/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15041862]

Is it acceptable for a Christian to be very rich and have a big mansion and fancy cars and live a lavish lifestyle and things like that? In America there are lots of Protestants who are like this and some say that God has ordained them to have lots of money and they argue that they are good stewards of their money and that building wealth is Godly and Biblical. I don't know if Catholics and Orthodox and European Protestant Christians do this too but I know this type of thinking is common among American Protestants. Are they correct?

[Anonymous No.15041883]

If a man has two shirts, one belongs to him, and the other to the man without a shirt - Saint Bishop "I can read silently" Ambrose

[Anonymous No.15041920]

Yes, it is perfectly fine for Christians to become wealthy, and there is nothing in the Bible that forbids Christians from gaining large amounts of money. The problem is that the love of money is the root of all sorts of evil (1 Tim. 6:10). Jesus said that you cannot serve both money and God at the same time: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon (wealth),” (Matt. 6:24). Jesus is not saying that it is sinful to be rich. Jesus is telling us that the problem is when Christians start putting their faith, hope, and security in their money (and it becomes their master) rather than God. At this point, they become idolaters and fail to serve the true God.

Also, if a Christian is blessed by God to have large amounts of wealth, then he or she should use it for furthering the gospel. Therefore, wealthy Christians, just like poor Christians, should tithe to the church to aid it in expanding the gospel of Christ. Consider the parable that Jesus gave concerning the use of money in Luke 19:11-27. In it, the person who was punished was the one who did not use the money given to him by his master in a manner profitable to the master, and he was condemned. So, when someone is given something by God, he is to use it for God’s glory. This includes money.

[Anonymous No.15041968]

God does not condemn anyone for having riches. Riches come to people from many sources, but He gives grave warnings to those who seek after them more than they seek after God and trust in them more than in God. His greatest desire is for us to set our hearts on things above and not on things on this earth. This may sound very high and unobtainable, but Paul wrote, “I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me” (Philippians 4:13).

We are to be wise with our money. We are to save money, but not hoard it. We are to spend money, but with discretion and control. We are to give back to the Lord, joyfully and sacrificially. We are to use our money to help others, but with discernment and the guidance of God’s Spirit. It is not wrong to be rich, but it is wrong to love money. It is not wrong to be poor, but it is wrong to waste money on trivial things. The Bible’s consistent message on managing money is to be wise.

[Anonymous No.15041999]

The apostle Paul addressed the issue of wealth in 1 Timothy 6:8–10: “If we have food and clothing, we will be content with that. Those who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.” Having money is not wrong, but loving money is. The abundance of money or the lack of money is less important than our spiritual condition.

In Jewish culture, poverty and even disability were often seen as the result of someone’s personal sin. In John 9:1–2, the disciples of Jesus asked, “‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned,’ said Jesus, ‘but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.’” While human nature often attributes poverty or other weaknesses to something wrong a person has done, God can and does use such circumstances to work His perfect plan.

The account of the rich young ruler in Mark 10:17–22 shows how riches can be a spiritual stumbling block. Jesus told the young man to sell his possessions, give the money to the poor, and then follow Jesus. The man walked away sad because he was a man of much wealth. In this case, the man’s wealth was a negative since it kept him from following Christ. He loved his money more than he loved Jesus.

While many of the psalms and proverbs speak matter-of-factly regarding the benefits of wealth and struggles of poverty, the Bible is clear that both poverty and wealth can be the will of God and a blessing from God. Jesus lived in relative poverty; Solomon was blessed with significant wealth. King David had a humble beginning and a wealthy ending. The apostles followed Christ to persecution and martyrdom; they were not regarded as wealthy, but they used all they had to share Christ with others (Luke 18:28). “Rich and poor have this in common: The LORD is the Maker of them all” (Proverbs 22:2).

The human perspective sees wealth as a blessing and poverty as a curse. God’s plan is much greater and uses both wealth and poverty to accomplish His will. We are to avoid the temptation to see wealth as God’s only blessing and instead be content in any and every circumstance, knowing that God’s blessings are not defined by our possessions in this world but are found in their fullness in a kingdom not of this world.

[Anonymous No.15042011]

>>15041862
>Is it acceptable for a Christian to be very rich
Yes i don’t see why not
>big mansion and fancy cars and live a lavish lifestyle and things like that?
It depends how lavish it gets, it very easily and very often will stray into hedonistic decadence to aggrandise the self rather than God and care more for money than for God.
>building wealth is Godly and Biblical
oy vey

[Anonymous No.15042073]

I wouldn’t be comfortable with it past a certain point. I think enjoying wealth and excess are capitalistic ideas and the idea that wealth is always earned an deserved due to hard work is an american idea. since there’s a heavy influence and presence of christianity within US, ideas are often conflated. i feel like it’s significant and worth noting that Jesus was essentially homeless and that the early church operated in something similar to a socialist system. can’t remember the specific verse for this but I’ll find it if you’re interested.

[Anonymous No.15042122]

>>15041862

Matthew 19:24

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.

If we look at the size distribution of camels....only .000000001% of camels can fit through the eye of a needle (only a short time after conception)...therefore it is highly unlikely that a rich person can enter the kingdom of heaven.

although we must acknowledge that through God all things are possible. What is rich? Here we must infer, but I would imagine that Jesus would include most middle class individuals in developed countries since all children are God's children and therefore middle class individuals are actually in the top 20% when compared against the rest of the world.

Also scholars have shown that the idea that Jesus was referring to a gate is actually a medieval anachronism. Therefore, it is probably wise to take Jesus for his word and not resort to extra interpretation.

Lastly, we must remember that through God all thigngs are possible, so yes Jeff Bezos and Donald Trump may be in the Kingdom of Heaven...but true Christians concerend about their fate should probably give away their earthly posessions and follow Christ as suggested in Matthew 19:21

Jesus answered, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

[Anonymous No.15042124]

>>15041862
I've assisted two churches with several of DR's financial peace courses, and I've never heard DR or anyone taking/facilitating the course say anything remotely similar to:

>God has ordained them to have lots of money >building wealth is Godly and Biblical.

What you MAY be getting twisted is this suggestion that DR proposes in his courses: "Imagine what we could do as Christians if WE HAD THE MONEY TO DO IT." What DR means is that if it was Christians--and not corrupt people--who had influence/power (through money), then they could do a lot more charitable works. Honestly, however you feel about Protestantism, a course that teaches people fundamental financial literacy is a positive service.
INB4 some anon say s but I don't agree with what he says about credit cards
His advice is useful for people escaping debt. For people building credit responsibly, which can be a challenging endeavor, having credit cards is obv necessary.

[Anonymous No.15042127]

Yes why wouldn't it be

[Anonymous No.15042141]

>>15042122
>"If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."
my money is given to the poor via taxes and welfare.
I've sold stock(possessions) in the past
still rich

[Anonymous No.15042182]

>>15042124
I do not have links but I heard him say in a video "building wealth is Biblical" and if you look up how he built a big new house, there are people who criticized him for this and his response contained arguments that God wanted him to have a big new house and that he was ordained to have it.

There also was that megachurch pastor who said something about how God wanted him to have a private jet or something like that if I recall correctly.

[Anonymous No.15042196]

>>15042124
>>15042182
Oh and some argue that his advice is not always mathematically accurate and is more about selling his own brand.

His entire career is based on teaching people how to make money and he seems rather obsessed with it, although he does sometimes talk about God and the importance of giving to others, that much is true.

[Anonymous No.15042331]

bump

[Anonymous No.15042336]

>>15042124
His accent is so annoying and gay though.

[Anonymous No.15042531]

>>15042182
I'd be interested to see the video. He may or may not have a verse that served as his evidence for those statments, but without seeing the context, idk.

>There also was that
What I said was I'd never heard of anyone taking/facilitating the course say those things. People have said them, but my expiernce with financial peace has nothing to do with those stories.

>>15042196
>His entire career is based on teaching people how to make
WRONG. His entire career is based on teaching people how to MANAGE their money.

>>15042336
No it's not, but he can be extremely condescending. That's what's annoying.

[Anonymous No.15042587]

>>15042531
If he really wants to help people and educate them then why does he only talk about managing money and never about the people who own the money? I think that he serves them.

[Anonymous No.15042630]

>>15042531
>No it's not
It is. Southern accents are ugly and garbage tier.

[Anonymous No.15042701]

>>15042587
>If he really wants to help people and educate them then he should tell them about jews

FPU's extremely popular among Zio-Christians, so if he talked about the jews, his whole operation would likely crumble. He does good work for people by alerting whites about some of the jews' vampyric tactics.

>>15042630
Whatever yankee

[Anonymous No.15042722]

>>15042701
>He does good work for people by alerting whites about some of the jews' vampyric tactics.
Where does he do that? I am interested to see it.

[Anonymous No.15042880]

>>15042124
But he is fat. Isn't gluttony a sin?

[Anonymous No.15043053]

>>15042722
Indirectly, at least, by way of cautioning people about the predatory nature of lending and credit in the modern world. It's disturbing how many people don't understand the meaning of terms like "principal", "interest", etc., or that by buying on credit a person will end up paying more than if they'd paid up front.

In effect, a large amount of his content boils down to "beware the usurer".

[Anonymous No.15043068]

>>15043053
But he has never named the Jew directly?

[Anonymous No.15043125]

>>15043053
>>15043068
Do you think he is even aware of Jewry at all, or does he just dislike usury in general?

[Anonymous No.15043540]

>>15041862
>>15041920
>>15041968
>>15041999
That's why protestants are so adamant about supporting and backing all pro Israel politicians and legislation. Genesis 12,3. Some protestants want them some blessins .

[Anonymous No.15043576]

>>15043540
Was there ever any widespread pro-Jew movement in Christianity before the 19th century?

[Anonymous No.15043655]

? Pro Israel. Not pro Jew. There are Jews who are not pro Israel. Think the pro Israel thing is after WWII.

[Anonymous No.15043671]

>>15043655
So this interpretation of Genesis 12,3 is a modern interpretation? Or is it simply that Christians in the past were less greedy than they are now?

[Anonymous No.15043740]

I think its mainly USA mega church Christianity. Those who snuggle up to NEO CON politics. Maybe a little bit of the prosperity gospel type churches. Protestantism is a big umbrella with different denominations.

[Anonymous No.15043773]

>>15043740
Are there any traditionalist, conservative (not neocon) branches of Christianity?

[Anonymous No.15043810]

Roman Catholicism

[Anonymous No.15043829]

>>15043810
The Pope does not seem very conservative.

[Anonymous No.15043836]

>>15042141
based letter but not spirit of the law retard

[Anonymous No.15043929]

Hmm? Well I dont that's his role, conservative from a political perspective. Conservative as keeping traditional church teachings then I think he's conservative. He hasn't changed anything that I know of. Some liked Ratzinger because of his past writings, they were interpreted as conservative but as pope again didn't change anything.

[Anonymous No.15043962]

>>15042122
>Matthew 19:24
>Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.
Does anyone have an argument against this? It would seem like the answer to the OP question is no, a Christian cannot be rich.

[Anonymous No.15044140]

>>15043962
bump

[Anonymous No.15044223]

Love God and do whatever you please for the soul trained in the love of God will do nothing to offend the beloved.- St. Augustine.
that's all I got. Rich is relative. The disciples may have been considered rich compared to some of the lepers. Being rich in a refugee camp is not rich in silicon valley.

[Anonymous No.15044236]

>>15044223
But what about the parable of the eye of the needle?

[Anonymous No.15044291]

I wish there were more people here who have read the Bible in more than one language. It's a shame our discussion is so limited.

[Anonymous No.15044320]

>>15041862
Yes, unless he got those from usury.

[Anonymous No.15044402]

No.

[Anonymous No.15044422]

>>15044236
bump

[Anonymous No.15044466]

Can a Christian commit violence in self defense? My dad said no. He said that even if someone came up to you and tried to kill you, if you are a true Christian then you will lay down your life rather than fight him. Is he right, anons?

[Anonymous No.15044478]

>>15044466
Yes. Something like Krishna's argument about how you should not grieve for the dead applies here as well.

[Anonymous No.15044491]

>>15044478
Do you mean yes a Christian can commit violence, or do you mean yes my dad is right?

[Anonymous No.15044512]

That's what Jesus said. The word to be unpacked is RICH. The young man was unwilling to give up his riches. It might have more to do with ones willingness to give up the things of the world in order to enter the kingdom.

[Anonymous No.15044592]

>>15041862
No its a heresy, theres a reason why atheists always choose to argue with the lowest tier scumbag protestants that believe complete nonsense.

[Anonymous No.15044595]

>>15044466
Yes, life is sacred. You don't use more than necessary violence. And don't harbor hate in your heart for the aggressor.

[Anonymous No.15044611]

>>15043773
Orthodox Presbyterian Church (OPC) and Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) are the ones I'm aware of, they are a bit smaller compared to the more mainline liberal denominations.

[Anonymous No.15044633]

Are Zionist Christians correct in their interpretation that God will bless them for supporting Israel and curse those who curse Israel? Is there a different interpretation? Because Zionism doesn't seem to have been so prevalent before WW2, so what did Christians before believe this verse meant?

[Anonymous No.15044643]

>>15044611
Did they break away from the mainline Presbyterian church?

[Anonymous No.15044661]

>>15044595
What about Jesus physically forcing the money changers out of the temple?

[Anonymous No.15044671]

>>15044611
>>15044643
All the Presbyterians that I know are massive putrid normalfaggots, but to be fair I only really know two of them desu

[Anonymous No.15044685]

>>15044611
What about Lutheranism and Eastern Orthodoxy?

[Anonymous No.15044773]

>>15044633
bump

[Anonymous No.15044774]

>>15044491
Your dad is right. While Krishna used the argument to exhort Arjuna to fight, it is trivial to turn it on its ear and use it to not fear one's own death. I wouldn't kill unless I literally had God embodied in front of me telling me to, as Arjuna did.

[Anonymous No.15044782]

>>15044774
What about fighting but not killing?

[Anonymous No.15044784]

>>15044661
Same rule as Raskolnikov applies: if you were meant for such deeds, you would not be dithering here over them. You would just act.

[Anonymous No.15044786]

>>15044633
Galatians 3,8 doesn't sound like it.

[Anonymous No.15044801]

>>15044782
You don't have the nature of a fighter. Fighters don't question when or why to fight, they just do it when their nature spurs them to act.

So no, don't fight.

[Anonymous No.15044867]

>>15044661
The money changers and doves and sheep meant for sacrificial offering. This happened before the passion. Jesus was the sacrifice no longer were the doves and sheep needed. Could've symbolic and practical a house of worship is not for commerce.

[Anonymous No.15044889]

Everyone should strive to become Rich As In Spirit

[Anonymous No.15044911]

>>15043962
Yes... he said it is EASIER not impossible. Not everyone rich person is a bad person, but it is way easier to be a greedy asshole if you are rich than if you are poor. Many rich people do good things with their money for example, but do most?

[Anonymous No.15045005]

>>15044911
Do ANY camels go through the eye of a needle?

[Anonymous No.15045019]

read Thomas Dubay's Happy Are You Poor

[Anonymous No.15045106]

Nothing is impossible with God. Camel and the needle might not be the point. Can one separate from the things of the world or not.

[Anonymous No.15045437]

>>15045106
Exactly. Though it does strike me as difficult to become rich while detached. Where would the drive to become rich even come from for one indifferent to worldly matters?

[Anonymous No.15045465]

>>15041862
>Is it acceptable for a Christian to be very rich and have a big mansion and fancy cars and live a lavish lifestyle and things like that?
It is not acceptable for any human to live like that regardless of religion.

[Anonymous No.15045485]

>>15045437
What if one is born to rich parents?

[Anonymous No.15045695]

>>15045485
That does make it easier I guess, so long as one is not attached to a wealthy lifestyle.

[Anonymous No.15045706]

>>15044633
bump

[Anonymous No.15045728]

>>15041862
Discord gg/Ye72mjy

[Anonymous No.15045734]

No, every religion does this though. God chastises them for usury several times Himself in the Old Testament and one of the commandments (Exodus 23) is that you receive no gift. One of the commandments for a king is that he not multiply gold to himself (Deuteronomy 17). Jesus was always poor because that is how God expects you to be as long as one other person who deserves your money is poor. If they were sharing equally they would be allowed better things, the New Testament goes into how the apostles and the early church considered all the goods for every member.

Asking for donations specifically is also warned against, you are supposed to tithe ten percent of all you have but unless you're a miner or some shit you wouldn't have a need to donate gold. Money itself is actually supposed to change value according to the jubilee to avoid inflation, the only time money was required of a person was when they made a vow or offering or were counted for the state. One of the few times David transgresses is when he numbers the state without direction from God, this would have put an unfair burden on the poor and when it was revealed Judah excelled it divided his people.

No, it is not right for a person to use the teachings of the Bible for profit and if you read it you will know this. Jesus said several times one of the problems with the Temple was their love of money, they devour widow's houses for example. He also noted how much profanity they cause in the people with their practices by the proverbs of the time (He that swears by the gift on the altar is guilty).

[Anonymous No.15045751]

>>15045734
So this Dave Ramsey guy is a false prophet?

[Anonymous No.15045773]

>>15045751
I don't think he ever claimed to be a prophet, but he is a good-for-nothing demon

[Anonymous No.15045783]

>>15045773
>demon
You think he is not human? Or can a human be a demon?

[Anonymous No.15045795]

>>15045783
Demons and humans are all spirits, humans just have flesh. When his flesh is gone he will see his Hell for what it is

[Anonymous No.15045820]

Is Christianity anti-fun? Can a Christian ever just have fun and enjoy himself and relax?

[Anonymous No.15045847]

>>15045820
Oh and I don't mean being a degenerate scumbag. I simply mean to stop being so serious and solemn all the time and to enjoy oneself.

[Anonymous No.15045855]

>>15045820
Yeah, when he's balls deep in a virgin.

I think Leviticus 21 says they have to marry virgins

[Anonymous No.15045891]

>>15045847
New Testament also says to never drink water but always wine

Also enjoying yourself is easy when you have good food and someone to love

[Anonymous No.15045899]

>>15044911
the point is that its impossible for a camel to go through the eye of a needle

[Anonymous No.15045905]

>>15045899
"It would be better if a millstone were hung about his neck and he were drowned at sea" was another reference to opulence and ignorance

[Anonymous No.15045921]

DR bases his entire money management philosophy on charity and giving back. From the website “... truth is that giving should always be a priority, no matter what”

https://www.daveramsey.com/blog/give-a-little-until-you-can-give-a-lot

[Anonymous No.15045928]

>>15045820
Christianity is only anti fun if you’re a degenerate.

[Anonymous No.15046000]

>>15045928
Can a Christian enjoy classical music, hiking, and video games?

[Anonymous No.15046011]

>>15046000
Vidja wouldn't be allowed in holy places just like pork since it is an image, but yes. In Deuteronomy IIRC you are allowed to eat non-kosher foods in "gates" as in other, non-holy towns. Since vidja aren't used for idolatry but are just offensive such as a rock that has been struck with a tool (noted in altar-building) it would be allowed in some areas.

[Anonymous No.15046025]

>>15046000
Of course.

>>15046011
What the fuck are you talking about? Christians aren’t bound by kosher dietary laws of the OT.

[Anonymous No.15046033]

>>15046025
Yes they are

"I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it"

"This ye should have done, and not to leave the other undone"

[Anonymous No.15046071]

>>15046033
but Paul...

[Anonymous No.15046084]

>>15046033

No we do not. Which denomination are you?

https://carm.org/do-Christians-have-to-obey-the-old-testament-law

Romans 14:

13 Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way. 14 As one who is in the Lord Jesus, I am fully convinced that no food is unclean in itself. But if anyone regards something as unclean, then for him it is unclean. 15 If your brother is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy your brother for whom Christ died. 16 Do not allow what you consider good to be spoken of as evil. 17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and approved by men. 19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification. 20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All food is clean, but it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble. 21 It is better not to eat meat or drink wine or to do anything else that will cause your brother to fall.

Mark 7:
14 Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, “Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. 15 Nothing outside a man can make him ‘unclean’ by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him ‘unclean.’ “

[Anonymous No.15046359]

>>15044643
Yes it's actually a pretty interesting bit of history, John Gresham Machen was one of the founders and wrote a very interesting book called Christianity and Liberalism about the split. Highly recommend it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gresham_Machen

https://archive.org/details/christianitylibe00mach_0/mode/2up

[Anonymous No.15046692]

>>15041968
>God does not condemn anyone for having riches
>“But woe to you that are rich, for you have received your consolation.
>“Woe to you that are full now, for you shall hunger.

[Anonymous No.15046702]

>>15041862
IT IS EASIER FOR A CAMEL TO PASS THROUGH THE EYE OF A NEEDLE THAN FOR A RICH MAN TO ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

[Anonymous No.15046715]

>>15041862
People are reading The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism by Weber.

Since this board is full of LARPers who don't read, the gist is early protestants didn't spend money on conspicuous consumption which they saw as sinful, they invested it in their families and communities.

[Anonymous No.15046718]

>>15046071
Paul never said not to follow the Law, he said not to force others to

>>15046084
I have no denomination, I am the son of man

[Anonymous No.15046722]

>>15044466
Yeah man, God just told the Israelites to spread their cheeks for the Egyptians and Philistines

[Anonymous No.15046736]

>>15046722
Not only this but when Jesus said to give him the other cheek he meant you should provoke the guy again, not let him smack you when you're in your right

[Anonymous No.15046750]

>>15041862
From r/AcademicBiblical:

Long answer: Jesus' message (as recorded by the synoptics) was an anti-socioeconomic message that sought to overturn––less emphatic, challenge––the socioeconomic value system of his day, and part and parcel to that was certainly a repeated message against those who valued wealth, money, possessions, high-standing in the socio-economic value system of his day; salvation hinged on giving these up. Since I am currently working on a project related to this, I will provide an answer at length which will also feel more like an argument, since indeed I have made a claim herein.

“Follow Me!” (Matt 4:19, 22; 9:9; Mk 1:17-20, 2:14, 10:28; Lk 9:59-62). At heart these words express an imminent socioeconomic imperative: immediately stop what you’re doing, leave your job, your livelihood, and even your family, and “follow me!” And indeed, this is what the disciples are depicted doing in every account––immediately leaving behind jobs, social status, family, and even social and familial obligations.

Luke is more emphatic in representing this complete abandonment through his additions of the word panta (“all,” “everything”) to the tradition. Here are some examples:

They immediately abandoned their nets and followed him (Mk 1:18; Matt 4:20). He rose up and followed him (Mk 2:14; Matt 9:9).

They abandoned everything and followed him (Lk 5:11). He forsook everything, rose up, and followed him (Lk 5:28).

Several of these “Follow me!” imperatives anticipate objections, that is requests to delay following Jesus in order to fulfill prior or immediate social and/or familial obligations, by relaying the point that this too is not permissible (Matt 8:22; Lk 9:59-62). The message is clear: Following Jesus means to immediately “forsake all” and “leave everything behind.”

This same message is reinforced later in the gospels when Peter says: “See. We have left all (panta) and followed you” (Matt 19:27). This comes right after the OP’s verse and I will look at that context below in detail. Luke reproduces this in 14:26-33 more emphatically: “unless you have forsaken all––father, mother, brother, home, life (a socioeconomic lifestyle and security is to be understood)––you cannot be my disciple.” And in 18:29 it is claimed that those who have forsaken these (i.e., have forsaken earthly treasure) will have their reward in the kingdom of God (also Matt 19:28).

[Anonymous No.15046756]

>>15046750
>From r/
Stopped reading, go back

[Anonymous No.15046761]

>>15046750
>>15046756
2) “Do not store up treasures for yourself on earth.” (Mat 6:19; Lk 12:33-34). In the original Greek, the verb and the direct object of the sentence are the same word. Me thesaurizete humin thesauros epi tes ges. So a literal reading of the saying runs: “Do not store-up stores [of goods or of money] for yourself on earth.” Or more colloquially: Do not save anything on earth!

Unlike Matthew where this saying is a self-contained unit (Matt 6:19-21), Luke creates a parable around which his readers are to understand this saying, which serves as a double conclusion (vv. 21 & 33). There are several salient points to note.

Luke 12:15b-34 can be divided into two sections: the parable of the rich man which exemplifies what happens when one stores-up goods & money on earth, concluded in the first occurrence of the saying (v. 21), and the opposite message—Jesus’ imperative to not only NOT store up goods/money but don’t even seek out food, shelter, or clothing! This section also ends with the second occurrence of the saying (v. 33).

“For one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses” (Lk 12:15). The key word in this axiom that sets the stage for the parable of the rich man is “life.” The rich man in the parable, he who has stored up wealth and possessions, feels that his life/soul is secure and at ease. And indeed, saved up money and material possessions do provide security in a life defined by socioeconomic terms, as we are all well aware of. But this is precisely what Jesus is challenging and overturning. Luke 12:15-34 is a direct challenge to this assessment of life. “Do not worry about your life . . . nor your body.”

Contrary to the rich man whose life is secure in the abundance of his material possessions, including food and clothing, Jesus claims otherwise. Life and the security of one’s life (i.e., one’s soul (v. 19)) are no longer to be understood in socioeconomic/monetary terms, but are now to be defined vis-à-vis the kingdom of God. The passage challenges and overturns how one’s life is assessed vis-à-vis the socioeconomic trappings of the world––bank accounts and possessions. The parable concludes by arguing that on the contrary such an individual has not procured for himself any security vis-à-vis his life/soul.

We should also hear the overtones of Luke’s Jesus who exclaims that anyone who has not forsaken “his own life” will not enter the kingdom (14:27), and “one must deny his life and pick up the cross” (Mk 8:34, etc.) and “one will find Life by losing his life.”

[Anonymous No.15046777]

>>15046761
4) “You cannot serve God and money/wealth [mamona]” (Matt 6:21; Lk 16:13). This saying, found in both Matthew and Luke, means exactly what it says, and is yet another requirement for following Jesus that demands one to denounce and abandon a life built and valued on socioeconomic terms.

Matthew embeds this saying in between the imperative not to store up money & possessions (Matt 6:19-21) and the pericope on trusting God and not earthly concerns (Matt 6:25-34). Compare the commentary on Luke 12:15-32 above.

The verb “to serve” here is the typical Greek verb expressing servitude/enslavement: doulein. As such it expresses complete submission and enslavement to, and, implicitly, the notion of loyalty and vassal-ship. Like our previous textual examples, this saying also advocates that the follower abandons any fidelity to money, wealth, or possessions––all understood in the word mamona. It emphatically says, one cannot serve both God and money; rather, one must choose. This expresses the stark opposition between earthly wealth and heavenly ‘wealth’ that Jesus’ sayings have been expressing all along. I would even stress that if our goal was to analyze this message from a modern perspective: if you’ve been born into our global socioeconomic way of life where we inherently measure and understand our life, future plans, stability, success, social status, etc. in terms of money, wealth, or possessions then that choose has already been made for us! We have chosen mamona! We inherently define success, progress, and advancement, and social hierarchies––for us and our children––in monetary and socioeconomic terms.

Money is the King of any socioeconomic system and how it defines value––the more you have the more value you have! Thus, the goal in any socioeconomic system is increased wealth, increased material possessions, increased financial independence and security. But these socioeconomic markers and the value system it inherently endorses, I would argue, are exactly what Jesus questions. Following Jesus means abandoning this value system. Or, it is to abandon how value is defined in this socioeconomic worldview!

Finally, Luke’s Lazarus story (16:19-31) can be used as a nice conclusion: the rich man cannot enter the kingdom because he had enjoyed his treasures on earth (Lk 16:25), illustrating just how hard it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. And interesting here, there is no mercy, no pleading after the lesson is learned in death.

There are many other sayings and of course many parables that would buttress the conclusion drawn here, but I’ve said too much already… Most of my current work has to do with how the synoptics define "follow me" and abandoning monetary anchors and a value-system seem to be key. Anyway, there's enough food for thought here.

[Anonymous No.15047075]

>>15046000
ye

[Anonymous No.15047096]

>>15041862
It's only acceptable if they would be willing to give up their wealth. Otherwise, they're just the young rich man from Matthew 19.

Realistically, not many would actually do it. So probably not. Wealth is a poison.

[Anonymous No.15047848]

>>15045437
If you had a well paying job and were a good steward of your compensation which includes being charitable it wouldn't be difficult to become what others would consider rich. Without making the act of becoming rich your goal. Your net worth I guess would determine rich and that number value is relative to where you live.

[Anonymous No.15049198]

Luke 18:18-30
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

20 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.

22 Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.

24 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle's eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

26 And they that heard it said, Who then can be saved?

27 And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.

28 Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee.

29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,

30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.

[Anonymous No.15049243]

How do all of you have a computer if you're supposed to sell all you own and give it to the poor? Or is it ok to have a little bit of wealth but only to a certain limit?

[Anonymous No.15049435]

>>15049243
And if so then what is the limit?

[Anonymous No.15050481]

bump

[Anonymous No.15051325]

Wealth, poor, rich its all relative. No set limit.

[Anonymous No.15052225]

>>15047096
hmm

[Anonymous No.15052302]

>protestant
>Christian
Pick one

[Anonymous No.15052897]

>>15052302
You disgust me

[Anonymous No.15053835]

>>15049243
bump

[Anonymous No.15054019]

>>15046750
>>15046761
>>15046777
bump

[Anonymous No.15054645]

>>15041862
Dangerously close to a /pol/ thread, but obviously it's because most American "Judeo-Christianity" is a thinly veiled Zionist brainwashing scheme using trivial self-help memes to preach the prosperity gospel, in order to create a religion out of neoliberal consumerism. In other words, it's nonsense & should be disregarded.

[Anonymous No.15056096]

>>15054645
What do these people get from being cucks for the money changers? I do not get it.

[Anonymous No.15056503]

>>15056096
bump

[Anonymous No.15056578]

>>15056096

Do you mean the preachers themselves? They get to egotistically bloviate in front of huge crowds for massive amounts of money. What is there to "not get"?

[Anonymous No.15056633]

>>15056578
But what do the regular people who just believe him get from it?

[Anonymous No.15057830]

>>15056633
bump

[Anonymous No.15058716]

>>15044685
Lutheranism is beyond fucked, I don't know about Orthodox though

[Anonymous No.15058813]

>>15058716
>Lutheranism is beyond fucked
What happened?