The Jewish prophet scholars term Trito-Isaiah had a more sophisticated version of theistic karma than the stern father. He said:
If you remove the yoke from among you,
the pointing of the finger, the speaking of evil,
if you offer your food to the hungry
and satisfy the needs of the afflicted,
then your light shall rise in the darkness
and your gloom be like the noonday.
Notice the "if-then" nature of the prophet's words. If you do such-and-such a thing, then such-and-such a thing will happen to you. In all versions karma is of this type: "if-then." The "then" will happen if you fulfill the condition of the "if."
In some popular versions of Christianity the "if-then" is used in this way: "If you give your money to the church/mission/evangelist/healer, then you will get rich, or g*d will bless you, or you will be happy." In its more crass versions this kind of religion becomes just another way to make money. Karma becomes a threat, or a reward, or a gamble. But someone profits.
In other versions the karmic effect is found not in getting rich now, but getting rich in heaven. Karl Marx, among others, noted that this was a very useful karma for the wealthy. You can get the poor to do a great deal for you, if you promise them a reward in heaven for all their hard work. It's no wonder that Marx considered religion an opiate for the people. Life is tough for the poor workers. But you can dull their pain by promising them riches in the by-and-by.
Clearly, karma holds truth in cause and effect and in natural consequences, but it can be misused and abused.
For the Jewish prophet the best kind of life was one lived in accordance with the grain of the universe and not against it. The grain was imprinted in nature by g*d. If you lived against g*d's grain, then there would be natural bad consequences. If you live with g*d's grain, then the consequences would be good for both you and all that you touch.
Karmic ideas have their uses: parents use natural consequences to teach their children life's lessons; behavioral psychologists (now out of fashion) used rewards and punishments to change behavior; states uses karma constantly in their myriad laws to ensure reasonable civic life. We would be foolish to ignore karma, pretending it is not so.
But karma might not be the highest road. The ancients said that "virtue is its own reward." You love goodness, seek truth, and appreciate beauty not for any utility. You love g*d not because of what g*d will give you, but because g*d is the supreme good. Ancient Chinese sages urged us to follow the dao not to get what you want and to avoid what you don't but because the dao is a good in itself. Aristotle thought the best friendships were not about what your friend could do for you but were friendships based on your shared love of the good. Utility is all well and good, but it is not the highest good nor the end of well-being.
And what about those good things that happen to us which we don't deserve—completely unmerited kindnesses, where no karmic payback involved is involved? Christian theologians have called that grace. Grace and karma run contrary to each other: In karma you get what you deserve; with grace you get what you don't deserve. How can that be? How do we square the circle of grace and karma? As Socrates might have said, "I think it's time for a cup of tea."
+Ab. Andy