How far should we take financial stewardship?

[MarrowMan]

See, I don't think so. And this then goes back to the widows mite. Having disregard for personal expenditure can develop a generosity out of abundance mentality. Yet, who did Jesus justify? Asceticism is the belief that our deeds make us more righteous; but we all know none of our acts can compare to that which is imputed freely by grace. But the Bible does beckon us to spiritual practices; and one who may be gifted in one area may not be in another, since in fact all graces are gifts. But there is no fault in seeking the best of graces, if God would impart them.

Frugality is one of the only ways to give sacrificially. Otherwise we only give in excess. My intent is not to convict people of indulgence, instead it is to have the greatest impact, thus the greatest stewardship of the finances allotted to me, in regards to Kingdom work.

When we die, we can take nothing with us. And the only treasure we will have in Heaven, apart from Jesus, are those treasures which we stored in Heaven while on Earth.

And as we see, those treasures are not measured by the amount; but are calculated by the heart of the giver.

Jesus clearly lays out the blueprint. On that Day, there are no do overs.

I’m sorry, but this doesn’t address my post at all beyond an assumption that I mean generosity out of abundance when I say joyful, loving generosity. Is it your understanding that you can only be generous if you have abundance? If so, I challenge your understanding of generosity.

I find it concerning that you think “frugality“ is one of the only ways to give sacrificially. That’s an odd perspective that I don’t think can be Biblically substantiated at all. Generosity, to be true generosity, is inherently self-sacrificing. It sees all of its substance as that which is to be used in service to God and love to neighbor and so gives all it can of what it has to that end. Which is my point. Scrupulous (chicken vs beef), self denying frugality is the stuff of pietism. Using ones resources in service of an outward looking generosity will, of necessity, produce less self-service in use of those same possessions. Your order of priority is backwards. The cart before the horse, as it were.

 

[davejonescue]

I’m sorry, but this doesn’t address my post at all beyond an assumption that I mean generosity out of abundance when I say joyful, loving generosity. Is it your understanding that you can only be generous if you have abundance? If so, I challenge your understanding of generosity.

I find it concerning that you think “frugality“ is one of the only ways to give sacrificially. That’s an odd perspective that I don’t think can be Biblically substantiated at all. Generosity, to be true generosity, is inherently self-sacrificing. It sees all of its substance as that which is to be used in service to God and love to neighbor and so gives all it can of what it has to that end. Which is my point. Scrupulous (chicken vs beef), self denying frugality is the stuff of pietism. Using ones resources in service of an outward looking generosity will, of necessity, produce less self-service in use of those same possessions. Your order of priority is backwards. The cart before the horse, as it were.

By definition sacrificial generosity stems from sacrifice. And it can most certainly be substantiated by scripture. The first being the widows mite. Both gave; both were being generous; yet, one gave out of their abundance, and the other gave out of their lack. In my experience, the only people that really seem to have a problem with frugality, are those who do not want to live frugal. And that is your choice. But, yes, I think denying ourselves is a part of being a disciple, mainly because Jesus literally says:

“If anyone wants to come after Me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it."

Furthermore, this comment is illogical:

"It sees all of its substance as that which is to be used in service to God and love to neighbor and so gives all it can of what it has to that end. Which is my point. Scrupulous (chicken vs beef), self denying frugality is the stuff of pietism."

Are not finances also a part of a persons substance? And if all we have is to be used in service of God (giving all we can,) for the glory of God, how is making the most of what we have a disservice to God? Also, I am not afraid of Pietism. Many of the Puritans were very pietistic. They didnt just want to know, they wanted to live what they know. And these three things I know.

1. Do not store your treasures on Earth.
2. He who sows sparingly will reap sparingly.
3. Life is a vapor.

We also see that what is more/less is not based on the amount, but on the amount comparative to comfort/security. What one person gave was not a sacrifice, what the other did was. Therefore it seems one can very easily be both generous and non-sacrificial, but the culmination of the gift is not what is given, but what it costs a person. Not to say God disregards any of our gifts, not at all, only that some gifts are more, though less; and some are less, though more.

So, I don't see what or where the danger is of extending my generosity to frugality? Do you think I am going to advertise it? Do you think I am going to sit around and think how good I am? No, Lord willing I will not. But I have a very short life, literally, it is like a breath. Yet, because of what Christ did on my behalf, I will have eternity in the bliss of his presence, in the bliss of total sanctification, in the bliss of every need met. The Bible says, "Lord, teach us to number our days."

The point is, if you do not want to be frugal, don't be. That is your choice. I am going to strive to be (and I already do) in as much areas of my finances as I can be. This does not make me any more righteous than any other believer, because our righteousness is from Jesus, not ourselves. I dont want to wait until I get to Heaven to strive to put everything at his feet. He has provided for me to this day, and he promises to do so until I get home. And, I have full faith if this way is in error, my Father will steer me out of it. For he who started a good work, will finish it.

 

[MarrowMan]

By definition sacrificial generosity stems from sacrifice. And it can most certainly be substantiated by scripture. The first being the widows mite. Both gave; both were being generous; yet, one gave out of their abundance, and the other gave out of their lack. In my experience, the only people that really seem to have a problem with frugality, are those who do not want to live frugal. And that is your choice. But, yes, I think denying ourselves is a part of being a disciple, mainly because Jesus literally says:

“If anyone wants to come after Me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it."

Furthermore, this comment is illogical:

"It sees all of its substance as that which is to be used in service to God and love to neighbor and so gives all it can of what it has to that end. Which is my point. Scrupulous (chicken vs beef), self denying frugality is the stuff of pietism."

Are not finances also a part of a persons substance? And if all we have is to be used in service of God, for the glory of God, how is making the most of what we have a disservice to God? Also, I am not afraid of Pietism. Many of the Puritans were very pietistic. They didnt just want to know, they wanted to live what they know. And these three things I know.

1. Do not store your treasures on Earth.
2. He who sows sparingly will reap sparingly.
3. Life is a vapor.

We also see that what is more/less is not based on the amount, but on the amount comparative to comfort/security. What one person gave was not a sacrifice, what the other did was. Therefore it seems one can very easily be both generous and non-sacrificial, but the culmination of the gift is not what is given, but what it costs a person.

So, I don't see what or where the danger is of extending my generosity to frugality? Do you think I am going to advertise it? Do you think I am going to sit around and think how good I am? No, Lord willing I will not. But I have a very short life, literally, it is like a breath. Yet, because of what Christ did on my behalf, I will have eternity in the bliss of his presence, in the bliss of total sanctification, in the bliss of every need met. The Bible says, "Lord, teach us to number our days."

The point is, if you do not want to be frugal, don't be. That is your choice. I am going to strive to be (and I already do) in as much areas of my finances as I can be. This does not make me any more righteous than any other believer, because our righteousness is from Jesus, not ourselves. I dont want to wait until I get to Heaven to strive to put everything at his feet. He has provided for me to this day, and he promises to do so until I get home. And, I have full faith if this way is in error, my Father will steer me out of it. For he who started a good work, will finish it.

I think we are talking past each other. In a nutshell, what I am saying is that frugality is not first in the order of operations. Cultivating a spirit and disposition of generosity is. Frugality, as you seem to be using the term, flows from a generous disposition, not the other way around. That's all I am saying. If you seek to cultivate a generous disposition, you will, of necessity, become less wasteful and less self oriented in your use of your resources, financial or otherwise.

 

[davejonescue]

I think we are talking past each other. In a nutshell, what I am saying is that frugality is not first in the order of operations. Cultivating a spirit and disposition of generosity is. Frugality, as you seem to be using the term, flows from a generous disposition, not the other way around. That's all I am saying. If you seek to cultivate a generous disposition, you will, of necessity, become less wasteful and less self oriented in your use of your resources, financial or otherwise.

That makes perfect sense. I agree.

 

[Morgan]

And again, this is where I am getting at. What makes a Christian think they deserve the best quality beef? What makes a Christian think they need to get beef when chicken will suffice? "Give us this day, our daily bread" is not a petition of extravagance, but of necessity; not of flavor, but of sustenance; and do we really want to be like Israel in the wilderness, when God fed them by placing their daily food outside their tents, to complain of an observed redundancy or mediocrity when it was in fact the food of angels? Yet he gave in to their desire placing meat in their reach, but in his anger, thousands were struck dead while the meat was still between their teeth.

I am not disagreeing, but consider some other things, not trying to get off topic but there are other things to consider. I do not believe in being wasteful and even among the professing Christians in America, we are very wasteful.

I buy beef from a Christian rancher who raises it only on grass, no corn, no hormones, no antibiotics. When I buy it the cost is high, but when I figure how long it lasts it is cheaper than buying at the store week after week. It is cheaper and better for me than the store bought, corn fed, hormone laden beef.

Chicken is cheap but my day job is at a chemical plant. One unit makes the amino acid that is fed to chickens to fatten them up quickly to sell. Compare a store bought chicken with a natural one - there is a big difference. I can eat store bought chicken that is cheap but I am convinced it is not healthy for me. Natural chicken costs more than my natural beef so I rarely eat it. If you know anyone who manages a Chick-Fil-A, ask them about all that is done to the chickens they use. Commercial chicken is chock full of man made things to make them grow so they can make more money.

So I can be frugal and unhealthy or spend wisely and try and achieve both. I meet frequently with church members for coffee and I pick the cheap stuff now, 7-10 dollar coffee is getting to be the norm and personally I think that is wasteful for me so I do not buy it. I buy everything I can on clearance, my first place I go in the grocery store is the clearance isle. This does allow me to give freely was I see fit and I have money to help those in need while still giving to my church.

 

[davejonescue]

I am not disagreeing, but consider some other things, not trying to get off topic but there are other things to consider. I do not believe in being wasteful and even among the professing Christians in America, we are very wasteful.

I buy beef from a Christian rancher who raises it only on grass, no corn, no hormones, no antibiotics. When I buy it the cost is high, but when I figure how long it lasts it is cheaper than buying at the store week after week. It is cheaper and better for me than the store bought, corn fed, hormone laden beef.

Chicken is cheap but my day job is at a chemical plant. One unit makes the amino acid that is fed to chickens to fatten them up quickly to sell. Compare a store bought chicken with a natural one - there is a big difference. I can eat store bought chicken that is cheap but I am convinced it is not healthy for me.

So I can be frugal and unhealthy or spend wisely and try and achieve both. I meet frequently with church members for coffee and I pick the cheap stuff now, 7-10 dollar coffee is getting to be the norm and personally I think that is wasteful for me so I do not buy it. I buy everything I can on clearance, my first place I go in the grocery store is the clearance isle. This does allow me to give freely was I see fit and I have money to help those in need while still giving to my church.

That makes a lot of sense. But I would politely counter with, that even precautions for health can become a hindrance to our walks at times. Consider in Christianity. There is a whole subset that is into health and fitness, body building and exercise (without going into the details of the associated gluttony of muscular gain,) yet, would a person not enter into frequent fasting's based on health precautions? When we look to the NT and the OT, fasting was a normal part of the experience; yet, it is an area I never hear preached about, nor have I experienced much of myself. But look at the blocks we put up. If I spend all of this money to work out, to gain an inch of muscle; but fast, I lose those gains. We are told that going without meals is unhealthy; yet, there is a spiritual aspect that supersedes normal activity. I am asking the Lord to "prepare" me for fasting regularly. Look at the world we live in. Almost, if not every time fasting is mentioned in the Bible, it is about food; yet, what has the church turned it into....fasting is almost anything but food.

The reason I mention this is because I really believe there are so many nuggets of experiential discipleship in the Bible, that are seen as pietistic in the contemporary church; that were normal, if not deemed necessary for early believers, that I may be missing out on an entire level of relation with God I don't need to be. It is easy to stuff our brains with theology or debate doctrinal issues; it is another to anoint thy face, and present the world with a smile while you are battling desire inwardly. To me, there seems like this experience is beckoning people to come, come taste and see; yet we live in a world of comfort; where we will use health, or prosperity, or a disdain for frugality, or any other means (and I am the chief culprit,) from actually suffering to obtain greater graces. The Bible says "for the joy set before him he endured the cross." I have been, in my eyes, way to happy to embrace the joy while minimizing my cross to almost non-existence.

I apologize to derail this a bit, but if only in my mind, it is connected. Because when I think of fasting, I think of Isaiah 58. It is not to just refrain, but to refrain and give. God has calculated the span of our days; not one bird falls to the ground apart from his will. None of the stuff I am saying has anything to do with being more righteous either in the eyes of God, or man; but has everything to do with being a good steward of the things he has given me and a desire to draw closer to him. Both of these issues, frugality and fasting, no one will know I am doing but God; yet, I perceive both as a normal, if at least in my life commonly neglected, part of the way.

I am just really blessed there seems to be a good selection of Puritan books on fasting; so I look forward to getting into those as the Lord prepares my heart, if it be his will, to begin to do so.

 

[Morgan]

That makes a lot of sense. But I would politely counter with, that even precautions for health can become a hindrance to our walks at times. Consider in Christianity. There is a whole subset that is into health and fitness, body building and exercise (without going into the details of the associated gluttony of muscular gain,) yet, would a person not enter into frequent fasting's based on health precautions? When we look to the NT and the OT, fasting was a normal part of the experience; yet, it is an area I never hear preached about, nor have I experienced much of myself. But look at the blocks we put up. If I spend all of this money to work out, to gain an inch of muscle; but fast, I lose those gains. We are told that going without meals is unhealthy; yet, there is a spiritual aspect that supersedes normal activity. I am asking the Lord to "prepare" me for fasting regularly. Look at the world we live in. Almost, if not every time fasting is mentioned in the Bible, it is about food; yet, what has the church turned it into....fasting is almost anything but food.

The reason I mention this is because I really believe there are so many nuggets of experiential discipleship in the Bible, that are seen as pietistic in the contemporary church; that were normal, if not deemed necessary for early believers, that I may be missing out on an entire level of relation with God I don't need to be. It is easy to stuff our brains with theology or debate doctrinal issues; it is another to anoint thy face, and present the world with a smile while you are battling desire inwardly. To me, there seems like this experience is beckoning people to come, come taste and see; yet we live in a world of comfort; where we will use health, or prosperity, or a disdain for frugality, or any other means (and I am the chief culprit,) from actually suffering to obtain greater graces. The Bible says "for the joy set before him he endured the cross." I have been, in my eyes, way to happy to embrace the joy while minimizing my cross to almost non-existence.

I apologize to derail this a bit, but if only in my mind, it is connected. Because when I think of fasting, I think of Isaiah 58. It is not to just refrain, but to refrain and give. God has calculated the span of our days; not one bird falls to the ground apart from his will. None of the stuff I am saying has anything to do with being more righteous either in the eyes of God, or man; but has everything to do with being a good steward of the things he has given me and a desire to draw closer to him. Both of these issues, frugality and fasting, no one will know I am doing but God; yet, I perceive both as a normal, if at least in my life commonly neglected, part of the way.

I am just really blessed there seems to be a good selection of Puritan books on fasting; so I look forward to getting into those as the Lord prepares my heart, if it be his will, to begin to do so.

Actually fasting is quote popular in the secular world today, just do searches on intermittent fasting. There are claimed health benefits to it also. I am surprised when I speak to some younger guys who have not fasted (in a biblical manner) and state how hard it would be. It does not seem to be common today although we do see it taught in scripture.

It is a fine line, I am not going too far into trying to think that I can extend my life and live forever (as some try to achieve). But I think it is another matter if we concede and say God has set my days so I can eat however I want. We know that there are ways that will shorten our lives and those revolve around sin. The more unhealthy we are the less we can serve - our health affects how we can serve. If I can eat better at no greater cost I will do that. It does not hinder my ability to help others.

We do live in a world of comfort but we can also do that without being wasteful and still be good stewards. For some that may mean living in a shack so they can give everything they make - I will not fault that, some do that. For others, having a house with a spare room to offer to someone is fine.

I think it is a question each of us should ask ourselves. Are we being excessive and wasteful or are we being good stewards with what we have. Are we clinging to the things of the world or are we longing for and storing up our treasures in heaven. It does help when church members can support the church and pay the bills to have a place to worship. Not a cathedral but a place to worship.

We do not need to be ascetics but we do need to be disciplined and we do need to examine ourselves.

 

[JimmyH]

I haven't read every post in this thread, so if it has been mentioned I missed it, but Dabney's Principles of Christian Economy, (vol 1 Discussions) is quite compelling. After you read it get some sackcloth and ashes to sit in while you contemplate it.

Google Sites: Sign-in

Access Google Sites with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use).

sites.google.com

 

[davejonescue]

I haven't read every post in this thread, so if it has been mentioned I missed it, but Dabney's Principles of Christian Economy, (vol 1 Discussions) is quite compelling. After you read it get some sackcloth and ashes to sit in while you contemplate it.

Google Sites: Sign-in

Access Google Sites with a personal Google account or Google Workspace account (for business use).

sites.google.com

Thank you for sharing this. With the help of ReadAloud I listened/read this last night and today. He better illustrates the points I was trying to get at way better than I could have. There are so many areas I was wishing to quote, but really the entire work is terrific. This treatise is really where I would like to go, and in my personal walk, this is the gist of much of what I was saying:

"New and unheard-of indulgences are invented. What our fathers regarded as luxuries almost extravagant, we have accustomed ourselves to look upon as ordinary comforts, almost despised for their cheapness."

That is, I am not saying I want to choose chicken over steak simply to be a miser, or e-books over print books to shun publishers, or thrift store clothes over new ones to idolize frugality; but that in almost every generation preceding ours, daily food, what ever it was (chicken or steak) would have been a luxury, e-books provide theological libraries at no cost for the personal user, vaster than most universities had prior to 1920 or larger than the greatest theologians we commend were ever privy to, and one can buy more clothes at a thrift store with a single days wages than most people owned collectively in generations before.

We are such a materially blessed nation; yet cursed to be raised with the ideology that frivolous expenditure affirms prosperity. Even the impoverished of America are kings and queens compared to the citizens of many countries of the world. And it is really my point. If we have so rich a heritage (let alone theological heritage,) from ancestors of lesser means, in what ways is frivolity pertinent to the proliferation of the Great Commission? In what ways does a Christian have a "right" to be an unfaithful steward in the way we spend our finances? Plus, stewardship is not just being frugal in our spending, but stepping back and looking at the blessings already presented to us in which no expenditure at all is needed to obtain.

I think often times we comment on "rich Christians" as if it were an abstract anomaly; when I would argue that even the poor American Christian is in many, if not most ways the globally "rich Christian" we try and paint as a rarity.

"A reference to the views which prevailed in former ages concerning the evil effects of luxury will suggest another consideration. The time was when wise heathens and wise Christians alike looked upon luxury as a vice in itself—a thing which emasculated the hardihood and energy of the character, stimulated all the vices, as tropical heat and moisture force up the vegetation of a wealthy soil, and unfitted man for usefulness. Wise legislators excluded luxury as the bane of commonwealths and as a crime unworthy of manhood. Historians constantly pointed at the luxury which accumulated wealth had provoked as the cause of Persian imbecility, of Grecian decline, and of the downfall of imperial Borne. Senates made repeated attempts to restrain it by sumptuary laws; attempts which were vain indeed, and ill-judged, but which evinced the reality of the evil. The plain, good sense of the olden times pointed out the stubborn fact, which men had not then learned to dodge by a deceitful philosophy, that luxurious expenditures, in wasting the labour of working hands and the products of labour, must be ruinous to public wealth. “What has now become of these old-fashioned facts and truths? How is it that a Christian ethics, in a Christian age, professing to be unspeakably purer than all pagan systems, is silent concerning a vice which old pagan Sparta and Borne reprobated? How is it that Christian people indulge, without a whisper of disapprobation or a frown of public opinion, in luxuries more elaborate than those which even a polished Cicero denounced as disgusting and contaminating in the young men of licentious Borne? How is it that it has become proper, and manly, and wise, for the soldiers of the cross, who ought to be girded for the terrific war with “principalities and powers and spiritual wickedness in high places,” to soften their effeminate limbs with indulgences which would have been shameful and ruinous in the secular soldier or athlete? It passes our wit to tell! To us, who remember how Paul commanded “to crucify the flesh with the affections and lusts,” how he set the example of “keeping under his body and bringing it into subjection,” and how he has charged us “to endure hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ,” how every Christian has dedicated himself, professedly, soul and body, to a tremendous conflict, for a stake which is composed of his own soul, worth more than a world, and a world of immortal souls like his; to us it does seem that every indulgence which diminishes the hardihood and self-denial of the man, or unnerves him for the strife, is a crime and a treason, leaving out of view the waste it causes of the material means for carrying on the great cause. Do the fashionable indulgences now common among rich Christians have this effect? Let the fact before referred to give the answer, that the of the age are usually the sons of simple mediocrity."

Soldiers of secular warfare are given a uniform, an MRE, and only carry that which is necessary for their survival and victory. If this life is warfare, and we are soldiers of Christ; should we not resemble more men of war, or men of luxury?

“And not only are these indulgences objectionable as weakening to the Christian character, but they waste the attention and time of those who love them. He who goes to warfare should not encumber himself with much baggage. The true soldier has no time to provide gorgeous caparisons for his horse and drapery for his own limbs. All that he can take care of is to have his weapons in fighting order. All else is an incumbrance. When Darius and Alexander met at Arbela, the Macedonian phalanx was horrid with brass and iron. The only things which glittered along the sturdy ranks were the deadly points of the pikes and the sword-blades. But the half-armed men and horses of the Persian came sweating under gorgeous draperies of worsted and purple and gold, which swept the earth. Which conquered? Of Frederick the Great, Macaulay says:— “Some young Englishmen of rank proposed to visit Germany as volunteers, for the purpose of learning the art of war under the greatest of commanders. This last proof of British attachment and admiration Frederick politely but firmly declined. His camp was no place for amateur students of military science. The Prussian discipline was rigorous even to cruelty. The officers, while in the field, were expected to practice an abstemiousness and self-denial such as were hardly surpassed by the most rigid monastic orders. However noble their birth, however high their rank in the service, they were not permitted to eat from anything better than pewter. It was a high crime even in a count and field-marshal to have a single silver spoon among his baggage. Gay young Englishmen of twenty thousand a year, accustomed to liberty and luxury, would not easily submit to these Spartan restraints; and the king could not venture to keep them in order as he kept his own subjects in order.”

Thus act the children of this world, who are wise in their generation. And thus should act the children of light.

They should be too busy in the service of their king to have a thought for gewgaws, and. too anxious for efficiency to burden themselves with superfluities."