Is money and wealth evil?

[swansont]

25 minutes ago, nec209 said:

text from Bible showing being rich is not sin

What passages explicitly show this?

[zapatos]

45 minutes ago, nec209 said:

I think it was pointed out text from Bible showing being rich is not sin and other text saying Jesus saying being rich person harder to get to haven so points to many conflicting text.

Those two statements are not in conflict. The first says it is a sin. The second does not say if it is a sin or not. You are making assumptions.

[nec209]

10 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Those two statements are not in conflict. The first says it is a sin. The second does not say if it is a sin or not. You are making assumptions.

Did you not read page one and two of this thread?

Where does God command that there is no rich? I don’t see any commandments saying no rich.

God knowledge there is poor and rich.

 

Bible poor and wealthy

The Bible presents a nuanced view of poverty and wealth, emphasizing that both are under God’s sovereignty (1 Samuel 2:7). Here are some key insights:

• God’s equality: Proverbs 22:2 declares that “the rich and the poor meet together: Jehovah is the maker of them all.” This verse highlights that both the wealthy and the poor are created by God and have equal value in His eyes.
• No distinction: The Bible does not teach that poverty or wealth is inherently sinful or blessed. Rather, it emphasizes that both are neutral, and it is how one uses their resources that matters (Matthew 25:14-30).
• Responsibility to the poor: The Bible consistently calls believers to care for the poor and vulnerable (Deuteronomy 15:7-11, Psalm 41:1-3, James 1:27). This is seen as a demonstration of faith and obedience to God’s commands.
• Warning against wealth’s dangers: The Bible warns against the dangers of wealth, such as arrogance (1 Timothy 6:17) and a lack of spiritual focus (Matthew 19:23-24). Jesus taught that it is difficult for the rich to enter the kingdom of God due to their attachment to material possessions (Mark 10:23-25).
• God’s provision: The Bible affirms that God provides for both the rich and the poor (Psalm 104:28, Matthew 6:25-34). It encourages believers to trust in God’s provision, rather than relying solely on their wealth or poverty.

Key Verses

• 1 Samuel 2:7 - “The Lord makes poor and rich; He brings low, He also exalts.”
• Proverbs 22:2 - “The rich and the poor meet together: Jehovah is the maker of them all.”
• James 2:2-5 - “My Christian brothers, our Lord Jesus Christ is the Lord of shining-greatness. Since your trust is in Him, do not look on one person as more important than another. What if a man comes into your church wearing a gold ring and good clothes? And at the same time a poor man comes wearing old clothes…”

Scriptural Perspectives on Poverty and Prosperity

The Bible presents a nuanced view of poverty and wealth, highlighting both their positive and negative aspects.

Poverty

• God is concerned with the poor and needy (Psalm 72:12-13, Proverbs 31:8-9)
• Poverty can be a result of God’s humbling or testing (1 Samuel 2:7, Job 5:7)
• The poor can be rich in faith and spiritual wealth (Matthew 5:3, Luke 12:15)
• Examples of poor individuals who trusted and served God include Job, David, and the widow who offered her last meal to Elijah (Job 1:1, 1 Samuel 20:42, 1 Kings 17:8-16)

Wealth

• Wealth can be a blessing from God, indicating His pleasure and favor (Deuteronomy 28:1-8, Genesis 13:2, 1 Kings 10:23)
• However, wealth can also lead to pride, greed, and spiritual decay (Proverbs 30:8-9, Luke 12:15)
• The Bible warns against the dangers of wealth and materialism, encouraging believers to use their resources wisely and generously (Matthew 6:19-20, Luke 12:15, 1 Timothy 6:17-19)

Key Principles

• God is the one who gives and takes away wealth (Job 1:21, 1 Samuel 2:7)
• Wealth is not an indicator of one’s standing with God (Psalm 73, Jeremiah 12:1)
• True riches come from a right relationship with God, not from material possessions (Matthew 6:33, Luke 12:15)

In conclusion, the Bible presents a balanced view of poverty and wealth, emphasizing the importance of faith, generosity, and a right relationship with God, regardless of one’s economic circumstances.

Conclusion

The Bible presents a balanced view of poverty and wealth, emphasizing God’s sovereignty, equality, and provision for all people. While wealth can be a blessing, it also carries risks, and believers are called to use their resources responsibly and to care for the poor and vulnerable. Ultimately, our trust and focus should be on God, rather than our material circumstances.

 

[zapatos]

9 minutes ago, nec209 said:

Where does God command that there is no rich? I don’t see any commandments saying no rich.

 

Neither do I. Of course that has nothing to do with your two statements not being in conflict.

[nec209]

21 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Neither do I. Of course that has nothing to do with your two statements not being in conflict.

It does not say being rich is sin. The text shows God knows there two groups the rich and the poor and God seems okay with it base on the text.

Well God dos not say I command all faithful people being rich will not enter gates of haven. it says nothing like that or it is sin.

Later on Jesus says rich people having harder time going to haven this is very different tone than the other text. But even Jesus does not say being rich is a sin or God commands being rich will not enter the gates of haven.

One text reads conservative and the other text reads little bit liberal but still conservative.

[iNow]

Just stop trying to make sense of contradictions in Christianity. They are everywhere and you’ll drive yourself mad trying to reconcile it

Edited August 19 by iNow

[swansont]

3 hours ago, nec209 said:

It does not say being rich is sin. The text shows God knows there two groups the rich and the poor and God seems okay with it base on the text.

Well God dos not say I command all faithful people being rich will not enter gates of haven. it says nothing like that or it is sin.

Later on Jesus says rich people having harder time going to haven this is very different tone than the other text. But even Jesus does not say being rich is a sin or God commands being rich will not enter the gates of haven.

One text reads conservative and the other text reads little bit liberal but still conservative.

Seems to me you’re looking for a passage that clearly and blatantly states something, in a book that rarely does that.

[MigL]

4 hours ago, nec209 said:

Did you not read page one and two of this thread?

Yes ... We all did.
And we all gave you our opinion, yet you keep asking the same question over and over, and adding different quotes from a book which is full of people's opinions from 1600 to 1900 years ago.
Our opinions have not changed over the last three pages.
Did you not read them ???

[Night FM]

On 8/14/2024 at 7:55 PM, Phi for All said:

The Christian god's son thought it might be easier to thread a needle with a camel than for a rich person to get into Heaven. Can't see how a "Christian" feels good about amassing enormous personal wealth while fellow people starve. 

That, in my view, isn't totally accurate if one adds more context to the text.

For one, "heaven" isn't mentioned. What is mentioned is the "Kingdom of God". "Heaven" is mentioned in a variety of different ways in the Bible. (In the Genesis, for example, when God created the "heavens", this is usually taken to refer to the celestial bodies in outer space, while in Revelation, it is mentioned that there will be a "New Heaven" and a "New Earth").

There are other issues as well, such as the fact that the individual who Christ said this to was a prince, who presumably inherited his wealth. (Christ didn't seem to have issue with individuals such as vineyard owners whose professions would have made them wealthier than the average person). And given that Christ recruited a minority of disciples, he seemed to have stricter requirements for them than the layperson, such as requiring them to leave their father and mother and lead what seems to be a somewhat materially-renounced life.

Likewise, if we take modernity into context, there would be issues with trying to put a specific "hard limit" on the amount of wealth a person can possess. As the average, middle class person in a 1st world country like America would be very wealthy compared to the average person in a country like India (and would likewise be very wealthy compared to the average person in Jesus' time). So this would degenerate into purely "comparative" wealth, in which one only views others as "wealthy" in comparison to them (while being ignorant, willfully or otherwise of the reality that they are indeed wealthy compared to many people in the world and throughout history).

And this is often based on a superficial understanding of "wealth" which boils down to gawking at the material possessions of others. (e.x. If a person earned $1 billion dollars a year, but donated 99% to charity, would they still be "wealthy"? And how would these charities be able to function if there were not people with large amounts of money to donate to them?)

Hence the problems with taking this verse out of context simply to make a political point. And this is only the tip of the iceberg.

Edited August 28 by Night FM

[Phi for All]

4 hours ago, Night FM said:

And this is often based on a superficial understanding of "wealth" which boils down to gawking at the material possessions of others. (e.x. If a person earned $1 billion dollars a year, but donated 99% to charity, would they still be "wealthy"? And how would these charities be able to function if there were not people with large amounts of money to donate to them?)

Do you have any evidence that such a situation was ever the case? This person who makes $1B but gives away all but $10M sounds made up to drive your point.

And perhaps charities wouldn't be needed in the first place if more Christians weren't so fixated on extreme wealth (or extreme nationalism, or extreme behavioral modification, or, well the list goes on). I personally don't consider it charity if it's for tax purposes. 

[dimreepr]

On 8/19/2024 at 9:06 PM, nec209 said:

I think it was pointed out text from Bible showing being rich is not sin and other text saying Jesus saying being rich person harder to get to haven so points to many conflicting text.

That why one member said 

Which is why you can’t use the Bible as a reliable reference. It’s an anthology where different authors give conflicting instructions. 

 

So I’m sure what else is there to discuss in this thread now.

The bible was never meant as a reference library of facts, it's a teacher's manual of life; the synopsis of which is heard, by some 'big nose', on the mount... 😉

Read it with that in mind and much is reviled revealed; it might be out of date now, but there's no reason to dismiss the wisdom it contains; unless you're looking for an excuse to revile...

[LuckyR]

Money is just a tool for keeping score, it isn't intrinsically on the good/evil continuum. Wealth or sums of money at the high end of the scale, is not evil, per sè, but many who possess wealth, acquired it through evil means or participated in an unjust system that those who do poorly under that system would view as evil.

[iNow]

7 hours ago, LuckyR said:

many who possess wealth, acquired it through evil means or participated in an unjust system that those who do poorly under that system would view as evil.

It’s extremely odd to me that you would use evil as a descriptor given how mere minutes before making this post you said this about that word in another thread:

 

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/134580-defining-evil/?do=findComment&comment=1274803

Quote

evil is not only subjective, but it is also relative. Thus any "definitions" are going to be extremely personal and not universal

 

[LuckyR]

4 hours ago, iNow said:

It’s extremely odd to me that you would use evil as a descriptor given how mere minutes before making this post you said this about that word in another thread:

 

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/134580-defining-evil/?do=findComment&comment=1274803

 

What do you find extremely odd about using the stipulated terminology of the OP when addressing the OP? Though I stand by my observation that this terminology is both subjective and relative and therefore personal and not universal. 

 

News flash, personal opinions are the bailiwick of Internet Forums, btw. 

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, LuckyR said:

News flash, personal opinions are the bailiwick of Internet Forums

Thanks, professor. So glad you’re here to pass along these gems of wisdom 

I’m obviously new to this whole Internet forum thing and welcome your continued guidance. 

[LuckyR]

5 minutes ago, iNow said:

Thanks, professor. So glad you’re here to pass along these gems of wisdom 

?? 

Maybe you're having a bad day. Wishing you the very best. 

[iNow]

I just found it odd, that’s all. Then was reacting to your newsflash comment. Was thinking “yeah, no shit. Opinions on the internet. Gee golly. Super insightful.” No worries, though. Can move along. 

[Night FM]

I think it's fair to say that "rich" doesn't have a simple and consistent definition, and relies heavily on subjectivity and where a person is coming from in making that judgment.

[dimreepr]

3 hours ago, Night FM said:

I think it's fair to say that "rich" doesn't have a simple and consistent definition, and relies heavily on subjectivity and where a person is coming from in making that judgment.

That only goes so far, you can be content with only having what you need to live, but this rich %£$" wants to tax that which I need, in order to chase what they think they want; it's nothing more than a gambling addiction, but somehow it's the fault of an alcoholic... 😉

[LuckyR]

On 9/15/2024 at 3:03 AM, Night FM said:

I think it's fair to say that "rich" doesn't have a simple and consistent definition, and relies heavily on subjectivity and where a person is coming from in making that judgment.

Sure it does. It means: has more money than I have.

[dimreepr]

7 hours ago, LuckyR said:

Sure it does. It means: has more money than I have.

That's a very shallow definition of rich, money is an ever more arbitrary measure of wealth distribution, it could change overnight and you have no money, you've still got the house and and a larder that can feed the family for six months.

For me the truely rich are happy with that for six months.

[LuckyR]

On 10/3/2024 at 6:15 AM, dimreepr said:

That's a very shallow definition of rich, money is an ever more arbitrary measure of wealth distribution, it could change overnight and you have no money, you've still got the house and and a larder that can feed the family for six months.

For me the truely rich are happy with that for six months.

Yeah, but psychologically valid. Like most things, it depends on perspective. 

[Night FM]

If we're using the Bible as a source, it specifically says this:

¹⁰ For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Timothy 6%3A10&version=KJV

[LuckyR]

On 10/21/2024 at 10:09 PM, Night FM said:

If we're using the Bible as a source, it specifically says this:

¹⁰ For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1 Timothy 6%3A10&version=KJV

Ah, so it can cause evil (since it's the root), but isn't itself evil. So to the OP: no, not evil.