Dave Blocked Me, Part Two: Some Clarifications

My post regarding Dave Ramsey's dismissiveness to me and the poor has blown up. I never expected such a response. I've had a welcome amount of agreement along with a surprising amount of "I've been there". It seems to me as if Dave and his team make a habit out of closing off disagree-ers by blocking them on social media platforms. As you can imagine, this is both comforting and frustrating for me.

I've also had a fair amount of criticism.  That's fair because when I put something in the public sphere, I don't expect everyone to agree with me. The criticism can be separated into three categories as best I see it. Rather than responding to each and every comment or thread, I thought this post might help. The main critiques are:

1. I shouldn't have put such a thing on social media to begin with (either the blog or the original tweet).
2. Dave Ramsey is immensely generous because of his wealth and most churches turn to rich people first in order to accomplish their calling in helping the poor.
3. Capitalism is not bad and has been proven to be far more successful than socialism in this world. 

I'll attempt to briefly address each critique.  I think these critiques suffer from some presumptions that are American in nature and not, in my view, Christian in nature.

1
I shouldn't have put such an argument on social media. This isn't the first time I've heard such and argument. That's ok. I think the world is still experimenting with what is appropriate in a social forum like the internet and those lines have been both defined and blurred throughout time. For all who say that this conversation is inappropriate to have on the internet, I've got a ton of people who say they appreciate reading this stuff via the same medium. It's both a win win and lose lose situation and as long as I'm willing to put up with the consequences, I'm ok riding that line.

2
Anyone familiar with Dave Ramsey should be familiar with the amount of money he makes. He makes it clear within Financial Peace University that he's a multimillionaire and that he advocates giving as a part of being a financially peaceful. I'll go as far as to commend him for a line he often tells callers on his radio show: giving isn't about percentages or anything else, giving is about giving with a giving heart. Dave advocates giving, especially when you've developed wealth.

But this is a fundamentally American view of wealth. After all, if there were no rich, who would support our moralistic endeavors? This is American in nature because it presumes free market capitalism and few Christian virtues. Funny enough, Dave presents this theory under the guise of scriptural authority in FPU. He quotes Proverbs 21 saying that wise people store up food and oil, fools gulp theirs down. You can only be of help to the world if you have money saved up.

What type of scriptural authority is it though, if it ignores perhaps the most famous exchange about riches in Scripture? The gospel writers tell us that when a rich man was asking the very question of salvation (inheriting the Kingdom of God), Jesus quoted off some laws he must follow. When the man said that he had followed all those laws, Jesus introduced him to one more idea: sell everything you have and give the money to the poor.  After that, he said, come follow me. I don't think Jesus is strictly saying here that you can't have money and be a Christian, but I do think he's making a point: you can't love your possessions more than following Jesus. Christianity does not function under the assumption that we need rich people. Christianity functions under a devotion to the lordship of Jesus Christ and nothing else. This is a fundamental difference between American views of wealth and Christian views of discipleship. 

3
My argument against capitalism isn't that it's unsuccessful. Financially speaking, capitalism makes more rich people. My argument is that socialism helps us equally value each and every member of society based on their worth as a human, not only off their work ethic or success in business. I don't think the United States could ever move to a socialistic form of government or economics (and I don't think Obama is moving in that direction--I think that's largely rhetoric), but as a Christian I can see how socialism mirrors the way God looks at all God's children. I can at least see the holiness in it. The US could not move to to socialistic values for precisely that reason: it values things Christianity does not.

I greatly appreciate everyone's interest in my original post. I reiterate that I find Dave's general principles helpful but that his outlook and general despise for socialism for no other reason than love of money hurts his Christian witness.

-B

Can The Church Be Innovative?

One of the best shows on TV, in my opinion, is Modern Family. But that's not the one I want to talk about. That is, also on ABC, Shark Tank.

For those who aren't familiar with the show, it goes a little something like this: An inventor or someone with a "good" idea or product needs financial help. They may need financial help to be bailed out of the debt they've incurred upon themselves, they may need it to grow the business. Whatever the case, they need financial help for their business and so they seek an investor to invest in them and their product in exchange for a percentage of equity in the company or product.

Think of it like this: Joe Schmo makes really cool socks. And his sock business has been booming. It's been selling so well that he cannot meet the orders that he is getting, and so he is forced to make customers wait for the product (weeks, maybe months...sound familiar Apple?). So, in order to meet demand and not turn customers away, he comes and asks the group of investors (referred to as "Sharks" on the show) for, let's say, $50,000 in exchange for 20% of his business. The idea is that the idea and product are so good that with the Sharks' help, the business will grow and both people will make lots of money.

In fact, that's the goal...make money. One shark in particular, Kevin O'Leary, makes that point very clear. He isn't interested in stories of heartache and suffering. If he can't make money, he isn't interested at all, no matter whose feelings he hurts.

I've struggled with why I like this show so much.

I think it is exciting. I think it is a neat idea, and to be honest...when a really good idea comes along, the show is breathtaking.

Then, last night I was reminded of one of Jesus' message while putting away laundry watching Godspell. You know the one, about not serving two masters...God and money in Matthew 6. The Greek word used is "μαμωνα" which I think is borrowed from Aramaic and is most often translated "money" or "wealth."

If we agree to work off of that translation (and not the one of the personified Mammona), we can see the rationale for people in ministry attempting to live a life of non-wealth (I personally think that describing American pastors as living a life of "poverty" is unfair and untrue). We can understand why many pastors and Christians get upset at pastors like Joel Osteen. We can also see why many pastors feel comforted when they hear of Rick Warren serving his church for free (although let's be real, Warren is making plenty with his book...it's just that by most accounts he tries to tithe most of it back to the church).

Keeping that in mind, back to Shark Tank. As someone who admittedly has issues with the wealth of the world and collecting products (I should really count how many Apple products I own sometime), my first reaction to this realization that these two worlds might possibly be incompatible was to come down on myself as being a gluttonous pig. While I'm not saying that isn't true, it still didn't feel like the right answer to me.

So I thought, what is it that I like about Shark Tank? Why am I so intrigued by Apple and the tech industry?

I realized: innovation.

I like the idea of progress. I like the idea of humans using their minds to be creative. I like the idea of humans truly pursuing their callings by inventing things. And I'm not saying all innovation is good, but I do think it has helped all of our lives (even those who think that things were always more authentic and better way back when). Some forget that the very Scriptures we read were written down on a paper like material...and copied over and over, all a form of technological progress.

And that's why I like Shark Tank. The people that come and bring in companies and products are innovating, for the most part.

But it occurred to me, the world and life-centering ideology of money and the inspiration for innovation go hand in hand. In our capitalistic American society, people innovate because they want to find a way to sell their invention and make money...lots of it (and save me the arguments about people like Jonas Salk, who are obviously the exception to the rule).

And if we function off of the rationale that these two function together, my question becomes: where is the Church? Are people inspired to innovate for the Church?

There was a time when the Church influenced the culture. Sometimes, that was paired with the Church ruling over others' lives without their sayso or freedom. Today, the Church doesn't seem to have much influence on the culture.

It seems to me, in these days, that the Church has also lost its interest in innovation. We study tradition (for good reason) and then sometimes we sit by the tradition and have it speak for itself. But we have forgotten that the Gospel is what needs to speak for itself. While the tradition of the Church has brought quite a bit of positive influence of the Church, it has also destroyed many many many people's faith in God. Our tradition is good, but it is also bad.

The churches that ARE innovating these days are drawing large crowds. And they get looked down on for that. Unfortunately, because often these churches have innovated in new forms of worship with the intention of drawing more people in, to collect more money. They sell their products outside the services. (I can't remember so well, but I seem to remember Jesus not liking that idea.) So these churches aren't truly innovating for the church, they're innovating like Americans innovate...for money and money alone (and probably to "save souls").

Maybe, then, the question is less about the Church innovating...and more about letting the Gospel innovate through the Church. At least, I sure hope that's what it is.

-B