Do not despise a thief

[BibleOnly]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

We are robbing them of what they need by hoarding our riches vastly beyond what we need.

I don't buy into that. I don't believe our riches are the cause of the poverty seen in some parts of the world. I believe that most societies could be prosperous without causing other societies to be poor. And we are seeing that happen. Many societies that have struggled with terrible poverty are decreasing poverty and starvation as they modernize government, agriculture and markets.

There is only so much money printed. The more that is held by the very rich, the less is in circulation for everyone else. So, when people have a stupid amount of money, yes, that directly stops people who need money from having access to it.

[Bravus]

The question is actually really, really simple. What did Jesus do?

[BibleOnly]

*grin* he feed a multitude with a couple of fish and some bread. I'm not sure that's an option most people have

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

We are robbing them of what they need by hoarding our riches vastly beyond what we need.

I don't buy into that. I don't believe our riches are the cause of the poverty seen in some parts of the world. I believe that most societies could be prosperous without causing other societies to be poor. And we are seeing that happen. Many societies that have struggled with terrible poverty are decreasing poverty and starvation as they modernize government, agriculture and markets.

You are missing the point. It is not our riches that are the problem. In fact quite the opposite, our riches can be the solution. It is our hoarding all of our riches that is the problem. Jesus didn't say money was the root of all evil. he said the love of money was.

God blesses people with the clear purpose that they should bless others. That is a fallacy of the prosperity gospel. God doesn't reward people for being good by making them rich so they can luxuriate in their riches. God blesses good people, because there is a better chance that good people will act responsibly to use their wealth to help those who need help. To him who much is given, much is expected.

[M. T. Cross]

The question is actually really, really simple. What did Jesus do?

That actually raises a number of other questions.

Jesus lived in a time where barter was a plausible way to put food in your belly. Sadly that option is seldom open to people any more.

It also raises the question of the difference of what would you do for your self vs what would you do to feed your kids.

To me they are totally different things.

As Jesus did not have children I'm not sure what he would have done.

[Bravus]

*grin* he feed a multitude with a couple of fish and some bread. I'm not sure that's an option most people have

Indeed. But he also kicked the traders out of the temple, and in general aligned himself *against* the rich and advantaged. He converted Zaccheus. He *never* aligned himself with wealth and privilege. He owned nothing except his clothes.

Can't say the same for his followers, I'm afraid: they seem to be frightfully eager to damn the poor and suck up to the rich.

It's not rocket surgery: want to call yourself a Christian? Look at what Jesus did and do the same.

[ClubV12]

The issue here is "situational ethics".

Tom makes some valid points about the picture, the affluence vs the very starving poor, what is our responsibility? A different question for a different thread I think. The question on THIS thread is simple:

Is it justified to steal to feed your children? For a Christian I think there is only one answer, NO! While you trust God to provide you also do all in your power to provide for yourself SHORT of "sin". Stealing IS sin, it cannot be defended by the situation.

A Mother was recently sent to prison for three years for lieing on her food stamp application. She really HAD starving children! They were taken away from her as she could not provided for them. She will be in prison for three years and may never get them back. While you can say she was "justified", the State kept it simple, she was a thief, guilty of fraud. Sad reality check.

Population control in countries like Ethopia is a "nice, feels good" American goal. Reality check, it aint gonna happen. The kids won't be "adopted" they will be sold into slavery, used as sex slaves, the parents that steal to feed them are just like any other thief, they WILL be harshly punished. There is no excuse when 1,000's just like them are also starving.

In bible times to steal a mans property, his cow or his crop or house could literally end in starvation. While the "thief" was not despised, his actions could not be condoned. He put at risk of death another person by his actions. Were using a BIBLE quote that the theif was not "despised", put that SAME VERSE in context. The theif was required to repay, seven fold or be sold into slavery. Stealing was very serious, there was sympathy, but no excuse.

Today different countries have different rules for stealing food. Some allow for ONE time, no prosecution. 2nd time, common thief. Some cut off your hand, FIRST TIME, your a common thief with no excuse. "For the children" doesn't work. Why? LOTS of folks are poor in some countries, if you steal, someone could STILL literally die as a result. In America, while you might not be despised, when you steal food from Walmart to feed your kids, your still going to jail.

Theft is theft is theft, period. It brings dishonor upon yourself, your family, your God. To say someone should "offer them a job" is a pipe dream, it's a American misconception of the depth of the world wide problem. RAMPANT POVERTY leading to stealing food, and paying the price, EVERYWHERE, in EVERY country in the world. Stealing reamains "stealing", do what you gotta do if you want, but you will pay the price! It's wrong, period, under any and all circumstances.

[BibleOnly]

You are missing the point. It is not our riches that are the problem. In fact quite the opposite, our riches can be the solution. It is our hoarding all of our riches that is the problem. Jesus didn't say money was the root of all evil. he said the love of money was.

God blesses people with the clear purpose that they should bless others. That is a fallacy of the prosperity gospel. God doesn't reward people for being good by making them rich so they can luxuriate in their riches. God blesses good people, because there is a better chance that good people will act responsibly to use their wealth to help those who need help. To him who much is given, much is expected.

Actually, Paul said that. I agree that the prosperity gospel is a fallacy. God doesn't love us in accordance to our wealth, and if we have wealth we need to make choices about how we allocate it, that go beyond our belly.

I disagree that God blesses good people so they will spread money. Bad people have money too and God could just as easily make the poor, rich and cut out the middle man. The sun shines on the righteous and the unrighteous. I agree our faith should be expressed in the way we spend our money, as well as our time, every day.

[M. T. Cross]

The issue here is "situational ethics".

Tom makes some valid points about the picture, the affluence vs the very starving poor, what is our responsibility? A different question for a different thread I think. The question on THIS thread is simple:

Is it justified to steal to feed your children? For a Christian I think there is only one answer, NO! While you trust God to provide you also do all in your power to provide for yourself SHORT of "sin". Stealing IS sin, it cannot be defended by the situation.

A Mother was recently sent to prison for three years for lieing on her food stamp application. She really HAD starving children! They were taken away from her as she could not provided for them. She will be in prison for three years and may never get them back. While you can say she was "justified", the State kept it simple, she was a thief, guilty of fraud. Sad reality check.

Population control in countries like Ethopia is a "nice, feels good" American goal. Reality check, it aint gonna happen. The kids won't be "adopted" they will be sold into slavery, used as sex slaves, the parents that steal to feed them are just like any other thief, they WILL be harshly punished. There is no excuse when 1,000's just like them are also starving.

In bible times to steal a mans property, his cow or his crop or house could literally end in starvation. While the "thief" was not despised, his actions could not be condoned. He put at risk of death another person by his actions. Were using a BIBLE quote that the theif was not "despised", put that SAME VERSE in context. The theif was required to repay, seven fold or be sold into slavery. Stealing was very serious, there was sympathy, but no excuse.

Today different countries have different rules for stealing food. Some allow for ONE time, no prosecution. 2nd time, common thief. Some cut off your hand, FIRST TIME, your a common thief with no excuse. "For the children" doesn't work. Why? LOTS of folks are poor in some countries, if you steal, someone could STILL literally die as a result. In America, while you might not be despised, when you steal food from Walmart to feed your kids, your still going to jail.

Theft is theft is theft, period. It brings dishonor upon yourself, your family, your God. To say someone should "offer them a job" is a pipe dream, it's a American misconception of the depth of the world wide problem. RAMPANT POVERTY leading to stealing food, and paying the price, EVERYWHERE, in EVERY country in the world. Stealing reamains "stealing", do what you gotta do if you want, but you will pay the price! It's wrong, period, under any and all circumstances.

Great example of the law vs, whats actually right.

[ClubV12]

It's not about "us" as the wealthy. It's about what each of us would do IF we could not provide foor for ourselves or for our children.

Would you steal to do so? Why stop there!!! Once you open the door of justifying theft (sin), why stop there? Why not kill? Why not canabilize? Why not follow the mob and loot and rob? You can BET most people in the world would not hesitate to kill you first when it comes to a life and death decision. Would Jesus? Would a Christian?

God has laws as well as the State. HIS law says, "don't steal". Is His law as flawed as you find the States law?

[Bravus]

'situational ethics' is a pejorative label only used by Christians trying to justify their bizarre sense of values.

In what universe is property more important than human life? That's the issue.

[ClubV12]

In some countries to steal food IS to threaten human life.

Consider those thousands of refugees fleeing war, people dieing along the road, babies and children literally left to die. Americans keep seeing this problem as if it were acceptable to steal from Walmart if your hungry. Or, someone should offer them a job so they don't have to steal. What part of "it's illegal" is so hard to grasp? In America the issues are simple, get a job, lie on that welfare application, steal from Safeway.

How did that work for the 30 some miners trapped in the Chilean mine? Where they actually talked about who might die first and whether they should stop giving them rations so they would die sooner so they could eat him? There is no "Walmart" for those thousands of refugees fleeing war. There is no welfare application to lie on. It's life and death. Who are THEY going to steal FROM?

If it cannot be justified for the refugees fleeing war and dieing of starvation, what makes it acceptable for us to steal from Walmart?

Situational ethics is not some label, look at Stan's picture again, dismissing the starving kids with a "label" doesn't work. It didn't work in a mine shaft with trapped miners either.

[fccool]

It's not about "us" as the wealthy. It's about what each of us would do IF we could not provide foor for ourselves or for our children.

Would you steal to do so? Why stop there!!! Once you open the door of justifying theft (sin), why stop there? Why not kill? Why not canabilize? Why not follow the mob and loot and rob? You can BET most people in the world would not hesitate to kill you first when it comes to a life and death decision. Would Jesus? Would a Christian?

God has laws as well as the State. HIS law says, "don't steal". Is His law as flawed as you find the States law?

Reminds me of something:

[M. T. Cross]

In some countries to steal food IS to threaten human life.

Consider those thousands of refugees fleeing war, people dieing along the road, babies and children literally left to die. Americans keep seeing this problem as if it were acceptable to steal from Walmart if your hungry. Or, someone should offer them a job so they don't have to steal. What part of "it's illegal" is so hard to grasp? In America the issues are simple, get a job, lie on that welfare application, steal from Safeway.

How did that work for the 30 some miners trapped in the Chilean mine? Where they actually talked about who might die first and whether they should stop giving them rations so they would die sooner so they could eat him? There is no "Walmart" for those thousands of refugees fleeing war. There is no welfare application to lie on. It's life and death. Who are THEY going to steal FROM?

If it cannot be justified for the refugees fleeing war and dieing of starvation, what makes it acceptable for us to steal from Walmart?

Situational ethics is not some label, look at Stan's picture again, dismissing the starving kids with a "label" doesn't work. It didn't work in a mine shaft with trapped miners either.

In the case of the Chilean miners, starving Africans etc, there is no really easy choices. It comes down to this. What can action can you live with? Which thing seems to be the right choice for you? In some of those situations you choose between horrible and horrible. Thats not easy, and I can't tell you what I would do. But I can tell you what I would not do. I would not sit there waiting for God to provide. The millions of people that have died from starvation are proof that he does not always provide. Or does he? Lets see, the Chilean miners got out so in the end that worked out alright.

Billions of dollars in aid and food have been sent to help the starving. Sadly it is sent to a culture that is so beaten down by years of poverty that the programs do not continue to function once the people giving aid leave them to continue it on their own. Whats the answer? There is none. Other than people stepping up and going -"Hey we can do this for ourselves" - maybe thats where our focus should be with some of these other countries.

As for those living in the western world. Your right, people stepping up and offering some employment is a pipedream. But that does not mean that it should not happen. If at that point you don't take that employment then yeah - tough luck on you.

However - there is not always available jobs. To feed humgery little mouths I believe that if you have to steal from Walmart, then you have to. Never have I said that it should be your first choice. I have worked jobs that would make your skin crawl in order to feed my kids. I had zero moral dillema doing so. Why? Cause the moral need to feed them was more important than any other.

[M. T. Cross]

It's not about "us" as the wealthy. It's about what each of us would do IF we could not provide foor for ourselves or for our children.

Would you steal to do so? Why stop there!!! Once you open the door of justifying theft (sin), why stop there? Why not kill? Why not canabilize? Why not follow the mob and loot and rob? You can BET most people in the world would not hesitate to kill you first when it comes to a life and death decision. Would Jesus? Would a Christian?

God has laws as well as the State. HIS law says, "don't steal". Is His law as flawed as you find the States law?

If there is no flexibility too it...... then yes it is flawed.

[BibleOnly]

The fundamental issue really is that you're arguing about a hypothetical situation, and many people are choosing to assume that they'd maintain the standards they maintain through a comfortable western existence, no matter what happened. Any hypothetical can be created that assumes that God does not do anything, so it is flawed. Discussing it as if we know what it's like, is flawed. The whole conversation really has no value that I can see.

[Dr. Shane]

There is only so much money printed. The more that is held by the very rich, the less is in circulation for everyone else. So, when people have a stupid amount of money, yes, that directly stops people who need money from having access to it.

This sentiment is completely wrong. The reason we went off the gold standard is because we can only mine so much gold. That means, we can only pull so much gold out of the ground over a given period of time. If we are on the gold standard, we limit the amount of money we can print. That limits the amount of growth an economy can experience.

Economies grow. An economy is not like a 12" pie that is divided up among a population with some getting more than others. Economies are so dynamic that as the grow the rich can stay rich and the poor can move out of poverty at the same time. Money doesn't need to be taken from the rich in order to help the poor. Consider this example. There are acres and acres of dry land producing nothing. Then an irrigation system is put in place and scores of people that were dying of starvation are put to work in fields and can easily provide for their families. The rich guy that paid for the irrigation system gets richer while all the starving peasants no longer need to fear starvation. In that example, the local economy grew. Everyone involved got richer and no one got poorer.

[Dr. Shane]

You are missing the point. It is not our riches that are the problem. In fact quite the opposite, our riches can be the solution. It is our hoarding all of our riches that is the problem.

Again, I don't buy into that. Certainly there are some US, European, Japanese and Australian policies that contribute to global poverty and more could be done by these nations to alleviate it but I completely reject the idea that western imperialism is the cause of it. Much can be done by these countries, in these countries and for these countries that would itself alleviate much of the poverty class in them.

[Dr. Shane]

It's not rocket surgery: want to call yourself a Christian? Look at what Jesus did and do the same.

As Adventists we see Jesus as the central theme throughout all of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation - not just the four gospels. So if we are to look at what "Jesus" did we must look at all of the Bible and not just the window of time when He walked among us.

Certainly Jesus did not take issue with the rich Roman centenarian. In fact, He commented that He had not seen such faith in all of Israel. As Tom commented, it is not money that is the problem, it is love of money. Money is a good thing. Money helps people. Jesus blessed Job with riches. Jesus blessed Abraham with riches. Jesus bless Joseph with riches as He did with many of the patriarchs. Nicodemus was a rich man that supported the early church and certainly was blessed by Christ.

[ClubV12]

I don't know what I would do if:

I was one of those Chilean miners. A member of the Donor party trapped in the mountains in winter, where most died of starvation. One of several people adrift at sea with no provisions. A member of the soccer team in a crashed airplane on a mountain top, where most initial survivors died and were eaten by those eventually rescued. A father with starving children in a village in Africa forced to flee with nothing before an Army of soliders came to burn and kill all in the village. What did the Waldenses of France do when they suffered persecution to the point of death and had to hide in the mountains? The wives who sang to their husbands as they burned at the stake. What did the people in Jerusalem in AD 70 do when the Roman Army surrounded the city and starved the people to death? In that case, we know mothers and fathers ate their own children!

The above examples are not hypothetical, they are a few of the vast number of incidents history records reveal and the terrible things people did to survive.

What would I do? I think we are forming a character every day of our lives that will dictate what we would do. The crisis will not change us, it will reveal who we really are. Forming a character TODAY by determining to follow God in every little way in life is forming a character for the crisis. The heart is deceitfully wicked. Without a determination to allow God to rule our life in every aspect, every day, we will eat our own children when the crisis comes.

We don't have the moral courage to become a martyr right now. But God will provide that courage and strength when the time comes. IF, we are preparing ourselves to receive that miraculous strength TODAY. By determining to follow, accept, believe and honor Him in our every day activities. It's the little things we do everyday that prepare us for the big things that may come in our future.

[BibleOnly]

Originally Posted By: BibleOnly

There is only so much money printed. The more that is held by the very rich, the less is in circulation for everyone else. So, when people have a stupid amount of money, yes, that directly stops people who need money from having access to it.

This sentiment is completely wrong. The reason we went off the gold standard is because we can only mine so much gold. That means, we can only pull so much gold out of the ground over a given period of time. If we are on the gold standard, we limit the amount of money we can print. That limits the amount of growth an economy can experience.

Economies grow. An economy is not like a 12" pie that is divided up among a population with some getting more than others. Economies are so dynamic that as the grow the rich can stay rich and the poor can move out of poverty at the same time. Money doesn't need to be taken from the rich in order to help the poor. Consider this example. There are acres and acres of dry land producing nothing. Then an irrigation system is put in place and scores of people that were dying of starvation are put to work in fields and can easily provide for their families. The rich guy that paid for the irrigation system gets richer while all the starving peasants no longer need to fear starvation. In that example, the local economy grew. Everyone involved got richer and no one got poorer.

Sure, I know why we're off the gold standard. There are people who want to get back on it. Gold mining today involves pulverising mountains for gold dust, there's no more major deposits to find. But, it's still true we can't just print money without devaluing the money we have. So, there is a finite supply of money, same as gold, the only difference is, we can make as much as we want, in theory. There is no trickle down effect if Steve Jobs puts all his money in the bank, there's only trickle down if you talk Bill Gates, who sees he has a stupid amount and gives most of it away.

[BibleOnly]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

You are missing the point. It is not our riches that are the problem. In fact quite the opposite, our riches can be the solution. It is our hoarding all of our riches that is the problem.

Again, I don't buy into that. Certainly there are some US, European, Japanese and Australian policies that contribute to global poverty and more could be done by these nations to alleviate it but I completely reject the idea that western imperialism is the cause of it. Much can be done by these countries, in these countries and for these countries that would itself alleviate much of the poverty class in them.

I think you are right, here, to a degree. Its' not our fault that other countries are corrupt, unless you talk about the fault of the US in propping up corrupt regimes. Our affluence is largely built on the cheap labour of the third world, though, so in that sense, there's a direct relationship.

[olger]

Well, the verse is in there. As we understand it properly, we will apply it right.

[phkrause]

Actually, Paul said that. I agree that the prosperity gospel is a fallacy. God doesn't love us in accordance to our wealth, and if we have wealth we need to make choices about how we allocate it, that go beyond our belly.

I disagree that God blesses good people so they will spread money. Bad people have money too and God could just as easily make the poor, rich and cut out the middle man. The sun shines on the righteous and the unrighteous. I agree our faith should be expressed in the way we spend our money, as well as our time, every day.

Great points BibleOnly.

[Dr. Shane]

Our affluence is largely built on the cheap labour of the third world, though, so in that sense, there's a direct relationship.

The problem with that theory is that the US became affluent due to the industrial age. We won WW1 and WW2 with a military machine built here in the US with iron, copper and brass mined here. We fueled the war with American oil. Our troops ate sea rations produced by American farmers and canned in American factories.

As corporate America has began to "exploit" the third world, what they have done, to some extent, is to spread the wealth. Certainly they earn less than what their American counterparts do here. However natives line up for the opportunity to work in an American factory. Comparing the jobs in American factories in third world countries to the other jobs in the same geographical area, the American factory jobs offer greater opportunities - even though the wages are far less than those paid to the American counterparts working in the US.

Of course we could do better. I don't want to spin reality to make it seem that everything is great with no room for improvement. My point is that it isn't all bad like many anti-capitalists or pro-union ideologues would like us to believe.