Loving Money from Afar
Politics
| April 13, 2005
| Tim
In response to "Money is the root of all evil", Perry Eidelbus comments:
That's one of the biggest misquotes of all time... St. Paul was talking about the love of money, not money itself. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with money, or living a comfortable life. Paul was warning about the wanton accumulation of money and wealth for their own sake, when they become a distraction from God.
Yes, but it's so much more than that.
Socialists like to use this bible misquote because they think it applies to "the rich" only -- or at least those rich who won't demonstrate their "right attitude" by advocating socialism. No. Love of money can strike in those of any economic bracket or political stripe.
It's easy to see how a wealthy man might love "mammon" (bread). (Though he instead might not.) But it's also true that the angry socialist railing against the rich also has an inordinant love of money -- it's just that he's angry someone else has control of it right now. Someone clearly morally inferior to himself.
In fact, I'd venture to suggest socialism as a whole is actually based on an unhealthy love of money, since it attributes to mammon powers associated with God -- deployed properly money makes one righteous, feeds the poor, heals the lame, rights all injustices, and can bring about utopia.
More than mere love, that's worship.
(I would have posted this to Perry's blog, but it seem blogger wants you to set up a blog or at least give excessive information about your own before it will let you post a comment. Annoying.)
Perry's answer to me demonstrates ex reme bias. Whether money, 'the rich', 'the poor' or socialism his comments are less than 'Christian.' Jesus admonished his followers to 'render unto Caesar, etc..' He taught the poor will always be among us, BUT a true Jew, following Torah Must care for them. Saul of Tarsus was taught by the grandson of Hillel, so Saul threw out Deut. 15:9 (plus lots more important economic injunctions).
Nicholas,
This is not Perry's blog. Keep your conversations with him over there -- this would normally be considered an "off topic" comment and simply deleted, but a warning is in order the first time.
Also, I'm leaving it to answer the second part...
Saul of Tarsus was taught by the grandson of Hillel, so Saul threw out Deut. 15:9 (plus lots more important economic injunctions).
Sorry, Nicholas, but you appear to live in a different world than I do.
To my readers (both of you), Nicholas is referring to this verse which says to forgive debts against your brothers every seventh (sabbath) year. He appears to be using the tired old "Paul corrupted Christianity!" narrative to claim Paul somehow undermined this situation.
First, let's look at this verse, regarding what parts of the Jewish law applied to Gentiles:
It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. (Acts 15:28-29)
Who authored this? James and the other leaders of the church at Jerusalem. Not Paul. Who argued before them for this stance? Peter! And who do they credit this policy to? Saul/Paul? No, the Holy Spirit.
So the biblical account portrays this "minimalist" approach, of not trying to get Gentiles to live by Jewish law, as coming from the Holy Spirit (e.g. God), through the leaders of the church in Jerusalem (who did not include Paul).
So if there's some problem with Jewish law not applying to Gentiles -- including this passage -- I hardly see where Saul/Paul gets the blame.
Next, what did Paul, after he became a follower of Jesus believe about his studies under Gamaliel? Did it form the basis of his Christian theology?
No:
I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers...
[I was] circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, [I was] a Pharisee; as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for legalistic righteousness, faultless.
I consider [these things] rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ–the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith.
(Gal 1:14, Phil 3:5,8-9)
So if we are to look to Paul's view of the teachings he once had received, rather than forming the basis for his outlook, he seems to have considered them garbage.
Now, on to the third question: What were Paul's actual teachings on debt?
Certainly, Paul enjoined us to pay off our debts to others (Rom 13:8) -- a good policy, as Christians should not be known as those who default on their promises! -- but that wasn't an injuction that we shouldn't forgive others their debts to us.
To the contrary, Paul echos Jesus's "Lord's Prayer" exactly when he says:
Bear with each other and forgive whatever grievances you may have against one another. Forgive as the Lord forgave you. (Col 3:13)
And states that we should be ready to be wronged financially for righteousness' sake:
The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? (1 Cor 6:7-8)
So what have we here? Did Paul "toss out" the Jewish law for debt? Instead, his teachings are more strict for the one holding the debt -- forgiveness must not be merely every seven years, but as often as we ourselves would wish to be forgiven. And his teaching for the debtor is also more strict -- instead of borrowing knowing you can shaft someone every seven years, you have to continue paying off as you are able.
And, again, though Paul might touched off the debate, the decision not to apply Jewish law to Gentiles was not his, but was attributed -- by all the leaders at that time -- to the Holy Spirit.
Tim: 5th attempt. stone torah deut 15:9 made me happy. did you get ike and mcintire ?
e-net me when you feel t e spirit move. there is a problem here deut 15, acts 2:44, rev 19:10and romans 16:22 probably are the 3/4 passages which can unite billions. nick
if you must lay the axe to the evil tree - be certain to go to the roots paraphrase of K. GIBRAN [on religion] MY bible not my Holy Bible - if the world could follow 'The Prophet' g-d would be in heaven and all would be right with the world I BELIEVE THAT WITH ALL MY HEART AND SOUL.
nicholas, perhaps you should do me the courtesy of reading my entire blog before accusing me of having no charity? I think that would be the "Christian" thing to do, i.e. make a judgment against someone only when you have all the facts at your disposal?
I have never once spoken out against charity -- REAL charity. But I continually speak out against government taking money from us under the guise of "charity." Haven't several decades of "taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots" shown you that government doesn't care how well its "charitable" programs perform? After all, it's not government's money. It has no incentive to give money in the most efficient manner to the most deserving. It doesn't care if those in genuine need slip through the cracks, while others who could support themselves get public assistance. It doesn't care that 40 years of "war on poverty" hasn't done a whit of difference and in fact has encouraged more people to stay on the public dole.
Really, you might want to take a closer look at my blog to see what I'm talking about.
http://eidelblog.blogspot.com/2005/04/what-kind-of-privatization-is-this.html
Now, Christ was not merely a "Jew" who cited the Torah as why we should act charitably. Remember that "charity" in the KJV is translated today as "love," which is what true charity is: love for each other. Christ said, "This _I_ command you, that ye love one another." He didn't say, "I gave this to Moses as the Law, that you love one another." Christ said that it was HIS command to us.
Tim: Where did I intimate you were not charitable? You are. run this by your readers: tax currency markets one to two cents on each dollar traded
In case I hadn't made myself sufficiently clear, this posting is not an open thread for discussing currency markets, nor alleged deficiencies in Perry Eidelbus's blog (off topic) or character (ad homen). Readers coming to this post will not be blessed by such rambling. Further comments in this vein will be DELETED, as the last eleven were.
Comments, including critical comments, on any of the issues actually being raised in the post above are, of course, always fine.
Thank you.
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.
« Cornyn out of Context |
Front Page |
Page Two
| "Revelations" Kibbitzing »
|
Perry's answer to me demonstrates ex reme bias. Whether money, 'the rich', 'the poor' or socialism his comments are less than 'Christian.' Jesus admonished his followers to 'render unto Caesar, etc..' He taught the poor will always be among us, BUT a true Jew, following Torah Must care for them. Saul of Tarsus was taught by the grandson of Hillel, so Saul threw out Deut. 15:9 (plus lots more important economic injunctions).
Posted by: nicholas herr on April 25, 2005 12:15 PM