But I am a christian
She was heavily pregnant, wore little make up and wore a small silver cross at her neck. We were discussing options for the recovery of a substanial amount of money which she had loaned. As I am accustomed to do, I laid out the different steps that could be taken, the costs and risks involved. But when I came to discuss bankruptcy, she said “I could never bankrupt someone because I am a Christian”. I wondered whether I was in the wrong profession.
But this was just another example of issues of financial management becoming tied up in religion for no good reason. And I see it a lot in my line of work. I could have spoken to her and pointed out that bankruptcy is actually designed as a form of restorative justice - a process which balances the rights of those that are owed money while giving the debtor a chance of a fresh start. It developed as a replacement for the system where hopelessly indebted people would enter into a spiral of prosecution which ended with their being imprisoned until their debts were paid in full. Due to the fact that they were imprisoned, they were unable to earn money to pay these debts and therefore the effective result of financial difficulties was life imprisonment. I could have explained all of this to my client, but I doubt she would have appreciated it.
We all know that religion has a messed up relationship with money in all its forms. Prosperity theology, dodgy teaching on giving, lack of accountability - we have talked about all of these on this site. This week I received an alert to an article about Christian financial counsellors - the debt slayers. We come across these people from time to time. There are the real Christian debt counsellors - the priests and ministers and church leaders who deal straight with us lawyers and counsel their “clients” to be honest and open about your abilities to pay and cooperate to arrange the resolution of the situation (in whatever way) with a minimum of evasion, costs and manipulation. But those saints never advertise or present themselves as financial counsellors. And they are not the focus of this article. Rather, this article is about the ‘other’ kind of Christian financial counsellors:
Dave Ramsey is a fast-talking, in-your-face kind of guy whose tough-love guidance—both in books and over the airwaves from Nashville—connects with a lot of Americans. Every few minutes on his three-hour weekday afternoon radio program, callers who recently paid off massive amounts of credit card obligations scream, “I’m debt-free!”
Although he is overtly Christian, Ramsey resonates with a market beyond the evangelical niche: His show is carried on 272 secular stations. In March, cbs television began filming a pilot for a reality series that will follow Ramsey around the country, helping families conquer overwhelming debt and cut the credit umbilical cord.
“I’ve cried over this stuff, too,” says Ramsey, who established a $4 million real estate portfolio by age 26 and lost it four years later. “I’ve done stupid with zeroes on the end.”
I don’t want to impugn Mr Ramsey’s ministry, but I just don’t see the difference between this and any other financial counselling service. Just what are the Christian principles in relation to debt? I would venture that we are called to be good stewards of our resources (which would mean avoiding waste, consumerism, excessive spending etc). We are called to give sacrificially to others. And we are called to deal honestly with other people (ie that there is a moral aspect to clearing debt and not leaving people in the lurch). But except where you want to justify your tips with a bible verse, I can’t see how the nuts and bolts of Christian financial counselling is any better than the more principled of secular financial counsellors.
So I don’t really think you are getting anything extra from Christian financial counselling than you are from secular financial counselling, except the warm glow that comes from being told that becoming debt free is pleasing to God (in itself a little creepy). But putting such a religious overtone on paying off credit card debt can be profoundly manipulative:
According to Mary Hunt, who says her Debt-Proof Living website attracts more than 8 million monthly hits, multitudes of Christians have curtailed church giving because of overspending.
“People can’t believe it when I tell them they need to tithe and save even if they are deeply in debt,” says Hunt. “Most of them think, I’ll do that when I pay all my bills off.“
“A whole bunch of us got all this stuff we really didn’t want with money we really didn’t have to impress people we really didn’t like,” Ramsey says.
And all of it is built around that old chestnut, that God likes us better if we are not in debt. Or, even if we are wealthy. And correspondingly, if we are in financial trouble, then we are not living as God wants us to live. But in order to find this in the Bible, you have to really want to see it:
Most Christian financial leaders acknowledge that debt isn’t called sin in the Bible, but they believe that Scripture discourages debt. They concede that debt is a reality of modern life and even drives the economy, but warn against a lifelong pattern of debt.
“We can’t make a blanket statement that all debt is wrong,” says Blue, author of Master Your Money, now in its 32nd printing. “But it doesn’t make sense to borrow your way to prosperity.”
And it should be no surprise that the ‘typical’ success stories from such counsellors follow the “I paid off my debt and God blessed me with money and success” formula:
Doug and Sherrie Spracklen of Fair Grove, Missouri, are typical beneficiaries. They believe an intensive 13-week Crown Ministries course at Peace Chapel Assembly of God strengthened their marriage and transformed their lives.
Doug, 35, says in his younger years he bought things like a car stereo system and golf clubs, but didn’t have the money to pay for them. His credit card balance further escalated when he started his own insurance business and bought office furnishings and business suits.
Four years into their marriage, the Spracklens had amassed $20,000 in unsecured debt. They had two vehicle payments, an older house that needed repairs, and no equity. They made minimum payments on their credit cards and rolled debt over whenever a zero percent credit offer came along, but those introductory benefits soon expired. The Crown classes helped them devise a plan to get out of debt in two years, just before the birth of the first of their two sons.
Although he always had tithed, the Crown course taught Doug Spracklen to view giving as something more joyful than a mere obligation. Since becoming debt-free, the Spracklens have increased giving to missions, benevolence needs, and savings. He hired three agents, and his business income quadrupled in six years. The Spracklens have purchased 30 acres, but are in no hurry to go into debt by borrowing to build a home.
Want a real Christian attitude to debt and stewardship? Then you are better off going to this guy:
On the other end of the spectrum is the Sarasota, Florida–based Gary Moore, who provides “counsel to spiritual and ethical investors.” He advises the Templeton Foundation and is a board treasurer of Opportunity International, an organization that sees loans as a means of empowerment for the poor. “Small loans,” its website proclaims, “sometimes as little as $50, in the hands of a poor entrepreneur, can transform the lives of individuals, families, and entire communities.” Not surprisingly, then, Moore paints a much different picture than Dayton, Ramsey, Blue, and Hunt.
He argues that Americans are in the top 1 percent of all wage earners in history and that less than 2 percent of Americans have serious credit card debt. Federal Reserve reports indicate that of the households that carry a credit card balance (45 percent of all households), the median amount owed is $1,900. “As the average American lives on $40,000 a year, that’s hardly an economic earthquake,” Moore comments. Only 29 percent of households owe $1,000 or more on their cards, 4 percent owe $10,500 or more, and 1 percent owe $21,400 or more. Moore contends that debt can be empowering rather than enslaving, and that credit is compatible with Christian values.
Or better still, how about we listen to this guy:
Then he said to the crowd, “Don’t be greedy! Owning a lot of things won’t make your life safe.”
16So Jesus told them this story:
A rich man’s farm produced a big crop, 17and he said to himself, “What can I do? I don’t have a place large enough to store everything.”
18Later, he said, “Now I know what I’ll do. I’ll tear down my barns and build bigger ones, where I can store all my grain and other goods. 19Then I’ll say to myself, `You have stored up enough good things to last for years to come. Live it up! Eat, drink, and enjoy yourself.’ ”
20But God said to him, “You fool! Tonight you will die. Then who will get what you have stored up?”
21″This is what happens to people who store up everything for themselves, but are poor in the sight of God.”
Who here really thinks that Jesus would be mad if I borrowed money to give it to the poor?
May 24th, 2006 at 5:47 pm
keep it coming, Lance - we have to get real, no other way leads to anywere worth being:-)
May 24th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
James - I thought I read somewhere that you yourself had been burned by the demands of…. whoever it was. When you advocate these teachings, is it because you really truly believe that we are better of having all the right teaching? I would say that any teaching exceeding what we are actually able to live out is to some extent “overload” - I believe that is the first principle of teaching: don’t put burdens on others that you don’t carry. If you think you are doing that, have you considered carrying what you already are, along with the burdens of some of the people here - how does that weightload fit? Just curious, as to whether you considered that?
May 25th, 2006 at 6:17 am
Depends i guess on how you defined right teaching. Let us consider: for freedom has Christ set you free, dont let anyone bring you into bondage again. Use not your freedom to satisfy the desires of the flesh. Anyone who relies upon keeping the law brings themselves under a curse. You have been bought with a price and you are not your own…. balanced with … Whatever is not of faith is sin.
Piask, you say, “I believe that is the first principle of teaching: don’t put burdens on others that you don’t carry …” Absolutely! Could not agree more.
Right teaching leads IMO to freedom in Christ. Free from condemnation, a free from the control of others, free to act and live in accordance with the faith God has granted us. But as the Scripture points out in a number of spots, eg Does that mean we go on sinning because we are under grace and not under law? By no means! So, at the same time, not a freedom to call right that which God calls an abomination - but lets not go there.
When it comes to issues of money, there are many so-called leaders whose teaching robs the trusting of their freedom. They persuade the poor to give beyond their means … tithe, double tithe, first fruit offerings, miracle offerings, you borrow to buy your own house so why not borrow to buy a house for some other poor person. All manipulative, all based upon wrong interpretation or wrong use of Scripture - or often simply based upon the product of their own minds. This is why RIGHT TEACHING is essential - right teaching leads to faith in Christ alone, to liberty in Christ and security for the sheep. Wrong teaching, such as mentioned above, leads to bondage and despair and loss of faith. … Of course, the pastor gets to take world trips and build a big new building and multiple mansions … guess his/her faith is working OK.
And Lance #29 is a good case in point of the outcome of wrong teaching. Wouldnt you like to able to say, A pox on the lot of them? But of course, we dont say such things
May 25th, 2006 at 7:28 am
Somewhere in here we could also throw in ‘money is the root of all evil”-well not really, but it has to make the top 3. Re James @ #25, yes I have enough case studies to write a book.
Personally I don’t have a problem with borrowing money to help others, providing it doesn’t result in placing my family in financial difficulty. I have no aspirations for wealth or its entrapments, I’m happy to go with a roof over my head, clothes on my back and 3 meals a day (but not the Benny Hinn version of multi storey mansion, Pierre cardin suits etc).
As for borrowing to give to others-why not?? My mother in law is a pensioner and recently took very ill. She needed major surgery to pull through but had no money, my wife and I borrowed $6,000.00 to give her the chance she needed. How is this different to say, if you watch the 6:30 news and your heart is touched by the plight of sick and homeless people in any one of the African countries, or Katrina victims and, while you may not have the cash on hand, you feel compelled to do something? If your heart’s in it, and it won’t end up in you yourself being the one in need, why not??
For any absurdists lurking on the site (Mr Duck) I’m not a Marxist.
May 25th, 2006 at 8:29 am
Appreciate the feedback, James - and I’m with you on a lot of it. Don’t have any objections to any of the scripture you quote, either. Only, I think that maybe things are a little more complicated than this/ or simpler, depending on how you see it. If I read you right, it’s like you say: if only we have the right teaching (eliminate all the wrong) we’ll have a clear way ahead to freedom - the real thing, out of bondage and all. Only, I think we need more. Jesus never really attacked the teaching of the pharisees - actually He told people to be even more righteous - but he still blamed them big time for not having the right attitude in their righteousness. I’m not saying that you have a legalistic attitude towards the “law of grace” - I don’t know if you do! hope not:-) My point is somewhere along the line of: It’s the “job” of God’s Spirit to convince people of sin - and here’s the funny part: I expect him to convince me of MY sin, not of others. That to me means: what “stands out” to me when reading the bible, are the parts convicting me - so that I might be drawn to Jesus for deliverance. Since I’m not homosexually inclined, those passages do not stand out to me, nor do I think they should. They’re unarguably in the bible, probably for the purpose of standing out to somebody else - what do I know?? Like Jesus said, when Peter asked about what would happen with John: What’s that to you, YOU follow Me! So, I think we are to encourage each other to seek transparency with God - I loved your piece on confession, believe I told you that - but what that transparency leads to is really not our business. Also, if someone asked me to search the bible with them for direction in specific matters of course I would - just not without the invitation to do so. Only God knows for each person which “trait of their character” (or whatever you want to call it) needs most immediate attention for His love to reach through, and he will deal with each one individually. In my experience:-) Feel free to disagree, anyone!
May 25th, 2006 at 8:32 am
Sorry - just realised that somerwhere along the way I got the threads somewhat mixed up - but apart for the example, which could have been more appropriate, I think the point applies here just the same…
May 25th, 2006 at 10:07 am
Excellent piece that. Thought provoking. And well written.
May 25th, 2006 at 11:18 am
James, I am not advocating manipulation in relation to money, and I am certainly not attempting to manipulate with my discussion here. What I am gently probing is why we think it is okay to use money in a certain way for ourselves but not for others. Many people in the article I quoted say that debt is not Christian, even though there isn’t a lot of biblical support for this position. What do we say?
May 25th, 2006 at 11:21 am
Piask, what a breath of fresh air you are!!
May 25th, 2006 at 2:23 pm
Actually, i find myself in complete agreement with quietriot #34. A good succinct capture of both the letter and the spirit of it all.
Piask, i also agree with the essense of #35; and yes, i think you may be referring to other threads … get a bit mixed
As for worrying about the log in our own eye or, … dont you worry about that other fellow, you follow me; i agree with this. However, when someone comes out publicly and states that that which God has denounced as an abomination is in fact not even sin, this argument requires IMO a public challenge. Has nothing to do whatsoever with the person, that is there business before the Lord, but when the state ” … ” is not a sin when the Bible clearly states otherwise, then it would be remiss IMO to lend tacit approval by failure to challenge. … but lets take this to the thread where it belongs.
Dan, i didnt think you advocating manipulating for money; “Jesus in fact said that we should give away all of our wealth to the poor”, but i did find this statement to be erroneous and with the potential to mislead.
May 26th, 2006 at 4:21 am
Would it be fair to say that we shouldn’t expect to agree on everything? I’m afraid I just don’t get why we should feel obligated to publicly object to anything anybody states. Probably because I’ve personally never seen that kind of objection bear good fruit. Actually, I think this whole “public debate”-thing is a left-over from ancient greek culture via european culture to most part of western christianity. Not that I mind public debates - it kind of goes along with democracy, which is also a greek heritage - but it’s just no way to win a brother! Please enlighten me, I just don’t find Jesus teaching us to “publicly correct” anywhere in scripture. I find a lot of places where He, and Paul, and others, tell us to pray for our brother, or to go to him privately, if we think he’s wrong off.
May 26th, 2006 at 6:21 am
Paul publicly rebuked Peter when Peter’s behaviour had the potential to lead others into error!
May 26th, 2006 at 6:39 am
Thank you for enlightening/reminding me:-) Can’t say that wasn’t the kind of exaple I asked for, although I don’t really see myself in the “founders of the faith”-league, somehow. Also funny to see how this rebuke kind of goes the other way, more like “don’t you go legalistic on me, Peter, you ought to know better!” What I’m really looking for are better alternatives than public rebuke to the question on “how to win your brother when worried for his spiritual health” - any input on that?
May 26th, 2006 at 6:50 am
Actually Piask, do you think dialogue or discussion or debate or “come let us reason together” might be more what we are looking for then “rebuke”. I see little if any value in “rebuking” but hope there is value in seeking to work together to come to a better appreciation of the truth.
For example, i tend to be a clingy to money … live on debt and often think “well i dont have much ability to give”. On this thread, some good balance to this has been brought. Some of statements have been to the extreme, but that just serves to make me take a fresh look at matters.
We can sure do without personal attacks; with this i am with you almost entirely:)
May 26th, 2006 at 6:52 am
anybody? - not just James:-)
Just told some young people from church today how I enjoy “visiting” with you all here a signposts - I really enjoy reading and thinking and praying and learning and I am constantly blown away by the fellowship happening in this place. I must admit though I still go to church:-) Me and my family have a history of several abusive fellowship settings over the years - however, the last one so small (close to 100 active members), that we have decided to go for an “old saying”:
“congregations are like icebergs. If you sit, and you get a cold b…, get up and leave - but if you sit, and it starts melting around you, you’re right where God wants you” So far, it keeps melting, so despite the occational hurts of having to “combat” controlling people, we’re staying for now:-)
Well, night has caught up with little Denmark - so a good day to you all!
May 26th, 2006 at 6:59 am
Monty Python 1972- John Cleese and Terry Gillam
Gillam : “Is this the right room for an argument”?
Cleese : “I told you once”
Gillam: “No you didn’t”
Cleese : “Yes I did”
Gillam : “No you didn’t”
Cleese : “Will this be a 10 minute argument or would you like the full half hour”
Gillam ; “Oh I see, 10 minutes please”
Cleese : “I’m sorry, but I can’t argue unless you’ve paid me”
Gillam : “But I just did”!
Cleese : “No you didn’t”
Gillam : “yes I did”
Cleese : “ Did not”
Gillam : “Well if I haven’t paid you, why are you arguing with me”??
Cleese : “I could be arguing in my spare time”
Gillam : “ This is ridiculous”!!
Cleese : “No it isn’t”
Gillam : “This isn’t an argument, it’s just contradiction”
Cleese : “If I’m to argue with you, I must take up a contrary position”
Gillam : “No you shouldn’t”
Cleese : “Yes I should”
Gillam : “Look, an argument is a logical discussion of 2 differing
viewpoints, not just the automatic gainsay of conversation”
Cleese : “No it isn’t”
Gillam : “Oh I give up”!
Cleese : “No you don’t”
The “argument” goes on for another 5 minutes or so until Gillam walks out and goes into the next room, which he discovers is “banging your head against the wall lessons”.
Sometimes we tend to lose track of what we set out to discuss and frustration sets in.
May 26th, 2006 at 7:06 am
Actually, I’m much more worried about “impersonal attacks” than personal ones - for the simple reason that you have absolutely NO IDEA who gets hurt from it! I’m really not onto you, James, in particular - but some of what you wrote, and a lot of what has been going on here, sure looks like attempts to “set the record straight” on a general level (it’s in the bible, so no discussion here) - maybe I just don’t get Australians…
- but I’m all for exchanging views and learning from each other, as long as nobody is passing judgment of what other’s views ought to be.
May 26th, 2006 at 3:55 pm
Sometimes we tend to lose track of what we set out to discuss and frustration sets in. - couldn’t agree more - and somertimes, even worse, we forget that very often the question is far more important that the answer!
May 26th, 2006 at 4:12 pm
Quite true, but often times here, questions are replied to with other questions and the discussion goes in ever decreasing circles- a bit like a meeting of Rabbis.
I guess it’s all worth it if the discussion bears fruit.
May 26th, 2006 at 4:37 pm
And it does - cleraly - just wish is could without some of the “bloody noses” and “bruised knuckles” I’ve seen while I’ve hung around…
May 26th, 2006 at 8:30 pm
Took some time to think on this one. OK Piask, at your request i’ll not dialogue with you further.
May 26th, 2006 at 9:03 pm
??? did I request that? Sorry, didn’t realize that. certainly didn’t mean to. I’m all for testing views and getting smarter - can’t think of anyone of us who couldn’t need that:-)
May 27th, 2006 at 6:56 am
OK Piask, maybe i misinterpereted yanybody? - not just James:-) and I’m really not onto you, James, in particular -
Im all for exchanging views as well, but don’t consider any view i or anybody else has to offer transcends in any way that which is set forth in the Bible. Im not arguing that “the Bible is the Word of God therefore you cannot express another opinion”. What i am arguing is “I accept the Bible, and believe it to be the Word of God”. Accordingly, if i am to respond to any view expressed by anbody then you are likely to find me saying something to the effect, The Bible has this or that to say on this matter. And before you go there; no i dont think my interpretation of the Bible is altogether correct or necessarily any better than somebody else’s. At the same time, i have no view on any matter that i consider more worthwhile to share than the view on the matter as set forth in the Bible.
One clarifying point a lot of people miss IMO is that the Bible is God speaking life to His creation, its not a set a rules by which man is judge each other.
May 27th, 2006 at 7:15 am
Thanks James, appreciate the response:-) We’re actually not at all that far apart in views, other that our view on how to engage in communication with people who have other views. Well that, and then McLaren - just read your exchange with Urbanmonk on two of the other threads! I’m about to watch a movie with my teenage kids now, but I’ll look forward to engaging in new exchanges on “my” saturday (I’m in timezone +1) Peace and joy!
May 27th, 2006 at 8:14 am
Just a little thought to ponder.
I thought Jesus is the word made flesh.
So, shouldn’t we use his flesh, his life, his communion with broken, sinful, willful mankind as a concordance to the words we chose.
Perhaps we should chose to live in the flesh of the word rather than speak
our interpretaions and expectation of what we read
May 27th, 2006 at 9:28 am
Amen to that - hope that’s not a “button”, either!
May 27th, 2006 at 12:14 pm
I was thinking only yesterday about the same thing in a very different context, how very much we try to regularise and rationalise and explain the faith, when our first responsibility is to live it. The Word became flesh indeed, yet we we live as if the Word became words — bricks to build our fortresses and arrows to hurl at one another. The hands that serve, the art that inspires, the hearts that suffer, the arms that hold, these, potentially, can express Christ more than any theological formulation (not because the formula is necessarily wrong, it may be very right and very important, but because it is one dimensional). think about it, the word that spoke the universe into being became so limited by our flesh that He had to learn to speak all over again — and how many words did He speak on the cross while doing His greatest work? Just pondering ..
May 27th, 2006 at 8:45 pm
“Before the world was created was the Word, and the Word was wiith God, and the Word was as of God”.
The words of God, through his Son and the prophets can be harsh, compassionate, stern, kind, convicting, reassuring - depending on each persons circumstances I guess. Words can be a help or can be a weapon, they can sooth or can cut to the bone. We can always enquire of each other as to how we can address our life’s “hassles” in reasonable discussion but, as Jesus did, we should choose our words carefully.
May 27th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
If you’re going to quote gibberish from the Bible, please try to follow it up with some more gibberish.
Oh, I see you’ve done that, quickrot.
May 27th, 2006 at 10:54 pm
Donald,
I’ll excuse your inability to spell, what would you have me do? You must of read the bible to be able to construct your attempts at debate. Where would you like me to start?