1

Unfortunately, his answer for how to respond is rooted more in antiquated and discredited leftist ideas than in the Bible. Government redistribution of wealth in not a Biblical idea, yet it appears to be the cornerstone of Wallis’ response to poverty.

When we have a government of the people, by the people and for the people, it is not redistribution of wealth. "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's," Jesus said. We are Caesar, in this country.

Conservative-proto-fascist extremist "free market" ideology, by contrast, is most certainly not in the bible.

Like most liberals, he pins the Palestine problem on the Israelis while ignoring the fact that they have refused offers to have their own state.)

Straw-man!

Most people I know, left, right, and center blame both sides for this conflict. The Palestinians were never actually made a genuine offer of "their own state," they were only offered a Middle Eastern version of a Bantustan.

2

I read "God's Politics" last year with an open mind, but came to a similar conclusion regarding Jim's views. Though passionate and well-intentioned, the worldview that Mr. Wallis promotes is not the result of some spiritual or biblical enlightenment. It's more or less syncretic, fusing the mantras of the political Left with the message of Christ. Of course the Religious Right does the same, but you can't correct scriptural imbalance with equal and opposite imbalance.

3

Wallis is a fraud who uses Christianity as a tool to push his true agenda: Marxism.

4

Joe, Wallis needs to read Henry Hazlitt's book "Economics in One Lesson" and a book on hermeneutics. His use of the prophets is pathetic.

5

My understanding of Jesus' admonishment was in reference to the taxes that the Romans collected in the name of the Caesar or Emperor, which was essentially tithing to a foreign God. How this becomes the basis for a sharing of property is a mystery. Plus a little research comes to 2nd Thessalonians 3:8, "Nor did we eat anyone's food without paying for it. On the contrary we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you."

As the Palestinians have been on the losing side of three Intifadas and four wars it certainly is not be surprising that the Israelis might not offer any return to an ante-bellum border.

6

Pat Patterson:

Regarding Israel, so theft and murder justifies...justifies what exactly? The corresponding Palestinian logic is quite simply: "We have been having war waged on us for almost 60 years. We will prevail, and then 'never again!'" Or quite simply, "We haven't won yet. We must continue."

It is a symmetry which guarantees continued murder, deprivation, and atrocities all around.

Nice "moralism."

...essentially tithing to a foreign God.

Dude, re-read the whole passage. That was the Pharisees' position. With which Jesus begged to differ. IOW, the Pharisees were saying "Don't pay taxes to a foreign god - the guvment," and Jesus was saying, goverments, even ones with which you disagree on religious principles, have legit functions and their operations should be respected.

In the united states, supreme power derives from
the people (not as some propagandists on the right would have it the "unitary chief exectuive.")

And hence...

7

Nor did we eat anyone's food without paying for it. On the contrary we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you.

That tells us we have an ethical duty to sustain ourselves. It tells us nothing whatsoever about our ethical duties to those that either can't or won't help themselves. And, as Wallis points out, Jesus costantly foregrounded our ethical duty to help others, regardless of their stations in life.

8

Scripture is clear in that governments are responsible to God for caring for the poor, widows, orphans, aliens, strangers, etc. Sodom and Gomorrah's judgment was based partly on the neglect of this responsibility and so was that of Judah and Israel. And I see that nations are apparently given free reign in how to do that. Given Scripture's fairly obvious bias against the selfish rich I don't see that God is opposed to redistribution of these folk's wealth. Trying to bring God down to fit in with our various economic philosophies seems a bit arrogant.

9

Mumon
I hope you simply misuderstood my postion as I agree that Jesus was asking his followers to obey Roman rule and pay their taxes even though earlier attempts to collect these taxes were met by riots. The Romans, at least until Titus destroyed Jerusalem, cared not a fig for how or who its subjects worshipped. But it fully expected those subjects to pay their taxes and in doing so acknowledge the authority of Caesar, who as a demigod would naturally raise the hackles of the Jews and early Christians. Jesus basically dismissed these concerns as the cost of preparing for the Kingdom of Heaven. Even as early as 30 BC the Romans had decided that the Jews were crazy, especially after the riots caused by the the X Legion marching into Jerusalem with its lightning bolt insignias uncovered.

As to whether the Palestinians, who could have had an independent state after 1947, we will just have to agree to disagree. My own thought would be to let the Egyptians have Gaza back and restore the West Bank to the Hashemites in Amman.

As to the supreme power of the people I can only respond by noting how glad I am to be living in a republic where the citizens indeed do not have supreme power. Its no coincidence that our dimes used to have a bundle of rods with an ax head to symbolize that the state had corporal and capitol punishment.

jpe
Is right about ethical obligations, but these appear to be personal obligations relating to the soul of the individual. Else the quote I offered would not have so specific in regard to the individual not being a burden on others. I'm not convinced that these ethical imperatives would have included a demand for the central government to carry them out.

10

jpe,
That only tells us that Paul worked to support himself so that he couldn't be accused of preaching the Gospel for money. Your point may be true but this passage can't be used as a proof text.

11

Like me, Jim Wallis seems not to have graduated from Trinity, but I at least did another whole theological degree.
I met Jim when he published his anti-war 'Post American' newspaper in 1971.
He has since been consistently promoting socialist redistribution as the solution to every economic and social problem [with a nod towards Christian orthodoxy as well].
He's essentially anti-capitalist, which Jesus certainly was not [read a few parables]. He is a predictable one-note 'anti-nationalist' in my opinion, with a negative, carping role. [I am Australian and proud of it.]

Jim is long on rhetoric, very short on detailed policies. Unfortunately he has not become wiser with time. Why didn't he ever enter politics and test his ideas there? Soulmate Kerry did.

12

Barrie,

If you're going to argue that Jesus was pro-capitalist based on his parables, then you must also take the position that Jesus was pro-slavery.

Was Jesus a nationalist?

13

A non sequitur, ex-p.
Please cite a parable where Jesus referred to slaves favourably, not just to employees?

Why else would Jesus commend the productive investment of your [or another's] money as a moral imperative? It seems that Jesus came from a bourgeois capitalist building business family.

Can you deny that socialists claim Jesus advocated socialism, when there's *no* evidence for that in His parables? In fact he justifies very unequal wage contracts made for the needs of the boss [God!] ie 'Be content with the contract you have accepted, regardless of what another person might negotiate later.'
And so on...

And yes, Jesus *was* a nationalist. He offered Himself as the prophesied King of the Jews. "He came to his Own, and His Own received Him not." [John 1]

Which Bible do you read?

14

"Given Scripture's fairly obvious bias against the selfish rich I don't see that God is opposed to redistribution of these folk's wealth. Trying to bring God down to fit in with our various economic philosophies seems a bit arrogant."

Your last sentence applies to yourself, Stan. The Bible is also opposed to the 'undeserving poor' as much as 'the selfish rich'; but the first category seems to be politically incorrect to mention today. Look at Jesus' parables and learn.
'Redistribution' yes, but government coercion is not mandated as the *means*, personal generosity IS.
Jesus was clever when he said 'Give to Caesar what is Caesar's'. He was saying give if under compulsion, but not a cent more. Your *real* values come from God, not man.
When will people see that Jesus' values are *universally* applicable, and not warped by any socialist dogmas?
'God is NOT a respecter of persons' -ANY persons.
This is the great weakness of Wallis's one-sided rhetoric.

15

Barrie,

I'm in no way a Wallis fan. I would agree with most of what you wrote about him in your above post. And I think your point about the Bible coming down on undeserving poor as hard as on the rich is also true. But a quick run through a concordance would prove quickly that God has a special heart for the poor as would a quick reading of the Sermon on the Mount. And entire nations were judged for their neglect of the poor including Sodom, Gomorrah, Israel and Judah, etc. Nations were judged, not just persons. There is clearly a national responsibility to care for the poor, widows, orphans, etc. You are reading Scripture through the lens of political conservatism and it won't wash. There is no Biblical evidence that caring for the poor is a personal responsibility only. On the contrary, Rom. 13 is clear that nations are God's ministers for good. And our own Constitution was written to provide for the general welfare. We must be careful not to say what the Bible does not say.

16

Barrie,

I'm in no way a Wallis fan. I would agree with most of what you wrote about him in your above post. And I think your point about the Bible coming down on undeserving poor as hard as on the rich is also true. But a quick run through a concordance would prove quickly that God has a special heart for the poor as would a quick reading of the Sermon on the Mount. And entire nations were judged for their neglect of the poor including Sodom, Gomorrah, Israel and Judah, etc. Nations were judged, not just persons. There is clearly a national responsibility to care for the poor, widows, orphans, etc. You are reading Scripture through the lens of political conservatism and it won't wash. There is no Biblical evidence that caring for the poor is a personal responsibility only. On the contrary, Rom. 13 is clear that nations are God's ministers for good. And our own Constitution was written to provide for the general welfare. We must be careful not to say what the Bible does not say.

17

Barrie,

I'm in no way a Wallis fan. I would agree with most of what you wrote about him in your above post. And I think your point about the Bible coming down on undeserving poor as hard as on the rich is also true. But a quick run through a concordance would prove quickly that God has a special heart for the poor as would a quick reading of the Sermon on the Mount. And entire nations were judged for their neglect of the poor including Sodom, Gomorrah, Israel and Judah, etc. Nations were judged, not just persons. There is clearly a national responsibility to care for the poor, widows, orphans, etc. You are reading Scripture through the lens of political conservatism and it won't wash. There is no Biblical evidence that caring for the poor is a personal responsibility only. On the contrary, Rom. 13 is clear that nations are God's ministers for good. And our own Constitution was written to provide for the general welfare. We must be careful not to say what the Bible does not say.

18

Hi Barrie,

Barrie asked: “Which Bible do you read?”

I wish I could say that I use the original languages, but my Greek and Hebrew are both a bit rusty. The two English translations I generally use are the NIV and the NRSV.

Barrie wrote: “Please cite a parable where Jesus referred to slaves favourably, not just to employees?”

Jesus refers many times to slaves in his parables and in other teaching, without ever saying a negative word about slavery.

Before I give some examples, it is important to understand that most English translations prefer to use the softer term “servant” instead of “slave.” In nearly all cases, though, the same Greek word (doulos) is used. There is no distinction between slave and servant in the Greek.

I have not listed parallel passages in the synoptics.

Matthew 13:24-30 (The Parable of the Weeds)
Matthew 18:21-35 (The Parable of the Unmerciful Servant)
Matthew 21:33-46 (The Parable of the Tenants)
Matthew 22:1-14 (The Parable of the Wedding Banquet)
Matthew 24: 45-51 (Unexpected return of master)
Matthew 25: 14-30 (The Parable of the Talents)
Luke 12:47-48 (Disobedient servant to be severely beaten)
Luke 15:11-32 (The Parable of the Prodigal Son)
Luke 17:7-10 (“We are unworthy servants”)
Luke 19:11-27 (The Parable of the Ten Minas)

I would argue that Jesus endorses neither socialism or capitalism. He certainly never advocated the overthrow of Roman despotism and the implementation of constitutional democracy. I don't think Jesus called for a social or political program of any sort. He anticipated that the kingdom of God was at hand, which would usher in a whole new order of things. He called for personal repentance in anticipation of the imminent arrival of the kingdom.

Regarding Jesus and nationalism. It is true that Jesus is said to have not objected to the title: “King of the Jews.” However, I do not think that the type of nationalism that Wallis is criticizing or that you are advocating is the same type of nationalism Jesus may have acknowledged. I would call Jesus’ version “spiritual nationalism,” while you and Wallis are discussing “political nationalism.” If Jesus were a political nationalist, it would have made sense for him to support the aims of the Zealots (sicarri), who sought independence for Israel in Jesus’ time. In fact, he never advocated revolt against the Roman authorities. Indeed, he taught submission to the foreign authorities.

It is also worth noting that those Jewish Christians closest to Jesus’ time refused to help Jewish nationalists fight Rome in the Revolt of 70 AD or the Bar Kochba Rebellion of 120 AD. The refusal of Christians to fight alongside Jewish nationalists contributed in no small measure to the widening of the rift between Christians and Jews.

It is difficult for me to imagine Jesus or the early Christians advocating the type of nationalism that you seem to endorse.

19

To understand the Lord's beliefs about the poor, it is important to remember that he was a Jew, the most devout Jew that ever lived. The Jewish law has several provisions regarding the individual's duty to the poor.

Deut. 15:7. If there is a poor man among you, one of your brothers, in any of the towns of the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart, nor close your hand to your poor brother; but you shall freely open your hand to him, and generously lend him sufficient for his need in whatever he lacks.

Deut. 26:12. When you have finished paying the complete tithe of your increase in the third year, the year of tithing, then you shall give it to the Levite, to the stranger, to the orphan and the widow, that they may eat in your towns, and be satisfied.

Lev. 19:19. Now when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, neither shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God.

Prov. 31:8ff. [Commandment to kings.] Open your mouth for the dumb, for the rights of all the unfortunate. Open your mouth, judge righteously, and defend the rights of the afflicted and needy.

Is. 58:66ff. Is this not the fast which I choose, to loosen the bonds of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke, and to let the oppressed go free, and break every yoke? Is it not to divide your bread with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into the house; when you see the naked, to cover him, and not to hide yourself from your own flesh?

Jer. 22:3. Do justice and righteousness, and deliver the one who has been robbed from the power of his oppressor. Also do not mistreat or do violence to the stranger, the orphan, or the widow; and do not shed innocent blood in this place.

The Jewish law clearly states tyhat there is a responsibility to the poor. In fact, this view is shared by other cultures.

Of course, nowhere in the Jewish law were the Jews commanded to abdicate this responsibility to their rulers. And in the Gospels, Jesus never commanded to let Caesar take care of the poor.

The idea that Christianity (or Judaism for that matter) advocates welfare states and social programs is not found anywhere in Scripture.