The Simple Pastor
By Phil Whittall, church planter, blogger & book reviewer
RT @lukedvd: Hope his resignation from the England manager job will allow @JoelVirgo to focus on his church duties #nomorehairdye 15 hrs ago
In his original invitation (no longer on the site), organiser James Macdonald said,
“I am also excited to hear him state his views on money, which may be closer to Scripture than the monasticism currently touring the Reformed world.”
In the first Elephant Room, Macdonald went toe to toe with David Platt on the issue of money. For what it’s worth I thought they were both wrong. What’s interesting here is that Platt (not involved in the second one) is known for challenging the American church on their wealth. TD Jakes on the other hand is a millionaire and an extremely wealthy man. He teaches prosperity.
That strikes me as interesting. Macdonald disagrees with Platt and then invites TD Jakes whose views on money he thinks is closer to Scripture. Which really is sad. So it was interesting to think through some of the issues raised yesterday talking about the pay of megachurch pastors (some more thoughts to come on that by the way). TD Jakes would have raised that average quite considerably all on his own.
Money is a big deal, a really big deal. Love it too much and you can’t serve God. Put too much trust in it and it will reward you but God won’t. What we do with money, what we think about money, what we say and teach about money matters. It matters a lot. So let me be clear, on the issue of money TD Jakes is wrong and unbiblical and if James Macdonald thinks his views are closer to scripture then he’s wrong too. End of story, although not of debate. Thoughts?
The financial crisis affects everybody but not everybody equally. Working in the charity sector (and more specifically, the church) insulated us from much of it and our church was fortunate in that very few were hit by redundancies. Now that we’re in a blissful mortgage free state (and house free state) in another country I thought I’d reflect a little on this ongoing mess we call the global economy.
On a personal level I think it would be fair to say that we were net beneficiaries of the parlous state of our nation’s finances. With low personal debt, living within our means we gained as interest rates fell. We had a tracker mortgage (2% above the base rate) and we’d set it up so we could overpay without penalty. A further blessing was that we were committed to sharing our home with someone who became a great friend and her contributions to the house went to overpaying on the mortgage.
In May 2008 the interest rate on our mortgage was 5.89%; less than a year later it was 2.5% and we were £150 a month better off. From May 2008 to October 2011 the financial crisis saved us just over £6000. Thanks very much.
Now if we were good consumers we would have spent that money and sunk it back into the economy. Instead we chose to be good citizens and help our bank recapitalize by using that money to pay down our capital. Our aim was always to reduce the mortgage as quickly as possible to free us to give more or serve the church more easily because our living costs had been brought down as low as we could manage. Simple living in order to be missional. It also, of course, gave us that bit of freedom to absorb the additional costs of a second child and to give more.
A financial crisis of this scale is not exactly something to be thankful for, but because we eschewed the notion of personal debt, because we believed in simplicity of lifestyle, reducing debt to maximise giving and because we believed in sharing our home we were not only protected from the shock but were also in a position to benefit.
The second reason is that despite the issues in the housing market from 2008-2011, the house we owned increased in value by nearly 40% in less than 9 years. So we gained again by being able to reduce our mortgage faster and through an overall increase in our assets. This is all very nice for us.
But here’s the kingdom angle. Now I can afford to house my family in Stockholm, the capital city of one of the most expensive countries in the world. Simply put, being a good steward of money meant that even during a financial crisis we could still be mobile and go when God called us to. I realise that not everyone will be so fortunate but the principle, I think, is sound: Good stewardship can be a servant to mission now as well as in the future.
Income seemed to influence the survey. 46 percent of people with incomes of $100,000 a year or more believe that capitalism is consistent with Christianity, while only 23 percent of those with incomes of $30,000 or less said so.
No kidding.
On the other side of the coin Dan Partridge admits,
“There are elements of Communism that resonate in my heart and mind. I like the emphases on social justice, one people working towards a common goal, and, to an extent, the idea that we share an inherent value and dignity which is expressed in different abilities and vocations.”
But there’s a problem,
“Communism throws everybody into the mixing bowl and imparts an ideology of same-ness, but it’s a same-ness which is average, mediocre. Christianity is so much better.”
So for a different perspective turn to a different source. How about Randy Alcorn and his new book Managing God’s Money. In this review the book is described like this:
This is no-holds-barred stuff; he teaches that most of us have neglected our responsibility to give deeply, consistently and generously. He rebukes the materialism that inhabits the church to almost the same extent that it inhabits the world. He calls for a radical rethinking of the way most of us relate to our money.
A timely word then to a world that needs to rediscover fresh, generous and liberating ways of living with money. And Tim Challies offers some more thoughts on how to resist the consumer mindset that is so prevalent in capitalist societies.
So in this recent Elephant Room discussion MacDonald and Platt argue about the nature of radical sacrifice. I’m basing all this off some notes made (with appropriate caution added)and the helpful reflection by Trevin Wax. So there’s a chance that a third person could be wrong about all this and that would be me.
CS Lewis says,
“I do not believe one can settle how much we ought to give. I am afraid the only safe rule is to give more than we can spare. In other words, if our expenditure on comforts, luxuries, amusement, etc., is up to the standard common among those with the same income as our own, we are probably giving away too little. If our giving does not at all pinch or hamper us, I should say it is too small. There ought to be things we should like to do and cannot because our commitment to giving excludes them.” [Mere Christianity; see here].
Tom Schreiner says,
“Those who are blessed with wealth are to enjoy the good things God has given them, but they are also to be generous to those in need (1 Tim. 6:17–19). The New Testament clearly teaches that wealth is dangerous because it can seduce us so that we stray from the Lord. God is to be our treasure, and hence believers are to give generously and freely. For most believers in the West, that means giving more than a tithe.”
So let me ask you this, when was the last time you planned to increase your regular giving?
“In June, Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffett started the Giving Pledge: an initiative aimed at getting billionaires to pledge at least half of their net worth to charitable donations. So far, 40 individuals have signed up. The roster includes household names like George Lucas, David Rockefeller, Ted Turner and, not least, founders Gates and Buffett, who have pledged significantly more than half of their net worth. While some have already argued that part of the estimated $600 billion that this initiative could raise would have been donated anyway, the impact of the Giving Pledge remains astounding. We break down the numbers in this infographic.”
See it here
“The more sacrificially generous you are on earth, the greater will be your enjoyment of heaven. Therefore, since Jesus loves us and summons us to maximize our eternal joy in heaven, he demands radical freedom from the love of money and radical generosity, especially toward the poor . . . The reason money is so crucial for Jesus is that across all cultures and all ages it represents the alternative to God as the treasure of our hearts, and therefore the object of our worship. . .There are two things being said here. One is that a selfish spirit will keep us out of heaven. And the other is that there are degrees of reward, or degrees of joy, in heaven, depending on how sacrificially generous we were on earth.”
HT: Adrian Warnock
Jeremy wonders whether we can carry on consuming while Colin Beavan argues that Treating anxiety and depression could save the planet while Matt Hosier points out some of consumerism’s more silly statements when buying a shirt. Gareth reminds us that TV is not all it’s cracked up to be.
Here are 10 theses on social action and the kingdom of God while Kevin DeYoung begins a new series on social justice and the poor. While on the other side of the coin Warren Buffett wonders about the US financial recovery.
Come on, somebody find me a capitalist somewhere to justify this. They might be right, but I want to hear a justification because I just can’t for the life of me imagine what it might be that doesn’t boil down to greed.
(HT: Challies)
If you know of anyone who has preached a cracking sermon on money, generosity, consumerism and the like I’d be grateful if you could let me know.
This is great (HT: Tim Chester)
Thanks to Mint we now know ho big a number this is and how much trouble the world’s economy is in.
For example there are plenty of things that we could reasonably argue are morally neutral and all depend on how we use them. So we’d argue that the thing itself isn’t bad it’s just what we do with it that makes it good or bad. Food isn’t bad but eating too much of it maybe, having a computer isn’t bad but downloading porn, hacking and illegal downloading is.
But does everything fall into that category? How about nuclear weapons? Designed with one purpose in mind, to kill tens of thousands of people in an instant. It only ever has one purpose. Death. Is that morally neutral? Does its use ever depend on the heart attitude of the one using it?
Most of us don’t own nuclear weapons so closer to the issue of money might be something a bit more ambiguous like TV. The physical set itself is morally neutral but it only ever truly becomes a TV when it’s switched on. What do I mean by that? Well no one buys a TV to leave the screen off, it’s purpose is to be switched on and watched and then it isn’t morally neutral at all. In fact as a transmitter of programs it is constantly relaying moral values and from a Christian perspective they’re rarely Christ honouring. That doesn’t mean I shouldn’t watch TV but neither should I think it’s harmless and passively accept everything that is sent my way.
If you think money is just metal and paper then you’ve made the same mistake. That’s NOT what money is at all, that’s just the physical form of money. Money is so much more than a medium of exchange. It’s so much more to us than the weekly shop at Tesco. Money is life, power, influence, happiness, pleasure, security. Of course it is humans that have invested those things into coins and paper but that’s what money is to us.
An analogy for church goers might be the sacraments of baptism and communion. It’s just bread and wine but it’s also so much MORE than bread and wine. It’s just getting wet as a believer but its so much MORE than that. Money isn’t simply metal and paper. It’s much, much more and as a result it money requires a health warning. In the next post we’ll look at the health warnings given by the Son of God.
It’s a view that I’ve often heard but and it may be right but in my soul I’m not convinced. I left a comment for Sean asking,
“Hi Sean, enjoying your thoughts on Ecclesiastes. Just wondered how if money is morally neutral you’d understand Jesus words in Mt 13:22 where he calls money/riches deceitful? I guess I would say money is like us, it can be redeemed and used for kingdom purposes but unredeemed well, we just have to look at our MPs!”
What do you think? Is it simply a case of money being a mirror that simply reflects the use we put it to?
Matt Perman was the second half of the audio and he blogs here. I’m not sure quite what made me uneasy but it really did. A few things bugged me. His justification for having 4 laptops was in case he went away on a trip and left one at home, was just lame for someone who blogs on efficiency. Just don’t forget your laptop Matt, it’s not difficult.
At one point he said having ‘too much’ wasn’t wrong and we shouldn’t feel guilty about it. I’m not so sure about that because the point of ‘too much’ is that it’s ‘too much’. If I eat too much it’s gluttony. If I sleep too much its laziness. If I work too much its unhealthy. If I want too much its greedy. The whole point Matt is that it’s too much. It’s too much for us, it’s not good for us because it’s too much. If God has given us an abundance then that means we have enough, we can enjoy our enough, we can enjoy our plenty AND we get to give.
It was OK when he talked about money and possessions being a relative good but when we make it an absolute it fails us. By that he means when we make something more important than the kingdom of God.
Even so I was left with the distinct impression that he gave comfort to the rich and comfortable, that he began by justifying wealth and then in talking about the texts that challenge our wealth was just a bit average, saying nothing new and let the listener off the hook in the way he accused others of doing.
I’ve listened to Tim Keller on money and it’s been excellent, so I had high hopes for TGC on this subject and this seminar but it was a disappointment.
“Evangelical Christians tend to be the most generous (giving the lie to the misconception that liberal Christians are more liberal in their concern for the less fortunate), but even their giving is nothing to brag about.”
and
“Americans earning less than $10,000 gave 2.3 percent of their income to churches. Those who earn $70,000 or more gave only 1.2 percent.”
and
“Poor leadership by the pastor always results in poor congregational giving. Faithful giving begins with every pastor…saying, ‘I have discovered the joy of cheerful tithing, and you can to’.”
Read the whole thing
Time magazine thinks our lifestyle is changing as a result of this financial crisis (HT: Josh Harris). I’m not yet convinced. What do you think? Are we changing how we live?
Although this on guns in the same article is just frightening. Can anyone tell me why Americans think they need to own M-15s? Seriously. If you’re an American I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Christ the Saviour deals with my guilt and shame. I feel better. I feel loved.
Christ the Saviour assures me of forgiveness and a new start. I feel better. I feel good.
Christ the Lord calls me to deny myself. I feel resentful and unwilling.
Christ the Lord calls me to hate my own life. I feel this is unlikely.
Christ the Lord calls me to pick up my cross and follow. I feel if he loves me then he wouldn’t ask too much of me.
I’ve been wondering for a while, that I need to ensure when I preach and call people to respond to Christ that I’ve proclaimed Christ not simply as Saviour but also as Lord, that the cost has been announced as well as the reward. But this submission to Christ as Lord is not just something for altar calls, but something for the people of God. We need to be converted to His way every day. That’s the mark of a disciple. “Today God, convert me again. I submit.”
Evangelicals are very familiar with the idea that becoming a Christian involves moral change. If we’re promiscuous we should rediscover chastity, if we’re lying we need to speak the truth, if we swear we must rediscover pure speech. But the whole point of Lordship means influence over all spheres of life – the way I spend must be just as converted to Christ as the way I speak and the way I deal with sex.
Yet I believe that by and large evangelicals have failed to yield to Him in the area of money and that goes for people who tithe too. We can give God our 10% and pay our religious dues and feel that in the area of money we have done our part. Money is a powerful thing and even a little can grip us. Generosity is not often achieved by a static percentage. Grace filled living and giving, joyous freedom from the ‘deceitfulness of wealth’ is not often achieved by the mere keeping of a rule.
Having said that for many of us the regular discipline of regular tithing would be an excellent place to start, but it’s just a shame that so many of us stop there instead of pressing on to excel in this gift of generosity.
More than ever today the world needs to see that the church, the people of God are not held in the sway of money that it is Jesus not Mammon that is Lord over the church. The god Mammon may have taken a few blows right now, but none of the solutions being offered by the governments of this world suggest that Mammon is about to be dethroned. Now is the time for the church to rediscover a deeper conversion, a deeper following that frees us and others to discover ‘the life that is truly life’.
My hope is that you, the reader, will sponsor me for this attempt. The two options are:
1. Breadtrust do great work feeding the hungry and caring for the needy in Ukraine. http://www.mycharitypage.c
2. I used to work for Tearfund and love what they do around the world, fighting poverty
http://www.justgiving.com/
Both organisations really serve the poor and needy well, so your money will be used not as motivation for me but genuinely help people in need. Please give generously.
You can follow my training at this blog here or/and join the Facebook group
“Ultimately, there is no way to share: either our confidence is in God or it is in our savings account. To claim that we can thus insure ourselves and still put our trust in God is to add hypocrisy to mistrust.”
– J Ellul, Money and Power, Marshall Pickering, 1986
I wish more church leaders would just stand up and say, this is not right. It’s wrong.
I believe Jesus when he said 'life does not consist in the abundance of our possessions'. I believe he offers something better. This blog is mostly about that search.
I'm also a husband, a father, church planter, keen runner, reader, and motorcyclist. These and a few other things make guest appearances from time to time.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
LinkedIn
Picasa
