tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post8858243776006470081..comments2023-10-25T09:45:40.318-04:00Comments on The Politics of the Cross Resurrected: What Happened to Craig Carter?Craig Carterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10209954891388905090noreply@blogger.comBlogger76125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-73763253501115797672010-08-24T03:59:45.247-04:002010-08-24T03:59:45.247-04:00I declare Peter Dunn the winner of this debate. H...I declare Peter Dunn the winner of this debate. He has certainly been the most respectful (with Thom Stark the opposite).Keen Readerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18171491573514489497noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-64632755961016540902009-05-12T20:06:00.000-04:002009-05-12T20:06:00.000-04:00not to take sides but I think this is appropriate:...not to take sides but I think this is appropriate:<br /><br />http://xkcd.com/386/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-53671340581881299202009-05-11T16:08:00.000-04:002009-05-11T16:08:00.000-04:00I mean seriously, what happened to Craig Carter? I...I mean seriously, what happened to Craig Carter? It's like he's gone all "First Things" on everyone.Thom Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18436448315505182664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-78695589711120470352009-05-11T14:41:00.000-04:002009-05-11T14:41:00.000-04:00Craig Carter wrote:
"Lancaster Co. PA, with its ve...Craig Carter wrote:<br />"Lancaster Co. PA, with its very high concentration of Mennonites, normally votes Republican (even though the Amish don't vote). That should tell you that a simplistic equation between Mennonite pacifism and liberal pacifism is not right."<br /><br />This example is fraught with complexities and variables - too many to be used the way Craig is using it. I lived there for almost 40 years, and I would consider the strident Republican support given by many Mennonites to be an erosion of Mennonite pacifism. I would make the claim/observation that right-leaning Christian radio has had (and still does) a huge influence on Mennonites who became a little embarrassed about being the "quiet in the land." And their wealth and affluence lure them in that direction as well.LeVonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13951934882152986942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-71945158147223004602009-05-09T17:41:00.001-04:002009-05-09T17:41:00.001-04:00I've become a follower recently of this blog and I...I've become a follower recently of this blog and I've appreciated Prof. Carter's views. Obviously we don't agree on everything. However, our interactions have been respectful and I am not here to tell him how wrong he is about everything.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-62879364266897518832009-05-09T17:41:00.000-04:002009-05-09T17:41:00.000-04:00I've become a follower recently of this blog and I...I've become a follower recently of this blog and I've appreciated Prof. Carter's views. Obviously we don't agree on everything. However, our interactions have been respectful and I am not here to tell him how wrong he is about everything.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-67060792526514004242009-05-09T17:08:00.000-04:002009-05-09T17:08:00.000-04:00In Peter's revealing non-answer, he helpfully disp...In Peter's revealing non-answer, he helpfully displayed that not only does he not know what socialism means, he doesn't know what capitalism means either.<br /><br />"I would favor a political system which respects property rights (You shall not steal; you shall not covet), whether monarchical or democratic, which allows the freedom of individuals to work to obtain and keep property (hence, capitalist)."<br /><br />I think it's silly that this conversation has been hijacked by Peter when Peter's position doesn't really represent Craig Carter's in the slightest (their joint rejection of their own mis-definition of socialism notwithstanding.)Thom Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18436448315505182664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-28942399623669212552009-05-09T15:43:00.000-04:002009-05-09T15:43:00.000-04:00Mr. Smith:
Thanks for the question.
The Ten Comm...Mr. Smith:<br /><br />Thanks for the question.<br /><br />The Ten Commandments are perhaps a good place to start. In them, are our basic duties to God and rights before man. I would favor a political system which respects property rights (You shall not steal; you shall not covet), whether monarchical or democratic, which allows the freedom of individuals to work to obtain and keep property (hence, capitalist), and is fair in its meting out of justice. Such a system, all other things being equal, will lead to greater prosperity than socialist, marxist, or kleptocratic systems. Experience teaches us that when property rights are jeopardized by seizure or high taxes, productivity goes down, because as Adam Smith suggested, individuals working in their own interests in a free market benefit the society as a whole.<br /><br />But experience teaches us over and over again, with every failed Marxist experiment, with every klepotcrat, or with every example of highly collectivist cultures, that if the individual is forced to benefit the collective, productivity goes down. I am a living example of lower productivity because I do not taxable work that benefits the GDP, because my wife works until June for the Canada, Ontario, and municipal governments, why should I also give them six months of my life?<br /><br />So to answer your question, prosperity is more the measure than the criterion of a good political/economic system. The US and Canada are more capitalist by protecting private property and fair business dealings than Central African Republic, North Korea or Cuba, and as a result are far more prosperous.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-61848466922310694542009-05-09T13:28:00.000-04:002009-05-09T13:28:00.000-04:00Peter, back to my original post: do you believe th...Peter, back to my original post: do you believe that economic prosperity is the primary criterion which we as Christians should use when evaluating political/economic systems? Your posts indicate that you would answer a resounding "yes," but I would like to hear from you directly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-67135543306856618022009-05-09T02:42:00.000-04:002009-05-09T02:42:00.000-04:00Oh snap.Oh snap.Thom Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18436448315505182664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-46457057538900668422009-05-09T00:07:00.000-04:002009-05-09T00:07:00.000-04:00Thom: you seem very self-assured of your interpret...Thom: you seem very self-assured of your interpretations. Your first suggestion assumes that there is no coherence between Deuteronomy, Jesus and Job. I believe in divine inspiration, while you don't seem to think that Deuteronomy is inspired at all. Besides, I was answering the question of why prosperity is good, and why if capitalism leads to widespread prosperity it is a better system than Marxism, which leads to misery. As a better working system, it is therefore one which Christians can support, work in and thrive. But you want to do social experiments; how many people will die in these "authentic" experiments. Isn't 100,000,000+ and counting enough already?<br /><br />You tell me that I know nothing of "marxism". But from your words I see that I was right to fear you. You will remove my wife's company from her and "give it to the rightful owners" (BHO). And you think that the Year of Jubilee enshrines Marxism in the Bible. You shrug when I suggest redistributing wealth to projects which are dear to me, in a callous way. I am beginning to understand now very well the tone that Carter uses with some of you people. You make me shudder. You are very dangerous, and your ideas are not all to be taken lightly. And also, you are even more dangerous than an atheistic marxist, because you think that you can justify your theft with the Bible; but it is still theft, and ultimately God enforces his laws.<br /><br />Wealthy people have rights too. Your views disgust me, because the means of production in most cases are earned not stolen. All the wealth that my family has is earned at great risk and with hard work. Stealing the means of production is what people like Hugo Chavez do in nationalizing the oil industry.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-51328626532319905592009-05-08T22:47:00.000-04:002009-05-08T22:47:00.000-04:00"Christians affirm that God is a good creator who ..."Christians affirm that God is a good creator who gives material blessings to the covenant people, but this blessing is also affirmed for non-covenant people: So Jesus says that God makes it to rain and sun to shine on the good and the evil alike (Matt 5.45), as a sign that God loves and blesses his enemies."<br /><br />"But how can you not [sic] read Deuteronomy and not see that poverty is part of God's curses and wealth his blessing (e.g., 28.1f.)?"<br /><br />Note the incongruity here between the worldview of the Deuteronomist and that of Jesus, an incongruity Peter obviously misses. The Deuteronomist believes in a cosmos in which the good are rewarded with prosperity and success while the wicked are punished with poverty and ruin. Peter also lumps Job together with the Deuteronomist, failing to see that Job is a critique of precisely the worldview held by the Deuteronomist. Moreover, Jesus' view clearly contradicts that of the Deuteronomist, saying that God gives indiscriminately to the good and the wicked alike. Therefore the Deuteronomistic idea that wealth is a sign of special blessing while poverty is a sign of sin or some shortcoming was wholesale rejected by Jesus. <br /><br />"The year of Jubilee protects private property, family rights and individual freedom, by making it possible to find complete freedom from debts. I don't think it is far from capitalism as you have suggested, because it affirms a family's right to property which cannot be annulled by indebtedness. If anything, it is a hyper-capitalism."<br /><br />The implicit critique of socilialism here betrays further unfamiliarity with the tenets of Marxism and perpetuates the unhelpful conflation of the "socialisms in name" (like Stalinism or State Capitalism) that have made it so much more difficult for the more authentic socialist experiments to get off the ground running. In Marxist thought, communism is not the eradication of private property like cars or houses and such. The primary meaning of "private property" in Marx is the private ownership of the means of production in industry. The only "theft" involved, therefore, in a Marxist vision of socialism is the retrieval of the means of production by the proletariat from the wealthy ruling classes who obtained ownership of the means of production (land, patents, equipment, sometimes labor power itself, etc.) through theft or exploitation in the first place. So the redistribution of wealth in the Marxist vision is precisely what's envisioned in the biblical year of Jubilee. Bankruptcy is not at all an analogous system to Jubilee as Peter claims. Bankruptcy doesn't redistribute property back to the original owners but simply eradicates the debt of the hapless soul who is rarely free to "make a new start in life." Bankruptcy results in stigmatization. It frequently requires the relinquishing of all valuable assets, so that after bankruptcy the victim is often worse off in terms of private property ownership than when s/he was still in debt. It disables the victim from being able to freely navigate the economic world. There's a more obvious difference. Bankruptcy is considered failure, whereas Jubilee is considered justice. <br /><br />"If you are in favor of a biblical form of wealth redistribution, you may send me your next pay cheque (or as soon as you can) and I will make sure that a poor African will receive it. I'd happily do this as a favor to you: I would make sure that it would go to Bayaka Pygmies, Orphans in Bangui, or to Sudanese refugees."<br /><br />Yes. This is A biblical form of wealth redistribution. It is certainly not the only form. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, other than just to be cute. <br /><br />"The New Testament doesn't continue the Year of Jubilee."<br /><br />Wrong. Jesus called for the restoration of the practice of Jubilee in Israel. It never happened because they killed him, but I don't think he was just kidding around with them. Luke 4 and the Sermon on the Mount are both examples of Jesus' call to renew the practice of Jubilee. This was argued first by Trocme, then regurgitated by Yoder, and affirmed by real exegetes like N. T. Wright and others. <br /><br />"But Christians who are filled with the Spirit give spontaneously and under no compulsion (Acts 4.35-37; cf. Acts 5.3-4)."<br /><br />We're not talking about the church, though. We're talking about broader society. Aren't we? The discussion revolves around what's best for broader society. Conservatives love to go on about how the law of the land reflects the morality of the people in defense of their policy positions on abortion and homosexual marriage, etc. And though they all seem to affirm the moral force of voluntary collectivism (at least, that is, when they're talking about Acts 5, not necessarily subsistence groups in Africa), they go ballistic the moment its suggested that collectivism be enshrined in the law as a societal value. (This is true predominantly in the U.S., and with the one exception of Craig Carter in Canada.) This is a contradiction. It's all right to enshrine some values into law, even when not everybody shares those values--just not when it comes to money. Sex values: public. Money values: private. Interpretation: bourgeois morality. <br /><br />"The Year of Jubilee was not enforced by a coercive bureaucracy like the IRS or CRA, but it was intended to be a voluntary community practice that the people did out of love of God and neighbor."<br /><br />Wrong. It was <I>intended</I> to be enforced by the Israelite judicial system. It probably wasn't ever enforced, but that's only because the Israelites (namely, the rich ones) failed to live up to Yahweh's demands. <br /><br />"Written into the tax code of Canada and the US, are laws for enforcing redistribution. But God was the one who enforced the year of Jubilee, no human authority."<br /><br />Wrong. It was meant to be enforced by Moses, judges, and then kings and their systems of governmental control. <br /><br />I find it funny that on the one hand Peter says that Jubilee is perfectly compatible with capitalism and gives a legally enshrined "parallel" (according to him: bankruptcy) as an example, but then goes on to feel obliged to say that the biblical idea of Jubilee was not something that was meant to be enforced. I'd say Peter has at least got one aspect of Jesus' ethical teaching down: he doesn't let his right hand know what his left hand is doing. <br /><br />"One way that USA could apply the Year of Jubilee, therefore, would be to abolish inheritance taxes so that when farmers and business men die, their holdings could more easily pass on to their families instead of redistributed by the government. Taxes after death can be very hard on families. My father-in-law has a huge insurance policy so that when he dies, his company can remain in the hands of his children. This is not right. To apply the biblical principle of behind the Year of Jubilee in our day, you would have to have less redistribution not more."<br /><br />Yeah. Or not. Or we could read the practice of Jubilee correctly and admit that an analogous practice today would be the handing over of land to the natives, the dissolution of NAFTA followed up with a contract with indigenous Mexican corn farmers (after first restoring their corn farms to them by taking them away from the moneylenders who took them away when the corn farmers went out of business because of NAFTA) making them one of the primary suppliers of corn to the U.S., and that sort of thing. Jubilee isn't just about a fresh start. It's about a fresh start <I>with all the means they had at their disposal</I> before the powerful came in and took advantage. Jubilee is not compatible with capitalism. Capitalism fundamentally depends upon the illusion of the legitimacy of the private ownership of the means of production and distribution by the wealthy elite. Jubilee undermines the legitimacy of this private ownership, thus undermining one of the basic pillars of the capitalist myth.Thom Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18436448315505182664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-8771768731000634872009-05-08T21:54:00.000-04:002009-05-08T21:54:00.000-04:00Christians affirm that God is a good creator who g...Christians affirm that God is a good creator who gives material blessings to the covenant people, but this blessing is also affirmed for non-covenant people: So Jesus says that God makes it to rain and sun to shine on the good and the evil alike (Matt 5.45), as a sign that God loves and blesses his enemies.<br /><br />The year of Jubilee protects private property, family rights and individual freedom, by making it possible to find complete freedom from debts. I don't think it is far from capitalism as you have suggested, because it affirms a family's right to property which cannot be annulled by indebtedness. If anything, it is a hyper-capitalism. Laws like the Year of Jubilee are not foreign to contemporary capitalism. Personal bankruptcy laws have a similar effect in that the individual can escape otherwise enslaving debts and make a new start in life.<br /><br />If you are in favor of a biblical form of wealth redistribution, you may send me your next pay cheque (or as soon as you can) and I will make sure that a poor African will receive it. I'd happily do this as a favor to you: I would make sure that it would go to Bayaka Pygmies, Orphans in Bangui, or to Sudanese refugees. The New Testament doesn't continue the Year of Jubilee, but Christians who are filled with the Spirit give spontaneously and under no compulsion (Acts 4.35-37; cf. Acts 5.3-4). The Year of Jubilee was not enforced by a coercive bureaucracy like the IRS or CRA, but it was intended to be a voluntary community practice that the people did out of love of God and neighbor. Written into the tax code of Canada and the US, are laws for enforcing redistribution. But God was the one who enforced the year of Jubilee, no human authority.<br /><br />One way that USA could apply the Year of Jubilee, therefore, would be to abolish inheritance taxes so that when farmers and business men die, their holdings could more easily pass on to their families instead of redistributed by the government. Taxes after death can be very hard on families. My father-in-law has a huge insurance policy so that when he dies, his company can remain in the hands of his children. This is not right. To apply the biblical principle of behind the Year of Jubilee in our day, you would have to have less redistribution not more.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-28392611513999154602009-05-08T20:28:00.000-04:002009-05-08T20:28:00.000-04:00Deuteronomy lists specific blessings and curses fo...Deuteronomy lists specific blessings and curses for Israel as God's covenant people. Moreover, Israel is about as far from Capitalism as you can get. Ever hear of the year of Jubilee? Sounds like redistribution of wealth to me. The stuff in Proverbs and Deuteronomy should be read in that context.<br /><br />And everything should be read in the context of Jesus's statements above all.Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-42645710251684333362009-05-08T19:49:00.000-04:002009-05-08T19:49:00.000-04:00You doubt what?You doubt what?Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-80693251524641830762009-05-08T19:39:00.000-04:002009-05-08T19:39:00.000-04:00I doubt it.I doubt it.Thom Starkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18436448315505182664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-49495090290667429102009-05-08T19:33:00.000-04:002009-05-08T19:33:00.000-04:00In capitalist countries, laws are supposed to crea...In capitalist countries, laws are supposed to create fairness and to stop coercion and stealing; so if killing and stealing occur, it is in spite of the system. In socialist system, the government itself does the stealing through coercive wealth redistribution. <br /><br />I agree with Paul that the love of money is the root of all evil. But it is not the sin only of the rich. Indeed, the poor who are filled with envy and covetousness are also highly susceptible to the love of money. Gehazi was not wealthy, but he was destroyed by love of money (2 K 5.23f.). And a rich person can be indifferent to money; some do not crave what they already have in abundance.<br /><br />Halden: If you say to a rich person, "God ... richly furnishes us with everything to enjoy" you are saying that wealth is a blessing whose source is God himself. But how can you not read Deuteronomy and not see that poverty is part of God's curses and wealth his blessing (e.g., 28.1f.)? And Proverbs gives a advice that will lead people to wealth and happiness (e.g., 3.1-10--God will multiply your shalom and barns and wine vats bursting). The produce of the land is seen as a gift from God and therefore in the Old Testament, the Israelites were required to give back to him 10% in the form of a tithe.<br /><br />But I am not sure what it is about Jesus' words that should make me favor socialism, despising Adam Smith and Milton Friedman. Could you please explain that to me?Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-44478305239704820692009-05-08T16:54:00.000-04:002009-05-08T16:54:00.000-04:00Nice obfuscation there, Peter. You mention only on...Nice obfuscation there, Peter. You mention only one specific reference, which does not in any sense say that material wealth is a blessing and completely ignore dealing what what Jesus actually says in the verses quoted to you.<br /><br />How cheap and disingenuous.Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-86184984318824122412009-05-08T16:16:00.000-04:002009-05-08T16:16:00.000-04:00I agree that providing food, clothing, shelter, an...I agree that providing food, clothing, shelter, and medical care are aspects of neighbor-love and therefore laudatory. That being said, I think I would still rather phrase my critique of political systems in terms of love of God and neighbor rather than directly in terms of prosperity. After all, "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."<br /><br />I myself know little about economics, so I am probably not qualified to comment on your assertions about global capitalism, collectivism. However, I think it is worth noting that some people would characterize capitalism by "stealing and coercion" as well.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-67725639040038980262009-05-08T15:22:00.000-04:002009-05-08T15:22:00.000-04:00That is not all the Bible says about poverty and w...That is not all the Bible says about poverty and wealth. Wealth is also a blessing in the Bible, as in Deuteronomy, Proverbs, and Job; in the NT, 1 Tim 6.17-19.<br /><br />While there is no perfect economic system in the world today, people vote with their feet. During all the years of the cold war, many millions of people sought to escape from the Eastern bloc to the West, and from Cuba for Florida. Today, millions of people escape the poverty and despair of Africa for the western capitalist countries; and the oppression of the Middle East for Canada and the US.<br /><br />I can't see how any economic system that is based on coercion and stealing can ever lead to a prosperity which maktes it possible to provide decent food, clothing, shelter, and medical care to children. Is that not a good thing? Do you think Jesus would be against that? If you really do, go live in the forest with the pygmies and let the fleas bite you all night long. You too can suffer from river blindness, chiggers eating your toes, and malaria, and like them, your children will suffer from 80% infant mortality. But it would be a spiritual blessing, right?Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-13614568853903631552009-05-08T14:50:00.000-04:002009-05-08T14:50:00.000-04:00Sure. When it comes to evaluating political and ec...Sure. When it comes to evaluating political and economic systems from a Christian perspective, I don't think the primary criterion should be economic prosperity. That principle comes from my understanding of Jesus' statements on wealth - namely that it is of no spiritual value and is indeed a hindrance.<br /><br />Now, it very well may be that you do not use that as your primary criterion. If that is the case, then my comment is misdirected.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-71647189845102785322009-05-08T14:21:00.000-04:002009-05-08T14:21:00.000-04:00Mr. Smith: Can you please explain how the scriptu...Mr. Smith: Can you please explain how the scripture verses that you quoted apply to what I said? And may Halden could explain why he thinks it's "snap".Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-72173027555945611602009-05-08T14:07:00.000-04:002009-05-08T14:07:00.000-04:00Oh snap.Oh snap.Haldenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03936185959033443640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-44627526276205686222009-05-08T14:03:00.000-04:002009-05-08T14:03:00.000-04:00"All I've done is observe social customs in Africa..."All I've done is observe social customs in Africa and remark how their collectivism is an impediment to economic prosperity." ~ Peter Dunn<br /><br />"But woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort."<br /><br />"I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5328993133397649838.post-64917288787228548672009-05-08T10:46:00.000-04:002009-05-08T10:46:00.000-04:00That's brilliant. For all my points I made, your ...That's brilliant. For all my points I made, your best response is to call me an accomplished ignorant, revisionist, and apparent colonialist? All I've done is observe social customs in Africa and remark how their collectivism is an impediment to economic prosperity. I also notice that communism, where it is tried, leads to murder and desperate poverty. I don't know where you've been, but you're darn lucky to live in the US.Peter W. Dunnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07160703257731149376noreply@blogger.com