Wealth, Prosperity, Justice, and Social Justice

In the Bible there are several competing views of wealth a prosperity.  These views are sometimes seen side by side, but are most often pitted against one another. 

The first is the view of the Deuteronomistic history (Joshua - II Kings).  In the DH, the primary theology states that if you do good God will bless you and if you do bad God will curse you (see Deuteronomy 30:15-18).  A corollary to this view is that if you a wealthy and/or prosperous God has blessed you because you are righteous, and if you are poor and afflicted, God has done this due to some disobedience on your part. 

A second view, one that directly challenges that of the DH is that view of the prophets and their call for justice and a privileging of the poor and outcasts of society.  Amos rails against unjust business practices and the exploitation of the poor.  Micah calls for a person to do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with your God (Micah 6:8).  Jeremiah calls for justice and righteousness and a privileging of the alien, orphan, and widow (Jeremiah 22:3).  The Lukan Jesus proclaims that his purpose is to "bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free" (Luke 4:18-19). These outcasts of society, according to the DH, would be in their position precisely because of some sin, yet in the prophetic view, they are in their position because of some injustice, and they become those whom God favors. 

The book of Job is also a profound challenge to the theology of the DH as the main character is afflicted because of no fault of his own, and his "friends," who are portrayed as perfect DH apologists, are actually in the wrong.

At the end of the 19th century, with the rise of the industrial revolution, this prophetic view of wealth and society was reclaimed by those who would be the champions of the poor, of the victims of the industrialization of the West.  Thinkers such as Walter Rauschenbusch and General William Booth of the Salvation Army latched on to this prophetic view and sought to relieve the ills of the underprivileged in society. 

Also influenced by this prophetic view, and in many ways taking up the mantle of the social gospelers, were the leaders of the Civil Rights movement.  Martin Luther King Jr., in his Letter from Birmingham Jail, made this call for justice: "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."  Coming out of the civil rights movement came another term, that of "social justice." 

So, what is social justice and how is it related to the prophetic view of wealth and prosperity found in the Bible?  There are several definitions.  For example:

"The mission of the [Catholic] Office for Social Justice is to serve those most in need by calling for Justice."  

Thus, the primary goal of that office is "justice."  Or there is this quote from the National Association of Social workers:

Social justice is the view that everyone deserves equal economic, political and social rights and opportunities. Social workers aim to open the doors of access and opportunity for everyone, particularly those in greatest need.

Justice and opportunity also seems to be at the heart of this definition.  Then there is this motto from the Centre for Social Justice:

Narrowing the Gap in income, wealth and power.

This last one does not have justice at its core, but rather an agenda to "narrow the gap" in the economic and political realms.

As Christians, we are called to do Justice, to protect those who can't protect themselves, to serve those in need.  How does the teaching of the Bible and the history of both the social gospel and social justice movements impact our lives and actions.  What say you?

The Event vs. Lost

In the last couple of years a few shows have tried to cash in on the phenomenal popularity and success  of "Lost."  These new shows have all poached several things from Lost, the mysteries, the flashbacks and flash forwards, some have even poached actors (Elizabeth Mitchell, "V"; Sonya Walger and Dominic Monaghan "Flash Forward").  The latest effort to recreate a "Lost" type show is this year's "The Event."

"Flash Forward" and "V" were relative failures last season, the former getting canceled, the latter being picked up for a second season after a lackluster first season with a paltry 12 episodes.

So, how will the event fair? << Spoiler Alerts: Spoilers for Lost and the Event are possible below >> I must say, after two episodes I am not optimistic. The show is interesting enough (barely) at this point and has earned a commitment to a third episode from me and my wife, but the show is lacking.  One should not fault the producers of these shows for trying to latch on to Lost's success, the problem is not their attempts to use Lost as a template, their problem in my view is that they misunderstood what Lost was about. Lost was not about the mysteries, not about time gimmicks, it was about telling a story of lovable and compelling characters.  The finale of Lost alone demonstrates that this was a story about people and their life journeys, not about some mysteries of an Island.  Sure, the mysteries mattered, but they were background to the characters.  In the Event, it appears that only the mystery matters and I could not care less about the characters.  There is not one character through 2 episodes that I even remotely care about. 

Moreover, the time shifts, back and forward in Lost were not gimmicks, they were an aid to telling the story of the characters.  The time shifts in Lost were deliberately not given time stamps.  The audience was never told when a certain flashback or flashforward or flash sideways was.  It didn't matter, the story was not some complex time line that the audience had to figure out.  It was fun to try and figure out when things occurred, but it was not the point.  The point was to tell the story of the characters.  The time shifts in The Event are given time stamps and it is already making my head hurt.  1944, 10 years ago, 13 months ago, 7 days ago, 4 days ago.  I have this disjointed time line in my head and it seems to serve little purpose.  In fact, both my wife and I agreed that the Pilot of the Event would have been more compelling if told in chronological order, starting with a week ago and then following out the events to the Plane incident with perhaps one flashback to 13 months ago.  The time shifts in the Event seem to be more pointless and merely a gimmick: "Hey, it worked for Lost, right?"

Three of my favorite shows over the past several years are Lost, Alias, and Battlestar Galactica.  One thing all of these shows had in common was the connection that they created between me -- the audience -- and the characters.  Both good and bad characters were all compelling.  Who makes a better hero than Starbuck?  Who a more compelling villain than Sloan?  Who a more creepy and ambiguous villain/hero than Baltar?  Who a better "good guy" than Hurley?  The characters created an emotional response in me whenever a beloved or hated character would arrive on screen.  Characters like Starbuck and Adama, Baltar and Roslin, Locke and Ben, Jack and Sawyer, Kate and Hurley, Sydney and Sloan and Will.  Even now, when I see one of these actors in another role, my heart jumps or I get goosebumps.  It happened just the other day when Terry O'Quinn had a guest role on an episode of the West Wing that I was watching.  And all of these shows were able to create this type of character connection by the end of the 1 or 2 hour pilot.  So far with The Event, it is only the vague mystery that is barely holding me to the show.  Will it be enough? We'll see next week.

The Changing of the Light

Several years ago, a good friend of mine, Peter Pope, mentioned something in the early Fall during our undergraduate days at Baylor.  He said, "Oh, I love this time of year, the light is changing." I thought he was nutso, the light changing?  He tried to explain it to me, tried to point out how the light was softer, less harsh, more colorful.  I didn't get it.  It was the same sun, the same landscape, what was he talking about?

Then, a couple of years ago, my wife said the exact same thing, at the same time of year.  What was she talking about.  I still resisted, thinking there must be something in the water here in Texas that had infected their brains.  It wasn't until I read it in a photography book that my mind was opened to the possibility of the light changing. I started to notice the subtle change in the light.

While I no longer think that there is something in the water here in Texas that makes people's minds go fuzzy, I do think that it is the incredibly hot and bright Summers that make the change in light more noticeable than it was in my home state of Colorado.  This last Summer especially I noticed the nature of the light in Texas.  It is that harsh Summer sun that leaches all of the color out of the landscape.  The sun that batters down on the dry ground and leaves nothing but a bleached horizon, painful to the eyes.

Hurrah, the light is once again changing in central Texas bringing with it the glories of Fall.  Football is in full swing, temperatures are no longer flirting with triple digits (although mid 90s are still a real possibility), pumpkins have arrived at the supermarket, and school is rumbling along.  I love this time of year, a time to finally take respite from the long hard Summer and finally enjoy the outdoors.

The Rhetoric and Story of Politics

This will be a rare political post on this site, but I think that the information is pertinent.

I have talked recently on this blog about the connection between rhetoric and story.  Rhetoric, as it is recognized is usually found in the micro, in bits and pieces of language, while story creates the overarching narrative.

It is no different in politics. Rhetoric is usually noticed in politics in sound bites. A clever turn of phrase, or a repetition in the message.  Unfortunately, I think that the overarching story is often missed, if it is there at all.

I would argue that there are essentially two competing stories in American political culture: the story of the Left, and the story of the Right. When these stories are told in a compelling manner, the corresponding party will usually win.

Here are the stories:

First, the Left: This story has a problem, a villain, a hero, and a solution.  The problem, according to the Left's story, is that there is inequality in society, there is a big gap between the rich and the poor, a big gap in freedoms between minority groups and WASPs (White Anglo Saxon Protestant Males).  The villain in this story is Big Business. Big Business, comprised almost entirely of WASPs, keeps the rest of the people in society down through their greed.  They have a stranglehold on almost all of the wealth in society and are in no mood to give it up.  The hero in this story is the crusading compassionate politician who will help to level the playing field. The solution to the problem is for this crusading polititian, through taxation and strong regulation, to take on the forces of Big Business, make sure that the redistribute some of their wealth to the poor and underprivileged, and make sure that the barons of Big Business are cut down to size.

Second, the Right:  This story also has a problem, a villain, a hero, and a solution.  The problem, according to the Right's story, is that people are not free to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without unreasonable restrictions from the Government.  The villain in this story is Big Government. Big Government taxes and regulates all people too much which restricts their freedoms.  The hero in this story is the Big Business man or woman.  Not the villain from the Left's story, but someone who has pulled themselves up from the lower classes, and through hard work and ingenuity has become successful and wealthy. Far from being a greedy and nasty member of the elite, the hero in this story is compassionate and a philanthropist.  Not only does this hero provide jobs to masses of people, but he or she also donates heavily to charities, passing on their wealth to benefit society.  The solution in this story is to lower taxes and reduce business regulations to allow all people to become upwardly mobile, to contribute to society, and to grow the economy.

With the recent economic meltdown in America, both sides have been trying to tell their respective stories.  For the Left, they told their story best in 2008 and elected Barack Obama.  He was the perfect hero, one who would bring hope and change, one who would take on the greedy corporations and wall street fat cats who had, through their greed, caused this calamity.  He promised to take care of the poor, providing health care for all, end our energy crisis, bring racial reconciliation. The story worked and he won big.


The Right has not backed off of their story either during this economic crisis.  For the Right, the economic crisis was not caused by greedy corporations, but by government regulations. The Government's push to get the underprivileged into houses and to require lenders to grant loans to those who could not pay them back caused the collapse of the housing market, and in turn, the rest of the economy.  Now, in their story, the Left is doing things exactly backwards.  Instead of spending money that the Government does not have to get out of the crisis, the Government should reduce spending, cut taxes, and allow the ingenuity of the American people to create businesses (with their lower taxes), put more people to work, and to grow the economy.

Which story is more compelling?  You decide.  But, whichever side tells their story and makes it more compelling is in for a big win this November.  It will be interesting to see how the politicians handle their respective stories this Fall.

Mihaila Book Review

My book review of Corin Mihaila's book The Paul-Apollos Relationship and Paul’s Stance toward Greco-Roman Rhetoric: An Exegetical and Socio-historical Study of 1 Corinthians 1-4, has now been published in the Review of Biblical Literature.  Link here.

Watch your grammar, or else!

I got several comments on my post Student Essay Fail.  One student sent me a link to a hilarious spoof of the movie Inglourious Basterds that deals with grammar, and I thought it was hilarious.  YouTube wouldn't let me embed the video, so here is the link.

David and Goliath in Legos