Deut 054-slides

103 views

Published on

Published in: Spiritual, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
103
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Deut 054-slides

  1. 1. Chias&c Structure ( Χ )   5:6‐10  God alone is worthy of worship and service   5:11  Accuracy in language about God     5:12‐15  Management of labor and property     5:16  Society depends upon func;onal marriage & family         5:17   Life is to be respected & preserved       5:18  Marriage is to be protected     5:19 Property is to be protected   5:20  Accuracy in language of judicial proceedings 5:21     Self is not worthy of worship and service  
  2. 2. God s Design of Society LIFE (protected) LIFE (jeopardized)MARRIAGE & FAMILY MARRIAGE & FAMILY(strong & functioning) (weak & dysfunctional)LABOR & PROPERTY LABOR & PROPERTY(respected & productive) (demeaned & wasted)INTEGRITY of INTEGRITY ofCOMMUNICATION COMMUNICATION(consistently states truth ) (deceitfully professes truth for agendas)HEART ALLEGIANCE (to HEART ALLEGIANCE (toGod) self)
  3. 3. He shall restore what he took by robbery, or what he got by extor2on, or the deposit which was entrusted to him, or the lost thing which he found.   Levi&cus 6:4 
  4. 4. It is the vulnerability of the weakest seller oflabor that makes this law necessary. God imposesthis law because of what I call the priestly factorin free market pricing. This factor is seldom ifever discussed by free market economists. Whenhuman life is at stake – beyond the moderneconomic principle of marginalism– unrestrictedfree market competition is in some instances notmorally valid. All real-world societies recognizethis fact, but free market economists rarely do,since they are committed to a supposedly value-free (ethically neutral) analysis.
  5. 5. This law does not prohibit other forms ofcompetition among workers. It prohibits only thisone, which reflects the character of God in hisgracious dealings with men in history. There is nolaw in the Bible against one worker s willingnessand ability to offer to work for less per day or lessper hour than another worker presently does. . . .The legal right to make a better offer is inherent inthe biblical requirement that we become moreprofitable servants.
  6. 6. The employer s economic problem is his lack ofknowledge about the competence of the newworker. The employer uses a delayed paymentscheme in order to minimize his search costs inestimating the competence of new workers.Accurate knowledge is not a zero-price resource.Employers try to obtain such knowledge ascheaply as possible. They use the new worker swillingness to accept delayed payments as a cost-effective substitute for more detailed informationregarding the worker s abilities and hiswillingness to work.
  7. 7. politics Pressure of Life ethicsSequenceLogical epistemology metaphysics Yahweh or an idol?
  8. 8. This means that the gleaning law was a form ofconditional charity in each individual recipient scase, although the loss was compulsory from thepoint of view of the landowner. Biblical charity isalways conditional. Charity is not to subsidizeevil, for it is an act of grace. Unconditionalcharity is antinomian. In a fallen world,unconditional charity will eventually subsidizeevil. This is even more true of legal entitlementsto other people s wealth. Such wealth transfersare not a form of charity. They are legislatedtheft. They represent a perverse modification ofthe eighth commandment: Thou shalt not steal,except by majority vote.
  9. 9. The obedient owner did not pay salariedharvesters to collect marginal pickings. Thislowered his labor cost per harvested unit of crop.But the net income loss as a result of gleaning didlower his total return from his land and plantingexpenses. There is no doubt that this economicloss of net revenue constituted a form ofcompulsory charity.
  10. 10. How did piece-rate harvesters suffer a reductionof total income? Because they could not lawfullygather the total crop of the field or the vineyard.Each worker had to leave some produce behind,which means that his income suffered. This alsomeans that the poor of the community were inpart funded by the slightly less poor: the piece-rate harvesters. The harvesters were reminded ofthe burdens of poverty.
  11. 11. This in effect became an unemploymentinsurance program for the harvesters. They knewthat if they later fell into poverty, they wouldprobably be allowed to participate as gleaners.They forfeited some income in the present, butthey did so in the knowledge that in a futurecrisis, they would be able to gain income fromgleaning. Both the land owner and the piece-rateworker financed a portion of this morallycompulsory insurance program.

×