Income Inequality?

[Spartacus]

You mean you are not willing to flip burgers. Or do whatever you can to earn money. You want it handed to you free.

Are you calling me a liar?

And there you go! You want to decide what to do with your own money rather than me deciding for you. Congratulations, you have admitted I was right all along. Welcome to the Republican side.

Not quite my position: my resources, to the extent that I have any, should be used for the good of others and not simply for my own enrichment. I must spend my resources virtuously, not simply according to my whims.

If you are not willing to work, then you shall not eat. Isn't that what the bible tells you?

That's from one of Paul's epistles, I believe: he is arguing that those capable of work should do so so as not to stretch too thin the resources of the Church, which are needed by the widows and orphans.

Avoiding the debate again I see. I shall repeat it:

But we were talking about Mosaic law, not the USA. How is working for food anything but fair? It sure isn't what you have been arguing. You want people to get paid no matter what they do or how hard they work. You think the employer exists to support the employee and that somehow the employees get to decide how a business should be run and how the owner should spend his money instead of the other way around. You are just proposing a tyranny of the masses. If owners can not decide how to spend their own money and property, then they will stop owning businesses and then there will be no jobs and the workers can demand nothing from nothing all day long and still have nothing.

At the risk of repeating myself, this is a strawman.

I love how when you know you are wrong, rather than admit it, you avoid it.

You were arguing Mosaic law and now you are claiming that Jesus changed how people should spend their money? If anything, Jesus eliminated the tithe by fulfilling the law. You give what you want. You help who you want. Nobody forces you to do anything. Jesus gave advice and taught us to care for our neighbors, but he never legislated it. You can't legislate charity because when you take from me to give to someone else, it becomes stealing.

Again, strawman. You don't understand what I'm actually arguing and you don't care to understand.

[seer]

Are you calling me a liar?

Are you a Communist? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

I. Nothing in society will belong to anyone, either as a personal possession or as capital goods, except the things for which the person has immediate use, for either his needs, his pleasures, or his daily work.
II. Every citizen will be a public man, sustained by, supported by, and occupied at the public expense.
III. Every citizen will make his particular contribution to the activities of the community according to his capacity, his talent and his age; it is on this basis that his duties will be determined, in conformity with the distributive laws.

[Spartacus]

It is an acknowledgement by Jesus that there will always be poor.

It's a deliberate reference by Jesus to the Law. Or do you think that the fact that it's a word-for-word repetition of a key OT passage is just a coincidence?

I'm sorry, but no. This comment was made to ALL of the Disciples, not Judas specifically. Jesus was telling His disciples that no matter how much they could get for the perfume, there would still be poor people. No amount of money would eliminate the needs of everyone.

Did God not put enough resources in the world for everyone?

Cool.

[Zymologist]

It's a deliberate reference by Jesus to the Law. Or do you think that the fact that it's a word-for-word repetition of a key OT passage is just a coincidence?

Couldn't it be both?

[Spartacus]

Are you a Communist? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

There's quite a bit more to Communism than that. Materialism. Atheism. The Hegelian dialectic.

[Spartacus]

Couldn't it be both?

Can it be both a coincidence and a deliberate reference? No, I'm pretty sure those two propositions are mutually exclusive.

[Zymologist]

Can it be both a coincidence and a deliberate reference? No, I'm pretty sure those two propositions are mutually exclusive.

Sorry; couldn't it be both a deliberate reference and an acknowledgment by Jesus that there will always be poor?

[Bill the Cat]

It's a deliberate reference by Jesus to the Law. Or do you think that the fact that it's a word-for-word repetition of a key OT passage is just a coincidence?

It was a midrashic use, as was common for Him. He was reminding them that God had already told them that there would be poor among them

Did God not put enough resources in the world for everyone?

No. That's the reason for the Sabbath year of forgiving of debts.

Deut 15:11 For the poor will never cease to be in the land

[Spartacus]

[QUOTE=Bill the Cat;112614]It was a midrashic use, as was common for Him. He was reminding them that God had already told them that there would be poor among them

My interpretation is cooler: it turns Judas' complaint right back at him.

No. That's the reason for the Sabbath year of forgiving of debts.

Deut 15:11 For the poor will never cease to be in the land

The whole verse reads, "For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’"

It's not, "Sorry-- the Promised Land I made and am giving to you can't actually sustain everyone, so deal with it" but "don't ever stop caring for the poor, and don't ever neglect the Law, which I intended to help take care of their needs."

[Sparko]

Are you calling me a liar?

No. Just lazy or too proud to take any job you can. You are telling me there are NO JOBS at all where you are? Really?

Not quite my position: my resources, to the extent that I have any, should be used for the good of others and not simply for my own enrichment. I must spend my resources virtuously, not simply according to my whims.

No your position was that CEOs and Business Owners should be limited in what they make and how they spend their money. That they OWE their employees a higher wage. You want to tell them how to spend their money, but you don't want anyone telling you how to spend yours. I think that pretty much ends the debate.

That's from one of Paul's epistles, I believe: he is arguing that those capable of work should do so so as not to stretch too thin the resources of the Church, which are needed by the widows and orphans.

So much for your academic bible courses.

2 Thes 3: 6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching[a] you received from us. 7 For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, 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. 9 We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to offer ourselves as a model for you to imitate. 10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”

11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat. 13 And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is good.

14 Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer.

Paul is admonishing YOU, Spartacus. He is telling you to earn the food you eat and don't be idle. Take any job you can and work your way up. Don't expect handouts.

At the risk of repeating myself, this is a strawman.



Again, strawman. You don't understand what I'm actually arguing and you don't care to understand.

I understand very well what you are arguing and you have shown that you are a hypocrite, not willing to live by the rules you want to impose on others.

[seer]

There's quite a bit more to Communism than that. Materialism. Atheism. The Hegelian dialectic.

So are you a Communist? You certainly sound like one.

[Spartacus]

So are you a Communist? You certainly sound like one.

I reject materialism and atheism and Hegelianism. All three of those essential to Communist ideology. Therefore, I am not a Communist.

[Spartacus]

No. Just lazy or too proud to take any job you can. You are telling me there are NO JOBS at all where you are? Really?

Too lazy to look particularly diligently, but what jobs I've seen open take more qualifications than I have.

No your position was that CEOs and Business Owners should be limited in what they make and how they spend their money. That they OWE their employees a higher wage. You want to tell them how to spend their money, but you don't want anyone telling you how to spend yours. I think that pretty much ends the debate.

Show me where I said this.

not because we do not have the right to such help

What does the bolded line mean?

I understand very well what you are arguing and you have shown that you are a hypocrite, not willing to live by the rules you want to impose on others.

I'm not yet in a position to follow the rules particularly well, but the fact that I fail to live up to my own standards doesn't mean the standards are faulty.

[Bill the Cat]

My interpretation is cooler: it turns Judas' complaint right back at him.

But it wasn't Judas complaining. It was all of the Disciples.


Actually, yes it is. God was telling the Jews to not be stingy to their own Jewish poor so as to not lose so much on the day of forgiveness of debts, but to be generous in meeting their needs so God would bless them because of their generosity. Again, this was a midrashic use where the immediate context of the OT scripture was not important to the NT usage.

[seer]

I reject materialism and atheism and Hegelianism. All three of those essential to Communist ideology. Therefore, I am not a Communist.

So you are basically a Communist that believes in God.