Christian retirement

[abacabb3]

Let me speak honestly about a few things as it pertains to money. As for sin in my life, pride and a lack of faith in the Lord's provision are still things that I struggle with. I don't know how anyone here saves for retirement, which in of itself is dicey being that God says lay up riches in heaven. How have you guys lives with that verse and applied it? I, as a matter of principle, have made sure to tithe more than my retirement savings thus far. Can't say this makes me a great guy, because I still pay my property tax and stuff, and the majority of the income I make still goes towards paying our bills, feeding ourselves, and the occasional luxury. Ideally, we should be laying at God's feet every penny we can muster, like the poor widow at the temple.

So, why don't we?

 

[GQ Chris]

I think we have some loaded presuppositions here. God's not broke, he doesn't need your money.

 

[abacabb3]

I think we have some loaded presuppositions here. God's not broke, he doesn't need your money.

Of course He does not need my money. However, the greatest thing we can spend our money (and time!) on is on propagating the Gospel in some form. This is never entirely the desire of our hearts, but we want it to be more and more.

 

[BryanW92]

Let me speak honestly about a few things as it pertains to money. As for sin in my life, pride and a lack of faith in the Lord's provision are still things that I struggle with. I don't know how anyone here saves for retirement, which in of itself is dicey being that God says lay up riches in heaven. How have you guys lives with that verse and applied it? I, as a matter of principle, have made sure to tithe more than my retirement savings thus far. Can't say this makes me a great guy, because I still pay my property tax and stuff, and the majority of the income I make still goes towards paying our bills, feeding ourselves, and the occasional luxury. Ideally, we should be laying at God's feet every penny we can muster, like the poor widow at the temple.

So, why don't we?

In 1st century Jewish culture, the only people who were assured of welfare were widows and orphans. When the widow put her two coins in, they were all she had at that moment, but she did not starve to death because of it.

On the other hand, you will not work for your entire life. It is your responsibility to save for the day when you stop working. If you grew corn, would you give God all of your crop the instant that you harvested it? Of course not. Jesus tells a parable of a man with barns. The moral is not that barns full of grain is bad, but that just storing up wealth to be storing wealth is bad. The man who does not prepare for winter, or for a bad season, or for the day when he can no longer work is a burden on society. If he is doing it to test God, then he is just laying out a fleece and this isn't good either.

Now, if you are planning on buying a million dollar class A motor coach when you retire and spending 30 years burning gas and money, then perhaps you should give more. But, if you are planning to live comfortably and secure in old age, then you should keep your money.

 

[abacabb3]

In 1st century Jewish culture, the only people who were assured of welfare were widows and orphans. When the widow put her two coins in, they were all she had at that moment, but she did not starve to death because of it.

I agree with your other points, but in the above I would like some sort of historical citation for this. From reading the Scripture, it appears people have shirked this responsibility, which means, the widow was not assured of anything.

 

[BryanW92]

I agree with your other points, but in the above I would like some sort of historical citation for this. From reading the Scripture, it appears people have shirked this responsibility, which means, the widow was not assured of anything.

Acts 6:1

"Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution."

The daily distribution....Hebrews...widows.

That sounds like it was a common enough practice that people we noticing that it wasn't being fairly conducted. The problem was that the GREEK widows were being neglected. Acts 6 takes place in Jerusalem.

 

[jacks]

I believe you should strive to be able to support yourself in retirement. If you don't provide for your own needs then, someone else will have to. That is money they could have used for people who are incapable of providing for themselves. In other words if you are able to provide for yourself (including when you can no longer work) you should do so, otherwise you just transfer that burden to others.

 

[abacabb3]

Acts 6:1

"Now in these days when the disciples were increasing in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution."

The daily distribution....Hebrews...widows.

That sounds like it was a common enough practice that people we noticing that it wasn't being fairly conducted. The problem was that the GREEK widows were being neglected. Acts 6 takes place in Jerusalem.

The fact that it was neglected means it was not always assured. Being that the Church in modern days often shirks its responsibilities and that Israel, the precursor of the church did as well. So, perhaps for a time the Apostolic CHurch pretty much got it 99% right, the idea of being "assured" one's retirement appears to be a stretch, especially when people did not always share food with one another (1 Cor 11).

I do agree, however, the Church is supposed to supply the needs of unmarried widows without families (1 Tim 5).

 

[BryanW92]

The fact that it was neglected means it was not always assured. Being that the Church in modern days often shirks its responsibilities and that Israel, the precursor of the church did as well. So, perhaps for a time the Apostolic CHurch pretty much got it 99% right, the idea of being "assured" one's retirement appears to be a stretch, especially when people did not always share food with one another (1 Cor 11).

I do agree, however, the Church is supposed to supply the needs of unmarried widows without families (1 Tim 5).

We aren't writing a contract here where exact verbiage is essential. In conversational speech, it is smart to assume that any extreme word (all, every, never, etc) can still be used and that exceptions may still exist. You can nitpick all day, but the point is that the widow did not give all she would ever have when she gave those two coins. It was the custom in that time to take care of widows and these were people who tried to follow customs, even to their own detriment.

Your retirement fund is not cheating God. That is the answer to the OP.

 

[dysert]

Lots of issues here: tithing, giving, paying bills, saving. First I'd like to say that tithing is not a NT concept. If you're giving 10% because you think you're "supposed to", you're being unnecessarily legalistic. Of course you need to support your church, but you should also be able to give to worthy causes other than the church. You also have to pay your bills. "Owe no man anything...". And I think you should be saving for retirement. Who is going to pay your way after your income stops? God hasn't promised to be our provider as we sit in an easy chair for 20 years.

As with everything, you have to figure out the balance that works with what you've got. It's definitely not easy unless you're a millionaire.

 

[abacabb3]

I agree tithing is not a New Testament concept. 10% is not enough, Christ did not redeem 10% of our souls.

 

[BryanW92]

I agree tithing is not a New Testament concept. 10% is not enough, Christ did not redeem 10% of our souls.

You cannot earn or give enough to repay Jesus. Did you fully reimburse your mother yet for giving birth to you? If you gave someone a wonderful gift and they pulled out their checkbook to pay for it, would you be offended? Thats what legalistic giving is to God.

 

[abacabb3]

We aren't writing a contract here where exact verbiage is essential. In conversational speech, it is smart to assume that any extreme word (all, every, never, etc) can still be used and that exceptions may still exist. You can nitpick all day, but the point is that the widow did not give all she would ever have when she gave those two coins. It was the custom in that time to take care of widows and these were people who tried to follow customs, even to their own detriment.

Your retirement fund is not cheating God. That is the answer to the OP.

As a matter of historical principle, I have to disagree with you. I don't think the ancients had social safety nets anywhere close to us.

 

[abacabb3]

I think we are missing the mark in this thread. It is not a debate about tithing. I think that people have been taken aback from the idea that they don't lay down their lives as Christ laid down His and this has to do with a lack of conviction what laying down's life even means.

Hence, when we know the ideal is to lay down our very lives (which means even dying if necessary, but certainly giving up our time and money for the sake of others) and see how this creates a tension with how we would save for retirement.

Now the Scripture addresses the issue of saving:

”Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.” – Proverbs 6:-6-8

Obviously, it speaks how the ant saves so it can survive the winter. So, saving in order to survive (i.e. retirement) clearly is no sin.

So, how do we resolve this tension while taking seriously John's admonition to lay down our very lives? It is a serious question that cannot simply be handwaved away.

 

[gord44]

So, how do we resolve this tension while taking seriously John's admonition to lay down our very lives? It is a serious question that cannot simply be handwaved away.

I would not worry about it. Worrying about it goes against the Sermon on the Mount about not being anxious about money.

25 “Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26 Look at the birds of the air: they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? 27 And which of you by being anxious can add a single hour to his span of life?28 And why are you anxious about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin, 29 yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. 30 But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is alive and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will he not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? 31 Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ 32 For the Gentiles seek after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. 33 But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

34 “Therefore do not be anxious about tomorrow, for tomorrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient for the day is its own trouble.

 

[BryanW92]

As a matter of historical principle, I have to disagree with you. I don't think the ancients had social safety nets anywhere close to us.

I'm not saying they did either. But there were societal norms that were followed much more closely than we do in the US today. Did you watch or read "Lone Survivor", the story of the US SEAL? In the book, it goes into a lot of detail on the customs of hospitality in that region. When he accepted hospitality from that village, they were bound to protect him with their lives just because they offered hospitality and he accepted. You would never see that in the US or Europe today, but in earlier centuries, we did adhere to customs like that.

In the ANE, these customs were followed strictly because that was the social compact that bound people together. The bible does clearly state that there was an expectation that widows would be cared for. Do you dispute that?

Since people took their responsibilities seriously, they would have followed this custom in sacrificial ways, just as they did tithing, sacrifices, and other things that we view as optional today. Do you dispute that people followed their social customs in the 1st century near east?

 

[BryanW92]

So, how do we resolve this tension while taking seriously John's admonition to lay down our very lives? It is a serious question that cannot simply be handwaved away.

It is your tension. It is not tension for most people. If we were to literally lay down our lives, then a baptism should be a drowning.

You still have to eat. You need to have a roof over your head. And you will need that until the day you die. God wants you healthy and happy. What does his message say if we are all starving to death?

You don't need a large TV or SUV or giant McMansion. The tension is not with retirement. The real question is "why do you own a computer?" Shouldn't the disciple who is ready to lay down his life be out amongst the people with a bible instead of typing on an expensive computer? As the bible says, "Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages." (John 12:5) Your computer could buy meals for the poor!

But, there's the problem. That was Judas speaking. Jesus told him to chill out and not worry about it. When the bible causes you tension, just chill out. Perfection is where we are going. Its not where we are.

 

[GQ Chris]

Lots of works religion I detect.

 

[abacabb3]

But, there's the problem. That was Judas speaking. Jesus told him to chill out and not worry about it. When the bible causes you tension, just chill out. Perfection is where we are going. Its not where we are.

So, if I am a new believer and I ask you what do you think we should be acting like with money, for example, what example would you give me in your life? And, if you are not where you would like to be, where is where you want to be perhaps look like?

 

[abacabb3]

Lots of works religion I detect.

I have a question for you. Can a Christian wantonly perform acts of sexual immorality or would you advise against it?