AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

@Foxfyre,

Aside from arguments from (biblical) authority, I for one would be quite interested in seeing any biblical passages where jesus forwarded his notions on the proper role and function of civil government. Particularly helpful would be those passages where he had proscribed against such a redistribution of wealth, even if, say, by majority vote the members of that community voted in a government which had said it would in fact redistribute wealth.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Jesus admonished the people to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, minister to the sick, visit those in prison, have concern for widows and orphans, etc., and he praised those who freely and voluntarily gave of their own time and resources to do that. There is absolutely no saying of his that can be found that suggests that it was the duty of Rome to do that nor that the people should petition the government to assume those duties.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

What you are aware of Fox is often at odds with reality.

In 1959 - 31.1% of the population was at or below 125% of the poverty line
In 2007 - it was 17% of the population below 125% of poverty

Before you claim it was MORE people in 2007 - let me post those figures too in thousands of persons
In 1959 - 54,942
in 2007 - 50,876
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/perindex.html
Table 6

So to somehow claim there are MORE poor than ever since the implementation of government programs is complete nonsense.

Perhaps it is time to rethink what you are aware of Fox because you don't seem to be aware of anything outside your own reality.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

It is my experience that it is almost without exception people of faith who minister to the addicted, organize inner city programs for the kids, establish leper colonies and orphanages and programs to assist widows and orphans, who organize and staff the food pantries, thrift shops, soup kitchens, and private homeless shelters, etc.

I am unaware of any Atheist groups who do anything like that.

Spend some time somewhere else than the South. Out here in the Bay area, we have many non-religious aid organizations. Hundreds of them.

Quote:

And I am also aware that almost without exception, government programs intended to relieve poverty have resulted in more poor than ever.

Bull crap. Parados pointed this out quite nicely.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Actually, in the posted essay Medved is claiming that according to Leviticus, a progressive tax system cannot be justified, because it "constitutes the blurring of justice and charity", and that only a flat tax system is compatible with the bible. Quite obviously, it's Medved who is nitpicking Bible verses.

Fine with me. If you want to argue that a progressive tax system is incompatible with a 4,000 year old code for a tribal society, I have no problem with that.

And if you want to argue that the Golden Rule shouldn't be used to justify a progressive tax system, then I don't have a problem with that, either.

Just don't tell me that a half-sentence taken from some ancient text that lays down the rules on how to treat your slaves, stone adulterers and sacrifice two turtles or two young pigeons on the eighth day after your menstruation as compensation for being unclean should prevent modern society from fixing holes in the social safety net.

1 Reply

@old europe,

I didn't say that. Nor did Medved say that if his essay is assessed honestly and in the spirit in which he offered it.

He is just saying that justice will not be done if it is government that provides that safety net in any manner that favors one group or person over another. And THAT is his primary argument for a flat tax among other things.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Quote:
Obama Should Listen to Leviticus: Don't Confuse Justice and Charity

... Medved,...he frequently used religious or Biblical illustrations for the points he intends to make. Here he is almost certainly countering those on the Left who hold up the 'golden rule' and other Bible passages to defend Obama's 'redistribution of wealth' concept and those groups who are urging him to pour more resources into programs that address poverty and related issues.

In the posted essay, Medved is pointing out that there is nothing in the Old or New Testament that suggests that it is the role of government to minister to the poor but rather, for very good reasons, that it is the duty of the individual. It is the duty of government to dispense unbiased justice which is not possible if the government assumes responsibility to dispense charity.

but there is this;

Quote:

In Leviticus 25, God commanded the children of Israel to celebrate a year of jubilee for fifty years. This was to a be a time of renewal when the people could be made free of the obligations they had contracted for themselves and for their land. As long as jubilee was practiced, familiesin Israel did no have to worry about chronic poverty, because they all got a piece of the land.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/492427/the_year_of_jubilee_a_jewish_tradition.html?cat=34

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

As I asked:
1) where are his words (any) on the proper role or form of civil government? What does he suggest people "should petition the government to assume" as "duty"?
2) where does he proscribe against a community organizing itself to redistribute wealth?

He said, correct me if I have it wrong, absolutely nothing regarding whether it was the duty of Rome to place rapists or child molesters in jail.

1 Reply

@DontTreadOnMe,

Medved didn't use that passage though DTOM. That is a different subject than the one he is addressing in his essay.

We can go through the Bible line by line and find hundreds of passages that virtually nobody, Jew, Christian, or non-religious, condone or practice now. And we can find hundreds of passages that virtually all, Jew, Christian, and non-religious alike would agree are good things (or all would if it wasn't obvious that the idea was in the Bible.)

He was using Bible references to illustrate what he believes to be a universal truth that whenever rich is favored over poor or poor favored over rich, or any other forms of favoritism are ordered or condoned, injustice will be the result and cannot be a part of good government.

3 Replies

"The law, in its majectic impartiality, forbids rich and poor alike from sleeping under bridges, begging on the street, or stealing a crust of bread to survive." Anatole France

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Medved didn't use that passage though DTOM. That is a different subject than the one he is addressing in his essay.

...
He was using Bible references to illustrate what he believes to be a universal truth that whenever rich is favored over poor or poor favored over rich, or any other forms of favoritism are ordered or condoned, injustice will be the result and cannot be a part of good government.

i started to mention this at the end of the post and then didn't;

the point i was making is that it's a little iffy to use bible verses. because the old and new testaments were written by so many hands over so many millenia, it's possible to find at least one passage to support nearly any assertion.

i guess that's why so many people use it in the fashion of an "oracle", similar to the i ching or nordic runes.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Really, Mr. Mountie, how crass you are.

We don't quote Jeebus unless what he is alleged to have said is consonant with what we are prepared to believe in.

0 Replies

@blatham,

Jesus was not a politician and did not concern himself with government. He was concerned with the ethical, legal, and moral obligations of the individual and a person's spiritual well being. He acknowledged that government had certain authority.....render unto Caesar what is Caesar's.... and he submitted to that authority, but he clearly believed that charity was the role of the individual and gave no indication that it was the role of government or should be. Otherwise he would surely have taught that. He did defend women against injustice, however, and spoke very harsh condemnation for anyone who would presume to harm a child.

1 Reply

@DontTreadOnMe,

Quote:

the point i was making is that it's a little iffy to use bible verses. because the old and new testaments were written by so many hands over so many millenia, it's possible to find at least one passage to support nearly any assertion.

i guess that's why so many people use it in the fashion of an "oracle", similar to the i ching or nordic runes.

Personally, i've found the I Ching to be much more reliable . . .

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Medved didn't use that passage though DTOM.

No, he wasn't. He was cherry-picking a half-sentence from Leviticus and doing some additional creative interpreting in order to reach the conclusion that the bible wants us to have a flat tax system.

Foxfyre wrote:

He was using Bible references to illustrate what he believes to be a universal truth that whenever rich is favored over poor or poor favored over rich, or any other forms of favoritism are ordered or condoned, injustice will be the result and cannot be a part of good government.

He was using the bible to propagate a flat tax system, because, according to him, a progressive tax system was in conflict with Leviticus for not treating poor and rich alike.

And please stop hawking your opinion as "universal truth".

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

What you are aware of Fox is often at odds with reality.

In 1959 - 31.1% of the population was at or below 125% of the poverty line
In 2007 - it was 17% of the population below 125% of poverty

Before you claim it was MORE people in 2007 - let me post those figures too in thousands of persons
In 1959 - 54,942
in 2007 - 50,876
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/perindex.html
Table 6

So to somehow claim there are MORE poor than ever since the implementation of government programs is complete nonsense.

Perhaps it is time to rethink what you are aware of Fox because you don't seem to be aware of anything outside your own reality.

Foolish newspaper-reading toilet baby! Your puny "facts" are no match for Foxfyre's absolute certainty!

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

Quote:

a universal truth that whenever rich is favored over poor or poor favored over rich, or any other forms of favoritism are ordered or condoned, injustice will be the result and cannot be a part of good government

I guess that would be one of the best arguments against Christianity I have ever seen.

If God favors the poor over the rich then he cannot be part of a good government, don't you think Fox?

0 Replies

@DontTreadOnMe,

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Medved didn't use that passage though DTOM. That is a different subject than the one he is addressing in his essay.

...
He was using Bible references to illustrate what he believes to be a universal truth that whenever rich is favored over poor or poor favored over rich, or any other forms of favoritism are ordered or condoned, injustice will be the result and cannot be a part of good government.

i started to mention this at the end of the post and then didn't;

the point i was making is that it's a little iffy to use bible verses. because the old and new testaments were written by so many hands over so many millenia, it's possible to find at least one passage to support nearly any assertion.

i guess that's why so many people use it in the fashion of an "oracle", similar to the i ching or nordic runes.

Medved was almost certainly using these Bible verses as illustration to counter those on the Left who have been waving the Bible around as evidence that God wants Obama to feed the poor, clothe the naked, etc.

Using proof texts from the Bible as more than a sense of what the people of the Bible believed and experienced is a wrong use of the Bible in my opinion. Unless passages are considered within their full context and read through the eyes, experience, and understanding of those who wrote them, they will almost always be misinterpreted.

Medved was not suggesting anything was God's will or order in the illustrations he used to make his point. He was pointing out that attempts to use the Bible to justify politicians using bigger and more expansive government programs to solidify their power, prestige, or to keep their positions is contrary to what the larger teaching of the Bible actually is, and when they do that, injustice will be be done.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

So, he said almost nothing about the proper form or role of government. Including not giving any (and I do mean ANY) suggestion that government ought NOT to organize itself so as to redistribute wealth?

Do I have you right?

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Quote:
the point i was making is that it's a little iffy to use bible verses. because the old and new testaments were written by so many hands over so many millenia, it's possible to find at least one passage to support nearly any assertion.

i guess that's why so many people use it in the fashion of an "oracle", similar to the i ching or nordic runes.

Personally, i've found the I Ching to be much more reliable . . .

i like the i ching well enough, but the guy that turned me onto it was a welsh sax player and his reading of the thing was sometimes unintelligible.

i've had some good experiences with rune casting though.

0 Replies

AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know