Responses/Related Readings
2167 words by Ryan Griffin
My resopnse to all of these wonderful comments is thank you thank you very very much. You. all of you have given me some great ideas on how to fix the problem of poverty, and before long I will be putting these methods to the test. I only hope that these methods will be effective in relieving the Earth of this horrindace menace known as poverty. I mean it\’s ok to be broke, but it\’s ridiculous for anyone to be without food or shelter. I know I recieved many criticisms on my beliefs on the ways in which this problem can be reduced, but at least those criticisms were constructive. I am also strongly considering changing some of my own beliefs to satisfy my fellow Xavierite. Anyway I would just like to say that I am so greatful for your intellectual, precise, and oh so wise comments. [Poverty was also one of the three problems in the world that I discussed in my blog. However I didn’t choose this as the issue for my project (too hard of a topic). I can see how divorce and false belief can be a cause for poverty. And I truly agree that a lack of education is a cause for poverty, which is why I decided to base my project on illiteracy. I think you have some good ideas and you should try to think of a way to incorporate these ideas into a certain program to help those living in poverty or prevent more people from becoming impoverished
I like your plan and I hope that is gets started one day.
I agree that lack of education can contribute to poverty. I’m not sure how I feel about divorce being one of the problems that lead to poverty though. How can a separation of two people with different incomes lead to one of them being poor? I know it can take a lot of money to get through the process of a divorce, but not so much to put one of those people out of house and home? I mean, if you believe that then I think a good plan would be to promote programs with marriage counseling for the couples. If it works out, then that is one less person not in poverty. I’m not quite sure I understand what it is you are planning to do with this project, but let me know if it works out.
I agree that poverty is one of the biggest problems in the world and our society. The not necessarily the lack of education even though I can see where you where going with that. But what you later spoke on which is the lack of ability to get a proper education in many areas. That is probably the leading factor in poverty in my view because it creates more problems for people and gives them less answers. It was interesting to me how you broke that main problem into three possible causes (divorce, lack of education, and vicious cycle of poverty) that was something that I have not seen in any blogs that I have read. This was a quality and easy to read blog.
I think this blog is great. I wasn’t that hard to read and it had many interesting points and great statistics. I’m sure your plans will work out wonderfully. However I did have a slightly different opinion on some of your views.
I think you’re correct in believing that poverty is a pressing issue that must be addressed and I think that many of you ideas will be extremely effective. However I’m not sure I agree with your views on the causes of poverty. I understand how divorce could be an issue that aids in the creation of poverty for people in certain situations. However I disagree that helping to maintain marriages is the solution to this problem. No one plans a divorce when most people get married they have forever in mind. In the unfortunate event of a divorce alterations must be made in the lifestyles of both parents. I believe that if there was enough money at one time to accommodate both parties then after a divorce the funds should still be present. The single mother working twice as hard to support her family, wouldn’t have faired better had her marriage succeeded. The same man who evidently isn’t helping to take care of his kids after the divorce is the same person who she was originally married to. (Sounds like a scumbag to me). Children are the responsibility of both parents and a separation shouldn’t be the reason for poverty unless a parent dies. The major reasons for poverty after divorce is due to your second reason, lack of education. Many women do not finish their educations before starting a family. As a result, when the marriage comes crashing down there is very little to fall back on. For this reason I believe that your solution for a better education will also cause an effect on the poverty caused by divorce. I completely agree with the cycle being an issue. Poverty is continuous. It’s very difficult to break free from. Any solution to this problem would be great and extremely helpful.
Okay Ryan, now I like the concept of battling poverty through public education but some of the statements made weren’t quite clear. For instance, you talked about the concept of knowing yourself before you marry because at a certain age range many people are changing so much that they are unable to know themselves. Yeah this explains why young people shouldn’t get married, but what about the divorce rate of adults over 18. It would seem that it would be greater than marriage at 18 and below. Now instead of concentrating on early marriage as a result to poverty I would most likely concentrate on high pregnancy rates among teens and how that is related to poverty (like your more likely to be in poverty after having children in your teens). I’m not quite sure about the connection between divorce and poverty especially things like child support and alimony.
your plan is good. I wish I could to fix poverty. your method is a little confusing, I think you are going to help by giving information. maybe you and some of the others in theology that are doing poverty can help one another with your ideas and how to fix it.
I do agree that poverty is a problem. Maybe educating them on how to prevent poverty is a solution. Though I do disagree that many women depend on men for money a lot of women today are becoming more and more independent, you do have a point, but a lot of men depend on women for money as well. You have a good idea about educating the people, maybe you can think of a solution that will deal with all the issues you talked about.
Good topic and some great ideas. Please try to come up with specific things you can do this semester to address poverty and then be able to document what you did at the end of the semester.] Aah! Those miraculouse comments are just music to my ears. Can\’t you just hear them. Aren\’t they just lovely. Anyway the story which my problem relates to most would have to be The Divine Warrior in His Tent. You see God was living in a tent; POVERTY. Damn! What more can I say other than that is ridiculouse.
\”\”Yahweh could have asked Moses for just about anything–a temple, a palace, even a pyramid. Instead, Yahweh requests that Moses build him a tent (Exodus 25:8-9). Once the tent has been constructed according to Yahweh’s exacting instructions, the Israelite deity moves in. For the rest of the stay in Sinai, throughout the desert wanderings, the conquest, the settlement, and the period of Judges until the earliest years of the monarchy, when Solomon’s Temple is completed–that is, from the Book of Exodus through 1 Kings 8–Yahweh dwells in a tent.
Of course, the desert Tabernacle, with its elaborate construction of gold, silver, bronze, wood, linen, goat’s hair, and leather (Exodus 26), is no ordinary tent. Its greatness is indicated by Yahweh’s own lack of enthusiasm at the prospect of moving from tent to Temple. When David asks Yahweh if he is interested in giving up the tent lifestyle and settling down in a lovely three-roomed temple built on prime Jerusalem real estate, Yahweh responds negatively:
“Are you the one to build a house for Me to dwell in? From the day that I brought the people of Israel out of Egypt to this day I have not dwelt in a house, but have moved about in Tent and Tabernacle. As I moved about wherever the Israelites went, did I ever reproach any of the tribal leaders whom I appointed to care for My people Israel: Why have you not built Me a house of cedar? (2 Samuel 7:6)
Yahweh seems quite content with his portable accommodations, which are described in more detail (Exodus 26-27 and 36-38) than any other structure in the Bible–even the Jerusalem Temple. But despite the attention given to the Tabernacle’s construction, both by Yahweh and by the biblical authors, the historicity of the Tabernacle account has suffered greatly, as Kenneth Kitchen notes in the preceding article in this issue. The description of the Tabernacle is regularly dismissed as a fiction, a mere retrojection of the Jerusalem Temple’s design back in time. But the Temple is not the closest parallel to the Tabernacle. And, as we shall see, one particular ancient structure is much closer in design to the Tabernacle than the Temple is. This structure not only offers a historical precedent for the Tabernacle design; it also helps us understand just what kind of deity would ask his people to build him a tent rather than a temple.But before we turn to this example, let’s look at how the historicity of the Tabernacle account first came under fire.
In the late 19th century, the German Bible scholar Julius Wellhausen (1844-1918) synthesized the work of earlier scholars in developing what has come to be known as the documentary hypothesis. According to Wellhausen, it is possible to detect the work of at least four authors in the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible. J, named after this author’s frequent use of Yahweh (German, Jahweh) for God’s name; E, who prefers the name Elohim for God; P, an author concerned with priestly issues; and D, for the author of Deuteronomy (as well as portions of Joshua through Kings).* The detailed descriptions of the Tabernacle’s construction and the maintenance of its cult, as well as the vast majority of legal material, were all attributed to P, the priestly author.**
These various authors wrote at different stages in the history of Israel, Wellhausen argued. But of all the sources, P alone wrote following the Babylonian Exile (post 539 B.C.E.), when the Persian leader Cyrus the Great allowed the Jews to return to Israel and rebuild the Temple. P was motivated by a desire to establish a centralized cult in Jerusalem through stringent ritual legislation. P’s motives, according to Wellhausen, were selfish: The priestly author’s focus on the Tabernacle, its cultic implements and associated rituals was inspired by a desire to secure a stronghold in the business of post-exilic Jewish religion.
The Tabernacle, for Wellhausen, was the primary piece of evidence of the priestly source’s fraudulence. He insisted that the Tabernacle never existed outside the priestly author’s imagination. How did the priestly author come up with the plan for the Tabernacle? He simply halved the dimensions of the Temple, thereby making it portable, Wellhausen argued. The Temple measured 60 cubits in length by 20 in width; the Tabernacle measured 30 cubits in length, 10 in width. This was no coincidence, according to Wellhausen. In support of his theory, Wellhausen noted that both structures were oriented to the east, with the Holy of Holies in the west. He insisted that this orientation necessitated a fixed building, not a tent. The priestly Tabernacle, he concluded, “is in truth not the model, but the copy, of the Jerusalem Temple.”\’\'\’\’
So as anyone can see from this article from the Divine Warrior in His Tent written by Micheal M. Homan. God was living in poverty out in the desert and the Isrealites were poor also. For this reason I have related the Divine Warrior in His Tent as the reading which is related so closely to Poverty. Although the tent did contain some gold no one could use it because it was sacred and God said that He only wanted certain people to enter his tent. Moreover the people of Isreal could not use the gold because they were disobedient to God.