I don’t think we need to use it as a place to point at false teaching. I think we need to use any book like the shack to take a second look at what is inherently wrong with many Christians. Unforgiveness and judgement are two of our deepest rooted problems. The Bible said that, and this author does as well…in as loud a way as possible.

Someone asked me recently (the pastor’s wife at my church who also wanted to read this book)if I thought it was the word of God, or sacriledge. I said quite simply, “Neither. It is a book about God with some very thought provoking ideas.”

Again, I don’t believe my God requires that I stay fearful and ignorant. I also don’t think I serve a God so small that he requires I never question or step out of my safe ‘circle of Christianity.’ I frankly would find this kind of God (a God who required such things of me) too small to inspire the sort of faith that I have.

much love,

Bethanie

I do understand limitations for I am bi-vocational and am in the midst of a vocational move in addition to the normal demands of this type of ministry.

2 Corinthians 8:5 was a typo. It should have been 2 Corinthians 8:15. Lynn’s response is absolutely correct. As far as Exodus 16, there is nothing in the account explicitly or implicitly giving us a biblically mandated redistribution of wealth. Rather we see that dependence on God is what is important. Those who gathered to horde and thus trust in their ability to squirrel away an abundance lost out while God multiplied for those who gathered too little. When we come to 2 Corinthians 8:15 the section begins with those who were in deep poverty but gave with “liberality” in spite of it because of their joy. This is not a redistribution of the wealth but an expression of faith and trust in God and love for the brethren in spite of their circumstance. Even as Paul addresses the Corinthians he is clear to say “I am not speaking this as a command.” In other words, this isn’t a biblically mandated redistribution of wealth but about willingly serving those in need. As Lynn point out they were choosing to freely share. I think the answer to your question about the two instances of “equality” in this passage are addressed by David H. Stern in the Jewish New Testament Commentary”

It is tempting to see Sha’ul as a Jewish mother, “only giving an opinion” as he urges mature expression of initial zeal as being to your advantage (vv. 10-11a). You should not be dissuaded by poverty or by fear that your gift will be inadequate (vv. 11b-12). And relief for others should not cause trouble for you; rather, there should be reciprocity (vv.13-14), as when the Israelites were in the desert and each gathered just as much manna as he needed (v. 15).

This isn’t about a redistribution of wealth but a reminder to rely on God. Paul was calling them to proceed with their original commitment, not to shrink back because of a seeming lack of funds or fear that the gift would be too small to make a difference but rather a reliance on the God of all provision to use it to His glory and the benefit of all, the givers and the recipients. But I digress for as Lynn suggested, the original post was “whether these ideas should be government mandates.” Not whether Christians should feed the poor, clothe the naked or minister to the sick. I think the last portion of my previous response outlines my views.

The question is whether these ideas should be government mandates. Unlike Israel, we are not a theocracy, and the Scriptures are very strict as to who among the impoverished may receive church support, and who may not (ie - if a man won’t work, he won’t eat, either, and the instructions about widows).

I never mentioned 2 Corinthians 8:5. I mentioned 2 Corinthians 8 as a whole, however, but should have specifically referenced verses 13-15 which read…

2 Corinthians 8:13-15 Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. 14At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, 15as it is written: “He who gathered much did not have too much, and he who gathered little did not have too little.”

You say this passage is not about equality (a word used twice in it) or redistribution of wealth (asking for wealth from one church to give to another church in need) whereas I can’t read it any other way. How do you interpret this verse?

I do find your statement regarding Exodus 16 and 2 Corinthians 8:5 a bit troubling however. There is nothing in the text, explicitly or implicitly that this was done “so that there will be equality in the camp.” We don’t really find a sort of biblical Socialism. Our dependence and focus should be on God and we as believers should practice compassion but we don’t find a redistribution of wealth and in fact God lays out guidelines for such things as slave ownership, which would necessarily mean that sufficient wealth to own a slave or slaves which would have less or no wealth. Now please don’t misrepresent me, I am not arguing for slavery but rather to show that we don’t really find some sort of financial “equality in the camp.”

When you write, “I agree with what I believe you are saying about the role of government in all this…” it seems we are much closer than when your comment began. There is something special which happens when we as individuals and believers extend help to others as individuals and believers. The one in need is blessed to be fed, clothed, given medicine, perhaps assisted in finding work and they have a face to put on those who helped them. They are cared for and encouraged. Those who helped are blessed and gratified as they see the hungry full, clothed, healthy and growing in grace and knowledge of Him. When it is done institutionally all of that changes. The institution (the government) takes whatever finances it chooses from its citizenry, keeps a fairly large percentage to pay those are doing the redistributing and sends what remains out in various programs. The government is a nameless, faceless bureaucracy which exerts its will and those from whom the government takes money resents the institution as little more than common thieves. They don’t see those who work there are working there because they are in many cases concerned for the suffering. Since the tax payer doesn’t see how the resources are being used view those who are struggling as “freeloaders.” Many of those in need do not appreciate what they receive because it is coming from the nameless, faceless government and is viewed as what is due them and that they are entitled to more. So, no one is happy or blessed in this situation. All are nameless and faceless to the others involved and resent them for one reason or another.

I think he would affirm that there are christians who are doing wonderful things (and he does), but it doesn’t change the fact that what he is saying is true in many aspects.

Street interviews of what people in Chicago think of Jesus and then what they think of Christians (This is from my church, these are what 98% of the interview were like):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6573555175402382146&ei=UmekSLy_BJjMqgOPu5HeCA&q=orchard+valley+community

First it’s illogical. We’ll always have sickness as well, yet if your spouse were to be diagnosed with cancer would you not take her to an oncologist? We’ll always have atheists but you are dedicated to telling the story of a God who died for all to anyone who will listen. I will always be hungry but I feed myself three times a day.

Second, it’s unbiblical. The bible speaks of poverty and the poor and our calling to care for them more often than it does the physical places heaven and hell - and those are surely real and essential ideas to our faith. In Exodus 16 the Hebrews are told to only take the manna and quail they need for the day so that there will be equality in the camp. Those who have little should not have too little and those who have much should not have too much. Paul, in 2 Corinthians, quotes this passage as if this law made by God still applies after the cross and the giving of the Great Commission. He collects an offering from the church in Corinth for the church in Jerusalem - an impoverished persecuted church - saying he’s doing so to create “equality.” Again, he says those who have little should not have too little and those who have much should not have too much.

I agree with what I believe you are saying about the role of government in all this equality making though. I welcome the help of anyone willing to reduce the burden on the poor and give freedom to the oppressed but ultimately God has not commanded Democrats, Republicans, presidents or prime ministers to do this work. He has commanded the Church. He wishes to redeem all things by the power of his Spirit, according to his plan, through His People. Only His People can combat not only physical poverty but also have the Means to offer solutions to spiritual poverty as well.

I cannot speak for Mr. Warren. I do not know his position. But I do not believe we can rid the world of poverty. Yet we are commanded (as Paul was at his ordination in Galatians 2) to remember and care for the poor. To preach something different is to rewrite the Good News of Mark 1. The kingdom has come and is coming still. It’s daily bread, God’s will on earth as it is above, good news for the poor, sight for the blind, freedom for the oppressed.

-Shaun Groves
http://www.shlog.com
http://www.compassionbloggers.com