The Petra Zone

8 questions asked to famous evangelical Old Testament scholar Walter Brueggeman:

http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2015 ... ible/35739

I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I have to take issue with something he said right off the top. He talks about the debate over the Affordable Care Act, and essentially presents that there are only two side. You're either in favor of the ACA, or you want to deny healthcare to those who can't pay for it.
I'm not in favor of the ACA, however I do believe we should help those who can't afford healthcare. We can debate who those people are, but bottom line, I believe those people can be helped in a way that doesn't screw up my health insurance.
I don't believe that everybody getting healthcare means that everybody has to have insurance, or that we have to move in the direction of Gov't run insurance for all. I can't afford to go without insurance, but if I could, that should be a valid choice. The gov't collects enough tax revenue, that if it didn't pee it all away, it could just buy insurance for those that can't buy their own and leave the rest of us alone.

Yes, he shows his lack of understanding of reality when he says, " The gospel contradicts the dominant values of our system, which encourages self-protection and self-sufficiency at the loss of the common good."

The problem which he fails to see is that if I am not self-sufficient, then I can't really contribute to the common good, now can I?

Again, he demonstrates his disconnect from reality when he says, "Providing healthcare for all of our citizens is a mandate for any workable society."

So ... Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were not "workable societies"?!?! What about Babylon or Davidic Israel? Were these not workable societies.

When someone says stuff that silly, it's hard to keep reading. If he is that wrong about things in the natural world, how can I trust anything he says about Scripture?

knotodiswrld wrote:When someone says stuff that silly, it's hard to keep reading.

I have the same feeling reading your post.

p-freak wrote:

knotodiswrld wrote:When someone says stuff that silly, it's hard to keep reading.

I have the same feeling reading your post.

So do me a favor and enlighten me on the specifics.

People act like we had no health care, or poor people couldn't get healthcare before Obama care.

What I have issue with is the distortion of the facts. More people are losing their good insurance so people without can have some. The insurance people are receiving is really not insurance at all. It doesn't cover them if they get a major illness or disease. If I were to buy into what I used to have, it would cost me triple. No thanks. Doctors and hospitals are refusing to honor OC. How is that good for anyone? All that is going to happen is there will be a giant funnel, routing all Obama Care people to the fewer hospitals, which will result is less care per person, for more money. Yeah, sounds like a smart move.

I know many of you are bleeding liberals. We can't run the country on the commands given to the church. You can't make the church do what the government is supposed to do. We need to keep things separate, as they should be.

People could get care before Obamacare. there are options out there. I know because for 3 years after I lost my job I had no insurance whatsoever. When I had to see a doctor I went to a community clinic. When I caught pneumonia, I paid for it ( x-rays and treatments) in cash. I was given deep discounts because of no insurance coverage and because I paid upfront.

There are ways to take care of yourself without Obama.

On the other hand now that it's basically mandatory to have virtually useless insurance, I am not only paying a penalty because I did not have it in 2014 (a wonderful $200 penalty to the IRS) but now I am paying monthly for insurance that has a $5000 dollar deductible.

I went to get some medication and was told it wasn't covered - even if it was I still would have to pay cash for it in addition to my monthly useless payment to United Healthcare.

I called 3 times to the company and three times I was connected to someone I could barely understand - who was answering me from the Philippines on a phone connection that was horrendous.

if anyone thinks Obamacare is the answer they have a screw loose!

sue d. wrote:People could get care before Obamacare. there are options out there. I know because for 3 years after I lost my job I had no insurance whatsoever. When I had to see a doctor I went to a community clinic. When I caught pneumonia, I paid for it ( x-rays and treatments) in cash. I was given deep discounts because of no insurance coverage and because I paid upfront.

There are ways to take care of yourself without Obama.

On the other hand now that it's basically mandatory to have virtually useless insurance, I am not only paying a penalty because I did not have it in 2014 (a wonderful $200 penalty to the IRS) but now I am paying monthly for insurance that has a $5000 dollar deductible.

I went to get some medication and was told it wasn't covered - even if it was I still would have to pay cash for it in addition to my monthly useless payment to United Healthcare.

I called 3 times to the company and three times I was connected to someone I could barely understand - who was answering me from the Philippines on a phone connection that was horrendous.

if anyone thinks Obamacare is the answer they have a screw loose!

The idea for Obamacare is sound, but it sounds like execution is rubbish!

knotodiswrld wrote:Yes, he shows his lack of understanding of reality when he says, " The gospel contradicts the dominant values of our system, which encourages self-protection and self-sufficiency at the loss of the common good."
The problem which he fails to see is that if I am not self-sufficient, then I can't really contribute to the common good, now can I?
Again, he demonstrates his disconnect from reality when he says, "Providing healthcare for all of our citizens is a mandate for any workable society."
So ... Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece were not "workable societies"?!?! What about Babylon or Davidic Israel? Were these not workable societies.
When someone says stuff that silly, it's hard to keep reading. If he is that wrong about things in the natural world, how can I trust anything he says about Scripture?

If being self-sufficient will be to the detriment of others (which is an integral part of capitalism-left-to-its-own), then it contradicts the gospel. And anything in society that blocks others from having access to basic resources (like health-care, proper housing, healthy food) is not according to the gospel. So if some people can't afford health care, those who can and have left over, need to take responsibility to make sure that those lesser fortunate will be able to afford health care.

I'm sure I'll now get a rambling response about lazy people who are just leeching government benefits. I'm sure that happens, but that should not/cannot be a reason for believers to say that caring for your neighbour suddenly isn't biblical anymore. Unfortunately, in American society there's an engrained dog-eat-dog, individualistic tendency that is blinding to those who are not able to take one step back and look at culture as something that is not necessarily right. The fact that there are so many Christian elements to American culture, doesn't necessarily make it a Christian culture. If you want a Christian society, it includes care for the sick, the poor and the earth. The fact that they can't/won't help themselves (for whatever reason), should oblige Christian to step in and help them. If often hear the argument that not the government, but the church/individual people should do this. That may be your choice, but it's not a reason to just hang back and leave it to others. I hear nothing but criticism on a system that is meant to bring some equality and justice to your society. If it doesn't work, then come up with an alternative, instead of leaving the situation the way it is and complaining about the evils of Obamacare, when you should be glad that someone has signaled the problem and tries to solve it, however inadequately.

I'm sure you don't agree with what I say, but you've shown so far that it is not possible to have a fair discussion with you, since you don't accept the validity of my point of view. Only when you would come to realize that it's not your way or the highway (which goes for many conservative evangelicals on this board) a proper discussion might be possible.

There we go. Capitalism is evil. I guess only people with good ideas, a good work ethic and drive are evil, and those who refuse to work are holy. What a crock. Evil people are poor too.

Capitalism is working in China. Their economy is slowing now, but they had a BOOM. There are lots of countries flourishing because of capitalism.

Capitalism is not about standing on the backs of poor people with no desire to work. They are of no use. The only people of use are those who wish to work, are willing to learn a trade or provide a good/service people can afford to buy. If there are no jobs, people cannot exist. The money must come from the people, working for the people, employed by the people, not the representatives of the people in government.

Dude, you need to watch Shark Tank. There is no abuse of the poor on that show.

brent wrote:There we go. Capitalism is evil. I guess only people with good ideas, a good work ethic and drive are evil, and those who refuse to work are holy. What a crock. Evil people are poor too.

Capitalism is working in China. Their economy is slowing now, but they had a BOOM. There are lots of countries flourishing because of capitalism.

Capitalism is not about standing on the backs of poor people with no desire to work. They are of no use. The only people of use are those who wish to work, are willing to learn a trade or provide a good/service people can afford to buy. If there are no jobs, people cannot exist. The money must come from the people, working for the people, employed by the people, not the representatives of the people in government.

Dude, you need to watch Shark Tank. There is no abuse of the poor on that show.

This is a very predictable response, Brent. I never said capitalism is evil. It certainly has its benefits, but there needs to be some government control. If left to its own devices (completely free, open market), the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This was a situation that was banished in ancient Israel through several of the laws in the Pentateuch, one of which is the Year of Jubilee, when debts should be forgiven and slaves should be set free, meaning that everyone would receive their economic dependance. If we set no boundaries to capitalism it will grind the weaker people in society. Because of that negative side effect, I don't think that unbridled capitalism is compatible with a Biblical worldview.

And I'm not surprised by the ever-sounding complaint about poor people with no desire to work. That is so NOT true. Of course, there are those people, but they are the exception. Please be a bit kinder-hearted towards those who didn't have the same opportunities you had and who, through circumstances you don't know anything about, ended up on the wrong side of society. You are so judgmental in your approach.

You sure did say it was evil. You went typical liberal:

"If being self-sufficient will be to the detriment of others (which is an integral part of capitalism-left-to-its-own), then it contradicts the gospel."

You made illogical assumptions, proving a complete lack of understanding and wisdom.

brent wrote:You sure did say it was evil. You went typical liberal:

"If being self-sufficient will be to the detriment of others (which is an integral part of capitalism-left-to-its-own), then it contradicts the gospel."

You made illogical assumptions, proving a complete lack of understanding and wisdom.

Well, it's sad to realize that you don't appreciate my point of view I'd rather have you point out to me where the logic is flawed. If you want to interpret what I wrote as capitalism=evil, that's fine, but please show me how capitalism not detrimental to some people and prove me wrong with sound arguments.

It can be tricky when you can't hear or see someone; it's easy to read more into what someone might mean when that is the case. There are plenty of ultraconservatives who don't know which end is up. I don't think either extreme is a good one. I don't think the issue is so much the political party as it is members of both parties are too focused on their own agenda and thinking they are privileged to do what is best for America. The American people need to wake up, unite and tell the wonderful folks in D.C. to shape up and then boot them if they don't. They were elected into office; they can be removed also. I realize that may be easier said than done, but it's not impossible. As long as they are allowed to get away with garbage it will continue.

Whatever the case, Brent and Sue's take on the $#&! Affordable Care Atrocity is pretty accurate. It is not making things better for health care, and I think our lovely government knows that or they wouldn't have exempted themselves from it. That's what gets me more than anything; if they were having to follow the same ridiculous health care laws I bet they would change it pretty fast. I have had the same sort of challenges, although not as drastic, as Sue. I haven't been sick or not been able to get the medical care or medicine I need so far, although I've had to fight for it. It's ridiculous. I'm sorry you had to deal with pneumonia by the way Sue. I didn't realize you'd been sick. Although I guess when you're sick you may not be up to letting people know, you're too busy recovering.

P-Freak where in the U.S are you living?