How wealthy can you be before you are no longer a Christian ?

SuperBowserWorld

Genuine question.

I see wealthy Christians who hoard and grab wealth and resources for themselves and their families. And it has a snowball property. I.e. the wealthier you are, the easier it is to acquire more wealth.

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

So, how wealthy can you be before you are no longer a Christian ?

Are billionaires Christians ?

People with multiple properties ?

(Edit) typo

looksee

Mod: Irrelevant and frivolous posts removed. It seems unlikely that a sensible discussion on Christianity and wealth can result from this opening post, however I will leave it for a while to see how it goes.

riffmongous

Jesus was quite clear.

The fact that this has remained a topic of discussion for 2000 years considering how clearly written it is, is really remarkable, and shows just how wealth and riches truly are incompatible with his teachings.

Addmagnet

Well that sucks, typed out long post which Boards eated :(

Basically, money isn't the problem, it's what people do with it that is meaningful.

And the same can be said for religion.

SuperBowserWorld

It's a genuine question.

I don't really care about if Jesus is God or not, but I do admire highly and respect his teachings, especially when you strip away all the stuff and nonsense that's been added by others.

I get really annoyed when a wealthy relative bangs on about going to mass and confession and blah blah blah.. and donate a fiver each week to the church.

Silly, easy, fantasy stuff.

Walk the walk, not talk the talk. And this talk the talk becomes more unforgiving the wealthier you are.

(Edit)

So, for me, this is the hard and fundamental part of being a Christian.

Especially in a dog eat dog, wealth by any means worshipping society.

How do you survive and be Christian in a society like this. Especially with a family ???

Capt'n Midnight

It would depend on where the wealth comes from and there's the 'render unto Caesar' thing.

The second bit first. Tax avoidance is a grey areas. Anyone on PAYE earning over €70,000 a year is paying over 20% on PRSI and USC before they pay a single cent of tax. So a wealthy person paying an effective rate of less than that on their gross income is effectively being subsidised by the rest of us. And that means more economic hardship for those on the breadline.

If wealth comes directly or at a short remove from human suffering it can't be considered ethical. Look at the working conditions of Amazon workers for example. Everyone knows they'll be replaced by robots when it's cheaper to do so. Shareholders are morally responsible for the actions of the companies they invest in.

Some of the tech billionaires have individually amassed more wealth than 40% of the population of the USA to give an idea of how much suffering could be alleviated in other circumstances.

hayse

Another dole bashing thread.

Mrs OBumble

Was Joseph of Arimathea a Christian?

Sleeper12

Bill Gates is a pretty wealthy guy. I don't know if he considers himself Christian but he is extremely generous with his wealth. Many wealthy people are extremely generous behind the scenes.

Another question worth considering would be, is it very Christian to judge people based on their wealth or lack of it?

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093389#Comment_119093389

I don't know the answer to this question.

Has Bill given away a greater % of his wealth than a PAYE worker's earning above €70,000 would pay of that income in Tax, USC, PRSI and VAT and excise duty per year ?

Some say 'the eye of a needle' refers to a small gate used at night that a camel could only get through if unloaded and coaxed through on it's knees and then reloaded. Difficult but not impossible. Others say other things.

Sleeper12

Bill Gates donates millions per year. He continues to build wealth through his business. The more wealth he has the more he can donate. Bill Gates is planning on leaving less than 1% of his wealth to his children.

The more he earns now, the more he will leave to the needy.

Wealth has absolutely nothing to do with being a Christian. There are some not so wealthy people in Ireland who could by very Christian & take in Ukrainian refugees but they choose not to do so. Does this mean that they aren't Christian?

CrookedJack

This is an interesting question. I would be inclined to think of it from the other perspective.

It's not about how wealthy you are, rather it's about how poor others are. I think it's fundamentally unchristian for you to have more than you need while others have less than they need. In that case you have the ability to help others but are not doing so, which I would consider counter to the Christian ethos.

Therefore it's not a question of how much wealth would make you unchristian, but how much poverty that you could prevent, but are not.

Car99

Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."

handlemaster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058246763/how-wealthy-can-you-be-before-you-are-no-longer-a-christian

Have you been to the Vatican? Dripping in priceless artifacts. Have their own trading team. Pay no tax.. how rich you ask... obscenely rich there is no limit

Car99

The Vatican and the Catholic church is hardly the poster child of Christianity if you look into it history , recent or more distant.

riffmongous

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093443#Comment_119093443

The alternative eye of the needle explanation is just made up, theres no actual basis for it

Jellybaby_1

I'm certainly no Bible teacher, but I remember this from my early Bible study days:

Luke 12:48

................From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded, and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked.

So I take from that, that if I were to become wealthy there is a lot of responsibility put upon me to be to use it wisely and kindly. Just my interpretation. Probably doesn't help answer the OP though.

Jelly

SuperBowserWorld

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119104311#Comment_119104311

With great power comes great responsibility.

And money IS power.

Not originally a Spiderman quote.

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

Capt'n Midnight

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2022/0522/1300533-irish-billionaires-wealth-up-16bn-during-the-pandemic/

Roughly one million people enter into extreme poverty for every one who becomes a billionaire.

And that's been happening every 33 hours since the pandemic began.

Jellybaby_1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119104328#Comment_119104328

I see now, I didn't know where Spiderman came into it until I checked your link. I got my text from the NIV version of the Bible which I usually access on Bible Gateway.

Quantum Erasure

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119099920#Comment_119099920

some say 'camel' was actually a mistranslation, the correct word was rope, so... how thin can a rope be before its no longer a rope, how big can a needle be...

smacl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093485#Comment_119093485

Given serious levels poverty in the 3rd world and poorer countries, preventing some degree of poverty is within the capability of most people in the developed world. The question you could then ask is that if you generate significant wealth and donate a large part of that to charitable causes does that make you a good or bad person. Many people from most strata of society have an unhealthy obsession with wealth and celebrity which in turn leads to a society where we reward our bankers and pop stars more than our nurses and teachers and allow poverty and homelessness to progress unchecked. In my opinion, this isn't a problem for the individual so much as for society. Similarly, those in need should not be dependant on voluntary charity from individuals or private organisations (with whatever strings may be attached), it should be our collective social responsibility. Extremes of wealth should be coupled with extremes of taxation such that generation of wealth directly helps society rather than depending on so called "trickle down" economics. Just my 2c from a purely secular perspective.

Thinkingaboutit

Remember the Beatitudes say 'blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.' Priests like fancy car driving Fr Sean Healy SMA talk about taxes and redistribution and plastic in oceans and material things in a world which is passing, are just so tiresome. A humble millionaire, who gives to charity quietly, is not in some grave danger of damnation.

Graces7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093113#Comment_119093113

NB you have no idea what your relative gives. Period. We are bidden not to boast. And not to judge. MYOB

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093467#Comment_119093467

Bill Gates donates millions per year in order to build his wealth through tax breaks.

With every passing year this miserly 1% grows exponentially.

Also, how much of Gates' wealth has already been passed on?

I could plan on leaving 1% of my wealth to you, after offloading 98% of it to Tom, Dicky and Harry.

Fuck me, 2022, information has never been more readily been available and people still fall for this muck.

Hotblack Desiato

So you reckon that for Gates and co. it goes a bit like this...

Give money away

Something something

Profit!

Sure you can get tax relief on charitable donations you make - same as here - but you're still worse off than if you'd kept hold of the money in the first place.

growleaves

'Bill Gates is planning on leaving less than 1% of his wealth to his children.'

They will have the connections to get 200k a year jobs right out of the gate. They will not struggle, ever.

Its surprising to me that anyone can fall for the 'I'm disinheriting my children' line. We live in a patronage economy - why do you think so many people are desperate to get into Ivy league colleges? Because the connections they make from a Harvard MBA will set them up for life.

No one can say for definite that Gates is laundering money through his Foundation but I think its incredibly naive to hold him up as some kind of beacon of goodness. To put it into perspective: his wife told the Washington Post that his friendship with Epstein was part of the reason she divorced him.

So his own wife thinks he's an untrustworthy creep who hangs with paedos but Paddy Irishman is meant to look up to him because his P.R. Team sez he's giving money to the 'needy'?

Come on lads, have a bit of cop on. See through one or two deceptions, its not that hard.

What it comes down to ultimately:

Put your trust not in man, but in Christ

Graces7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119668293#Comment_119668293

This is a disedifying post full of gossip . Shocking on a Christianity forum.

Graces7

There is no limit to wealth. It is what you do with what you have. Whether it be the widow;s mite of great riches.

Please refer to the words of Jesus for this - as for every question about living for Him. He speaks simply and clearly... " Sell all you have and give to the poor" to the rich young man.

He is Lord. His Word is clear and it is to Him we both respond and answer. Joyfully and gladly

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119671569#Comment_119671569

What did Jesus say about aggrandising oneself through public displays of charity? It is the same now as it was in Jesus' time, people use a false veneer of goodness to promote themselves.

Let this billionaire's PR machine defend him, I have no obligations to give the benefit of the doubt to such an obviously wicked person and neither should any spiritually discerning person.

cnocbui

It looks like somewhere around $80 million is the cutoff, more than that and you are one with the darkside.

Pope Francis Net Worth 2022: Age, Height, Weight, Girlfriend, Dating, Bio-Wiki. As of September 2022, Pope Francis has an estimated net worth of about $80 million.

looksee

obviously wicked person

What happened to 'judge not that ye be not judged'? You would need to be a bit clearer about what is 'obviously wicked' about him before you leap to judgement. I would not consider twitter gossip evidence of anything.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119673828#Comment_119673828

Judge ye not...?

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119674330#Comment_119674330

I'm not judging his salvation. I'm saying that we shouldn't celebrate and go along with obviously untrustworthy people in public life.

I hope you understand the distinction.

looksee

But what is the basis for your decision that he is 'obviously untrustworthy' or 'obviously wicked'? And there is a fair bit of difference between those two descriptions.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119675481#Comment_119675481

Maybe not - but you are certainly casting metaphorical stones.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119675835#Comment_119675835

Yes there's a fair bit of difference.

First of all its bad that he is looked up to at all. There have always been rapacious businessesmen who built monopolies but until circa 1990s they were not admired by Irish people but seen as the worst excesses of a certain kind of Yankee money culture. That's how I remember it anyway but maybe my own feelings have overwhelmed my memory I'm not sure.

However we've been absorbed into this financial culture somewhat because of MNCs enriching us, the proliferation of mass media and the abandonment of previous values.

Gates is currently buying up huge amounts of farmland all over the US. If you have read my posts in other forums you know I am very against the business practices of corporate farms in deliberately destroying smaller farmers, buying up their assets and assimilating their farms.

But in any case these people are almost never what they seem.

Gates comes from a banking family. His maternal grandfather was a prominent banker in Lincoln, Nebraska. He comes from money.

Elon Musk's father owned an emerald mine in South Africa.

Facebook was set up with seed money from the CIA. That came out in Senate hearings. Marc Zuckerberg is the CIA's man - the very opposite of a 'self-made man'.

How can anyone champion these people and admire them and claim they are great businessmen who worked themselves up from nothing? The magic words 'self made' ought to be the occasion for laughter at this point. I'm not saying it never happens but when it is the lead-off for a PR campaign some scepticism is required.

Then Gates is mixed up in this Lolita Express thing, and his wife separated from him over it. That is very suss, its not a small thing,

Remember that in the last decade it was revealed that Jimmy Saville was in fact a serial paedophile. Before that he had been celebrated by all levels of the British establishment, made a Papal Count by the Vatican, given countless awards for his charity work etc., etc. He did this for charity, he did that for charity etc., etc.

Without the memory of a goldfish, this hugely affects my response to contemporary culture, elite culture and celebrity. A person should be capable of learning from experience. We should all be less naive than we were in 2010.

Then, so much of the Bible, especially the Gospels, has the theme of wicked people making lavish displays of their own goodness and chartiableness. Jesus spends so much time talking about this that a Christian in particular ought to be inoculated against it. Jesus goes around embarrassing people over it, back-talking them constantly, and then just straight out tells his followers to give to charity in secret without publicity.

"So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." - Matthew 6

Most people haven't read the Gospels, don't know what a Pharisee is so they have invent new phrases like 'virtue signal' to try to express their feelings about this kind of deliberate display of false goodness and are struggling to make sense of it amidst cultural confusion.

I hope this explains where I'm coming from. Do you see how I am responding both to recent cultural events and Biblical injunctions in a kind of synchronous way, or trying to?

In a legalistic sense there is 'not enough evidence' to say that Bill Gates is 'bad'.

However would a wise and cautious person, because of that, hold such a person up an example of goodness because he's funneled money to the poor? I really hope not.

Of course I probably shouldn't use the word 'wicked' I admit. I let my feelings push me too far. But untrustworthy/not deseving of the benefit of the doubt I am comfortable with.

looksee

Thank you for your more comprehensive answer. It is hard to know who has opinions based on 'something they read on twitter', on which they are prepared to spread gossip or untruths, and those who have done some research and have some basis for their opinions.

Too many people have been harmed by slanderous, ill informed gossip. Its unlikely that a discussion about Bill Gates on Boards.ie is likely to do him any harm, but its not good practice. I don't pay any attention to celebrity stuff so I have little idea of what any of them are doing/are being accused of.

smacl

Too many people have been harmed by slanderous, ill informed gossip. Its unlikely that a discussion about Bill Gates on Boards.ie is likely to do him any harm, but its not good practice. 

Agreed, I've no strong feelings about Gates either way, but comparisons to a serial paedophile such as Jimmy Saville without evidence are dubious at best and deeply unpleasant in my opinion. Yes, he's buying up farmland, though so are many financial investors in the US, more here. Whether his charity goes far enough is certainly open for debate, but he certainly seems to be making more of a social contribution than his contemporaries such as Musk, Bezos and Zuckerberg.

However would a wise and cautious person, because of that, hold such a person up an example of goodness because he's funneled money to the poor? I really hope not.

Of course I probably shouldn't use the word 'wicked' I admit. I let my feelings push me too far. But untrustworthy/not deseving of the benefit of the doubt I am comfortable with.

I think when you start accusing someone of being wicked, or even untrustworthy, you take on a burden of proof to back up your claims. I would have thought that providing people with the benefit of the doubt would constitute basic Christian charity here. I'd also suggest that giving $5 billion to charitable causes is somewhat more than virtue signalling. Doesn't make him a good person, nor does it contradict why you might have problems with Gates, but I think there are far worse out there.

I do think wealth beyond a certain level is obscene when we live in a world with so much poverty. I'd suggest this is something we need to limit as a society rather than treat as a matter of personal responsibility.

Packrat

Sorry, but these billionaires don't just "give to charity"

They manipulate people, politics, attitudes and world events using their money as a tool.

They give to causes they believe in and want to see advanced.

I don't like seeing opinions being bought like that.

It definitely isn't a christian thing to do.

growleaves

@smacl 'I think when you start accusing someone of being wicked, or even untrustworthy, you take on a burden of proof to back up your claims.'

I'm not comparing Gates directly to Jimmy Saville. I'm saying the phenomenon of Jimmy Saville and multiple others should influence how we treat these things, with caution.

We should not give an automatic free pass to wealthy givers to charity. How much he gave to charity is not relevant.

Its like if I said after the Ryan Report came out we should not automatically brush away rumours about this or that priest. It doesn't mean that I'm comparing this or that priest to Brendan Smyth, but I know that there was a Brendan Smyth who got away with crimes under people's noses and that informs my whole approach which is to remain alert.

In this case Gates' wife left him partly because she was concerned about his friendship with a procurer of young girls (Jeffrey Epstein). She said this to one of the biggest newspapers in the world, the Washington Post. This is public knowledge and his reputation is "permanently shattered" as one journalist put it.

I am not back-biting or putting the boot in, I'm saying be aware of this stuff and have both eyes open.

Yes its possible it may be tabloid gossip in which case he should sue his ex-wife for MILLIONS for she has basically ruined him with what she implied about him through her statements.

'I would have thought that providing people with the benefit of the doubt would constitute basic Christian charity here.'

Not as such imo.

I would say be on your guard, listen to you intuition & your instincts, use your BS detector, weigh your knowledge of the situation, pray for guidance if it helps, and then if you're happy to give someone the benefit of the doubt do so but continue to be careful.

"Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves. Be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves" - Matthew 10:16

smacl

I largely agree with most of the above, though would still take caution about labelling any specific individual as wicked based solely on guilt by association. By bringing up Jimmy Saville and the topic of serial paedophilia, your implication is clearly that we should consider whether Gates might also be a serial paedophile on what amounts, from what I can see, to speculation. Personally, I find this rather cruel.

Yes its possible it may be tabloid gossip in which case he should sue his ex-wife for MILLIONS for she has basically ruined him with what she implied about him through her statements

Hardly. A multi-billionaire suing for MILLIONS would be like a millionaire suing for small change.

I would say be on your guard, listen to you intuition & your instincts, use your BS detector, weigh your knowledge of the situation, pray for guidance if it helps, and then if you're happy to give someone the benefit of the doubt do so but continue to be careful.

There is a world of difference in thinking these things and acting with caution as a result and publicly stating them in such a way that can be utterly damning of another person. Melinda Gates for example firstly talks about Gates having an affair with an employee as the reason for divorce. I would suggest you are casting the first stone in this instance when bringing up serial paedophilia and no small pebble either.

growleaves

@smacl 'I largely agree with most of the above, though would still take caution about labelling any specific individual as wicked based solely on guilt by association.'

I went too far there I already admitted that, but the association in this case should put people on their guard. It doesn't prove anything but we have a right to regard that as a 'red flag' and say "Hang on here a second..." Again not randomly, but because his wife 'flagged' it specifically.

Melinda Gates told the Washington Post that Bill Gates' friendship with a serial procurer of young girls was part of the reason she divorced him. This is public knowledge and you've posted one news story which doesn't mention it, which ignores the several other interviews and stories that do mention it.

The thing is people are still "celebrating" Gates and talking about his public works of charity. It puts people in difficult position then if he's claimed as an example of goodness.

Again, I am not comparing him directly to Saville - I'm saying that knowing that Saville gave £40 million to charity and was a serial abuser ought to inform our attitudes to questions like whether people at the top of society (the most respectable public figures) who give to charity are regarded as totally above suspicion or not.

The whole "I give to charity, therefore I am good" thing is exploded imo. There have been too many charity scandals in the last decade. It isn't 2010 anymore.

smacl

The whole "I give to charity, therefore I am good" thing is exploded imo. There have been too many charity scandals in the last decade. It isn't 2010 anymore.

Most of us do things over the course of our lives that could be considered good or bad. Whether you choose to try to tally these up to say a person is, on balance, good or bad, depends on your own outlook. If we hold these actions distinct rather than summing them up, taking the view that an act of charity does not excuse a previous bad act, does a bad act undo the value of an act of charity? Even if, from a Christian perspective, you subscribe to the notion of some kind of final tally on which we are all judged, this is surely not our tally to make nor judgement to call.

Personally, I do not believe people are good or bad, I believe that they are good and bad. Acts of charity that help others who might not otherwise be helped are, in my humble opinion, good regardless of motive. We could argue that while doing good things does not make someone a good person, it does make them a better person.

growleaves

@smacl 'If we hold these actions distinct'

'Acts of charity that help others who might not otherwise be helped are, in my humble opinion, good regardless of motive.'

I don't think you quite grasp what goes on. If a corrupted person gives money while committing evil acts these are pay-offs to grease the skids or buy publicity or favour. Its not "good regardless of motive" - do you seriously not understand that the money can be used as a smokescreen, or a series of bribes? Its pay to play corruption. The money is like blood money even if does find its a way to poor person, which it might or might not.

^This is in the case of someone like Savile. It is not always the case that throwing money around genuinely constitutes an "act of charity". Its 'charity' in inverted commas.

'We could argue that while doing good things does not make someone a good person, it does make them a better person.'

It could make them a worse person depending on what the money is really being spent for and what they receive in return. This is in the most extreme cases of corruption, and obviously I'm not saying that it applies to most people.

We have seen in recent years, by any historical standards, some of the worst charity scandals to do with corrupt 'giving'.

smacl

We have seen in recent years, by any historical standards, some of the worst charity scandals to do with corrupt 'giving'.

Quite so, but that doesn't make all charity scandalous by any stretch of the imagination. In the Gates' case you seem to be implying the charitable acts of the Gates foundation are somehow tarnished by speculative wrongdoings by Gates himself. In fact, you seem to be suggesting the charity is being used as a smokescreen to cover up these supposed misdemeanours. Of course it is not beyond the bounds of possibility that this could be true, but it seems rather ill evidenced to take such a strident stance on the matter. I'd doubt Gates is any kind of a saint, but I don't see him as a demon either until such time we have some hard evidence that says otherwise. My guess is that there is a bit of both going on.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119680799#Comment_119680799

I'm not suggesting that

Let me say now for the third or fourth time, I'm not directly comparing Gates to Savile.

I'm saying that the Savile stuff should affect our responses and how we treat these things overall. That is the context since 2012.

Just like you wouldn't automatically bat away a rumour about a priest as impossible, without necessarily convicting that priest, because you know from the context of the Ryan Report what is possible - what the worst case *can be*.

dublin49

for me Christianity evolved to offer the Plebs some consolation for drawing the short straw in the evolution lotto.Probably championed or even initiated by the rich to prevent civil unrest and protect their assets.So perhaps the original Christians were all rich.

Graces7

Easy enough. Read the words of Jesus. look it up...Very clear and very simple.

Graces7

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119093113#Comment_119093113

Your last sentence makes no real sense? Or am I reading it wrong? It is whndardsat YOU do not what OTHERS do. We are bidden over and over not to judge others. Dear Lord! I for one have more than ehough keeping myself on the strait and narrow.. What anyone else does is between them and God. You survive by keeping your eyes on your own page. Setting your own standards based on the Presence of the Lord Jesus in your life..

dublin49

net assets of more than €175000 not counting family home preclude admission to Heaven.Might as well start the rumour.