Unironically, if the bootstraps ideology can be applied to anyone, it would be Jesus. Not only was he given a bunch of stuff, he could physically turn things into something else. He had zero excuse for being broke outside of “oh gee I hope dad doesn’t get angry at me for using my powers that HE literally gave me”
AFAIK the Bible doesn't directly comment on Jesus' wealth, but I think it can be inferred that he was a traveling tradesman and did well within that context. That's part of how he was able to build up his following in the first place - by being influenced by a lot of ideas in different places, and then spreading his own take on them as he traveled and did his thing.
One story in particular that stands out in my mind is when Jesus and the Apostles build a boat to go fishing and just leave it behind when they're done with it. When they weren't preaching, they were a group of skilled artisans, and at that time and place the population density wasn't high enough for you to stay put and ply your trade in a city, so you had to travel from town to town, get your bag and get a move on.
edit: something I just realized too is that a lot of what we see as transactional relationships in modern times were described in premodern ones as gifts. So you "gift" someone shoes if you're a cobbler, and in return people "gift" you their services, and it's all kind of informal. Jesus existed within this context, where the average person didn't deal with Roman coinage very often, so it would be hard to make a 1:1 comparison with how he fit into that economy and how modern people do even if the Bible contained a detailed description of what he did and what he got for it.
It's not a different or less formal way of describing sale or barter, it's a different logic.
For example, while gifts tend to be reciprocal among equals, they'll often deliberately be slightly more or less valuable so that it's hard to keep track of who has given more.
But also, gifts in heirarchal relationships tend to be uneven. For example, a gift from a chief to a subject is going to be greater than the subject's return gift.
In some places you'll even see competitive gift giving between powerful people as a form of power jockeying.
I think a lot has been lost in the Bible since we've lost the context for what gifts meant in biblical society. Were people flexing on Jesus by giving him gifts? Challenging him? Meeting his needs?
It’s not a different or less formal way of describing sale or barter, it’s a different logic.
Right, I meant that in modern society more directly transactional interactions have replaced these. Also what makes it "informal" is just the fact that there isn't an exact record of credit, it would be mostly vibes except in specific circumstances (such as when the law gets involved).
deleted by creator
Unironically, if the bootstraps ideology can be applied to anyone, it would be Jesus. Not only was he given a bunch of stuff, he could physically turn things into something else. He had zero excuse for being broke outside of “oh gee I hope dad doesn’t get angry at me for using my powers that HE literally gave me”
*I literally gave me
AFAIK the Bible doesn't directly comment on Jesus' wealth, but I think it can be inferred that he was a traveling tradesman and did well within that context. That's part of how he was able to build up his following in the first place - by being influenced by a lot of ideas in different places, and then spreading his own take on them as he traveled and did his thing.
One story in particular that stands out in my mind is when Jesus and the Apostles build a boat to go fishing and just leave it behind when they're done with it. When they weren't preaching, they were a group of skilled artisans, and at that time and place the population density wasn't high enough for you to stay put and ply your trade in a city, so you had to travel from town to town, get your bag and get a move on.
edit: something I just realized too is that a lot of what we see as transactional relationships in modern times were described in premodern ones as gifts. So you "gift" someone shoes if you're a cobbler, and in return people "gift" you their services, and it's all kind of informal. Jesus existed within this context, where the average person didn't deal with Roman coinage very often, so it would be hard to make a 1:1 comparison with how he fit into that economy and how modern people do even if the Bible contained a detailed description of what he did and what he got for it.
It's not a different or less formal way of describing sale or barter, it's a different logic.
For example, while gifts tend to be reciprocal among equals, they'll often deliberately be slightly more or less valuable so that it's hard to keep track of who has given more.
But also, gifts in heirarchal relationships tend to be uneven. For example, a gift from a chief to a subject is going to be greater than the subject's return gift.
In some places you'll even see competitive gift giving between powerful people as a form of power jockeying.
I think a lot has been lost in the Bible since we've lost the context for what gifts meant in biblical society. Were people flexing on Jesus by giving him gifts? Challenging him? Meeting his needs?
Right, I meant that in modern society more directly transactional interactions have replaced these. Also what makes it "informal" is just the fact that there isn't an exact record of credit, it would be mostly vibes except in specific circumstances (such as when the law gets involved).