I Appreciate Rich People
by Ted Slater on 02/12/2007 at 12:24 PM
It's clear that those who have a good deal of money tend not to be as acutely aware of their need for the Lord. Which makes it difficult for them to turn to the Lord for salvation.
But Scripture is clear that some people are rewarded for their obedience with financial wealth. Those who are faithful with little are given more. Some of Jesus' disciples were rich, after all.
And that means that the accumulation of money is not inherently a bad thing.
I, for one, appreciate rich people. I tuned into a show last night that featured the homes of the very wealthy. The artwork and craftsmanship was stunning. It made me starkly aware of the potential that people have to create beautiful work. If it weren't for these wealthy individuals, artists and craftsmen wouldn't have had the funds to produce such beauty.
I think about works of art through the centuries -- paintings, carvings, music, and the like -- that wouldn't exist were it not for wealthy people. And I'm grateful for their contributions.
Just this morning I was reminded how Boundless began. A wealthy individual had a vision for a publication that would encourage twentysomethings toward intentional, godly living. And in 1998 he wrote a check for $100,000 to get things started. I'm grateful for his contribution.
Yes, there are many rich people who are entirely selfish, who use their money to subjugate and oppress others, to insulate themselves from the needs of those around them. They may even get their money at others' expense or through immoral means.
But there are many others who have been financially blessed for whatever reason, and who use their money to improve the world around them. And I do not resent them for their money; that's the knee-jerk response schismatic demagogues like Marx would want me to have. No, I am grateful for their contribution to the beauty and edification of this world.
I appreciate rich people.
1. Mandi said the following at 1:02 PM on Feb 12:
Thanks for this reminder that not all those with wealth use it for evil. I certainly appreciate how Boundless has enriched my life in Christ, so I'm grateful to the man who wrote that initial cheque.
2. Jacob said the following at 2:53 PM on Feb 12:
My college is entirely privately funded because of Affirmative Action. Despite the fact that we've had a color-blind admissions policy since the 1800s, apparently the Gov't thought we still needed to impose racial quotas on our student body. Because we chose to act on principle, we cannot recieve federal funding and thus, we are entirely privately funded. Consequently, I like rich people too, because if it weren't for our donors who believe in the principles we abide by, I wouldn't be recieving anywhere near the quality of education that I do.
3. Ted Slater said the following at 9:17 AM on Feb 13:
For some reason, the comments started talking about presidential candidate Barack Obama. That's not what this post is about. This post is about how we shouldn't be so quick to condemn rich people, for some of them have done a lot of good -- from providing a tomb for Jesus to funding some beautiful artwork to providing funding to start Boundless some eight years ago.
I've deleted all the irrelevant comments.
Interested in talking about Sen. Obama? I've made a thread for that discussion here.
4. Dr. Ransom said the following at 11:04 AM on Feb 13:
Clearly, God in His sovereignty has allowed people to become rich and some to be less wealthy.
Lest anyone consider one "faction" better than the other -- for example, thinking a poor missionary is automatically spiritually superior to a "loaded" CEO -- consider that without the latter group, the missionaries on the field, like the publishers of Boundless, wouldn't be able to do what they do.
Worth noting here, too, is that the "verse" saying something akin to "money is the root of all evil" or even "the love of money is the root of all evil" are actually misquotations.
The Bible never assumes that all people should have roughly the same amount of resources, or that either wealth or poverty is spiritually superior.
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils," reads a literal translation.
And this jibes with common sense as well, for neither money nor the love of money logically lead to *all* sins -- rape, for example, or slander.
Those who in the name of "social justice" or a "social gospel" advocate little more than Christianized Socialism often miss not only the reality of human rebellion and the Church's role in the world, but the very clear Scripture principles supporting industriousness, the wise accumulation of wealth and the best uses for its resources.
Meanwhile, not all rich men in the Bible are portrayed as evil -- far unlike one of those "Captain Planet" cartoons.
In one or more parables, even God Himself is analogized in the form of a rich man.
And of course, in the New Heavens and New Earth, we are all destined for incredible wealth, both spiritual and material -- though at the time it will hardly seem wealthy, because everyone will have it.
To borrow the title of an infamous book, no, our "best lives" were never meant to be "now." But they're never meant to be *never*, either. | Dr. R
5. Justin said the following at 1:09 PM on Feb 13:
"Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
-Matthew 19:24
6. Ted Slater said the following at 1:14 PM on Feb 13:
Justin -- of course that's true. We have to be careful, though, not to condemn people just because they're rich. That too often seems to be our natural reaction.
Both Scripture and history testify to how rich people have been remarkable blessings to those around them. I have no doubt that there will be many formerly rich people in heaven.
We really need to question the kneejerk "rich-bad/poor-good" mentality that Karl Marx and others have foisted upon us. There are plenty of hell-bound poor people.
7. Alison said the following at 1:27 PM on Feb 13:
Thank you for this post! I grew up in a relatively well-off family, and I can't tell you how hard that can be sometimes. Most people in the church (at least where I grew up) assume the worst about anyone who has a nicer house than they do. The ironic thing is, my parents live FAR below their means. No debt. Cash only for cars. Their house is worth 1/2 my father's annual income. What do they do with the rest of the money? Well, a good 40% goes to the government, 10% or more goes to the church (they are faithful tithers), and a whole lot more goes to missions, non-profit organizations, etc. They've even anonymously made house payments for a friend whose husband died. They are incredibly generous people. They were really poor when they got married, and my dad has worked for everything he's made (and, by the way, we all paid a price for it too).
And yet, growing up, I often dreaded people finding out where I lived. Why? Because they didn't treat me the same afterward. I was looking for friends, regardless of income, but other people would turn the cold shoulder. Everyone talks about the rich looking down on the poor, but I can tell you from experience that the reverse is just as prevalent!
Now that I'm married, it's not a huge issue like it was before, but the wounds are still there. Look, the rich are people too. Please, please show a little grace. Their problems are just as real as yours. Money doesn't fix anything. It just makes life more complicated.
8. Justin said the following at 1:32 PM on Feb 13:
Ted said: "We really need to question the kneejerk "rich-bad/poor-good" mentality that Karl Marx and others have foisted upon us."
With all due respect, Ted. This sounds like a strawman argument. We live in Capitalist America, the richest country in the world. Wealth is not seen as a negative; it's a positive.
9. Mark Willard said the following at 1:38 PM on Feb 13:
I would also question Justin's (implied) interpretation of Matthew 19:24. It needs to be read in context. Verses 25 and 26 which follow state: "When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, 'Who then can be saved?' But Jesus looked at them and said, 'With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.'" The disciples reaction was as if Jesus said no one could be saved, and Jesus does not correct them by saying people who aren't rich can be saved. Jesus tells them that the only way anyone can be saved is by the power of God. Pastor John Piper expounds on that in his sermon How to Get a Camel through a Needle's Eye.
10. Dr. Ransom said the following at 4:28 PM on Feb 13:
An unspoken assumption often made when discussion the rich/poor dichotomy is that Something Must Be Done. And indeed, something must be done -- but it remains a truth because of humankind's sinful nature that *we will not eliminate poverty in this life*.
This isn't a utopian "Star Trek" where we'll just someday "reach" the stage of eliminating all Poverty and Want. This is a world locked in human rebellion against its Creator. Poverty is actually among the least bothersome results of sin.
This issue resurfaced back in November, when Motte Brown posted about Who Gives Money (answer: conservative Christians, or at least Churchians, give the most to charity).
I had an exchange with another commentor about whose job exactly it is to *attempt* alleviating the problem of poverty -- the government's, or the Church's?
Because "giving" via taxes is not giving at all. We may recall that God loves a *cheeful* giver. It's a matter of the heart, not of financial equality, Tax Cuts For the Middle Class or ensuring everything is "fair."
I wrote the following during that exhange:
------------------------------
[B]efore, during and after Jesus' time on Earth, when He spoke directly and through human authors, He was clear that giving is an act of the heart, done cheerfully.
Of course, God *can* use anything to accomplish His will, including government welfare. But it's a rather far leap to go from believing that because the Church hasn't “stepped up to the plate” in this regard (a debatable point, anyway), to deciding we bypass the Church and allow the government to appropriate its role.
I wrote more on my own site about the likely problems resulting from the church-bypassing, welfare-state concept:
----------
- Government members of this persuasion, because of sinful human nature, are all too eager to assume the power and exact resources from everyone they please, in the name of “benevolence.”
- People who don’t want to help (the stingy, the ultra-capitalists, a selfish libertarian here and there) are forced to “help” others, upon being forced by government. They resent the poor, and they are not personally helping others. If they’re outside the Church, that is not their job anyway! Which is more Biblical: God loves a cheerful giver, or, God loves a begrudging “'giver” whose clenched hands must be plied apart by government?
- Government, which is not the spiritually-minded Church, cannot differentiate from those who truly need help and those who will play the system to get what they want.
- But this next is perhaps the worst consequence. The Church, quite aware that government is Helping the Poor, will itself become lazy and retreat from its very real responsibility to help, voluntarily and joyfully, those who truly cannot help themselves. 2 Corinthians 8 and 9, in particular, describe the Christ-followers in the ancient city of Corinth who gave joyfully, and sacrificially, to help others. They responded to the Apostle Paul’s requests for a collection, and they loved it. This is the duty of true Christ-followers: to help others with gladness, to be filled with joy upon doing so and thus further glorify God!
[. . .]
So which came first, [one] might ask: the church’s failing, or government’s appropriation — and subsequent fouling-ups — of the task?
Further discussion may be necessary to answer. But ultimately this matters little. Helping people is the Church’s responsibility, regardless of whether it has lived up to the task. Enforcing law and security is the role of government. If the Church is failing, we must repair the Church from within, not despair and turn to another source.
------------------------------
Meanwhile, Mark Willard's point is incredible apt: Jesus said this not to illustrate that the rich are too disgusting to get into Heaven, but that even people as big and important and impressive as the "rich" would be unable to enter the Kingdom! Ergo, how much *less* would the poor be able to get there!
"Who then can be saved?" the disciples asked, aghast.
To which Jesus responded that with man, such redemption is impossible for rich and poor alike, but with God, it is. And this context is all about redemption and the Gospel, anyway, not about the here-and-now. So let us be careful to maintain focus on the Gospel and not merely *any* of today's seemingly pressing Social Justice Issues.
11. Andrew said the following at 10:08 PM on Feb 14:
Many people have this image of rich people as mean, conniving, miserly and greedy crooks that exploit working schlepps like you and me to make a buck.
Christians who accept this stereotype are merely accepting the Marxist class struggle theory. It states that exploitation primarily occurs economically, when the ruling class expropriates our capital through undervaluing our productive labours.
Whilst this may occur under strictly Marxist socialistic regimes, under capitalism the outcome is very different.
In countries that have adopted a capitalist model (however ineffectually), entrepreneurs are motivated to invest, develop and deliver products and services, create jobs and improve our standard of living. Prior to capitalism poverty was normal, famine and plague were common, and reading and literacy were rare because books were expensive and scarce.
The term capitalism itself is also falsely understood as a system that only benefits capitalists by exploiting workers and the poor. On the contrary, capitalism has brought products and services to the masses that were once considered luxuries available only to the rich (if available at all). Consider air conditioning, washing machines, personal computers, cars, internal plumbing and video camera recorders.
Capitalism brought us these products, making the people who delivered them rich. Our rise in living standards in the last hundred years has led to longer, healthier, more prosperous lives.
Should we decry this? No. We should be thankful for the opportunities brought about by people who have become rich. People often become rich by taking risks in business to deliver the products and services that we need and want to buy.
We often define rich people are those who have accumulated more capital than the rest of us. And we need to keep this in perspective; if we have a car to drive and a roof over our heads (whether we own it or not), most of the world looks at us as very rich indeed. We can easily forget that and get stuck in a lifestyle of envy in which we fruitlessly compare our possessions to others.
Comparing our position to others tempts us to succumb to envy. As well as being unproductive, it can also be yet another outcome of falsely applied Marxist beliefs, that rich people somehow got that wealth falsely and that they should be punitively taxed to relieve them of their “burden.” This is the basis of the progressive income tax. In reality all it does is encourage tax evasion and increase employment for accountants.
Yet rich people are human too; they have their issues like anyone else.
The Scriptures advocate neither seeking neither poverty nor riches. We need to also remember that it is not the wealth itself per se that is condemned. It is the attitude of the heart that is important. Why do we seek wealth? For power, status or influence? Or do we become rich through the productive use of our talents?
What we need to avoid is the trap of envy of the rich that focuses on success and possessions as the sole arbiter of worth. If we generate wealth through our earthly work, then we have a responsibility to use it well. But we are not called to envy the riches of others and vote to redistribute their wealth by force of law. Charity must be a choice. Christians need to recognise that they have absorbed a negative and elitist worldview that the rich are our enemies.
Until we recognise this, we will continue to harangue our political masters to make things “right” by punitively taxing the rich who we believe have somehow robbed us. The lawfully rich of today have harnessed the power of capitalism and enhanced and extended our quality of life. We should be thankful to them as the agents of God’s grace and creativity that makes our lives here that much more pleasant.
To me, this sounds like a positive outcome.
Source References:
“The Source of All Blessings,” Gary North. Available at lewrockwell.com
“Requiem for an Entrepreneur,” Doug French. Available at lewrockwell.com
12. Amanda H said the following at 4:05 PM on Nov 9:
Yes, capitalism has greatly improved our quality of life in the West. But at what expense? We can have "affordable luxuries" because the majority of those goods are made by people with a far lower standard of living in a far away place. So we should be thankful to those individuals who engineered this system? What would foreign workers say? Would they be thankful just to have a job, or do they not deserve more?
As a Christian I am thankful for all that I have, and I am convicted to be thoughtful in my purchases, as there are non-essential consumer goods available at a low price that may be appealing, but whose purchase perpetuates the system of low wages in developing countries.