how should modern american christians live?

[Guest]

this is a transfer of a discussion from the "announcements" forum entitled "help stop this". it started as a discussion of animal rights and transmuted into a discussion about how christians should spend their money etc. you can revw previous postings under the other heading but the new discussion better belongs here.. here was my last post and question for discussion:

Sean said: "Interesting point. So should we place our money in medicines so we privileged Americans with the best of the best can live longer in our air conditioning and internet to debate theology or should we feed the poor? Which one is more God honoring? Which did Jesus command? To give to others or give to ourselves? I'm not talking about taking an aspirin, I'm talking about the entire enterprise of health care. As long as we keep feeding it our money it will never stop growing. If we want treasures in heaven, then yes, the poor should get fed even more, but we will have to be willing to sacrifice our first world quality of life. Not many are willing though."
--------------------

Hi sean-- you have made some comments that surely give us some things to contemplate. what i would like you to do, if you can, is tell us what you think a biblical christian should "look like" living in america. i ask you this because i struggle with this- in fact my wife and i discussed this very thing with friends last night. you seem to suggest that a true disciple of christ who makes a decent living (compared to the 3rd world inhabitants) should not necessarily give up their job, but rather give up their money, essentially reducing christians to "3rd world" type families. in other words, let's say a christian has a good job making $70,000 a year. do you think he should live on 15k a year (even if it means living in a one room house) and give the rest away? obviously 99% of the christians in america would be appalled by such an idea (which doesnt mean the idea is wrong by any stretch). i dont mean to put words in your mouth, i would just like your thoughts on this. anybody else can chime in as well.

thx, TK

[Guest]

I think the amount you live on is between yourself and God. No one can dictate what the "right" amount is. But I do think we need to be mindful of where our "extra" money goes. In the majority of the world, there is little excess so having extra isn't as much of a conundrum. So it's not an easy matter to settle.

Whenever I want to buy stuff I don't really need, I try to sell stuff on ebay to raise money, so I'm not taking it out of our "regular family funds". But then once I have extra money, I wonder if I should just give it away instead of buying what I want. I don't like having money. I'm blessed to make just enough to pay for the house, single car and monthly bills I have. (While I have credit cards, they are paid off at the end of the month and are usually used for gas and such, since I don't carry cash) I don't have much extra at the end of the month if any, and know that if I made more, I would only want more.

So you see, I'm probably the wrong person to ask this question.

Just be mindful of what you spend your money on and what standard of living do you really need? You don't need to live in a one bedroom house, but it certainly is an option. How much "heaven" do we need on earth right now anyway.

[Guest]

I would say it comes down to your faith and stewardship of resources given to you by the Lord.

Jim

[Guest]

Much could be said about this. I once considered the idea of living a minimalist lifestyle; one room cabin, a few flannel shirts and jeans to wear, etc. One thing I would have would be my books. Then I thought how it would be with the other Christians around me. What about them, in particular my attitude toward their lack of a similar lifesstyle? I recognized that I would have a new problem: pride!

As Sean pointed out ther is no easy answer. How much would be an acceptable amount of possessions? Would three flannel shirts be OK or just two? And what about a cabin? After all, you can live in a tent.

I believe it is more a attitude toward possessions and toward our neighbor than anything.

[Guest]

i agree, homer, but let's face it.. we could probably all do more to "seek out" the poor than we do. in other words, people in desparate need do no come across my path every day. i could seek them out, however. should we?

TK

[Guest]

Much could be said about this. I once considered the idea of living a minimalist lifestyle; one room cabin, a few flannel shirts and jeans to wear, etc. One thing I would have would be my books. Then I thought how it would be with the other Christians around me. What about them, in particular my attitude toward their lack of a similar lifesstyle? I recognized that I would have a new problem: pride!

As Sean pointed out ther is no easy answer. How much would be an acceptable amount of possessions? Would three flannel shirts be OK or just two? And what about a cabin? After all, you can live in a tent.

I believe it is more a attitude toward possessions and toward our neighbor than anything.

Homer,
I agree with you. Not only could you fall into pride but also as you said one shirt or two smacks of the stink of legalisim.

Jim

[Guest]

Just as a point of clarification, not of contention, are you folks participating in this discussion assuming that there is a fixed pie of money or a bottomless ice cream bowl of money available for spending? I'm talking more here about economics in general than you personally since some of you have already indicated that your bowl is not bottomless.

A second question: Health care was specifically mentioned in regards to spending. What services or goods in the healthcare arena would or would not qualify as those a disciple would commit God's money to?

respectfully,

livingink

[Guest]

Hi livingink-- unfortunately you must have missed the prior discussion under the Announcements section that has now been "pruned." that discussion was moved here because it got off topic. the reason healthcare was mentioned is that the original discussion dealt with animal rights- specifically the use of animals for testing medicines.

sean, and others, were of the opinion that they would not avail themselves or their family of medicines that were tested on animals.

sean can explain himself better than I, obviously, but he felt, summarizing greatly, that if we are sick we should rely on God to heal us, and that we as Christians have placed too much stock in drugs and medicine for our healing. he went on to state that the money we spend on health insurance benefits (through work, e.g) might be better spent on more worthwhile causes, like feeding the poor, and simply trust God, and not Drs, to heal us.

this led to a discussion of what an average middle class Christian should "look like" in america if we follow the standards Jesus laid down. should we subject ourselves and our families to poverty (due to giving away most of our income) or is it ok to live in the suburbs with our kids in decent schools and possibly two cars in the driveway?

this subject warrants much discussion. part of the problem is that we have so much more than the average person in Jesus's time. thus we have more to lose. this sounds bad but it is the truth. i think it is very difficult to compare our times to bible times. as a necessity of living in america, we have many bills (not to mention taxes) , all of which were not around back then. we also have a lot more income, but not necessarily a lot more "disposable" income, although i may not be 100% correct about this. i am no expert in 1st century economics.

TK

[Guest]

I caught only pieces of that discussion. I saw Sean's comment that we would have to give up our lifestyle in order to feed the poor. Sounds like an economic fixed pie theory. Economists such as Milton Friedman would probably argue against this idea. Since God owns everything and since we're stewards of the things he entrusts to us, the increases in wealth would accrue to him. As I remember the parable of the talents, it may be that we could make a case that God expects you to invest his money soundly so as to increase the money supply. From this, he could easily direct his servants to show charity to those whom are truly poor while using some of the money for care of the servants and family. As long as the servant doesn't let the money or the house stand between he and God he may well have given all to Jesus. I remember hearing Steve talk about this concept on a recording re: Peter giving all when he still owned a boat and a house.

Thanks TK,

livingink