Hi BJ,
Thanks for your reply.
As for the kingdom parables, are you suggesting that Jesus is lecturing on economics? I can't find a single commentator that thinks Jesus is teaching anyhting about Capitalism. Maybe Gary North.
No, I am not at all suggesting Jesus was lecturing on capitalism. My point was that Jesus would not use an essentially immoral practice (if what you are saying is correct) to compare with the Kingdom of Heaven. Now the bible does sometimes compare God and his kingdom to worldly things, but it is always to make a specific point, and we are always told why. So the second coming is compared to a thief because of its unexpectedness. God is compared to an unjust judge who listens to a widow because of her persistence as an ‘if even he will listen, than won’t God…’ example to teach Christians perseverance in prayer. I do not see the same happening in the kingdom examples.
I am not sure that it does. Should it? My wife just had a C section instead of natural child birht due to complications. Does the Bible condone that? Should it?
If you say the bible does not command it (master working with their servants), than how can you condemn those who don’t?
You were free to have a C-section because the bible never condemns it. Some want to bring up the idea that there is a duty to take care of life etc, but I don't see that is necessary since the bible never even raises the idea that a C-section would be wrong. It is your freedom.
Likewise workers are under the authority of their employer or master, and he can do with them what he wishes. The bible does not command him to help them in the specific tasks they are performing. Of course, sloth is wrong, but if the master wishes to occupy his time in other ways, that is his choice. Again, I don't see from the bible that management or oversight is somehow not considered work.
As much as I believe in the suffiency of Scripture I also hold to the insuffiency of Scripture. And in this case, I dont think the Bible lays out the economic superstructure that Christian Capitalist want it to. I am open to the idea though. I just refuse to read 8,000 pages of Gary North.
But from your comments, you don’t even seem to be certain the bible condemns the capitalist superstructure. If the bible neither condemns something, nor commands something completely opposite, than how can we condemn that thing, no matter how much we may dislike it?
You did not interact with the point about masters and slaves and how God’s allowance for such a practice is consistent with the notions you are putting forward.
Thats a good question for a Capitalist who needs it to justify its use, Scripturally speaking. I asked that earlier. I wanted someone to show me that surplus labor was biblical.
My point was, I don’t see that the bible even supports the definition of surplus labour as Marx defines it. God has ordained some men as masters and others as servants. Servants are entitled to fair treatment, but I don’t see anywhere God gives them a right to demand a ‘fair share’ of the profits from their masters. Again, God did not even think it amiss for a master to own his slaves completely, which makes arguments about who owns their ‘surplus capital’ somewhat irrelevant, as I see it.
Exodus 21:2-5 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
God has such a high view of the rights of masters he did not even think a woman getting married broke the rights her master had over her. He required her husband to choose between his freedom and staying with his family. Note, even the
children are the master's. What in the world would God think about someone who wanted to argue about his 'surplus capital'?
Exodus 21:20-21 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
If a master was to go to far in disciplining a servant (even a female one) and that servant was to die, God did not consider the master guilty worthy, for as the text says, the servant is the master’s money or property. As I understand the text, the one day stipulation is to show that it was truly an act of discipline and not a malicious murder attempt, since if it was (ie the master really wanted to kill), the servant would not have survived a day.
Well, my first inclination is to say $25. No, I got it. The worker should be payed $24.97. That way the Capitalist makes .03 surplus labor. That seems fair, right?
Well, why should not the master earn $5, $10 or even more worth of surplus capital, so long as the worker (or servant, which is the bible term) is paid enough to feed and shelter himself? If the servant was not happy with the terms of his employer, why doesn’t he go and set up his own business so he can claim the full $25? Most probably he lacks the tools to produce the item, the reputation or distribution networks to sell it, or other resources needed for its production. Or, as I think you are getting at, because the employer owns the means of production while the worker doesn’t. Hence the employer profits because of his control of the means of production. While this may be wrong from Marx’ point of view, does the bible agree? As I said already, God made rich and poor, and he made masters and servants. Just has he ordained kings over citizens, husbands over wives and parents over children, by his providence, he gave some men the capability and resources to be masters, while denying that to others.
