^^Was that sarcastic? Because those descriptors do a pretty good job.

[Edited on November 7, 2013 at 12:43 PM. Reason : .]

11/7/2013 12:43:02 PM

I understand that not all Christians are Catholic, but I'm having a hard time seeing how the Pope's points are true for non-Catholic Christians too.


Pope attacks 'tyranny' of markets in manifesto for papacy

Quote :

"Pope Francis attacked unfettered capitalism as "a new tyranny" and beseeched global leaders to fight poverty and growing inequality, in a document on Tuesday setting out a platform for his papacy and calling for a renewal of the Catholic Church. The 84-page document, known as an apostolic exhortation, was the first major work he has authored alone as pope and makes official many views he has aired in sermons and remarks since he became the first non-European pontiff in 1,300 years in March. In it, Francis went further than previous comments criticizing the global economic system, attacking the "idolatry of money", and urged politicians to "attack the structural causes of inequality" and strive to provide work, healthcare and education to all citizens."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/26/us-pope-document-idUSBRE9AP0EQ20131126

which caused The Atlantic to wonder if the Pope is a Marxist (and decide he would agree with anti-free market economist Karl Polanyi):

Quote :

"Polanyi's Big Idea: The Economy Has to Serve Society, Not the Other Way Around Economic activity, Polanyi says, started off as just one of many outgrowths of human activity. And so, economics originally served human needs. But over time, people (particularly, policy-making people) got the idea that markets regulated themselves if laws and regulations got out of their way. The free market converts told people that "only such policies and measures are in order which help to ensure the self-regulation of the market by creating the conditions which make the market the only organizing power in the economic sphere." Gradually, as free market-based thinking was extended throughout society, humans and nature came to be seen as commodities called "labor" and "land." The "market economy" had turned human society into a "market society." In short (as social sciences professors prepare to slam their heads into their tables at my reductionism), instead of the market existing to help humans live better lives, humans were ordering their lives to fit into the economy."

they then go on to describe the Pope's statement and beliefs and how they overlap
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/pope-franciss-theory-of-economics/281865/

12/1/2013 7:23:46 PM

Quote :

"Economic activity, Polanyi says, started off as just one of many outgrowths of human activity. And so, economics originally served human needs. But over time, people (particularly, policy-making people) got the idea that markets regulated themselves if laws and regulations got out of their way."

Let me get this straight. Laws and regulations came first, and at some time later, lawmakers came in and decided to start "deregulating" on a whim? Is this what passes for intellectual thought now?

12/1/2013 9:19:05 PM

wat?

Rampant abuse of workers came first, regulations and unionizing came after.

Actually, rampant abuse of slaves came first, some regulation to define a "worker" came next and then rampant abuse of said workers, then actual regulation and unionizing came after.

12/1/2013 10:23:27 PM

hey, lets critique a gross simplification and entirely miss the point!

12/1/2013 10:46:13 PM

Quote :

"wat? Rampant abuse of workers came first, regulations and unionizing came after. Actually, rampant abuse of slaves came first, some regulation to define a "worker" came next and then rampant abuse of said workers, then actual regulation and unionizing came after."

Totally forgot about that. Slavery, enforced by free market capitalism, and definitely not enforced by the government.

12/2/2013 11:08:12 AM

woosh

12/2/2013 11:51:41 AM

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2013/12/04/the-radical-christian-approach-to-poverty-and-riches/

12/4/2013 10:03:16 AM

So basically:

1) the system we have is the system Luther wanted (its not, and why would that matter anyways?)
2) hard work is good for you, social services make you lazy and laziness makes you sin (don't wash anyone's feet, don't want to make them lazy!)
3) even though inequality is bad, scripture doesn't support redistribution of wealth (it does)

12/4/2013 10:27:55 AM

1) no
2) no
3) and no

meh, sorry for the sarcasm. maybe his position is so nuanced, that it doesn't fit our current constructions of what christianity is (from jerry fallwell and fox news), so i see how you might take what he says and interpret it that way. but i'd encourage you not to make those strawmen and to read what he says at face value. i thought what he said was pretty self-explanatory.

[Edited on December 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM. Reason : ]

12/4/2013 10:44:56 AM

it is self-explanatory, and those are the problems it describes. it's all about paternalism = bad

12/4/2013 11:08:22 AM

You obviously didn't read it.

12/4/2013 12:43:55 PM

You obviously didn't read it

12/4/2013 12:49:26 PM

Quote :

"3) even though inequality is bad, scripture doesn't support redistribution of wealth (it does)"

Also, I'm pretty sure the bible talks about a giving spirit. I don't remember justification for using state power to "redistribute wealth". There certainly is not a scriptural justification for vesting that redistributive power in an institution that wages war.

I think Tolstoy was right to say that any institution that uses violence must be rejected, and any Christian that supports such an institution is a hypocrite.

12/4/2013 1:40:05 PM

There is scriptural support for both of those things

12/4/2013 1:44:18 PM

Post it, then? I'm obviously not a bible scholar and I'm not bound by it, but you're the one that is making the claim that Christ supports redistribution through the use of state violence.

New Testament, of course.

[Edited on December 4, 2013 at 1:47 PM. Reason : ]

12/4/2013 1:46:17 PM

Romans 13:1-7

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience. ...

12/4/2013 1:58:46 PM

Quote :

"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God."

So anyone that is in a position of power must have been instituted by God? Hitler was literally appointed by God, good to know.

12/4/2013 2:09:07 PM

I attended a service at my parents' church during the Bush years, and the pastor did an entire sermon on that passage. He concluded that running a stop sign is a sin against god.

[Edited on December 4, 2013 at 2:17 PM. Reason : ]

12/4/2013 2:14:51 PM

^^
God works in mysterious ways!

12/4/2013 2:17:09 PM

Oh, scripture definitely tells us to obey authority:
To answer your question about the government, we are commanded to obey the government and pay taxes so they can do god's work. And providing to the poor is God's work.

Quote :

" Obey the government, for God is the one who put it there. All governments have been placed in power by God. 2 So those who refuse to obey the laws of the land are refusing to obey God, and punishment will follow. 3 For the authorities do not frighten people who are doing right, but they frighten those who do wrong. So do what they say, and you will get along well. 4 The authorities are sent by God to help you. But if you are doing something wrong, of course you should be afraid, for you will be punished. The authorities are established by God for that very purpose, to punish those who do wrong. 5 So you must obey the government for two reasons: to keep from being punished and to keep a clear conscience. 6 Pay your taxes, too, for these same reasons. For government workers need to be paid so they can keep on doing the work God intended them to do. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: Pay your taxes and import duties, and give respect and honor to all to whom it is due."

Since social programs are god's work, you have to pay taxes so the government can do god's work.
Romans 13 1-7
(Context: Paul writing to Christians under Roman rule)

Specifically about paying taxes for war we know from all three gospels that Jesus was asked about it (at the Wedding Banquet, Mathew 22, Mark 12, Luke 20) and he told people to pay the tax, but continue to do God's work.

We also know that the Apostles collected money and controlled how it was used, they had full control over outlays. In Acts 2:32-37 and 4:32-37 we learn that believers share their possesions and give them to the Apostle. In Acts 5 Ananias lies about how much he sold something for, and Peter says that he has lied to God. In 1 Corinthians Paul explains why it is everyone's duty to give (9:7-14). In Chapter 16 of Corinthians 1 Paul requires people to give to a charity being collected for drought relief, again to a governing body. etc...

(disclaimer: the last time I had to memorize scripture and go to Bible Study was 15 years ago, so some of those verses may be off but I'm pretty sure they are right)

12/4/2013 2:31:42 PM

^ and you wonder why people at you when you try to make such an argument. By your logic, if the gov't passed a law that said "kill all black people", "good Christians" would have no choice but to follow it. I know you REEEEEEAAAAAAALLY want it to be the case that the Bible says "pay taxes to help poor people," but it doesn't. It says, in two separate and wholly unrelated passages, follow your gov't's laws, and help the poor. So stop suggesting that two separate passages are in the same context and apply to each other, because they don't. Unless and until you can find a single scriptural passage that says "pay taxes to help the poor" or "vote for gov't programs that help the poor," then please stop showing your ignorance.

12/8/2013 3:57:56 PM

The local NPR affiliate in Charlotte discusses local megachurch, Elevation:

http://wfae.org/post/elevation-church-reporters-roundtable

Reporter Stuart Watson raises the point I've raised with others and yet to receive a satisfactory response to, do we want to continue to grant non-profit status and the tax exemptions that follow to organizations that raise millions of dollars and create millionaire pastors? And further, how do we distinguish these new megachurches from the church I grew up in that was over a hundred years old and had 150 or so in the congregation on a good Sunday? Or should we?

3/18/2014 12:25:29 PM

don't try to make a distinction, don't allow tax exemptions to any churches

3/18/2014 12:33:15 PM

yeah, there's no good reason any of them should be exempted over any other business.

3/18/2014 12:40:12 PM

Can you imagine the cries of "persecution" if they were no longer exempt?

3/18/2014 2:27:52 PM

I am going to dabble in the realm of false equivalency for a moment.

How much money is not collected annually by granting tax exemption to churches?
Once that number is known, how does that amount compare to the amount allocated for NSF and other scientific endeavors? Feel free to get bogged down in the weeds as to what is defined as a "scientific endeavor".

Also, this clown in Charlotte sounds like the kinda person Jesus expressly preached against.

3/18/2014 8:05:36 PM

Quote :

"How much money does the U.S. government forgo by not taxing religious institutions? According to a University of Tampa professor, perhaps as much as $71 billion a year."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2012-06-15/religious-tax-exemption-challenged/55629908/1

3/18/2014 8:49:16 PM

This link/amount is dated, but it's what I found on the fly:
https://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/09/13/nsf-funding/
$7 billion to NSF

NASA's budget: $17.5 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2014/03/04/white-house-budget-would-ask-for-17-5-billion-for-nasa/)

Looks like we have quite a gap to close...

3/18/2014 9:51:40 PM

I'm fine with religious tax exemptions, as long as my new church - the church of I don't want to pay a single cent to the government - is considered legitimate.

3/18/2014 9:52:57 PM

I mean if we started taxing all charities I'm sure the government could get a bunch of money it didn't have before.

3/18/2014 11:33:46 PM

And that would be a totally relevant point if churches were charities.

3/18/2014 11:48:11 PM

Many churches are. I know a bunch of churches that most of their money goes to community charity.

Other churches are huge ponzi schemes and most of the money goes to the administration.

But many charities are like that also. Some are good and some are bad, but rarely do the bad ones lose their tax exemption.

3/19/2014 12:07:12 AM

Hey, I'm all for not taxing anybody, I dont think the government should be taxing every dollar a half dozen times.

However, if we are going to have some kind of charitable exemption it should be a lot stricter to get classified as such and require frequent review to maintain it. I think there should be some maximum allowable administrative expense percentage, some non-political clause, etc.

There are a lot of good churches that really do spend a ton of money on community outreach, soup kitchens, women's shelters, and all kind of god stuff, but I suspect that they're probably in the minority. Most churches are in the business of growing membership and evangelizing.

3/19/2014 12:34:30 AM

I don't have a problem with churches being able to get non-profit status for their secular charity as long as they meet the same guidelines az everyone else (but the rules need to be more strict for all secular charities), they just shouldn't get special privileges just because they teach a popular fairy tale

3/19/2014 7:22:55 AM

preacher at my parent's church makes more than the average professional. and he probably works half the hours, maybe less. same with the rest of the administration. it's ridiculous.

3/19/2014 1:26:19 PM

What Jesus knew about income inequality
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/21/opinion/parini-are-rich-happier/index.html

8/21/2014 3:01:26 PM

Does Creflo Dollar count as a capitalist Christian?

He wants you to donate to help him get his jet that Jesus told him he needs.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/14/jesus-wants-me-to-have-this-jet.html

[Edited on March 16, 2015 at 9:38 PM. Reason : as]

3/16/2015 9:38:32 PM