I seriously want to see how any TRUE CHRISTIAN BELIEVER can justify such actions.  Biblically.  'Cause right now, it seems to me to be completely satanic and anti-Christ behavior.

Andrew Stanton, in a commentary on the WALL•E DVD, stated his inspirations for Buy n Large were large corporations and how some people let consumerism govern how they run their lives. He stated that the people at Pixar had always pictured WALL•E as a trash compactor when the idea for the movie was first discussed. He reversed-engineered the idea on why WALL•E was cleaning up the planet and why the Earth was covered in trash and the idea of what if a company was the government. And according to the commentary, one of the artists, Teddy Newton, came up with the term "Buy n Large Corporation". Stanton was intrigued by the term and he was able to truncate it to the acronym of BnL, which "tripped off the tongue real easily".

We are NOT too far from this reality!  Via their money and influence, they EFFECTIVELY run the government.

Lord bless us fools for letting this happen to us!

Post Edited (One Love) : 9/23/2011 9:31:09 AM (GMT-5)

That's their individual TAKE HOME money, alright?  More than any of us or our GRANDKIDS will ever see.

Now...something.  The Walton Family has been LIFELONG SUPPORTERS of the Presbyterian USA Church.  Even to the point where the PCUSA still  has "The Sam and Helen R. Walton Award"...

In late December 1991, Sam and Helen R. Walton made a generous giftof $6 million through the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Foundation. This gift included an endowment in the amount of $3 million, the earned interest to be used by new church developments that have placed an emphasis on site acquisition.

The MDRC offers an opportunity annually to sessions, presbyteries and synods to nominate new church developments that are working in creative ways to bring the gospel to their local communities. Those chosen will receive a one-time financial award of up to $50,000.

It seems that Helen, before her death in 2007, was actually named chairwoman of the PCUSA!  See here...

So it's safe to say that all of Sam and Helen's children AT LEAST know BASIC Christian doctrine.  In short, with respect to the Waltons (at least) WE ARE NOT TALKING about NON-CHRISTIANS but people who has SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES as Christians. 

So NOW...

Do you mean to tell me that their behavior EXEMPLIFIES Christ's teachings about money and generosity?  Seriously, bro? Especially given the many complaints about Wal-Mart's business practices??  Are you really gonna tell me that this is NOT directly a faith issue in that regard?

I sure hope not.  I'd be very, very disappointed in that. 

Post Edited (One Love) : 9/24/2011 11:36:49 AM (GMT-5)

As for Christians, I'd simply ask them a simple question:

"If we were to look at how you currently enjoy your wealth amid your suffering brothers and sisters in humanity and the "Body", would your behavior have you more like the Widow who gave the "mite"...or the rich who gave out of their plenty?"

Post Edited (One Love) : 9/24/2011 4:25:04 PM (GMT-5)

---------------------------------------

Post Edited (One Love) : 9/24/2011 5:09:08 PM (GMT-5)

Brandon:  For the most part I agree with you here.  I don't think that your question is answerable.  I certainly don't have what Gates has, but I do have more than a poor Mexican I helped on a missionary trip.  Should I give, putting, say my family at financial risk or ruination?  The fact that you say I can delight in the abundance that I do have while at the same time there's a hungry child some where in the world going without that small bowl of rice for the second or third day in a row seems to be contradicting what you are getting at.  I guess I'm reading you like this. You seem to want to say, "Yes you can have more than enough (than you need) and enjoy it but wonder if that "extra" over and above your needs is really necessary for you to have much less delight in."  As for not using our resources to empower people, I agree whole-heartedly with you there.  That's what I mean by using your resources for redemptive purposes.  But you have to have those resources to begin with.

D:  1) I don't think you noticed. I said: "As for Christians, I'd simply ask them a simple question:" The question was specifically for Christians...like the Walton Family.

2) Sacrificial giving is what Christ is all about. For a "more than enough" person, giving sacrificially could AT LEAST mean not having an "It's never enough" attitude. Basically, a willingness to DENY themselves the maximization of their own personal wealth for the sake of others.

AND

3) How about this, Brandon? In your opinion, would Jesus ever condone an "It's never enough" attitude towards wealth maximization...particularly in the face of suffering "neighbors"?

AND

4) The Batman issue I talked about before is a great example. Bruce Wayne brought a factory into an area that needed jobs, knowing that the financial profits would be marginal for shareholders...but did it anyway for the very community's sake. That was Wayne sacrificing his opportunity to maximize his wealth for the greater good of others.

You mean to tell me the Koch Brothers can't do something like that?

Brandon:  Gotcha on 1.  My bad.  In response to 2, 3 and 4.  I whole heartedly would endorse what you are saying about Bruce Wayne and others who would follow his example.  Totally.  But here's the thing.  I have another example even though I think the Bruce Wayne example would suffice for the most part as well.  But I'm thinking Oscar Schindler.  In Schindler's case, he had a factory that made bombs FOR the Nazis to kill the enemy, which was the Americans, British and Russians (even though those did not turn out as good mortars because they were off in their measurements meant they were practically useless for shelling the enemy).  He did this for a few years all the while trying to undermine them.  So he seemed to have two contradictory goals going on.  In fact, I see them as literally two opposites.  At the same time he "wined and dined" and little by little depleted his resources to save Jews.  In wining and dining and catering to the Nazis he had to at the least have the appearance that his factory was making profits and of course he had to have enough wealth and resources to keep it going.  In some ways, thats how I can really see Christians working with wealth.  In some cases they can take their personal wealth and deplete it to where they live in say the middle to upper middle class end of the economic scale.  At the same time I can see people keeping well above that so as to cater to others with wealth and riches and resources for even greater goals.  Even Bruce Wayne still, largely had personal wealth "to begin with" in order to do what he did.  I'm not going to judge Christians on that.

Post Edited (BBBCanada) : 9/24/2011 8:28:20 PM (GMT-5)

Brandon: OK…but what I’m saying is that not everyone would agree with this. Simply appealing to a general consensus is not enough of a basis for why one should adhere to such a doctrine. Even if this appeared obvious to everyone, that in itself would not be a reason for adhering to it or its being true. All we have here is an agreed upon value. Once I start declaring something right or wrong or that others ought to do something or not do something and if they don’t do it (when they should) or DO do it (when they shouldn’t) then you are talking about morality and its basis is simply that everyone agrees on it. That seems to me to be what you end up doing. And that doesn’t seem like a very solid basis. Because those agreeing can literally agree on any moral code and if agreement alone is what makes the code correct then any agreed-upon code will be right by definition. How much do people agree on what others interests are? That doesn’t seem to get us very far.

D: It seems like you are arguing for some point for private ownership of "more than enough" wealth. The ability to not bring oneself to mere subsistance in distributing wealth to others in need. I am not saying that it's inherently wrong to be a wealthy person who has "more than enough" and enjoys that...while somewhere else another starves for lack. I'm saying that it's sinful behavior for a wealthy person to place her identity in a mode of wealth concern (keeping it, getting it, maximizing it, etc) such that they are unable or unwilling to sincerely take the living conditions of others who lack into consideration of their decisions concerning wealth. That's what seems to be happening on Wall Street and in Corporate America.

Again, that goes smack dab AGAINST the idea of enlightened self-interest.

I'll give you a great example. Michael Bloomberg. Mayor of New York City. Also the 11th richest person in America. worth about 19.5 Billion dollars. I want you to imagine what would happen if he were to step down from being Mayor...and then literally gave 4 billion dollars of his money to improving ALL of the inner city schools in New York City. What if he basically single-handedly made it possible for all capable kids to get the education they need...and made ways for them to get college or vocational training, etc. Now would that all that end up being in Bloomberg's best interests, any way you look at it? You bet your sweet bippy! (Word to Martin and Rowan's Laugh-In) Heck, by the time it was all over NYC would be calling him KING Bloomberg, not just Mayor. People (PARENTS) in all 5 borroughs would be praising this man. AND NYC (and America as a result) would see flourishing like it's probably never seen.

Brandon: Sure. I hear what you are saying. I essentially agree with it. But let’s say he gave away 18 Billion. Seriously, what does he need the other BILLION for? Isn’t THAT billion “more than enough?” Shit man. I’d be happy with a million, but even that might be “more than enough.” Why not give away everything such that he lives in a regular middle to upper middle income? So this is why I’m asking about delight? At what point do you ask, “Don’t you have more than enough for to delight in and enjoy?” I’m saying that that is pretty much an unanswerable question.

D: 1) Are you genuinely trying to bring a genuine similarity between Oscar Schindler and his context...and the Walton Family and theirs? Speechless.

2) I think it is a completely FAIR QUESTION to Christians how they feel they are conforming to Jesus' teachings about wealth and justice with they way they steward God's goods they have. When there is a Christian who basically acts like Pharoah in their business practices and wealth concern, these behaviors needs to be at least acknowedged as NOT being commensurate with Jesus' perspective.

Brandon: I see the difference between the Waltons and Schindler. I think there should be an “economic revival” amongst Christians of wealth and resources. Forget them. Just Christians in general. What I’m saying is what I’m saying above. Oscar Schlinder, depleted his resources to save Jews. I thought it was a most moving moment in the movie at the end, when he says while holding a ring, (paraphrasing), “I could have bought one more!” Yes, everyone was thankful for those whom he did save, but think about it. If Bloomberg gave almost all of his wealth way and saved a billion for himself, I can still hear someone saying, “Yeah, well you could of done more with that last billion you have.” I mean, how far do you want to take this?

D: Seriously, Brandon. Do you really believe that a human being NEEDS 10 billion dollars of their own personal wealth?

I do want to see what you say with that.

You wanna be rich someday, bro? Heh...

Brandon: Oh gawd…I really don’t want to be rich. No. Seriously. I like it simple. I have a good friend who is 50 and still doesn’t have a full time job. Lives on the edge financially speaking. Is ready to work at a donut/coffee shop to pay his next rent. I envy him. He probably won’t get the chicks, because most gals want more stability than that. I make more than he does, but there are more important things I could do than spending my money on things and enjoyments. Like charities and helping people out. But seriously, does any human being (I see we moved from Christians now?) need a billion?

I'll be back on this in a little bit.  But as I was surfing the web for something totally different, I came across this: 

What's Right With The Prosperity Gospel? 

I think Jamie makes some interesting points that are fitting with what he says in other works.