Ron Sider, then I am led to believe so:

Materialism continues to be an incredible scandal. The average [American] church member [from across the denominations] today gives about 2.6 percent of his or her income—a quarter of a tithe—to the church. Evangelicals used to be quite a lot better [in giving] than mainline denominations. But their giving has declined every year for several decades, and they're now getting very close to the norm. The average evangelical giving is about 4.2 percent—about two-fifths of a tithe.

Six percent of the "born-again" people tithe; nine percent of evangelicals do. Our income has gone up fabulously over the last 30-plus years. The average household income now in the U.S. is $42,000-plus. If the average American Christian tithed, we'd have another $143 billion.

- http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/004/32.70.html

You want to return to the law of the year of Jubilee, Blacknad? Fine. First, you will have to go back in time and find out who originally owned all of the land on planet earth. (Good Luck). Then you will have to get the state (I assume a world state) to make sure that all of this land is returned to their proper families. Of course, those who disagree will have to be dealt with severely by the proper authorities, so that would make it a world police state. That is what the Jubilee would result in, Blacknad. Not "parity of resources between people", but an all-powerful police state "redistributing" wealth by force (minus 70% for administrative purposes). Blacknad, you scare me. Maybe you need a basic economics lesson. Maybe you study the role of civil government in the Bible. I don't know.

- Please point to where I have written that I want a return to the year of Jubilee.

I have neither said that, nor said I would like to see the forced redistribution of wealth. As I said, you seem to have misunderstood me in your haste to batter me down for daring to say (and this was all I said) that there was one shared basic principle between socialism and scripture.

That was the only point I was making.

Blacknad Quote:
I was talking about the basic principles of wealth distribution/redistribution.

Puritan Lad - Not Biblical (or practical). Please do not covet.

- There you go again trying to reduce it to envy.

Blacknad Quote:
Of course Socialism always fails. Never stated that it was effective.

Puritan Lad - Then why are you defending it?

- As I said - too eager attacking me to realise that I am not defending it. You want to have a proper in depth conversation with me about exactly what I think about the bankrupt ideology of socialism? Well try not to judge me until you have.


And on my comments about the NHS - your insightful and helpful comment:

"Too much nonsense here to deal with."

Puritan Lad - Where in the Bible is their a limit placed on wealth?

Please explain why it Biblical for a Christian to accumulate wealth whilst surrounded by needy people. Whilst children in Africa die because of the need for 'Oral Rehydration Treatment' that costs about 20 cents?

Blacknad.

[Jac3510]

Black,

I don't have time to engage in this discussion. I think that PL is doing a fine enough job here. I just want to go on record as saying that I think you are really, really off base here. The core of socialism is the civil-redistribution of wealth, which is not a biblical concept. The Scriptures you've provided to support fail terribly in that regard, in my humble opinion.

As for me, I'm a capitalist to the bone. I reject ALL forms of socialism, even down to public education. It's a terrible thing. It is not the government's job to take care of the poor--any of them. Sorry, I believe in personal responsibility. If you don't work, you don't eat. Sorry if that doesn't sound "compassionate." I'm not a compassionate conservative. Politically, I'm as conservative as they get. If I want to help the poor, it's up to me to do it, which I would and do. However, it is NOT up to the government to steal from me and my family and give my income to someone else.

Finally, on the Rich Young Ruler, though PL will disagree highly here, I would agree with Hal Haller on the issue. See the paper he wrote here. This should show why your use of this has absolutely no bearing on the discussion, especially not someone who looks at things like I do.

God bless

[Blacknad]

I'll start by once again stating that I don't support the state distribution of wealth.

I do however support government involvement in economic issues to protect the disadvantaged and mitigate against the worst excesses of Capitalism.

More on the Year of Jubilee

The aim of the jubilee, therefore, is to preserve unimpaired the essential character of the theocracy, to the end that there be no poor among the people of God (Deut. 15:4).

• It would prevent the accumulation of land on the part of a few to the detriment of the community at large.
• It would render it impossible for any one to be born to absolute poverty, since every one had his hereditary land.
• It would preclude those inequalities which are produced by extremes of riches and poverty, and which make one man domineer over another.
• It would utterly do away with slavery.
• It would afford a fresh opportunity to those who were reduced by adverse circumstances to begin again their career of industry, in the patrimony which they had temporarily forfeited.
• It would periodically rectify the disorders which creep into the state in the course of time, preclude the division of the people into nobles and plebeians, and preserve the theocracy inviolate.

- The Catholic Encyclopaedia

Deu 15:4 ' However, there should not be any poor among you, for the LORD will surely bless you in the land that he is giving you as an inheritance.'

We can chuck Bible verses around all day and either force them to make a point or hide behind them.

There are basic principles however:

Lev 19:18 You must not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the children of your people, but you must love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD.

- We feed ourselves junk food and furnish our houses with expensive consumer goods while our neighbour starves to death. How is that faithful to the command to 'love your neighbour as yourself'?

Worldwide about 30,000 children die every day because of poverty-related causes — such as lack of immunisation.

Capitalism leads to - a European cow gets more in subsidies than what 1.2 billion people have to live on.

The example of Jesus is that he forsook his privileges, lived among the marginalized and oppressed, died a violent death on the cross as an alleged criminal, and was vindicated by God at his resurrection. His life of identification and solidarity with the poor is the antidote against the blind spots of the modern Christian that supports a system [capitalism] that brings a massive disparity in resources and creates mega-rich at the expense of the dying poor.


It seems that scripture has a less than glowing impression of wealth:

Pro 11:28 The one who trusts in his riches will fall,
but the righteous will flourish like a green leaf.

Jer 9:23 Rich people should not boast that they are rich.
Jer 9:24 If people want to boast, they should boast about this:
They should boast that they understand and know me.
They should boast that they know and understand
that I, the LORD, act out of faithfulness, fairness, and justice in the earth
and that I desire people to do these things,"
says the LORD.

1Ti 6:17 Command those who are rich in this world's goods not to be haughty or to set their hope on riches, which are uncertain, but on God who richly provides us with all things for our enjoyment.

1Ti 6:18 Tell them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, to be generous givers, sharing with others.

Jam 1:11 For the sun rises with its heat and dries up the meadow; the petal of the flower falls off and its beauty is lost forever. So also the rich person in the midst of his pursuits will wither away.

Jam 5:5 You have lived indulgently
and luxuriously on the earth. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.3

Pro 30:8 Remove falsehood and lies far from me;
do not give me poverty or riches,
feed me with my allotted portion of bread,
Pro 30:9 lest I become satisfied and act deceptively
and say, "Who is the LORD?"
Or lest I become poor and steal
and demean the name of my God.

Hos 13:6 When they were fed, they became satisfied;
when they were satisfied, they became proud;
as a result, they forgot me!

Ecc 5:10 The one who loves money will never be satisfied with money,
he who loves wealth will never be satisfied with his income.
This also is futile.
Ecc 5:11 When someone's prosperity increases, those who consume it also increase;
so what does its owner gain, except that he gets to see it with his eyes?
Ecc 5:12 The sleep of the laborer is pleasant — whether he eats little or much —
but the wealth of the rich will not allow him to sleep.

Pro 28:11 A rich person is wise in his own eyes,


The great equality of capitalism?

The pre-eminent challenge to the human family today is the increasingly unequal distribution of wealth and power. Since statistics are wearisome, a few must suffice to capture this drift. The United Nations reported in 1992 that income disparities between the world's richest and poorest have doubled since 1960. Today the wealthiest 20 percent of the world's population receives almost 83 percent of the world's income, while the poorest 20 percent receive less than 2 percent! In 1965, the average U.S. worker made $7.52 per hour, while the person running the company made $330.38 per hour; today, the average worker makes $7.39 per hour, the average CEO $1,566.68 per hour—212 times more!

- Kerby Anderson - president of Probe Ministries International.

This is your beloved capitalism that you so admire, in all its unrestrained beauty.

Any theology that refuses to reckon with these realities is both cruel and irrelevant. We Christians must talk about economics, and talk about it in light of the gospel. "Churches," asserts Cornel West, "may be the last places left in our culture that can engage the public conversation with non-market values." Yet those who would challenge postmodern capitalism and its self-reflexive market discourses are struggling to find an alternative language and practice, particularly with the apparent discrediting of state socialism. This ideological vacuum offers a unique opportunity for the church to rediscover a radically different vision of economic and social practice—and one that lies right at the heart of its scriptures.

- Kerby Anderson - president of Probe Ministries International.

Economic principles glimpsed in Manna from heaven

First, every family is told to gather just enough bread for their needs (Exodus 16:16-18 ). In contrast to Israel's Egyptian condition of oppression and need, here everyone has enough: "Those who gathered more had no surplus, and those who gathered less had no shortage." In God's economy there is such a thing as "too much" and "too little." (This contrasts radically with modern capitalism's infinite tolerance for wealth and poverty.) Exodus 16's "theology of enough" is underlined by the (probably later) version of the manna story in Numbers 11, in which the people's persistent "cravings" are punished with a plague of "too much" (Numbers 11:33-34; see Psalm 78:20-31, 106:13-15).

And back to the Year of Jubilee…

THE FULLEST EXPRESSION of Sabbath logic is the Levitical "Jubilee": a comprehensive remission to take place every "Sabbath's Sabbath," or 49th-50th year (Leviticus 25). The Jubilee (named after the jovel, a ram's horn that sounded to herald the remission) aimed to dismantle structures of social-economic inequality by: releasing each community member from debt (Leviticus 25:35-42) ; returning encumbered or forfeited land to its original owners (25:13, 25-28 ) ; freeing slaves (25:47-55). The rationale for this unilateral restructuring of the community's assets was to remind Israel that the land belongs to God (25:23) and that they are an Exodus people who must never return to a system of slavery (25:42).

JAC - As for me, I'm a capitalist to the bone. I reject ALL forms of socialism, even down to public education. It's a terrible thing. It is not the government's job to take care of the poor--any of them. Sorry, I believe in personal responsibility. If you don't work, you don't eat. Sorry if that doesn't sound "compassionate." I'm not a compassionate conservative. Politically, I'm as conservative as they get. If I want to help the poor, it's up to me to do it, which I would and do. However, it is NOT up to the government to steal from me and my family and give my income to someone else.

If you don't work — you don't eat?

Four types of poverty

1. Poverty of oppression or fraud — people oppressed by governments or powerful individuals.

2. Misfortune, persecution or judgement.

3. Idleness — laziness — gluttony.

4. Culture of poverty — Proverbs 'The ruin of the poor is their poverty'. Unable to break the cycle of poverty.

While government should not have to shoulder the entire responsibility for caring for the poor, it must take seriously the statements in Leviticus and Proverbs about defending the poor and fighting oppression. Government must not shirk its God-given responsibility to defend the poor from injustice. If government will not do this, or if the oppression is coming from the government itself, then Christians must exercise their prophetic voice and speak out against governmental abuse and misuse of power.

- Kerby Anderson - president of Probe Ministries International.

Fat chance of the modern capitalism loving consumer Christian shouting out about anything with a mouth too full of Big Macs.

JAC - However, it is NOT up to the government to steal from me and my family and give my income to someone else.

But I presume you are happy for them to take money from you and spend it on national defence to preserve you from foreign aggressors?

But it is only stealing when the government wants to recognise that we all belong to an inter-dependent community and tries to support the poor.

I agree — those who can work, but refuse to, should not eat. But the poor is comprised of people who are in that position for a number of different reasons. It is disingenuous to lump them all together and call them lazyand think that resolves you or the government of responsibility.

And to say that the government does not have a responsibility to 'thieve' from you because you are capable of helping the poor yourself is problematic to say the least because at the moment both the government and individuals are helping the poor and yet the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' is growing phenomenally. And you want to further erode that support system by stopping the government redistributing some of your wealth and leave it all down to selfish individuals?

Despite the 'massive and unjust' tax burden you Americans have to suffer, you still manage to find $14 billion to spend on porn every year.

“The Internet accounted for US $2.5 billion of the adult industry's $14 billion in U.S. revenues in 2004.”

- National Coalition for the Protection of Children and Families.

Yes, I see the American consumer is so hard done by.

And American Christians support this monstrous system.

JAC - As for me, I'm a capitalist to the bone.

JAC - It is not the government's job to take care of the poor--any of them.

JAC - However, it is NOT up to the government to steal from me and my family and give my income to someone else.

Blacknad.

[Canuckster1127]

I agree with a lot of what Blacknad is saying.

American Chritsianity has to a very great degree incorporated the materialism and greed of our American Culture.

I think capitalism is the most realistic market system developed to date and I believe it succeeds because it recognizes the inherant evil and greed within each individual and structures the market system to to make it in one's own self-interest to work, and accumulate wealth.

The US is not an entirely capitalistic system to the extent of laissez faire (no government intervention.) We've had some spectacular collapses of the system in our history and have, perhaps grudgingly, had to implement controls in response to situations where that system and the failings of those in the system have required it.

Jesus had more to say about money and the poor than about most any other topic in the NT. The reason for that is Jesus recognized that "where your treasure is, there will your heart be too."

I believe that socialized redistribution of wealth doesn't work. The reason it doesn't work is primarily because:

1. Government is made up of fallen men, may of whom are not afraid to use their positions for their own personal benefit in making the redistribution. When administrative costs exceed 60% of a program, which it often does in government then there's obviously something wrong.

2. The recipients are human, and if they see a path to security without them working to carry themselves, there are many who will then be motivated to continue in that situation, opting for security without personal risk. That is why so many social programs implemented with good intentions have actually ruined people and destroyed families, because it provides "easy money" and all too often, "easy money" is easier spent on vices and personal indulgence.

Far too may Christians have a great sense of what is wrong with government programs and very little sense about what is right about Jesus' strong admonitions and appeals to care for the poor and not become diverted in their values and Christian walk by succombing to greed.

Jesus did advocate enlightened, spirit-filled Christians acting benevolantly out of their own love for God and their fellow-man. Unfortunately, a gret portion of the American Church, cross most denominations does not preach this important element of the Scriptures, perhaps fearing they will fall into a social gospel, which is a legitimate concern. Further, they have elevated capitalism almost to an element of their Christian faith, and not recognized that capitalism is a system designed upon and based upon a recognition of selfishness which is then kept in check.

I think capitalism is a wonderful system as far as it goes. I think we need to keep in view that capitalism is a lousy sytem compared to a Christian so in love with Christ that he is willing to follow his lead and commands.

Jim Wallis' book "God and Politics" is a real eye opener and worth the read. He is highly partisan and I don't like that element of his book. I don't believe God is a Republican or a Democrat and I think Wallis hurts his appeal where he obviously favors one party over another. But, he does an excellent job of pointing out how the Christian Right (which I am pretty much a part of although moderating it appears) has elevated some poitical values and "christianized them" to the point of ignoring huge sections of Christ's message, particularly when it come to the poor and social justice.

God help us if we don't hear that message.

[puritan lad]

You have obviously misunderstood what I am saying if you think I am defending the Ideology of Socialism. Even though what you seem to be attacking has more in common with Marxist Communism than contemporary socialism.

There are many forms of socialism. Marxism, Fascism, Nazism, and, as you put it, "contemporary socialism". They are are evil and they all fail. Like it or not, your healthcare system, along with the riots in France, testify to the wonders of "contemporary socialism". Socialism is statism. It is pure Caesar-worship. It gives the civil government power that God never intended.

With your comment about Ron Sider, I presume you have no issue with rich Christians in an age of hunger. Do you think Capitalism works?

Yes. Capitalism works like a charm. As for "Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger", it is a masterpiece of Socialist nonsense. Sider, with his irresponsible mishandling scripture, calls for a national (state) food policy, (state to state) foreign aid, a guaranteed national income, international taxation, “land reform” (i.e., We're not really stealing your land, we're just "reforming" it), bureaucratically determined “just prices", national health care, population control, and the right of developing nations to nationalize foreign holdings." Talk about "in government we trust"!!! No matter how you slice it, such policies are doomed to failure, and would require a totalitarian, worldwide, police state to enforce. (After watching the UN handle the Bosnian Civil War, do you really want to put them in control of healthcare?) There is nothing in the Bible to support any of the items on this list. He has been called to task by many Bible Scholars, and has admitted his own ignorance of both scripture and Economics.

In case your wondering, Sider himself has backtracked on much of his thesis, though he still has a long ways to go to adopt a biblical worldview.

See RON SIDER HAS MOVED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION

The American Christian embrace of consumerism and capitalism is completely anti-biblical.

Says Who? The Lord commands and loves just "consumerism" and "capitalism".

Leviticus 19:35-37
Proverbs 10:2-4
Proverbs 12:1, 24
Proverbs 13:4, 11
Luke 10:7

Good for a Start. Even ministers are allowed to profit from preaching the gospel. (1 Corinthians 9:14). If the Lord were against "capitalism", he would have made provisions in His Word to allow the state to interfere with it.

It's interesting that Christians who take a lot of the Bible literally don't do that with our Lord's words to the rich young ruler: 'Go, sell all you have and give the money to the poor...' (Mark 10:21).

So what? He told Hosea to go and take for himself a wife of prostitution. Do you want to make a Christian Doctrine out of that? Do you obey this priciple Blacknad? Do you own any property? It seems that you at least own a computer. Think of all the poor in India who could eat on what you spent on your computer. After all Jesus said to sell ALL that you have, correct? Even you don't believe that Christians should sell ALL of their property and give it to the poor, so why bring it up?

The purpose of Jesus statement was to refute the young rulers claim that he had obeyed all of the commandments from his youth. Jesus' statement revealed that the ruler wasn't even obeying the first commandment. The rich young ruler was worshipping another god, his possessions.

And here Jesus (amongst other things) was proclaiming his own poverty...

Mat 8:20 Jesus said to him, "Foxes have dens, and the birds in the sky have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head."

Again Blacknad, do you have a place to lay your head? I'll bet Ron Sider does too. There is no virtue in poverty.

There is NOTHING in the Bible about an even distribution of wealth. In fact, the Bible praises lawful gains and profits.

On the contrary 'Go sell all you have and give your money to the poor' is exactly about moving money & resources from those who have more to those who have less.

Already dealt with this Blacknad. See above. Unless you believe that Christians should sell ALL of the possessions and give them to the poor, your scripture is not relevant.

This is redistributing wealth, and yes is done by individuals and not the state.

Whoa. That sounds like capitalism to me. Keep going, your getting there.

I was never talking about the method of doing it, I was talking about the commonality of the basic principle.

So tell me, what makes Sider's "contemporary socialism" any better than Marxism? How is "contemporary socialism" not done by the state? Socialism in all forms must be done by the state. It has to be done by somebody. Redistribution of wealth requires someone to redistribute it.

And you keep mentioning covetousness. What has that got to do with anything? Are you really saying that a socialist who believes that money should be taken from the rich and redistributed to the poor, only thinks that out of envy.

The most basic principle of socialism is coveteousness. They believe that the poor have the right to steal from the rich via the state. In short, "Thou Shalt Not Steal, except by majority vote".

It couldn't possibly be that he just thinks it is more just. No of course not - he is demonic - your favorite label. (e.g. Judaism is a demonic cult etc.)

Define "just" Blacknad. It is God's Word that defines justice. Socialism in all forms is unjust and unbiblical to the core.

And is your attack on 'anyone drawing a general comparison between the socialist desire for redistribution of wealth and any likewise biblical principle' based upon a need to defend modern day Christians greed.

Why do you keep coveting other's possessions Blacknad? It is a serious sin against God, even if you are coveting them for another person.

Well as you seem to have so little respect for Ron Sider, then I am led to believe so:

I admire his ability to admit his own ignorance, and move in the right direction.

Materialism continues to be an incredible scandal. The average [American] church member [from across the denominations] today gives about 2.6 percent of his or her income—a quarter of a tithe—to the church. Evangelicals used to be quite a lot better [in giving] than mainline denominations. But their giving has declined every year for several decades, and they're now getting very close to the norm. The average evangelical giving is about 4.2 percent—about two-fifths of a tithe.

What does this have to do with socialism? I agree that Christians should tithe. The difference is that I hold to the Biblical view that the tithe is paid to the church, instead of Sider's unbibical "graduated tithe" paid to the state.

Six percent of the "born-again" people tithe; nine percent of evangelicals do. Our income has gone up fabulously over the last 30-plus years. The average household income now in the U.S. is $42,000-plus. If the average American Christian tithed, we'd have another $143 billion.

- http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/004/32.70.html

See above.

- Please point to where I have written that I want a return to the year of Jubilee.

I have neither said that, nor said I would like to see the forced redistribution of wealth. As I said, you seem to have misunderstood me in your haste to batter me down for daring to say (and this was all I said) that there was one shared basic principle between socialism and scripture.

First, there is not a "shared basic principle between socialism and scripture", and the Jubilee, as I pointed out earlier, is not about the redistribution of wealth. You're economic outlook is on very shaky ground when you keep bringing up scriptures that you, by your own admission, don't literally want to keep.

As I said - too eager attacking me to realise that I am not defending it. You want to have a proper in depth conversation with me about exactly what I think about the bankrupt ideology of socialism? Well try not to judge me until you have.

I'm not attacking you. I'm attacking socialism. If you try to defend it in any way, then you probably will feel attacked. The Bible supports a free market.

Let me ask you this. Since you are against the redistribution of wealth by the state (Thank God), but see a basic principle of redistribution of wealth in Scripture, who should be in charge of the redistribution of wealth?

Puritan Lad - Where in the Bible is their a limit placed on wealth?

Please explain why it Biblical for a Christian to accumulate wealth whilst surrounded by needy people. Whilst children in Africa die because of the need for 'Oral Rehydration Treatment' that costs about 20 cents?

Perhaps you should sell your computer and help pay for a few thousand of these. You sound like Judas complaining over the expensive perfume that was "wasted" in annointing Jesus instead of feeding the poor. Those poor kids in Africa are used for everything from making kids eat their vegetables to selling pseudo-christian socialist propaganda.

The fact is that the conditions in Africa and India are caused by the very policies that Mr. Sider wanted to implement. Totalitarian Statism. What these countries need is Christianity and Capitalism, not more Federal Aid that is used to empower their dictators. Imagine what a country like Africa could do with capitalism, with all of the resources, gold, diamonds, etc.

Besides, Christians give more to these types of efforts than anyone. We just don't do it out of guilt, but rather a love for Christ.

[puritan lad]

FYI: Capitalism isn't a system. It is a lack of a system. Capitalism is what happens when men are free to engage in sharing goods and services with government interference. Capitalism is natural. All other systems need to interfere with Capitalism.

No one is saying that Businesses should be able to operate completely separate from government. That would make Businesses tyrannical over workers. Businesses need to be accountable in some areas (Labor laws, waste disposal, etc.). But in the normal operation of exchanging goods and services, the less government, the better.

[Blacknad]

Puritan Lad - Where in the Bible is their a limit placed on wealth?

Please explain why it Biblical for a Christian to accumulate wealth whilst surrounded by needy people. Whilst children in Africa die because of the need for 'Oral Rehydration Treatment' that costs about 20 cents?

Perhaps you should sell your computer and help pay for a few thousand of these. You sound like Judas complaining over the expensive perfume that was "wasted" in anointing Jesus instead of feeding the poor. Those poor kids in Africa are used for everything from making kids eat their vegetables to selling pseudo-christian socialist propaganda.[/quote]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay. Now that you've finished dodging the question, please answer it.

QUESTION ONE. Why is it permissable for a Christian to accumulate wealth (i.e. more than enough to support their needs on an ongoing basis) when there are people in this world - in your society - who have nothing or little through no fault of their own?

Can you please answer the question without reference to my owning a computer, as if the whole argument rests upon a single individuals ability to live within his needs only?

Can you please answer the question without reference to Totalitarian Statism, as if that explains all of the poverty in the world - especially as there is dire poverty in Capitalistic societies?

QUESTION TWO. Can you please explain how we are obeying the command to 'LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES' when we accumulate more of the worlds resources than we actually need to live, when we are surrounded by people who are suffering because they don't have enough?


Please keep in mind as you answer, that the consequence of, as you put it, 'The Lord loving consumerism and capitalism' (and it follows He loves wealth also) is that He also loves the following:

'Today the wealthiest 20 percent of the world's population receives almost 83 percent of the world's income, while the poorest 20 percent receive less than 2 percent!'

The statement, 'The Lord loves consumerism and capitalism' is so worrying when issued from the mouth of a Christian that I despair.

So can I have an answer to question one and question two please?

Thanks,

Blacknad.