Perspicuo
Veteran Member
I don't know if economic theory really disagrees with Jesus' recommendation, there. It's based on the assumption that there would be no tomorrow, what with the end of the world coming up soon. That certainly informed Reagan's Secretary of the Interior's ideas for land and resource management, what with the world ending almost immediately.Exacto.
He was an ignorant git (if he existed at all, which is possible though unlikely). All areas of science contradict most of what he recommended: "Don't save for the morrow" (economy), "Give the other cheek" (psychology, particularly applied behavior analysis), "There be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake" (medicine), etc.
I disagree. The situation is there was no date given for the end of the world. So the situation is similar to what everyone saving has, "How do I know I will live until retirement age?". Well, you don't, your end could come any time, but there are maths to calc the risk for that versus the benefits of saving.
Actually Jesus did give a time frame. The Kingdom of Heaven was to arrive in the lifetime of the men around him. Matthew16:28:
"Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."
When that didn't happen, other gospel and bible story writers had to come up with a new deadline and to avoid the embarrassment of being caught wrong on a deadline for the apocalypse again, they started getting vague "no one knows...thief in the night...1000 years is but to god one moment..." blah blah blah
That's not a date. It's a lifetime. And a lifetime contains many morrows. My comparison with life savings, retirement and the imprevisibility of death still holds. It's economically unsound and socially irresponsible. Money makes the world go round, its accumulation is the stuff big and worthwhile projects are made of
... and fuck Jebus, that's what.