Menu

100 Sermon Illustrations on Wealth

100 illustrations Page 2 of 2

Wealth in Christian preaching is often portrayed as both a blessing and a potential spiritual hazard, emphasizing the need for wisdom and stewardship (1 Timothy 6:10). Illustrations frequently use images of great riches, luxurious possessions, and the fleeting nature of material gain to challenge believers to seek eternal treasures rather than earthly wealth (Matthew 6:19-21).

Eternal Riches Are Not Inherited Thus

Columnist L. M. Boyd recently described the amazing good fortune of a man named Jack Wurm. In 1949, Mr. Wurm was broke and out of a job. One day he was walking along a San Francisco beach when he came across a bottle with a piece of paper in it. As he read the note, he discovered that it was the last will and testament of Daisy Singer Alexander, heir to the Singer sewing machine fortune. The note read, "To avoid confusion, I leave my entire estate to the lucky person who finds this bottle and to my attorney, Barry Cohen, share and share alike." According to Boyd, the courts accepted the theory that the heiress had written the note 12 years earlier, and had thrown the bottle into the Thames River in London, from where it had drifted across the oceans to the feet of a penniless and jobless Jack Wurm. His chance discovery netted him over 6 million dollars in cash and Singer stock. How would you like to have been making Mr. Wurm's footprints on that San Francisco beach? What a find! And yet 6 million dollars doesn't even begin to compare with our spiritual inheritance!

(Christ does not will His eternal riches through such whims and chance! They only inherit His wealth who meet His conditions and who thereby become the sons and daughters of God. -- Duane V. Maxey)

from Fredericksburg Bible Illustrator Supplements via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealth

(untitled)

A young couple of meager circumstances was discussing their

financial problems one evening when the wife wistfully sighed, "I wish

we could be rich and not have to juggle our funds this way!"

Her husband with a smile placed his hands over hers, and said,

"Honey, we have the Lord; we have each other; our health is good; and

our home is happy. We are rich. And maybe some day we will even have

money!"

from Fredericksburg Bible Illustrator Supplements via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

(untitled)

Acts 3:1

Církev nerozdává ani støíbro, ani zlato a nenabízí ani jiné hmotné dary. To, že to tak nedìla, nemusí být žádné munus v její službì. Známý køesanský filozof a teolog Tomáš Akvinský navštívil jednou papeže ve chvíli, kdy zrovna dohližel na pøepoèitávání veliké donace, které se do církvi dostalo. Papež se obrátil na Tomáše se slovy: Vidíš, doby, kdy církev prohlašovala, že støíbra a zlata nemá, patøí už dávné minulostí.

Je to pravda, svatý otèe, odpovìdìl Tomáš, jenže, mùžeš-li ještì zavolat na chromého, aby vstal a chodil?

Každopádnì je tomu tak, že chudobou Kristových uèedníkù byl svìt více obohacen nežli majetkem tìch nejbohatších.

from V Královských Sluzbách - Thdr Jan Urban Str. 59 via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

Tax officials value Gates home at $53 million

Tax officials value Gates home at $53 million

SEATTLE (Reuter) - Microsoft Corp.'s billionaire Chairman Bill Gates, who moved into his luxurious lakeside mansion last month after seven years of construction, faces a hefty tax bill that is likely to go even higher.

County officials sent Gates a notice valuing the 20,000-square-foot main home and four outbuildings at $53.4 million, meaning he probably will get a tax bill of more than $600,000 in January, chief deputy assessor Bob Roegner said Thursday.

The valuation -- done entirely from records to comply with Gates' request that assessors not come tromping through the property -- was made in July when the house was only 85 percent completed, so the assessment is likely to go up next year.

Gates, his wife, Melinda, and their 1-year-old daughter Jennifer moved into the 20-room house in mid-September, although workers are still finishing construction and ironing out technology glitches.

In addition to luxuries like a 60-foot-long L-shaped swimming pool with piped-in underwater music, a trampoline room with 20-foot ceilings and a dining room that can seat 100, the home features a network of 50 high-powered personal computers to monitor lighting, sound and climate.

Smart pins help the computers identify who is in a room at any given time to customize the environment, although Gates said this week the system has not been perfected.

"Sometimes it plays music I want, sometimes it plays something else," he said in a speech.

Roegner said the assessment was based on records of what Gates paid to build the house, consultations with representatives of the software mogul, the estimated value of the home's prime five-acre site in the exclusive enclave of Medina and previous visits to the property.

Gates asked assessors to work from documents to prevent details of the home's security system from being entered in to the public record, Roegner said.

"It was somewhat unusual, but the feeling here is that it was very understandable based on the circumstances, and the chief assessor felt he could do a fair assessment," Roegner said.

Gates, whose stake in the computer software giant is valued at nearly $40 billion, has no plans to contest the home's valuation, a spokesman said.

"He plans to pay his taxes like everybody else," Microsoft spokesman John Pinette said Thursday.

^REUTER@

Woman Lands Small Fortune In Bank Blunder

Luke 6:38

A British secretary got more than she bargained for when she asked her bank for a small loan and was sent a check for a small fortune, a British newspaper reported.

Susan Anderson wanted $5,700 to pay off debts. The Halifax bank, which uses the slogan "Always giving you extra," did just that and sent her a check for more than $13 million.

"I know the slogan, but this was ridiculous," Anderson, 51, told The Sun.

The mother of two didn't spot the error at first. "It's only when I looked at it later that I thought: 'That's not right'," she said.

"At first I thought it was for 8,000 pounds (about $11,600), twice what I wanted. Then I looked at it again and realized that there was this huge figure that seemed to go on for ever," said Anderson, who is now expecting a new check for the right amount.

The single mother of two from Gloucestershire in western England alerted the bank to the mistake, but not before photocopying the check and showing it to her workmates. She also admitted dreaming about how to spend the money.

"Since getting it I've been round the world 20 times in my head spending it. I could certainly do some serious damage to money of that kind, and I need it," she said.

A spokesman for the bank told The Sun a computer error was behind the blunder.

from Reuters via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database grace

Themes In Proverbs: Wealth

1 Timothy 6:10

Themes in Proverbs: Wealth « Leader information »

{Verses shown are New American Standard version; look at them in your Bible}

A. 10:15 The rich man’s wealth is his fortress, The ruin of the poor is their poverty 11:28 He who trusts in his riches will fall, But the righteous will flourish like the green leaf. 18:11 A rich man’s wealth is his strong city, And like a high {NIV: unscalable} wall in his own imagination.

1. What dangers are there in wealth?

a. « it becomes the object of unwarranted trust »

b. « it replaces God in our affections (1 Timothy 6:10) »

2. What biblical examples of this are there?

a. « the rich man and his barns »

b. 2 Timothy 4:10

B. 11:4 Riches do not profit in the day of wrath, But righteousness delivers from death. 19:4 Wealth adds many friends, But a poor man is separated from his friend. 27:24 For riches are not forever, Nor does a crown endure to all generations.

1. what are some of the limitations and disadvantages of wealth?

a. « can avail little when you lose health, face judgment »

b. « people befriend you for what you have, not what you are »

c. « you can lose them faster than you gain them »

C. 13:7 There is one who pretends to be rich, but has nothing; Another pretends to be poor, but has great wealth.

1. what two kinds of pretense of wealth are there?

a. « not having money, but putting on a show as if one did »

b. « having money, but impoverished in soul and spirit »

2. what two kinds of pretense of poverty are there?

a. « having money, but loath to let others know or to spend it; miserly »

b. « not having money, but wealthy in soul and spirit »

D. 15:6 Much wealth is in the house of the righteous, But trouble is in the income of the wicked. 16:8 Better is a little with righteousness Than great income with injustice.

1. what kinds (examples) of wealth are found with God’s children?

a. « relationships: with God and with man »

b. « joy, peace, assurance, hope, purpose, etc »

c. « material blessing: Malachi; maybe not in absolute terms, but God benefits the Christian more with the 90% he keeps than the world benefits keeping the 100% »

2. what is the nature of this righteousness?

a. « it is the opposite of wickedness »

b. « it is the opposite of injustice »

E. 28:22 A man with an evil eye {NIV: a stingy man} hastens after wealth, And does not know that want will come upon him.

1. In what two ways will the miser suffer poverty?

a. « his only wealth is money; when lost he has nothing and even when he has it, it does not benefit him »

b. « even when successful in acquiring wealth, he still wants more; his wanting is never fulfilled »

2. what is the contrasting command to the Christian? « Colossians 3:1-2 »

from Sunday Bible School · Garth Hutchinson via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

It's Hard To Handle Money

Luke 3:14

Most folks find if hard to handle a lot of new money. A friend of mind from Mt Carmel, IL, told me an interesting story about what happened there after WW II.

A scientist had found a way to get the sulfur out of the oil deposits around there and all sorts folks were rich over night. At one time their county had more Cadillacs per capita than any other in the USA.

But this new wealth came at a price. It ruined just about every family who struck it rich. They could not handle it. Two who did handle it had interesting strategies. One gave every bit of it to his church and promptly forgot he ever had it. The other put all of it in trust for his grandchildren with the idea that maybe by then the family would learn to handle it.

Riches Fade

Mark 8:36

For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? Or what shall a man give in ex-change for his soul? — Mark 8:36, 39.

Unconverted souls who live and die without Christ have surely made a bad trade. Where is the power of Alexander? the wealth of Croesus? the fame of Voltaire? the greatness of Hitler or Stahlin? There have been more fools than Esau; he has had many followers; Achan, Gehazi, Judas, Ananias. How insignificant their gain! How great their loss! What is your relation to the birthright? to the new birth? Are you born again? Have you preferred the world to Christ, sin to holiness, hell to heaven? Beware!

Take the world, but give me Jesus, all its joys are but a name,

But His love abideth ever, through eternal years the same.

Take the world, but give me Jesus, in His cross my trust shall be;

Till with clearer brighter vision, face to face, my Lord 1 see. — F. Crosby.

from Old Devotional Calendar (1960's) · Anonymous via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database prioritiespowergreatness

The Richest Animals

London's THE MIRROR newspaper released a list of the world's 20 inheritance-wealthiest animals, topped by the dog “Gunther IV” (now worth over US$320 million, from the late German countess Karlotta Libenstein), followed by Kalu the chimpanzee (about US$95 million, from the late Australian Olympic swimmer Frank O'Neill) and the dog Toby Rimes (about US$80 million, from the late New Yorker Ella Wendel). The list consists of 10 cats (4 of them American), 5 dogs, a hen, a tortoise, a parrot, Kalu the chimp, and a herd of cattle supported by a British royal trust. (Most on the list are offspring of the original recipient, with trust funds even larger because of investments.)

from The Mirror Newspaper via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database rich

Not Enough To Be Upright and Moral

J.C. Penney was a man of advanced years before he committed his life fully to Jesus Christ. He was a good man, but primarily interested in becoming a success and making money. “When I worked for six dollars a week at Joslin's Dry Goods Store back in Denver,” he confessed as he looked back on his life, “it was my ambition...to be worth one hundred thousand dollars. When I reached that goal I felt a certain temporary satisfaction, but it soon wore off and my sights were set on becoming worth a million dollars.”

Mr. and Mrs. Penney worked hard to expand the business; but one day Mrs. Penney caught cold and pneumonia developed, which claimed her life. It was then that J.C. Penney realized having money was a poor substitute for the real purposes in living. “When she died,” he said, “my world crashed around me....I felt mocked by life, even by God himself.”

After several more fiery trials, J.C. Penney was financially ruined, and naturally, in deep distress. This is when God could deal with his self-righteous nature and his love for money. After his spiritual conversion he could testify of God's working.

“I had to pass through fiery ordeals before reaching glimmerings of conviction that it is not enough for men to be upright and moral men. When I was brought to humility and the knowledge of dependence on God, sincerely and earnestly seeking God's aid...a light illumined my being. I cannot otherwise describe it than to say that it changed me as a man.”

________

from James S. Hewett, ed., Parables, Etc. (Saratoga Press) quoted in 1001 Great Stories and Quotes by R. Kent Hughes (Tyndale) pp 215-16

There Are Only Five Or Six True Believers

Luke 13:23

Soren Kierkegaard, the Danish philosopher and theologian, once said, “If we mean by Christian what the New Testament means by Christian, then in any given generation there are no more than five or six true believers.” Kierkegaard made that statement because he was aware of the radical nature of the lifestyle into which our Lord calls us.

Kierkegaard had a hard time with the church of his day because he believed it was too enmeshed with the values of wealth, power and prestige that mark the secular world. He tells of how he once went to worship in the magnificent cathedral in Copenhagen and took his place in a pew. He recalls how the sun shone through the stained-glass windows and glistened off the brilliant tapestries that hung on the cathedral's walls. He watched as a velvet-robed minister took his place behind a golden pulpit, opened a beautiful gilded Bible marked with a satin ribbon and read the words of Mark from today's Gospel reading, “If anyone would be my disciple, let him forsake all, take up his cross and follow me. For what does it profit a person to gain the whole world and yet forfeit his soul.”

And Kierkegaard says, “The pastor stood up there in the midst of all that wealth and splendor and read those words of Jesus and nobody batted an eye.”

from Kerux Sermon #16698, Rev. Lee Griess via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database self denial

Becoming Our Own Gods: the Dennis Kozlowski Story

Three weeks ago, former Tyco executive Dennis Kozlowski walked out of Manhattan courtroom in a swarm of photographers. He had just been convicted on multiple counts of looting Tyco of hundreds of millions of dollars.

It was a chance for the press to once again fixate on the almost unbelievable excesses of Kozlowski's lifestyle — including the $2.2 million-dollar birthday party for his wife, Karen, with dancing nymphs and an ice statue of Michelangelo pouring out vodka. The magnitude of his theft makes many people wonder: What made Kozlowski do such a thing? And why? I looked for answers to that in my book, THE GOOD LIFE.

Kozlowski was raised in a poor section of Newark, New Jersey, but he worked his way through college, went to work for Tyco, and became CEO, doubling the company's business.

Kozlowski enjoyed a life of extravagance and self-indulgence — much at the company's expense. He bought homes in New York, Nantucket, and Colorado, bought a $30 million racing yacht, and installed his mistresses in Tyco-owned apartments, cost-free.

But eventually, trouble came. The New York State Banking Department began tracking a series of unusual bank transfers — and New York's district attorney investigated, leading to Kozlowski's indictment on charges of corporate corruption.

Was Kozlowski just another case of a poor kid who hits it big and then is overcome with his own greed? Well, yes, of course, he had an insatiable appetite for money and power. But though his case is extreme, can't all of us understand what really drove him? He wanted to gratify his own desires, despite the consequences to others. In that way, he exemplifies the modern American desire for personal autonomy, defined as freedom from all restraints. His ultimate goal was to do just as he pleased — to be, in a sense, his own god.

I have an idea that at the peak of Kozlowski's wealth and fame, he found his life empty and meaningless. I did when I rose to great heights of political power. According to researchers, whom I cite in the book, a growing body of data points to the conclusion that the amount of money accumulated above middle-class comfort level has no impact on our happiness. They found instead that it's social interaction and friendships that give us lasting pleasure in life.

Can we conclude from this that our natures as humans are shaped in a certain way? The researchers certainly seem to think so, arguing that human behavior follows a predictable pattern — we are wired a certain way. And when we distort the way we are wired — or what I call the natural order of life — we find ourselves miserable.

We all realize that there is a battle going on inside of us: One part of our nature says life has a higher purpose, and the other part wants to indulge all our desires. As I write in my book THE GOOD LIFE, the task in life is to subdue our baser nature and govern ourselves by what we intuitively know to be our higher purpose, what we are made for. And that's not hedonism or self-gratification. It is happiness the way the Greeks defined it, by the term eudaimonia, which means the virtuous life.

________

Copyright (c) 2005 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

from BreakPoint Commentary · Charles Colson via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database power

What's It Worth To You?

USA Today conducted a survey a couple of years ago and asked Americans in the top 1% income bracket how much they would be willing to spend on three intangible items: Great intellect, true love, and a place in heaven.

The super wealthy would be willing to spend an average of $407,000 for great intellect, $487,000 for true love, and $640,000 for a place in heaven!

*

from Sermon #15824, A Believing Heart, Dr. Bruce Emmert via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealth

They Were Never Happy Again Until They Lost All Their Money

The Osage Indians of Oklahoma endured a flood of income in the 1920s when their lands turned out to sit on an oil field. Rapacious non-Indians schemed to steal their sudden wealth, in one famous conspiracy even taking Osage wives and then poisoning them for the inheritance. As a tribal leader said of that period, “The Osage were never happy again until they lost all their money.”

Many more examples could make the point that it is often easier to become fabulously rich than to stay that way. Sudden wealth produces myriad problems, from technical questions of investment management to political and social crises. The problems compound when a favored few gain vastly more than others, and the whole group is surrounded by a mass of envious outsiders who have a long history of plundering their assets.

*

In the Image of God

Amos 6:1

I was on hold the other day trying to schedule an appointment for a hair cut. As I waited for the receptionist, I half-listened to the obligatory recordings. The announcer asked me to consider scheduling a make-over with my upcoming appointment and to make sure I leave with the products that will keep up my new look. (Apparently, when you have a captive audience of customers “muzak” is hardly strategic.) But I was then caught off guard by a question: “What do the local communities of Chad, Africa, mean to you?” The answer he offered was as immediate as my inability to think of one: “Chad is a leading producer of organic acacia gum, the vital ingredient in a new line of products exclusively produced for and available at our salon.”

In a culture dominated by consumption, the commodification of everything around us is becoming more and more of an unconscious worldview. Thus, when we think of Chad, we can think of our favorite shampoo and its connection with our hair salon. The land where it came from, the conditions of its production, and the community or laborers who produce it are realities disassociated with the commodity. Like soap and luggage, the nation of Chad can become just one of the many commodities within our consumer mindset.

As I put down the phone, I couldn't help but wonder about Amos's description of those who are “at ease in Zion.” How at ease do you have to be to begin to see the world in commodities? At the time of Amos's words, Israel was at one of its most opulent junctures. They had expanded their territory in more than one direction. Their winter palaces were adorned with ivory and their feasts were lacking nothing. They could be heard singing songs to the sound of the harp and seen anointing themselves with the finest of oils. It was in such affluence that the shepherd Amos proclaimed, “Woe to those who are at ease in Zion, and to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria” (Amos 6:1).

Amos's omen is far from isolated in Scripture. While Amos compares the drunken women of Israel to the fat cows of Bashan, Micah describes the rich as men full of violence, and Jeremiah cites those with wealth and power as those who grow fat and sleek. In the book of Revelation, the church that God is about to spit out of his mouth is the one who has “acquired wealth and needs nothing” — the one not realizing that they are “wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked” (Rev. 3:17).

As G. K. Chesterton once noted, “[I]t is impossible to have any sort of debate over whether or not Jesus believed that rich people were in big trouble — there is too much evidence on the subject and it is overwhelming.” The pervasiveness of this evidence makes for a rough entry into the ongoing debate about the morality of affluence among North American Christians. Like Chesterton, I am at times uncomfortably aware at whom the words of Christ were aimed: I am the rich Christian to whom Jesus speaks bluntly.

I am also among the crowd he takes the time and care to caution. Among his many words about money, Jesus warned, “Watch out! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; a man's life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions” (Luke 12:15).

How then shall we live in a world of affluence? How are we to fight the all-pervading atmosphere of consumerism and the attitude of commodification around us? There is good reason for unrelenting words against greed that turns communities into commodities and souls into consumers. There is a reason Christ has called the poor in spirit blessed, for those who cling to the Father know it is Him alone they can eternally hold. We were not made to be at ease in Zion; we were made in the image of God.

We serve a God who never sleeps or slumbers in part because those who are hurting never sleep or slumber. It is He who calls us to follow and to deny ourselves, to consider in our hearts the treasures that block our vision of the Cross, as well as our vision of our neighbor. There are none seen as commodities in the eyes of the Creator; there are but children with the eyes of their Father.

________

Copyright © 2005 Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM). Reprinted with permission. "A Slice of Infinity" is a radio ministry of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

*

Treasure In Heaven

Matthew 6:20

Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven … For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Matt. 6:20, 21.

As missionaries were visiting an African village they noticed a native Christian. Once he had been a wealthy slave trader. That was before he was saved. Now he was dressed in rags. One of the missionaries mentioned the contrast between his former riches and his present poverty and asked if he was not sorry. He was indignant. “My treasure is in heaven,” he said. “True in those days, I had wealth, power and honor but now I have God.”

I n the heart of London city,

‘Mid the dwellings of the poor,

These bright golden words were uttered:

“I have Christ! what want I more?”

Spoken by a lonely woman,

Dying on a garret floor,

Having not one earthly comfort:

“I have Christ! what want I more?”

from Old Devotional Calendar (1960's) · Anonymous via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

Budgeting For Billionaires

With a fortune estimated at $17 billion, Larry Ellison is so rich he spends $55,000 a day on what his accountant calls “lifestyle” expenses. It's a lifestyle few of us can even imagine, reports CBS News correspondent John Blackstone.

It's no secret Ellison, the founder of software company Oracle, spends exuberantly: $100 million went into his unsuccessful attempt to win the America's Cup sailing race.

“I'm addicted to winning. The more you win, the more you want to win,” Ellison told 60 Minutes in a 2004 interview.

He's rumored to have spent $200 million building a Japanese-style estate above Silicon Valley. Now, documents filed in a since settled lawsuit charging insider trading are giving an inside look at the billionaire's budget. A handwritten note from Ellison's accountant sets out expenditures: $194 million on a new yacht, $25 million on a villa in Japan and $20 million a year on “lifestyle.”

Worried about your credit card bill? Ellison spent $75 million in interest payments on bank loans.

Carrie Kirby of the San Francisco Chronicle first turned up the documents that reveal Ellison spends big, and borrows big. Her investigation found that in 2000 he was $1.2 billion in debt, having borrowed hundreds of millions from three different banks simultaneously.

“Wouldn't you loan money to him?” she asks Blackstone. “He's good for it, right?”

Ellison declined to comment for this story but the documents show one way he may not be much different than the rest of us. He has somebody nagging him about spending too much. An e-mail from Ellison's accountant reads: “I'm worried, Larry...New purchases should be kept to a minimum.”

It seems, however, that Ellison paid little mind to the advice given by his accountant. He later went on a beachfront buying spree in Malibu — spending $200 million on a string of luxury properties.

*

from C B S News.com via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealthdebt

She Starved To Death With $800,000

Bertha Adams died on Easter Sunday in Palm Beach Florida in 1976. She was 71 years old. The coroner’s report said that she died of malnutrition. She had been known to beg for food, and only weighed 50 pounds when she died.

Authorities found her home to be “a pigpen . . . a big mess!” It appeared that Bertha died penniless.

Then two keys were found, that led to two safety deposit boxes. The first one had over 700 shares of AT&T stock and $200,000 cash. The second one had only cash, $600,000.

Her great wealth did her no good. James sees such hoarding as obscene because it corrupts and corrodes life.

==============

Another version by Charles Swindoll:

"Tightwads"

Mrs. Bertha Adams, 71 years old, died alone in West Palm Beach, Florida, on Easter Sunday. The coroner’s report read: “Cause of death . . . malnutrition.” She had wasted away to fifty pounds.

When the state authorities made their preliminary investigation of Mrs. Adams’ home, they found a veritable “pigpen . . . the biggest mess you can imagine.” One seasoned inspector declared he’d never seen a dwelling in greater disarray. The woman had begged food from neighbors’ back doors and gotten what clothing she had from the Salvation Army. From all outward appearances she was a penniless recluse, a pitiful and forgotten widow. But such was not the case.

Amid the jumble of her unclean, disheveled belongings, the officials found two keys to safe-deposit boxes at two different local banks. In the first box were over 700 AT&T stock certificates, plus hundreds of other valuable certificates, bonds, and solid financial securities, not to mention a stack of cash amounting to nearly $200,000. The second box contained $600,000. Adding the net worth of both boxes, they found well over a million dollars.

Charles Osgood, reporting the story on CBS radio, announced that the estate would probably go to a distant niece and nephew, neither of whom dreamed their aunt had a thin dime to her name.

Can you imagine picking up the phone and hearing that you’d just inherited half a million? Why, I wouldn’t know whether to shout “Glory,” dance the jig, wind my watch, whistle “Dixie,” or sing “The Doxology.”

You can count on this, friend: those two relatives are awfully glad Aunt Bertha still had their names lying around.

But don’t you also wonder about this woman? Why, oh, why would anybody salt away all that bread in two tiny boxes, month after month, year after year, and refuse to spend even enough for food to stay alive?

Fact is, Bertha Adams wasn’t saving her money; she was worshiping it . . . hoarding it . . . gaining a twisted satisfaction out of watching the stacks grow higher as she shuffled along the streets wearing the garb of a beggar.

I confess an almost total loss of understanding as I try to imagine pleasure being drawn from simply stacking up one’s treasure for the sheer and selfish delight of watching the stack grow higher. Now don’t misread me. I’m a firm believer in saving, investing, intelligent spending, and wise money management. But I have trouble finding one word of scriptural support for being a tightwad!

And it isn’t hard to spot them. They all start with one main question: How much does it cost? And one main answer: We can’t afford it. And one main criticism: We’re spending too much money. I have yet to meet a Christian tightwad who knew BY EXPERIENCE the first principle of enthusiastic faith. Never have I seen one who could dream broad dreams or see vast visions of what God can do IN SPITE OF man’s limitations.

Give me a handful of “greathearts” . . . generous, openhanded, visionary, spiritually minded givers . . . magnanimous giants with God who get excited about abandoning themselves to Him. Now I remind you, they may not need a teller for their fortune when it’s over and done with, but who cares? The name of the game is not CAUTION — it’s still VISION, isn’t it? Seems like I read somewhere that those without it perish.

And speaking of that, when they buried Bertha Adams, she didn’t take a penny with her.

________

Taken from Charles R. Swindoll, “Tightwads,” in THE FINISHING TOUCH: BECOMING GOD’S MASTERPIECE (Dallas: Word, 1994), 448-49. Copyright © 1994 by Charles R. Swindoll, Inc. All rights reserved.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #20908]

from Kerux Sermon #14160, The Love Of Money · Rev. Robert AuBuchon via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richwealthidolatry

Stripping In the Public Square

Mark 10:21

A theme that runs throughout the Bible is the temptation of wealth. One reaction has been to renounce all wealth and live simply for God. Elijah and John the Baptist are prophetic examples. The most famous medieval example must be St. Francis of Assisi.

After having a crisis of faith on the battlefield, God put it on Francis' heart to rebuild an abandoned church in his area. He had no assets of his own, so Francis stole expensive clothes from his rich dad and used the money to rebuild the church with his friends. His irate father dragged Francis to the public square in Assisi and asked the local bishop to demand that Francis give up the project. Instead, Francis took off his clothes in front of the crowd and renounced all his possessions and inheritance. [The stunned bishop is said to have grabbed a cloak from someone in the crowd and thrown it on Francis.] From that point on, Francis never looked back.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #32974]

Dumb and Dumber Cashed the Check

Luke 13:32

Jim Carrey came to Hollywood years ago as a struggling standup comic. He had a wife and a baby and their small apartment had a mattress on the floor.

Around 1990 he wrote a check for $10,000,000 and put it in his wallet. He wrote it to “Jim Carrey, for acting services rendered”. He carried it in his wallet for 4 years.

In 1994 he was paid $10,000,000 for “Dumb and Dumber.” Well, at least he got his $10 million. In 2003 he was paid $25,000,000 for “Bruce Almighty.”

Do you wish you could plan YOUR life like this?

(sermon version by David Holwick)

================

Other sources make the figure $20 million, but the figure above is correct. According to Carrey himself:

“I wrote myself a check for ten million dollars for acting services rendered and dated it Thanksgiving 1995. I put it in my wallet and it deteriorated. And then, just before Thanksgiving 1995, I found out I was going to make ten million dollars for ‘Dumb & Dumber.’ I put that check in the casket with my father because it was our dream together.”

-- Jim Carrey on The Oprah Winfrey Show, 1997 (http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/38176.html)

================

Another version by Tom Venuto:

JIM CARREY’S CHECK

As a struggling young comedian trying to make it in the make or break city of Hollywood, Jim Carrey was just about ready to give up his dream of becoming a professional actor and comedian. He had just performed at an open mic session at one of the nightclubs in Los Angeles and had been booed off the stage by his audience. He sat by himself at the top of Mulholand Drive and looked out at the city below him — the city that held his future success or failure. He then pulled out his check book and wrote himself a check for $10 million dollars, post dated it for Thanksgiving 1995 and made a note on it: “for acting services rendered.” He then carried that check with him in his wallet everywhere he went from that day forward. By 1995, after the success of his blockbuster movies: Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, Dumb and Dumber, and The Mask, his contract price had risen to $20 million dollars.

http://www.tomvenuto.com/newsletter_archives/newsletter57.shtml

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #20929]

from Various Internet Sources · David Holwick via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealthsuccessvision

Thanks-giving Treasure

Luke 12:33

Over 200 years ago during the heart of the Methodist revival in England, John Wesley spoke fearfully about the movement’s ability to sustain itself. Even as thousands and thousands were joining his ranks, he spoke prophetically about the inevitable decline and dissolution of this revival. What would prompt his despairing prediction in the throes of revival’s raging fires? Wesley feared the danger of wealth and its expected increase as a result of his “Methodist” renewal. He wrote in his journal: “I fear, wherever riches have increased, the essence of religion has decreased in the same proportion. Therefore, I do not see how it is possible, in the nature of things, for any revival of religion to continue long. For religion must necessarily produce both industry and frugality, and these cannot but produce riches. But as riches increase, so will pride, anger and love of the world in all its branches.”(1)

The declining numbers in churches in the Western World seem to affirm that Wesley’s fears were warranted. Indeed, Christian leaders speculate that if current trends continue in England, for example, Methodists will cease to exist in that country in thirty years.(2) And while the increase of wealth might only be one factor of many that has contributed to this decline, the decline has happened and is happening nevertheless. Corroborating this fear is the best-selling book by historian Philip Jenkins. Jenkins has documented the rapid rise of Christianity in the Global South in his book THE NEXT CHRISTENDOM: THE COMING OF GLOBAL CHRISTIANITY. Could the growth of Christianity in the Global South be related to their relative poverty, and the decline of Christianity in the Global North be related to our wealth? Wesley seemed to think so.

But long before Wesley uttered his fears, Jesus warned his disciples: “No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other, or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and riches” (Luke 16:13). Indeed, it is hard to read Luke’s gospel and not be convicted about the dangers Jesus associated with wealth.

AS RICHES INCREASE, SO WILL PRIDE, ANGER, AND LOVE OF THE WORLD IN ALL ITS BRANCHES. . . Wesley’s words haunt me, just as Jesus’s warnings haunt me. For when I examine my checkbook, my time commitments, and where I set my heart’s affections, I sometimes have the sneaking suspicion that I am serving another god. It is a god that tempts me to busyness and distraction; it is a god that wants me to sacrifice worship, commitment to my church, and devotion to the Lord in order to invest my time, treasure, and talents in the “love of the world in all its branches.”

Sadly, as Wesley knew, the very blessing of wealth for Christianity, as a result of Christian frugality and diligence, can equally be a curse that would sell out its very soul. My own life is a microcosm of this struggle, just as the Western Church struggles with these issues closely related to wealthy societies: fragmentation of lives, rampant consumerism, efficiency over substance, and shallow, easy faith.

So, in this season of thanks-giving, how do we as rich, Western Christians escape the perils of over-abundance? Jesus instructed his disciples to “sell your possessions and give to charity; make yourselves purses which do not wear out, an unfailing treasure in heaven. . . . For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” (Luke 12:33-34). The answer is not necessarily in the abolition of wealth, but rather in wealth’s proper use in our world -- as a blessing for others, and not just for our own use!

John Wesley understood this, and in the spirit of Jesus re-iterates the same idea: “We ought not to forbid people to be diligent and frugal: we must exhort all Christians, to gain all they can, and to save all they can... What way then (I ask again) can we take that our money may not sink us to the nethermost hell? There is one way, and there is no other under heaven. If those who gain all they can, and save all they can, will likewise give all they can, then the more they gain, the more they will grow in grace, and the more treasure they will lay up in heaven.”(3)

________

1. Cited in an article by Philip Yancey, “Traveling with Wesley” Christianity Today, November 2007, Vol. 51, No. 11.

2. Ibid.

3. Cited from the The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, vol. XV (London: Thomas Cordeux, 1786).

________

Copyright © 2007 Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM). Reprinted with permission. "A Slice of Infinity" is a radio ministry of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries.

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #20950]

Deliverance From Wealth's Snare

Ezekiel 7:19

They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord: they shall not satisfy their souls … because it is the stumblingblock of their iniquity. — Ezekiel 7:19.

Not only is the love of money a root of all evil, but riches take to themselves wings and flee away. The Lord is able and willing to deliver us from its snare. If it has an attraction to us let us confess this to the Lord. and seek for grace to rise above its snare and temptation.

Your gold will waste and wear away,

Your honors perish in a day.

My portion never can decay,

Christ for me.

from Old Devotional Calendars · Anonymous via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richesmoney

Fortune's Fools: Why the Rich Go Broke

Job 24:9

George Foreman — bald, smiling and gigantic — is propped atop a stool in Gleason’s Gym, the venerable boxing haunt in Brooklyn, watching a videotape of his heavyweight championship bout in 1994 with Michael Moorer.

Mr. Foreman once devastated opponents with brutal, staccato punches short on artistry and long on force. He disposed of formidable pile drivers like Joe Frazier, traded blows with dangerous magicians like Muhammad Ali, and dropped the undefeated 26-year-old Mr. Moorer in the 10th round with a right to the jaw.

Mr. Foreman was 45 at the time of the Moorer fight, a roly-poly 250-pounder who had just reclaimed the heavyweight mantle that Mr. Ali had snatched from him 20 years earlier. By knocking out Mr. Moorer, Mr. Foreman became the oldest heavyweight champion in history and he hailed his victory at the time as one “for all my buddies in the nursing home and all the guys in the jail.”

As Mr. Foreman watches the tape of Mr. Moorer crumpling to the mat, part of a boxing retrospective that ESPN is shooting at Gleason’s, he beams. “Play that again,” he says to no one in particular, softly chuckling to himself. The knockout was the culmination of an unlikely return to the ring that Mr. Foreman staged in his later years, well after he had retired. He has often said that he ended his retirement to prove that nobody is too old for a comeback.

But Mr. Foreman confides in an interview that something else actually drove him back into boxing in the late 1980’s, and it had nothing to do with proving the meaninglessness of an AARP card. Having blown about $5 million, made mostly, he says, during his salad days as a young champion, he desperately needed the money he could earn by fighting again. A former street thug from Houston, accustomed to dispassionately cutting down the most ferocious of men, Mr. Foreman was on the verge of bankruptcy in the 1980’s — and it terrified him.

“It was frightening, the most horrible thing that can happen to a man, as far as I am concerned,” he says. “Scary. Frightening. Nervous. I had a family, people to take care of — my wife, my children, my mother. I haven’t gotten over that yet.”

Pondering his glimpse into the abyss a moment longer, Mr. Foreman’s eyes tighten: “It was that scary because you hear about people being homeless and I was only fractions, fractions from being homeless.”

Unlike many others with lush bankrolls who somehow manage to lose it all, Big George rebounded handsomely from his flirtation with bankruptcy. He earned multimillion-dollar purses boxing in the 1990’s and made tens of millions more by reinventing himself as a gentle entrepreneur, astutely peddling the best-selling hamburger grills that bear his name.

Even so, the trajectory of Mr. Foreman’s finances once had him headed into a gilded pantheon of big buckaroos who have squandered often-unimaginable sums of money, come perilously close to personal bankruptcy or completely lost their shirts. The ranks of well-heeled debtors include Thomas Jefferson, Buffalo Bill Cody, Mark Twain, Ulysses S. Grant, Debbie Reynolds, Michael Jackson, Dorothy Hamill, Robert Maxwell, Mike Tyson, Jack Abramoff and a long and pitiful cast of lottery winners.

Each of these grandees had distinct encounters with errant money management. Some of them were undone by rampant spending, others by injudicious deal-making, still others by various shades of greed, fraud or spectacularly poor investments. All of which gives rise to the same old set of questions: Why can’t those who are already wealthy restrain themselves from spending more than they have? Why do rich people, those who would seem to have all the financial padding one needs, wind up deeply in debt? Even worse, why do some of them end up broke?

Mr. Foreman, street-smart and now mindful of his wallet, has his own perceptive answers to those questions. For the man who came back from the brink, it’s all a matter of discipline and proper boundaries.

“A lot of people just don’t grow up,” he says. “I mean, 65-year-old men. They just don’t grow up. They don’t understand that money does not grow on a tree and that you’ve got to respect every dollar. Like Rip Van Winkle — the guy who slept — they party, party, party, then they wake up. ‘Oh my God!’ And they do something desperate trying to recapture what they had. And it doesn’t work like that. You must stay awake.”

David W. Latko, a money manager and radio host who recently published “Everybody Wants Your Money” (HarperCollins), a personal finance primer, reduces the mechanics of squandered wealth to handy categories. He says there are five basic ways people become rich: they inherit, marry, steal, win or earn their fortunes. Only those who earn fortunes, says Mr. Latko, tend to preserve their wealth. Inhabitants of the other four categories are more prone to be wastrels.

“The first thing you’ve got to look at, always, is where is the money coming from,” he says. “People who’ve made money themselves protect it. People who’ve inherited it spend it.”

Profiles of wealthy debtors may not be quite as tidy as Mr. Latko’s list suggests; self-made gazillionaires can wind up insolvent, too, particularly if they earn their money in celebrity circuses like Hollywood. But by and large, Mr. Latko’s list rings true and reinforces one of Mr. Foreman’s points: America’s rich, it would seem, sometimes do believe that money grows on trees.

In some of the darker scenes in Frank Capra’s 1946 cinematic parable about family, community and money, “It’s a Wonderful Life,” Uncle Billy, a kindly, pastoral fogy whose bank office is routinely visited by crows and squirrels, misplaces a hefty deposit that threatens to upend the Bailey family’s little savings-and-loan. Billy’s nephew, George Bailey, played by that symbol of middle-American rectitude, James Stewart, warns his uncle of the consequences of a bank collapse that also promises to force the Bailey family into debt.

“Where’s that money?” George screams at his uncle, growing more frantic by the second. “Do you realize what this means? It means bankruptcy and scandal and prison!” Later rescued from suicide and shame by a bumbling angel and generous townsfolk who kick in hatfuls of cash around the Bailey family’s Christmas tree, George gets smooches from his lovely wife and a new lease on life.

In our more modern financial era, fueled by credit card debt, home equity loans and myriad other forms of handy spending money, George Bailey’s predicament strikes us as, perhaps, quaint. When people like the former baseball commissioner Bowie Kuhn — who earned a handsome salary overseeing the national pastime before his law firm collapsed in bankruptcy in 1990 — decamp to manses in Florida to take advantage of state laws that prevent creditors attaching expensive homes, George Bailey’s fear of ostracism rings old-fashioned.

Over the last three decades, personal bankruptcy rates in America have soared. But in a nod to the notion that going belly-up still carries a whiff of disrepute, Congress tightened bankruptcy laws last year to circumvent what Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah, decried as “a way to avoid personal responsibility.”

It may be, however, that for most people, a bankruptcy filing simply marks an inability to stay afloat — not an attempt to dodge creditors — because most of those who lose their shirts typically are not rich.

According to a study by the St. Louis Federal Reserve last fall, most bankruptcy filers are blue-collar, lower-middle-class high school graduates who are already overloaded with debt when they get sideswiped by unforeseen miseries like a job loss or overwhelming medical expenses. Rarely do the rich have to ponder the consequences of layoffs or insurmountable hospital bills, yet the social ledger is chock-full of examples of landed gentry who still dissipate their wealth and run the risk of ignominy.

Buffalo Bill hauled in the equivalent of about $30 million in today’s dollars overseeing his Wild West show at Chicago’s Columbian Exposition in 1893, according to Erik Larson’s book “The Devil in the White City.” A financial panic in 1907 ruined him and his show; when he died in 1917 there wasn’t enough money in his till to pay for his burial.

Mark Twain, who had a lifelong penchant for dodgy investments and gimmicky inventions, lost about $4 million in today’s dollars betting on a newfangled but unwanted typesetting machine in the 1890’s. He subsequently had to take to the lecture circuit to stave off bankruptcy.

Michael Jackson, who began churning out Top 10 songs and albums as the lead singer of the Jackson 5 before reaching puberty, found it necessary to pledge a stake in his lucrative songbook of Beatles hits to secure a $270 million bank loan to forestall a slide into bankruptcy.

Mike Tyson, like Mr. Jackson a gifted man-child, is entangled in his own financial woes despite once having the marquee power to draw $30 million purses for a single fight. When Mr. Tyson filed for bankruptcy in 2004, he listed debts of $27 million, including about $13 million in unpaid federal taxes and about $174,000 for a diamond-studded gold chain. He had maintained a monthly budget of about $400,000 before the filing.

Buffalo Bill, Michael Jackson, Mike Tyson, Wayne Newton, Burt Reynolds, Elton John and other public examples of spending run amok were, or are, all entertainers, and entertainers offer ready fodder for tsk-tsking — largely because gossip columns make it easy for the rest of us homely paupers to take quiet satisfaction in their plight. Entertainers, for the most part, are also peculiarly vulnerable when it comes to personal finance.

“You have people who are struggling for a long time and then overnight, boom, they hit it,” says Shelley Finkel, Mike Tyson’s manager. “If they don’t have someone watching out for them, and some emotional stability, it will be very hard for them to be grounded financially.”

Mr. Finkel, a genial, elfin 62-year-old New Yorker who began his own career promoting a A-list rock stars like Jimi Hendrix, said he had always advised musicians and athletes to protect their wealth by socking away a chunk of their earnings into annuities or pensions. Few of them have heeded that advice, he said, including Mr. Tyson, who Mr. Finkel believes earned and lost more than $400 million in his boxing career.

“It’s very hard to tell them ‘Don’t!’ because they love the instant gratification,” Mr. Finkel says. “I think the human in general is vulnerable and whatever their weakness is it’s going to get exploited, particularly around money.”

Mr. Foreman, unlike most entertainers and athletes, had homegrown financial antennae, and his budgetary acumen surfaced at a relatively early age. He slugged his way into prominence by winning a gold medal at the 1968 Olympics, and a year later, when he was 20, he turned pro. Schooled, he said, in the perils of errant spending by the financial predicament of the boxing legend Joe Louis, he decided to form the George Foreman Development Corporation in 1971.

“I had so much time alone,” he recalls. “Not many people thought I would be champ of the world. Didn’t have any friends at all. And what I would do is walk to the bookstore, and I’d buy books. And they were books on taxes, accrual taxes, estimated taxes, and you better make a corporation.”

Mr. Foreman says his homework persuaded him to put about 25 percent of what he earned at every bout into a pension and profit-sharing plan controlled by his corporation. “I had all this time dreaming of this, so that when money came upon me I was already prepared,” he says.

Despite how closely Mr. Foreman tended his nest egg, most of his assets remained exposed. He describes the way he invested his unencumbered cash, about $5 million, as a series of blunders: “Oil wells, gas wells, banks, flop, flop, flop.”

Entertainers aren’t the only rich people with holes in their pockets. Business people, seemingly prepared to have a better handle on their balance sheets than celebrities, have wound up as big debtors as well. William Randolph Hearst, of the publishing empire, the San Simeon estate and a 280-foot yacht, stood at the edge of insolvency in the late 30’s. John Z. DeLorean, Motor City dream weaver and inventor of a streamlined sports car that bore his name, filed for bankruptcy in 1999 after financial and legal problems.

Questioned in 1991 about the reasons rich people hit the skids, the multibillionaire investor Warren E. Buffett told an audience at Notre Dame that debt and alcohol were ever-present culprits in financial demise. “I’ve seen more people fail because of liquor and leverage — leverage being borrowed money,” he said, according to a transcript of his comments. “You really don’t need leverage in this world much. If you’re smart, you’re going to make a lot of money without borrowing.

“I’ve never borrowed a significant amount of money in my life. Never,” he added. “Never will. I’ve got no interest in it. The other reason is I never thought I would be way happier when I had 2X instead of X.”

Yet even the most well-to-do sometimes still rely on debt. Over the years, Lawrence J. Ellison, founder and chief executive of Oracle, has preferred to hold onto, rather than sell, his shares in the database provider, giving him a stake currently valued about $17.6 billion.

Oracle shares represent almost the entirety of Mr. Ellison’s fortune, and to finance one of the country’s splashiest spending sprees (454-foot megayacht, mansions, expensive hobbies and more) he has occasionally taken on sizable bank loans rather than sell his shares — all on the presumption that the value of his shares will remain lofty enough to allow him to pay back the loans.

A raft of e-mail messages and financial documents introduced in a lawsuit that disgruntled shareholders filed against Mr. Ellison and other Oracle executives in 2001, give witness to some of Mr. Ellison’s budgeting practices. (The suit was settled last November and the judge in the matter subsequently unsealed financial documents submitted as exhibits in the case). The documents, first reported by The San Francisco Chronicle earlier this year, also show how far Philip E. Simon, an adviser who described himself as Mr. Ellison’s “financial servant,” went in trying to persuade his boss to pay off about $1.2 billion in loans. (Neither Mr. Ellison nor Mr. Simon responded to interview requests for this article).

Mr. Ellison’s ledger around the end of 2000 included annual “lifestyle” spending of about $20 million, the purchase of a Japanese villa for $25 million, a proposed underwater archeology project earmarked for $12 million and his new yacht, budgeted at $194 million (news reports later said that the yacht’s final cost approached $300 million).

“I know you view me as a pessimist,” Mr. Simon wrote Mr. Ellison in an e-mail message in 2002, several months after banks began sounding alarms about Mr. Ellison’s debt. “Maybe you’re right, though I would disagree. Nonetheless, I think it’s imperative that we start to budget and plan. New purchases should be kept to a minimum. We need to establish and execute on a diversification plan to eliminate (yes, eliminate) all debt and build up a significant, conservatively structured, liquid investment portfolio.

“I know you don’t like to discuss this,” Mr. Simon added. “I know this e-mail may/will depress you. View this as a call to arms.”

Mr. Ellison paid down a portion of his debt by 2002, according to court filings, and his Oracle holdings are vast enough that it was unlikely that his financial well-being was ever in peril. But for lesser financial potentates, the psychological twists behind overspending and bad investing can be more debilitating.

“The rich are different from you and me: they are more egotistical,” says Theodore R. Aronson, managing principal of Aronson Johnson Ortiz, an investment firm in Philadelphia. “Psychologically, I think the rich, because of their egos, think they know everything. Well, they don’t, and many of them repeatedly make horrible investments — because they can.”

Financial success can breed its own peculiar set of vulnerabilities. “People who are very successful develop elevated sensibilities about their skills, and when things turn on them they won’t admit they’re wrong because their self-confidence has held them up so long,” says Arnold S. Wood, chief executive of Martingale Asset Management in Boston. “In the face of evidence, even subjective evidence, that suggests that something bad is about to happen to someone, a funny thing happens: They reject the evidence.

“These kinds of people just continue spending because they think the money will keep coming in because they’re so successful,” adds Mr. Wood, who says he is fascinated by the possible neurological and social underpinnings of financial delusion and decision-making. He believes that gender plays a strong role in financial ruin because, he says, women tend to be more risk averse than men when it comes to money. Some interesting research backs this up.

Brad M. Barber and Terrance Odean, two business professors at the University of California, Berkeley, noted in an analysis in 2001 of stock trading, “Boys Will Be Boys,” that psychological studies demonstrated that men tended to be more overconfident than women. Financial data supported the same point. “Models of investor overconfidence predict that men will trade more and perform worse than women,” the professors’ study concluded.

Dig a little deeper into this psychological terrain, and, alas, the financial deck may be stacked beginning in childhood, regardless of sex. Kathleen Gurney, a “financial psychologist” who advises wealthy people trapped in monetary crises, said that the social milieu in which people grew up, the early messages they received about money and their individual emotional makeup all conspired to define how well they handled money as an adult.

America’s consumer landscape, which prizes spending and encourages people to define themselves by what they own, only makes the financial balancing act trickier for adults, especially if they have fat wallets.

“Someone who goes broke, or someone who goes into debt, is really somebody who isn’t comfortable having their money,” Ms. Gurney says. “Yes, it appears as a lack of discipline. But the lack of discipline comes from an emotional place that causes them to be undisciplined. It’s not about the money. It’s about our emotional relationship to money.

“The people who are out there just running through money have failed because they haven’t come to terms with who they are and what they want the money to do for them,” she adds. “I see a lot of baby boomers beginning to panic because they haven’t figured this out.”

Mr. Foreman, who stared down financial collapse as an adult despite a troubled, impoverished childhood, said he knew real wealth when he saw it. “If you’re confident, you’re wealthy,” he says. “I’ve seen guys who work on a ship channel and they get to a certain point and they’re confident. You can look in their faces, they’re longshoremen, and they have this confidence about them.”

He says he can spot a longshoreman who has enough equity in his home and enough money in the bank to feel secure, and that some people, no matter how much money they have, never get there. “I’ve seen a lot of guys with millions and they don’t have any confidence,” he says. “So they’re not wealthy.”

In the years after the Moorer fight, Mr. Foreman became much wealthier than he ever was during his boxing career. In 1999, he sold his name and his image to the manufacturer of George Foreman’s Lean Mean Fat-Reducing Grilling Machine for $137.5 million in cash and stock. He is now a proven pitchman on home shopping channels and the lecture circuit. He owns a fleet of cars, a watch collection, two homes and a ranch in Texas, and another home on the Caribbean island of St. Lucia — but he says he has no idea what his net worth is, and he says he does not want to know.

“When you start knowing, you’re scared,” he says. “I have lots of money, you know what I mean? But I haven’t found confidence like that longshoreman I told you about.” Nearly going bankrupt, he asserts, has permanently scarred him. “I will never feel secure again,” he says. “I’ve got to earn, earn, earn, earn.”

Respect every dollar, Mr. Foreman reiterated, respect every dollar.

“You can become complacent,” he says. “You can say, ‘I’m successful,’ which is the kiss of death. In America it’s hard to wake up hungry. It’s frightening. You can become complacent and wake up tomorrow totally homeless.”

$1 Million An Hour

Gambling is big business. Very big. Mogul Sheldon Adelson owns the Las Vegas Sands Casino and earned $9 billion in 2006, with his stock up 125% since its public offering in December 2004. Adelson has made almost $1 million an hour since the 2004 Forbes 400 list was published.

from Forbes Magazine, Article: 400 Richest Americans via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richwealthmoney

A Wide-Body Jet -- For Just Me

Amos 3:15

With some 10,000 private jets flying in the United States, a few billionaires are signing up for something roomier -- jumbo jets that can be outfitted as mobile mansions. Boeing says it has taken orders for 11 wide-bodies -- planes typically configured with two aisles, such as the 747 series or the new 787 Dreamliner -- over the past two years for “VIP use.” The price of a Dreamliner, interior not included, is about $150 million.

Now an individual customer is raising the bar, signing up for the largest passenger plane in history. European jet builder Airbus has signed a letter of intent with a Middle East buyer for one of its new A380s, which sell for about $300 million. Commercial versions of this plane can seat as many as 853 passengers on two decks. But this buyer will spend an additional $100 million to turn the craft into a more exclusive conveyance Airbus calls The Flying Palace.

hile the jet hasn’t yet been built -- Airbus is as much as two years behind schedule for the A380 – the designer says his plan includes two dining areas, a 600-plus-square-foot master bedroom and a game room. His plans also call for a lounge with giant curtains that will mimic tents of the Arabian desert, and a fiber-optic mosaic that will depict a shifting desert scene. It will also include a whirlpool tub, believed to be the first in the air.

These newest flying mansions can equal or surpass the cost of the world’s biggest corporate jets ($47 million), yachts ($200 million and $300 million) and are well beyond the most expensive estates on the market ($100 million to $150 million).

Airbus says the jumbo-jet buyers want self-contained worlds where they can eat, sleep and hold meetings even when they’ve landed. “You can host an elegant dinner party on the ground in a third-world country,” says Airbus’s John Leahy. “After you bid your guests a fond farewell, you close the door and head home.”

The new airships are, of course, expensive to operate. Maintenance and fuel costs are astronomical compared with those of smaller jets. A 747-400 costs about $10,500 an hour to fly. An A320, by comparison, costs around $3,000 an hour, while a Gulfstream G550 costs about $2,300 per hour.

Perhaps the biggest problem with the biggest private jets: They’re too big to land at many of the world’s high-end jet ports. That means owners of big jets have to pick their spots. Asked whether an A380 could try to fly into Aspen, Colorado, Mr. Leahy responded: “Only once.”

from The Wall Street Journal Online · Robert Frank & Daniel Michaels; edited by David Holwick via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

Does Money Make You Mean?

Luke 3:14

We all know that money can’t buy love or happiness. But could just thinking about money actually make you mean?

A new behavioral study finds that folks with money on their minds are less helpful, less considerate and less willing to ask for assistance or engage with others than those who have not been preconditioned to money. On the bright side, the money-minded tend to be more independent and focused and they tend to work longer on a task before asking for help.

The nine experiments in the study, published as “The Psychological Consequences of Money” in a recent issue of Science Magazine, used random samples of students and nonstudents at the University of Minnesota, Florida State University and the University of British Columbia.

Kathleen Vohs, the assistant professor of marketing at the UM Carlson School of Management who authored the article with Nicole Mead of FSU and Miranda Goode of UBC, says she was surprised at how consistent the findings were across the nine experiments.

“Money may not be the root of all evil, but it might be the root of some indifference,” she says. “It does make you perhaps indifferent to others.”

AT THE DROP OF A PENCIL

To determine whether money in mind leads to self-sufficient behavior, Vohs and her team divided their subjects into groups. The control group received neutral preconditioning while the “money prime” group was subtly reminded of money in various ways: a word scramble puzzle that contained money references, a poster depicting different currencies, stacks of play money or tokens, or reading an essay that mentioned money.

Following the preconditioning, the groups were given a task or placed in a staged situation that tested measurable subconscious behavior.

In the first two experiments, subjects were given a puzzle and told that help was available for the asking, either from the experimenter or a peer who had just completed the exercise. Result: The money-prime participants waited significantly longer than control subjects to ask for help.

In the next four experiments, subjects were asked for help in several scenarios: by the experimenter, by another participant, by a passerby who spilled a box of pencils in a random accident or by the suggestion that they donate to the University Student Fund. Result: The money-prime subjects offered to fill out fewer data sheets, spent less time helping a peer, picked up fewer pencils and donated less to the student fund than their neutral counterparts.

In the final three experiments, money-prime participants placed more physical distance between themselves and a participant partner, preferred solitary to group leisure activities and more frequently chose to work alone rather than with a peer compared to the control participants.

‘SOCIAL CLUELESSNESS’

But does that necessarily mean money makes you mean?

“No, we don’t find any evidence of that,” Vohs says. “We take a lot of emotion measures, and money reminders don’t put people in a different mood. Since mean people are generally in a bad mood, we rule that out. In nine studies, we found no effect on mood.”

Then again, money primes weren’t exactly candidates for Mr. or Miss Congeniality either.

“We didn’t find any animosity; it was more of a sense of social cluelessness. They’re not mindful of other people. We don’t have any indication that they were being rude to these people. It was more ‘I can’t help you’ or ‘I don’t know how to help you.’ Granted, being helpful would be a nicer thing to do, but the intention wasn’t to be selfish or mean; they just didn’t see that they had a role in this person’s life.”

The study doesn’t surprise New York psychologist and author April Lane Benson. She’s been counseling clients for years that the acquisition of wealth for the wrong reasons is virtually a prescription for unhappiness.

“So much of the literature says that there is an inverse relationship between subjective well-being and materialism,” she says. “But it only holds when the motives have to do with the desire to hoard, amass and use money for power and control, keep up with the Joneses, rather than as a vehicle for generosity.

“It does not hold when you want money in order to educate your children or save for the future.”

Benson notes with interest that the study’s findings were remarkably consistent, regardless of geography or the wealth of the participants.

“The fact that it is consistent over nine studies might tell us that there aren’t that many of us around who want money for the right reasons,” she says.

MONEY CHANGES EVERYTHING

Vohs says the study’s findings may have broad implications from the boardroom to the schoolroom. If just the thought of money tends to alter behavior, an increased awareness of that might one day lead to more productive relationships at work and at home.

“I think there is a power here to be used for good as well,” she says. “Depending on the results you are seeking to bring about, you can either underplay or enhance the role of money.”

Take “Dilbert,” which portrays the prototypical dysfunctional corporate cube farm where the well-intentioned efforts of the engineers are continually undercut by the bottom-line reasoning of a clueless management.

“If, as a manager, your goal is to get work groups to be very, very cooperative, you want to really minimize the presence of money and the importance of money, because if cooperation is the key, that’s going to be problematic,” says Vohs.

“On the other hand, you can use money to orchestrate certain situations. For instance, if you had a task where you really wanted people to just go at it full force and independently because maybe teamwork would slow the project down, then you may want to motivate them with money.”

On the home front, where money battles rank as the No. 1 cause of divorce, an ounce of awareness of the potency of the subject may eliminate the need for a ton of counseling.

“In interpersonal relationships, we know that it’s very difficult to talk about money,” she says. “Couples, and even parents and children, need to approach the topic with very open eyes and realize that disagreements that arise might just be because of the money and not because of what the other person is saying.”

“You’re working at cross purposes if you’re going to incentivize with money. I think it’s important to learn just to learn. On the other hand, I think that things like making the bed or helping set the table could be incentivized with a weekly allowance and I think that would be just fine because those are daily tasks that they’re not going to find much love in anyway. You can use money as an incentive to help kids be more self-reliant, but downplay the role of money when you’re teaching values.”

Benson agrees: “These are important findings that parents should know about. These studies show parents that if they’re throwing money and money talk around too much, this is the kind of long-term effect it could have.”

________

Jay MacDonald is a contributing editor based in Texas

from America Online: Money & Finances · Jay Mac Donald via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database financeswealth

A Millionaire's Vow of Poverty

Job 20:10

Tom Monaghan grew up very poor. His father died when he was five years old and his mother, who worked as a domestic servant, put him and his brother in a foster home. When Monaghan got out on his own he worked diligently and founded the Domino’s Pizza empire, which he sold in 1998 for one billion dollars.

Monaghan is a very devout, and very conservative, Roman Catholic. One day, he was arrested by a passage from the work of C. S. Lewis. Lewis proposed that, in the scheme of Christian morality, pride -– the sin of self-regard -- was “the great sin.” Lewis wrote that pride was “the essential vice, the utmost evil.... It was through Pride that the devil became the devil; Pride leads to every other vice: it is the complete anti-God state of mind.” A rich man’s striving for greater wealth, Lewis contended, was not greed but pride.

“That hit me right between the eyes,” Monaghan said. “C. S. Lewis told me that it was pure pride. You wanted to impress other people -- impress them with a spectacular play, or you wanted to impress them with all your worldly goods and accomplishments.”

As he lay in bed that night, Monaghan said, he swore a “millionaire’s vow of poverty.” The next day, he began to dispossess himself of the earthly treasures he’d accumulated, beginning with his dream house, which was under construction in Ann Arbor. The house had cost seven million dollars already; it sits unfinished in a field of weeds. Monaghan sold almost all of his art collection, some of it at a staggering loss. He had put thirty-five million dollars into building an island resort; he sold it for three million dollars. He gave up the helicopter, the Gulfstream business jet, and the Bugatti. In 1992, he sold the Tigers baseball team to his pizza rival, Mike Ilitch, of Little Caesars.

“I had to get rich to see that being rich isn’t important,” he told writer Peter Boyer. “I was brought up poor, and I was embarrassed by my threadbare clothes and shoes. I had to get that out of my system.... It was a relief. I was getting too sidetracked by the quest for that stuff. I mean, it was a game. It was fun. You know, which new Gulfstream do you like? How much is it gonna cost? What do I have to do to get one?”

After he made his decision, Monaghan announced that he would devote the rest of his life, and his resources -– after providing for his family -– to the Church. “I want to die broke,” he declared.

from New Yorker Magazine; article: The Deliverer · Peter J. Boyer via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richpride

Where Do You Stand In America's Wealth Spectrum?

Luke 3:14

[sermon version at the bottom]

Every three years the Federal Reserve Board conducts a national survey that tracks the financial health of American households. Most people are surprised to realize how little money it takes to win a gold star from the Fed. If you and yours are bringing in $40,000 a year, you’re doing better than half the households in America. Or, as a Washington think tank recently pointed out: If you’re a teacher married to a policeman, your combined household income puts you in the top 25 percent of all households in the nation.

Below you’ll find the average income picture sliced into income levels. Think of this chart as a parking ramp. If your household income is $170,000, you’re among the nation’s top 10 percent wage earners and get to park on the top floor. Anything in six figures means you’re in the top 20 percent and get to park on the floor right below.

ANNUAL INCOME PARKING RAMP

Income level Median income

(percentile) (rounded)

Level VI (90 to 100) $170,000

Level V (80 to 89.9) $99,000

Level IV (60 to 79.9) $65,000

Level III (40 to 59.9) $40,000

Level II (20 to 39.9) $24,000

Level I (less than 20) $10,000 [1]

So does making $170,000 a year make a person rich? Last year a plurality of respondents (29 percent) in a survey by The New York Times said that “rich” was making between $100,000 and $200,000 a year. Unfortunately, the survey didn’t break out how many people in that salary range considered themselves rich. If the people I talk to are any indication, very few do.

Of course, income is only one part of the equation defining where you stand. Net worth is more telling. Net worth, as every financially precocious schoolchild knows, is the sum of one’s assets -- home equity, investments, savings accounts, retirement funds, cars, furnishings and such things as jewelry, furs, wine collection, old baseball cards -- minus all outstanding liabilities such as mortgage balance, revolving and credit card debt, college loans and so on. Across all households, the national median net worth is $86,000. Half of your fellow citizens have more than that, half less. As you see, there’s a massive disparity between the haves and have-nots.

NET WORTH PARKING RAMP

Net worth (percentile) Median net worth

(rounded)

Level VI (90 to 100) $833,600

Level V (80 to 89.9) $263,100

Level IV (60 to 79.9) $141,500

Level III (40 to 59.9) $62,500

Level II (20 to 39.9) $37,200

Level I (less than 20) $7,900 [2]

We live in a country that once celebrated itself as egalitarian, yet 1 percent of the population -- nearly 3 million people -- currently has as much money as the 100 million people at the bottom of the ramp.

Yet when I ask those at the top of the ramp how they feel about the future, whether their fortunate place on the ramp gives them a measure of confidence about it, they shake their heads.

YOU AND YOUR BROKER

If you’re not parked near the top of the ramp, you’re of little or no interest to financial services firms and financial advisers. There’s no money to be made at these levels. Last year, a handful of Wall Street firms told their brokers they would no longer receive commissions on accounts holding less than $50,000. But for the Wall Street firms, there’s gold on the floors above. The greater the household assets, the more fees and transaction costs can be extracted from an account.

WEALTH POLL

The investment industry divides people on the top floors of the garage into three broad segments of wealth, each of which is nicely profitable.

The biggest and broadest affluent segment consists of people with investable assets of between $200,000 and $1 million to $2 million. This group is sometimes referred to as mass affluent, and it would be fair to think of it as the meat and potatoes of the financial services business. If you’re at the lower end of that range -- if you have, say, $300,000 in your accounts -- you’re definitely of prime interest to the brokers and customer reps at Merrill Lynch, Smith Barney, Vanguard and the rest. But they need to be careful lest you cost them money. They may call you on the phone, but they prefer that you use their website.

The next segment up from mass affluent is where the action gets white hot. This parking level belongs to those designated as high net worth individuals (or HNWIs). There are no universal criteria here. Generally, HNWIs have invested assets of at least $1 million, although some companies also target younger households with healthy six-figure incomes, knowing that their net worth is likely to reach target levels in the near future. Right now there are well over 7 million high net worth households in the United States, with a forecasted growth rate of 16 percent a year and projected assets of $32 trillion.

If their marketing efforts are any indication, Wall Street firms see HNWIs as the happiest people in the world, no matter that so many of them are, rightly or wrongly, distressed over their long-term prospects. Distress is not what’s pictured in the ads. The ads are filled with images of zippy seniors who flash large white teeth and incredibly healthy gums. They dance. They jog. They bike. They fish. They golf. They snuggle. According to the ads, life is a theme park expressly designed for the middle-aged. Graying boomers waltz across their living rooms, raise glasses to one another on the decks of ocean liners and exchange smiles secure in the knowledge that a surefire blue-steel erection is just a pill away. These ads remind us that we are living in the Golden Age of Aging. Not only are we younger and healthier than middle-aged people used to be, many of us would probably have been blind, disabled or dead by now had we had the bad luck to have been born just a tiny bit sooner.

VALET PARKING

If you’ve made it onto the top levels of the ramp -- say you have at least $5 million in investments -- you are deemed to be an ultra high net worth individual (or UHNWI). This is a very nice position to hold in life, all the sweeter thanks to recent federal tax cuts. People earning $10 million a year hand over a smaller percentage of their income to the government than those earning a tenth of that and -- to a great degree -- escape the “gotcha” snare of the alternative minimum tax, according to The New York Times.

The treatment extended to a UHNWI approaches that accorded to royalty. As a UHNWI, you aren’t offered a cardboard cup of day-old sludge from a Mr. Coffee machine. Now you qualify for a china cup of freshly brewed java from a gleaming French press. They’d better get another grinder or two. The Boston Consulting Group reports that 3,000 new households a year lay claim to $20 million or more in invested assets. Should you be among them, put your feet up and just whistle for service.

If getting yourself to a firm’s teak-paneled office is too much of a schlep, the investment advisers will high-tail it to you. They’ll be more than delighted to take you to dinner at the best place in town and toast your success with the finest vintages on the menu. They go to this expense because they obviously respect your business prowess and find you personally charming. Mostly, though, they admire you for your assets. They will ply you with leather binders filled with laser-printed pie charts, bar graphs and three-dimensional wave diagrams. Over dessert, they will produce PowerPoint slides that show how your nest egg will incubate and eventually burgeon into a soaring phoenix that will carry your Number higher and higher, all thanks to their nurturing and personal attention.

There is yet one more place to park, higher up and more exclusive still. This spot is for people for whom even discreet, private banking is déclassé. On this level of the ramp you forgo the wealth managers at even the toniest trust companies and rely instead on your own “family office,” complete with its own in-house investment manager and staff.

Typically, families with family offices have $100 million, $500 million, $1 billion, enough to blow off even the Lehmans, the Goldmans and the Northern Trusts of the world. At present, there are approximately 5,000 family offices around the country. Family offices are not for strivers -- at least not yet. But family offices may be going the way of fractional jets, shared yachts and high-end vacation-home clubs. People with only 20 million Numbers have begun to band together to create, in effect, multifamily offices to oversee their investments and estate planning.

Back down on the street, though, it’s another world. Most people have to circle the block, just looking for a way to get into the darn garage.

________

1. Before-Tax Family Income, 2001 Federal Reserve Board Survey

2. Family Net Worth, 2001 Federal Reserve Board Survey

From THE NUMBER by Lee Eisenberg. Copyright © 2006 by Lee Eisenberg.

===============

Sermon version:

If you and your spouse are bringing in $40,000 a year (each of you would be earning $10 an hour), you’re doing better than half the households in America. Or, as a Washington think tank recently pointed out: If you’re a teacher married to a policeman, your combined household income puts you in the top 25 percent of all households in the nation. If your household income is $170,000, you’re among the nation’s top 10 percent.

Income is only one way to look at it. How much have you saved away? This includes the equity in your house, your investments, your bank accounts, your retirement accounts. (Minus your credit card debt, of course.)

Across all households, the national median net worth is $86,000. Half of your fellow citizens have more than that, half have less. The top 10% have a total net worth of more than $833,000. Right now there are well over 7 million households in the United States with a net worth of $1 million or more. Together, they have assets worth $32 trillion - that’s a “t”.

The super-rich have $20 million or more in assets. Every year, 3,000 new households join this select club. If you are a proud member of it, our Building Finance Committee would like to have tea with you this week....

from America Online · Lee Eisenberg via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richmoneyfinancespoor

Should Pastor David Drive A Lincoln Continental?

James 5:1

Sermon in Book of James series, #15. James 5:1-6

SHOULD PASTOR DAVID DRIVE A LINCOLN CONTINENTAL?

================================================

I. My nice car.

A. I get many comments on my Lincoln.

B. The guilties of wealth.

II. James's radical blast.

A. James sounds like an O.T. prophet on the issue of wealth.

B. It still scandalizes us today.

C. We need to be warned, because we envy the rich.

III. Soaking the rich.

A. James is addressing the rich pagans outside the church. 5:1

B. No rich people in heaven?

C. Wealth has a way of demanding our allegiance. Matt 6:24

IV. Here come de judge.

A. James says we are in the "last days." 5:3

B. Our treasure can be secure in heaven, or rusted on earth.

V. Difficult truths.

A. Everyone will answer to God.

B. The way we live shows what we really believe.

C. The longer we live a certain way, the harder our hearts become.

D. Is your hope in God, or your money? 1 Timothy 6:17-18

from Condensed sermon outline (handout) by Rev. David Holwick · Rev. David Holwick, Serm07zj.pco via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database richesmaterialismmoney

Franc-ly Loaded (the Poor Rich Robbers)

Matthew 6:19

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal” (Matthew 6:19, NIV).

According to an article in “Today in the Word,” “A band of gangsters in France got away with more than $3.5 million. But the thieves had a problem. The loot was in French coins worth only about $2 each and weighing a total of 17 tons!

“A Paris newspaper taunted the bandits with this statement: ‘You can’t buy a chateau, a car, or even a pair of crocodile shoes with bags of change. And if you go out to celebrate your coup, the owner of the smallest cafe will become suspicious before you drop the tenth coin on the counter.’ The article continued, ‘Their punishment is included in their success. They will have to spend their loot franc by franc. They can buy millions of bottles of soft drinks. But what else?’”

The end result is pretty much the same for those who live only for this life accumulating whatever and make no preparation for eternity. How much wiser to follow the words of Jesus who also said, “But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matthew 6:20-21, NIV).

Suggested prayer: “Dear God, give me the wisdom and the courage (’the smarts’) to invest my life, my abilities, and my resources in eternity by being actively involved in doing your work on earth. And grant that I will do this out of a loving, thankful heart and not merely for rewards — and certainly not for the praise of man! Gratefully in Jesus’ name. Amen.”

from (unknown devotional) · Anon via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealth

Money Mattered More To Him

John Paul Getty was the richest man in the world in the 1970s. His fortune came from oil. He gave $660 million to endow an art museum in California. Yet he didn’t have the time to attend the funeral of his favorite son.

When his grandson was kidnapped by the Italian Mafia, Getty refused to pay the $17 million ransom. Then the kidnappers cut off the grandson’s ear and mailed it to the Getty family. Eventually he negotiated them down to $3 million, but put up no more than $2.2 million himself because that was the maximum that would be tax-deductible. He lent his son the remaining $800,000 at 4% interest.

One commentator has said, “Concerning intimacy, he was an utter failure.”

________

Adapted from the article "John Paul Getty III" in Wikipedia.org; , with further elements from Rev. Rick Warren's sermon "God’s Model For Manhood” [Kerux sermon #64056].

from (see notes below) · Rev. David Holwick via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealth

You Can Blow A Lot On a Wedding

Wedding Gifts

Evelyn Walsh McLean, who would later go on to own the Hope Diamond, was given a necklace nearly as impressive as that on her wedding day. Her husband, Edward Beale McLean, gave her the “Star of the East” diamond necklace, which was valued at $120,000 in 1909. It was 92.5 carats of diamond supported by a 34.5 carat emerald.

The most popular and outlandish wedding gift is real estate. Who wouldn’t want a house as a wedding present? How about a city? In one of the most outlandish wedding gifts of all time, the North African town of Tangier was given to Charles II of England as part of Catherine of Braganza’s dowry in 1661. [1]

Prince William and Catherine Middleton wanted to be more modern and suggested people donate to charity. But the South African discount airline, Kulula, sent the couple a traditional gift of a herd of cows. This is to compensate the bride’s family for the loss of their daughter. [2]

What do you get the couple who has matching first initials? [Kim Kardashian and Kris Humphries] Monogrammed towels? Booooring. Thank goodness they registered at Gearys Beverly Hills to make it a little easier for us. Thoughtful, you know? Maybe we’ll get them the Christofle “1925” Coffee/Tea Set, every home should have a decent one. Oh wait, it’s $3,360 - that must mean it comes to life singing and dancing with the voice of Angela Lansbury, Beauty and the Beast-style, right? For those who have to economize, you can get them the Torchon Salad Serving Fork for only $800. [3]

[The “marriage” lasted 72 days.]

Expensive Weddings

The most expensive wedding to date is the nuptials of Vanisha Mittal (daughter of billionaire Lakshmi Mittal, the richest man in India and fifth worldwide) and investment banker Amit Bhatia on November 18, 2006. The wedding took place at Vaux le Vicomte, a 17th-century chateau in France.

The elaborate, outrageously expensive wedding has been honored by Forbes Magazine as one of the most expensive weddings, and currently ranks in the Guinness Book of World Records for the most expensive wedding ever recorded, with $78 million spent.

The wedding went on for five days, and included extravagances such as invitations sent out in a 20-page silver book, 100 different dishes prepared by a top Calcutta chef, a wine tab of $1.5 million, and 1,000 guests on hand to witness the world’s most expensive wedding ceremony ever.

Actors Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes got married the same day but only spent $2 million. Their wedding took place at Italy’s 15th-century Odescalchi Castle. The bridal party attire was designed by Giorgio Armani. Andrea Boccelli performed at the ceremony. Costs included $900,000 for guest airfare and accommodations, and $180,000 for 300 bottles of wine. [3]

______

[1] Alex Lemone, “The Most Expensive Wedding Gifts of All Time”

[2] "Royal Wedding Gifts," April 26, 2001,

[3] Alex Gilman, “The Top 5 Most Outrageous Items On Kim Kardashians Wedding Gift Registry,”June 20, 2011,

[4] “Most Expensive Weddings”

from (see notes) · David Holwick via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database

How Have Our Presidents Done With Their Own Money?

Job 24:9

The President of the United States has enormous influence over the finances of the nation. How have they done with their personal finances? The net worth of the presidents varies widely. George Washington was worth over half a billion in today’s dollars. Several presidents went bankrupt.

2nd President Thomas Jefferson lived beyond his means and was mired in debt at the end of his life.

4th President James Madison was the largest landowner in Orange County, Virginia, and made significant money as secretary of state and president, but he lost money at the end of his life due to the steady financial collapse of his plantation.

5th President James Monroe married into money and made significant income during eight years as president, but entered retirement severely in debt and was forced to sell his large plantation.

7th President Andrew Jackson proclaimed himself the champion of the average man but was actually worth around $119 million in today’s dollars at his peak, yet at the end of his life he held significant debt.

9th President William Harrison married into money and he himself inherited 3,000 acres. He owned a mansion and property in Indiana but died penniless, causing Congress to create a special pension for his widow.

10th President John Tyler inherited a 1,000-acre plantation and his first wife was rich. He became indebted during the Civil War and died poor.

The fortunes of American presidents are tied to the economy in the eras in which they lived. For the first 75 years after Washington’s election, presidents generally made money on land, crops, and commodity speculation. A president who owned hundreds or thousands of acres could lose most or all of his property after a few years of poor crop yields. Wealthy Americans occasionally lost all of their money through land speculation — leveraging the value of one piece of land to buy additional property. Since there was no reliable national banking system and almost no liquidity in the value of private companies, land was the asset likely to provide the greatest yield, if the property yielded enough to support the costs of operating the farm or plantation.

Because there was no central banking system and no commodities regulatory framework, markets were subject to panics.

The panic of 1819 was caused by the deep indebtedness of the federal government and a rapid drop in the price of cotton. The immature banking system was forced to foreclose on many farms. The value of the properties foreclosed upon was often low because land without a landowner meant land without a crop yield.

The panic of 1837 caused a depression that lasted six years. It was triggered by a weak wheat crop, a drop in cotton prices, and a leverage bubble in the value of land created by speculation. These factors caused the US economy to go through a multi-year period of deflation.

The sharp fluctuations in the fortunes of the first 14 presidents were a result of the economic times.

Beginning with Millard Fillmore in 1850, the financial history of the presidency entered a new era. Most presidents were lawyers who spent years in public service. They rarely amassed large fortunes and their incomes were often almost entirely from their salaries. From Fillmore to Garfield, these American presidents were distinctly middle class. These men often retired without the money to support themselves in a fashion anywhere close to the one that they had as president. Buchanan, Lincoln, Johnson, Grant, Hayes, and Garfield had almost no net worth at all.

The rise of inherited wealth in the early 20th Century contributed to the fortunes of many presidents, including Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and both of the Bushes. The other significant change to the economy was the advent of large professionally organized corporations. These corporations produced much of the oil, mining, financial, and railroad fortunes amassed at the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th. The Kennedys were wealthy because of the financial empire built by Joseph Kennedy. Herbert Hoover made millions of dollars as the owner of mining companies.

The stigma of making money from being a retired president also began to disappear. Calvin Coolidge made a large income from his newspaper column. Gerald Ford, who had almost no money when he was a Congressman made a small fortune from serving on the boards of large companies. Clinton made millions of dollars from writing his autobiography.

Bankers Explain How They Cannot Possibly Live On $1 Million Pay

Luke 3:14

Like many carbon-based lifeforms, you perhaps think that bankers are driven only by naked greed. But that is just because you don’t understand them: They actually have a deep psychological need for that money.

In a new article at the U.K. site eFinancialCareers, several bankers explain that they have legitimate reasons for needing more than one million British pounds (about $1.6 million) per year in pay -- more money than most non-banking types could ever figure out how to spend. In a nutshell, it’s all about psychology. Abraham Maslow clearly should have added “crap-tons of money” when building his hierarchy of needs.

“It’s really not that unusual to find Wall Street bankers who are close to declaring themselves bankrupt,” Gary Goldstein, co-founder of U.S. search firm Whitney Partners, tells eFC’s Sarah Butcher. “Some people are really struggling.”

The entire story -- the latest in a series of jaw-dropping articles from Butcher, who is becoming the City of London’s version of Bloomberg’s Max Abelson, reporting bankers saying dumb things -- is required reading for anyone trying to understand the soul of the banker.

The struggles of millionaire bankers (in Butcher’s piece most of them are men) are an important factor for heartless regulators and shareholders to keep in mind as they consider putting limits on banker pay in the wake of a financial crisis that was fueled by bankers chasing higher pay. “One million” of anything -- pounds, dollars or Bitcoins, sounds like a lot to us rabble, but let bankers explain to you how it’s pretty much the same as nothing, really.

For one thing, taxes will quickly whittle a seven-figure income right down to the mid-six figures, perilously close to being within sight of the middle class. Then, an ex-Goldman banker points out, with the mere $600,000 in take-home pay remaining, bankers still need to “pay the mortgages on, and maintain houses, in the Hamptons and Manhattan, to put three children through private schools costing $40k a year each, and to pay living costs.”

Bankers might want to shed some of these costs by, say, sentencing their kids to rub elbows with the filthy Poors in public schools or owning just one house. But they are under constant social pressure to spend and spend some more, according to another ex-Goldmanite -- who is now a psychotherapist, naturally.

And this is before the wives get their cut. According to the bankers and ex-bankers in this article, there are only two marital choices available to bankers: The frumpy, educated girl they’ve been saddled with since college, or a physically attractive layabout who sucks their soul and bank account dry. Which only makes sense, because what other kinds of women are there, amiright, fellas? Science.

An even stronger urge than the need to keep up with the Rotschilds or satisfy the missus is rooted in the bankers’ childhoods. Every time they push a client to buy a subprime CDO, these bankers are merely trying to bring a smile to the cold, disapproving eyes of the parents looking over their shoulders. According to the squid/therapist quoted in the article, only “intense therapy” can help.

============

http://news.efinancialcareers.com/us-en/140070/when-a-million-isnt-enough-why-top-bankers-are-struggling-to-get-by/

When a million isn’t enough: why top bankers are struggling to get by

by Sarah Butcher

5/1/13

In theory, a seven figure annual pay packet should be more than enough to live on. In the UK, only the top 1% of income taxpayers earn anything more than £150k according to figures from the Office of National Statistics. In the US, the top 1% of people earn more than $370k according to the Internal Revenue Service. And yet, some bankers in the top bracket are having money troubles.

“It’s really not that unusual to find Wall Street bankers who are close to declaring themselves bankrupt,” said Gary Goldstein, co-founder of U.S. search firm Whitney Partners. “Some people are really struggling.”

Claims that bankers are having problems making ends meet won’t do much to ingratiate them to the public. At last week’s Barclays Annual General Meeting, Joan Woolard, a pensioner from the north of England berated Barclays for overpaying its bankers. Anyone who wanted more than £1m ($1.5m) a year was simply a “greedy b*stard,” said Woolard.

For some people working in financial services, however, £1m is simply what’s needed to cover the cost of living.

“You get a lot of people who have a very expensive lifestyle,” said Louise Cooper, a former Goldman Sachs salesperson and financial analyst at Cooper City. “They will always have a nanny, private schools for the children and they will have a very big expensive house. All of this has to be paid for out of taxable income,” she points out. “With a top tax rate of 45%, this means that you need to be earning nearly double what you’re spending.”

Tax is an issue in the U.S. too. “After tax, your million dollars will be around $600k,” said Goldstein. “Out of that, you get people trying to pay the mortgages on, and maintain houses, in the Hamptons and Manhattan, to put three children through private schools costing $40k a year each, and to pay living costs.”

Why can’t bankers simply ditch the house in the Hamptons and put their children into state run educational establishments? Unfortunately, this seems easier said than done. “When you work in banking, you end up surrounded by people who earn a lot of money,” said Erika Shapiro, a former fixed income saleswoman at Goldman, Citi, Credit Suisse and UBS who became a yoga instructor. “Everyone around you has a big mortgage and is sending their children to private schools.”

“You just get trapped at a certain level of expenditure,” said Tony Greenham, a former investment banker at Barclays and head of finance and business at the New Economics Foundation. “You’re in a peer group which aspires to and achieves a certain standard of house in a certain area, a certain type of holiday home, and certain schooling for your children.”

The social conditioning to spend heavily is insidious and is enforced by bankers’ peers, said Nell Montgomery, an ex-Goldman Sachs sales trader-turned psychotherapist. “People in banking get into a thought process whereby having three children at private schools costing £100k after tax is normal. You hear people saying they’d rather pay for private tutoring than spend £10k on a holiday. It’s a mindset in which things which are not normal come to be perceived as standard,” she said.

Ironically, in light of Woolard’s outpouring at the Barclays AGM, Goldstein said top-earning Barclays bankers are suffering most acutely. “Barclays’ bonuses are so heavily deferred that people there are receiving very little cash,” he said. “They are living on $300k-$400k base salaries, which are halved after tax.” Earlier this year, it emerged that Barclays was deferring 100% of all bonuses for its managing directors.

In some cases, the situation is being aggravated by decisions from the past – both in terms of spousal selection and ill-informed borrowing.

Cooper said some of the most impoverished-but-wealthy bankers are those with trophy wives. “You’ll get these guys who turn up at work with the girlfriends they’ve had since university, and then suddenly – once they start making a lot of money – they’ll ditch the old university educated girlfriend and find a much more glamorous and good looking woman that they’ve found through work,” she said. Predictably, Cooper said such wives are high maintenance, expecting expensive handbags, expensive shoes, houses in the right areas, expensive education for their children, jewels, nannies and help. “There are lots of lovely men in the City who’ve been with their wives since they were paupers,” said Cooper. “But there are also some who get trapped in relationships where the deal is that they have to earn a lot of money.”

Trophy wives are an issue on Wall Street as much as London, but Goldstein said U.S. bankers’ woes are being further compounded by foolish borrowing decisions taken during the boom times. “A lot of people borrowed against their stock,” he said. “It was rising by 20%-30% a year and a lot of people borrowed against it to buy a boat or the house in the Hamptons.” Now that stock is worth far less – or, in the case of Lehman or Bear Stearns, nothing at all.

How to learn to live on less

So what can you do if you’re a banker who’s lost all sense of financial perspective and can’t make ends meet on £1m? Get some perspective, is the widely advocated answer.

“Remember how little you needed to live happily when you were a student,” said Oliver James, a clinical psychologist and author of the book ‘Affluenza’. “People tend to think of their wants as needs,” James added. “But our real needs are actually very basic – you need food, warmth and maybe light, and you need to feel emotionally secure.”

The best antidote to over-spending is to retain a single partner for life, said Cooper: it helps put things in context. Alternatively, try cultivating friendships outside of banking. “I always had a lot of hobbies which brought me into contact with people from different walks of life,” said Shapiro. “I always knew people who earned £25k-30k a year.”

Finally, there’s always therapy. Montgomery said a lot of people in banking formed insecure attachments to their parents as children. This makes them overly-competitive and ostentatious, she said. “When you’re insecure, you can take refuge in a kind of grandiosity in which you say ‘at least I’m earning a lot and going to these kinds of expensive places,” said Montgomery. “You can only get over this kind of thing with intense therapy,” she added.

Prosperity Gospel Beliefs On The Rise Among Churchgoers

Luke 6:38

According to a 2023 survey from Lifeway, more than half of American Protestants say they hear the Prosperity Gospel in their churches. 76% of churchgoers believe God wants them to prosper financially. And almost half think that they have to do something for God in order to receive material blessings from him. With younger Christians, those percentages are even higher.

“In the last five years, far more churchgoers are reflecting prosperity gospel teachings, including the heretical belief that material blessings are earned from God,” said Scott McConnell, executive director of Lifeway Research. “It is possible the financial hits people have taken from inflation and the pandemic have triggered feelings of guilt for not serving God more. But Scripture does not teach that kind of direct connection.”

“Pursuing holiness was never designed by God to be a plan for financial riches,” McConnell said. “The size of one’s finances is not the measure of anyone’s service to God nor relationship with Him.”

As more churchgoers affirm prosperity gospel beliefs, younger churchgoers — those 18-49 — are more likely than older churchgoers — those 50 and older — to affirm their church teaches that if they give more money to the church and charities, God will bless them. “This research does not rule out the possibility that biblical teachings were poorly heard by more young adults, but they definitely have experienced a lack of clear biblical teaching on the reason for generosity,” McConnell said.

African American churchgoers are the most likely to say their church teaches that if they give more money to the church and charities, God will bless them in return. And those who attend worship services one to three times a month are more likely to say the same than those who attend at least four times a month.

Churchgoers without evangelical beliefs are more likely than those with such beliefs to say their church teaches that if they give more money, God will bless them (55% v. 48%). The opposite was true five years ago [2018] when 41% of evangelicals agreed and 35% of non-evangelicals agreed.

$37 Can't Get You In

John 14:6

You cannot buy your way into heaven.

You know this, but rich people think a little differently. Back in 2006 Warren Buffett announced that he was giving his fortune to charity. At the time Buffett was worth $44 billion just in stocks. He said he was giving away $37 billion. Most of it went to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. By anyone’s thinking ... that’s a lot of money.

When he presented his gift to the Gateses, he made the remark, “There is more than one way to get to heaven, but this is a great way.”

It is certainly a generous gift, but not a sufficient to get to heaven. $37 billion is not enough. Only the blood of Jesus can get you in.

from Sermon #64650 · Rev. Jeff Strite via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database one waywealth

Does Money Make You Mean?

From grumpy old misers to the wolves of Wall Street, Hollywood has always had plenty to say about the corrupting influence of wealth. But how accurate are the silver screen stereotypes - does money make you mean?

________

The road along the seafront in Los Angeles is lined with palm trees - skateboarders and dog-walkers stroll along, heading for the beach. And social psychologist Professor Paul Piff is spending the afternoon going back and forth over a pedestrian crossing.

Thanks to the high number of wealthy locals, there is no shortage of upmarket vehicles gliding past. The four-wheel drives, sleek sports cars and nifty hybrids are an essential part of his demonstration.

He’s here to illustrate one of his more provocative experiments - who is more likely to stop for pedestrians, the rich or the poor?

Drivers are legally obliged to stop if someone wishes to cross. And, as a Lexus blithely slips through in front of him, Piff explains what his researchers found.

“None of the drivers of the least expensive cars broke the law, while close to 50% of our most expensive car drivers broke the law,” he says.

Piff also asked a range of people from different backgrounds how they would behave in various scenarios.

In the past, public perception has tended towards the notion that the very poor are more likely to break the rules because they are under financial pressure and face more difficult circumstances.

But Piff’s work suggests the opposite - that having more money makes you care about others less and feel entitled to put your own interests first.

After nearly a decade researching this field, Piff has come to the controversial conclusion that being wealthy, rather than transforming you into a benevolent benefactor, can actually be rather bad for your moral fiber.

“It makes you more attuned to your own interests, your own desires, your own welfare,” he says.

“It isolates you in certain ways from other people psychologically and materially. You prioritize your own needs and your own goals and become less attuned to those around you.

“If I put a pen in your hand and ask you to draw a circle to represent yourself, the wealthier you are, the larger that circle is relative to the size of the circles poorer people draw of themselves.”

In his psychology lab, Piff has run studies which suggest people with more money are more likely to cheat in a dice game, more likely to take sweets reserved for children and less willing to give up their time to help others.

Using a well-known tool of psychologists, the dictator test, he took a group of people and gave some of them $10 (£7) each. He told them they could share all, some or none of that windfall with another participant who had been given nothing.

“Rational economics would say the poorer person should keep more for themselves, the richer person should give more away.

“We find the opposite. The wealthier you are, controlling for a whole slew of other variables, the less generous you are. You give significantly smaller portions away to this other person.

“Poorer people were significantly more generous - they give 150% as much as do richer participants,” he says.

In another study he rigged a game of Monopoly to privilege one player, giving him or her more money to start with. As a final touch, they had the counter of the Rolls Royce to move around the board - the disadvantaged player who was destined to lose had the old boot.

After dozens of games it transpired that winning brings out the worst in the player who is scooping the board - an imperious manner, domination of the space, even eating more from a communal bowl of pretzels.

When we feel wealthy, Piff concludes, we need other people less. In the real world, when people have less money, they rely more heavily on their social relationships to get by. Therefore interpersonal relations are prioritized. The rich, by contrast, can buy themselves peace, quiet and space - plus a solution to most problems. There’s nothing like a fat wallet to cheer you up in a crisis. But that tends to isolate them from others’ experiences.

Piff’s findings certainly have popular appeal. There’s a comfort in thinking that those who enjoy the advantages of wealth might also be paying a price. But not everyone is convinced.

Psychology is a discipline fraught with difficulties. In real-world studies there are always confounding factors - does the person crossing the road step out more confidently in front of a cheaper car? Is the driver really wealthy or has he borrowed his uncle’s BMW? Data from population surveys is hard to decipher. There’s no way to tease apart cause and effect, and subjects who turn up to take part in lab studies give responses that may or may not bear any relation to real life.

It’s only when studies employing different methods repeatedly point in the same direction that the results are deemed significant.

Since Piff published his first batch of findings in 2010, other scientists around the world have been busy trying to replicate them. Some have found results which back up Piff’s work, but others, confusingly have found the opposite.

One study in the Netherlands which used real-life millionaires as its participants found they were more generous than the average person when given a small sum of money to keep or share.

Analyses of population data by academics in Europe failed to find any link between wealth and a lack of generosity. If anything, they found the reverse, that wealthier individuals were more likely to offer time and money to others.

Wallets with foreign banknotes on cover You’ve now been primed. Be nice.

There is however a closely related field of study that may help explain Piff’s findings.

Research by Prof Kathleen Vohs at Minnesota University might help to explain Piff’s findings though. She spent her time “accidentally” dropping a bundle of little yellow pencils to see whether people would help pick them up.

First, though, she primed half of them with thoughts of money, either giving them money-related sentences to unscramble or banknotes to count.

Money-primed participants proved to be less helpful in gathering up the pencils. And in a similar study they were also less generous when invited to donate to charity.

Unlike Piff’s work, this seems to have little to do with how rich or poor they are. And the results have been replicated to date in 19 countries.

“It seems there’s something about the idea of money and the way that it’s represented in people’s minds that’s causing the effects that we see and it seems like it has very little to do with whether they are feeling strapped or flush with cash,” says Vohs.

Vohs says even just thinking about money invokes a “self-sufficient mindset” reflecting the fact money is all about transactions with strangers and calculating your best interest. You don’t typically use money with your nearest and dearest. As a result money can make us more determined and focused but it also makes us less sensitive to the needs and feelings of others.

Researchers in Hong Kong; One on left did the sound blast experiment; on right is Yuwei Jiang. Can ask Lucy for more info on other guy is necessary Prof Zhansheng Chen (l) and Prof Yuwei Jiang (r)

Researchers in Hong Kong have taken this a step further. Prof Zhansheng Chen and Prof Yuwei Jiang found money-primed subjects, when given a series of ethical dilemmas, were more likely to accept moral transgressions such as cheating in exams or lying on a CV.

And when playing a game involving punishing another participant with a blast of sound, money-primed participants set the unpleasant buzz for their unseen opponent at a consistently louder level for longer. Money priming made them more aggressive.

So focusing on prices and profits, bank accounts and budgets, may not be good for the atmosphere in your office or the integrity of your organization.

If you want your workers to cooperate with each other and remain honest don’t bribe them with bonuses, says Jiang. He has a better suggestion.

“You can award your employee a trip to Hawaii. People do not think about money when they go to Hawaii.”

Our Inalienable Right To Pursue Possessions

Luke 12:13

In the original draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that man had the inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of POSSESSIONS. The committee that worked on the document changed the wording, but our thinking hasn't changed at all. We all feel our happiness lies mostly with our things. Jesus says, "No, it doesn't." We answer, "Yes, it does."

from The Ten Commandments: Playing by The Rules · Rev. Stuart Briscoe via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database greedwealth

Solomon and Money

Proverbs 11

Why do you think God cares so much about how we handle our money? When have you been on the receiving end of generosity? How can you demonstrate generosity toward others?

If your life were cut up into a pie chart, it might be divided up into a lot of categories: work, home, church, friends and many others. And one piece of your pie would probably be money. That’s okay. Money isn’t evil. It’s a necessary part of living each day on earth. But since it’s a piece of your life, it’s also something God cares about deeply because He cares about everything that makes up who you are. That’s why the Bible has so much to say about money and why we will never be truly alive until we learn to handle money wisely.

Many of Solomon’s proverbs talk about using money wisely, and even Jesus used money stories to teach important lessons. But confusion over the topic continues today. Many, even in the church, think it’s wrong to be wealthy. The truth is, God gives each person what he or she can faithfully handle. Through the years many godly people have done incredible work with the riches God has given them -- things no one else could have done. But they made sure their focus was on the Giver of the gifts, not the gifts themselves. We honor God through the money He’s entrusted to us. That’s the wise and righteous way to approach our money and the only way to avoid the emptiness that comes from using money unwisely.

Solomon taught that wise use of our money and possessions means giving it back to God and using it according to His plans. In Proverbs 11, Solomon again affirmed that God stands against those who lack integrity, especially at the expense of others. He wrote that God finds dishonesty “detestable” (v. 1). He applied this basic principle to the area of money through the use of a contrasting parallel, starting with the negative aspect of dishonest gain and contrasting it with the benefits of financial honesty.

We know people make money in one of two ways: honestly or dishonestly. And they spend money in two ways: wisely or unwisely. Solomon doesn’t pull too many punches in telling believers exactly which choices they should be making. In a world that sometimes approves of cutting corners or “shrewd” business practices, believers serve as lights of integrity for God’s glory. If we can get a handle on this money issue, God has promised to bless us, and so many other areas of our lives will fall into place. When we demonstrate wisdom by handling money honestly, we bring Him delight because we are doing things His way.

Solomon went on to make two things incredibly clear in verse 4: a day of wrath is coming, and none of the riches we accumulate on earth will help us on that day. While money is an important trapping of this world, it means nothing when we enter the next. It can’t guarantee a spot in heaven or provide eternal security. Righteousness is the only currency recognized in heaven! Remember that riches are here today and gone tomorrow.

If God really owns everything -- and we manage His stuff for His honor -- then we have to see money differently than the world sees it. We should never waste our time and energy in an empty, unfulfilling chase for money. We’ve got to use all we have for God’s glory.

________

Adapted from the LifeWay YOU curriculum.

A Fancy Dinner Isn’t A Moral Failure

Job 7:2

Earlier this month, when celebrity chef Thomas Keller was interviewed by NPR about his new cookbook, his interviewer wasn’t all that interested in the recipes. Instead, he wanted to talk about the $850-per-plate price tag at Keller’s recently reopened San Francisco restaurant.

With so many people struggling financially due to the pandemic, asked the reporter, is it really “fair” to charge that much per plate? Or is it, to use his words, “tone deaf?”

That an interview, which was likely intended to be a puff piece, turned into a social justice diatribe is further proof that worldview affects everything.

To be clear, I cannot imagine ever spending $850 for a meal, but the reporter’s problem had nothing to do with prudence or financial stewardship. The problem with the price tag, according to the reporter, is not that some people would not have access to food, but that everyone would not have equal access to Thomas Keller’s food. In other words, his was a problem with the free market. And, of course, having a problem with the free market is all the rage these days.

Often called capitalism, a term popularized by Karl Marx and intended to be derogatory, the free market is an economic system. Unlike Communism, it is not a complete worldview. In other words, it doesn’t try to answer questions about the nature of reality, who we are, why we’re here, what’s right and wrong, what’s ultimately wrong with the world, and how it can be fixed. That’s a significant distinction.

The failures of Communism (everywhere it has been tried) are due to the fact it assumes wrongly about reality, morality, and human nature. Its failures are intrinsic. A free market, on the other hand, is premised on allowing consumers and entrepreneurs to make their own decisions. Its failures are the failures of the human beings it involves.

Economic freedom for a largely moral people leads to the explosion of wealth, innovation, and generosity. Economic freedoms outside a moral framework can lead to exploitation. Thus, instead of the totalizing control of a Communist framework, a free market leans on the state to provide legal protections and religious institutions to provide moral instruction.

Arthur Brooks, President Emeritus of The American Enterprise Institute and a professor at Harvard Business School, once said that he supports the free market because not because he cares about the rich, but because he cares about the poor. After decades of studying global poverty, he found that “four-fifths of starvation level world poverty has been eradicated since 1970.” How did that happen? It wasn’t through additional federal aid, or by throwing money at a problem that fundamentally wasn’t a money problem.

Poverty is addressed through opportunity, innovation, and people benefiting from their hard work and expertise. Thomas Keller can charge more because he sources the best produce and meat, buys the best kitchen tools, pays the best chefs, and tosses in his own innovation and skill set. I’m not saying that he should charge what he does, or that people should pay what he asks. I’m just explaining why his work and product deserves more value than a Big Mac.

Imposing absolute financial equality, on the other hand, doesn’t lift anyone to ingenuity or wealth. Rather, it lowers everyone to the lowest common denominator, economically as well as in creativity and quality.

A free market works not because wealth is valued, but because labor is.

Jesus said we can’t serve both God and money and that it’s more difficult for the wealthy to enter the kingdom of God. Jesus never said accumulating wealth itself is sinful. Exploitation of the poor is sinful. Looking to wealth for salvation and meaning is sinful. Failing to steward what we’ve been given and failing to care for those in need are sinful.

When these potential downfalls are mitigated or avoided, a free market inspires people to give more. According to data from The Philanthropy Roundtable, Americans give to charity at a rate seven times higher than continental Europeans. The top one percent of all earners in the U.S. give a full one-third of all charitable donations.

Once NPR finally asked Thomas Keller about what was in his new cookbook, the interview took an ironic turn. Keller cautioned that his recipes aren’t necessarily for home cooks. His recipes require a certain amount of previously obtained skill. Interestingly, the reporter didn’t seem to think that was unfair.

I won’t be buying Keller’s book, and I likely won’t be eating at his restaurant. Still, I respect what his labor and skill has created. All that’s ok. That’s how freedom works.

________

Resources:

“Should We Try to Erase Economic Inequality?” by Brooke McIntire, What Would You Say?, November 4, 2020

“For Chef Thomas Keller, Cooking Is Emotional,” NPR, October 28, 2020

“The Sad Decline Of The Word Capitalism’,” by Alejandro Chafuen, Forbes, May 1, 2013

“Capitalism is the greatest force for human advancement that we have,” by Arthur C. Brooks, National Post, December 23, 2019

“Who Gives Most to Charity?” Philanthropy Roundtable, 2019

________

Copyright (c) 2020 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with permission. "BreakPoint" is a radio ministry of Prison Fellowship Ministries.

from BreakPoint Commentary · John Stonestreet & Maria Baer via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealthmoney

In Our Rejection of The Prosperity Gospel, Are We Missing God’s Provision?

Job 1:1

As church leaders, we can model a balanced mindset about God’s material blessings.

________

I knew full well going to Facebook to ask for advice could be dicey. My wife and I had had our fill of mechanic bills and were in the market for a new (used) vehicle. Searching online for low-mileage, well-maintained cars in our price range was proving difficult, but I thought I’d found a good lead. The car was about 15 years old but appeared to have barely been driven by its one owner. It was in great shape and seemed like a steal.

There was only one problem. It was a BMW.

Am I a BMW guy? I thought to myself. My first concern, I confess, was about what others might think. So I took to Facebook and asked, “Anyone out there think it’s problematic for someone in my position to drive a car like this?” I was worried it might appear immodest or even hypocritical for a seminary professor and preacher of the (free!) gospel to be seen driving such a car.

I made sure to mention a few exonerating details — that it wasn’t new, wasn’t expensive, and the like. Most of my friends said they wouldn’t have a problem with me driving one. Interestingly, one commenter said that the very fact I was asking meant it probably was a violation of my own conscience. And another commenter added that seeing me drive a BMW onto the campus where I teach pastoral ministry would “cause him to stumble.”

In the end, my wife and I opted to keep searching, mainly because of warnings we received about costly repairs to older-model BMWs, which was the very thing we were trying to avoid in the first place. But the experience got me thinking about Christians’ vision of money and the perception, right or wrong, of extravagance and prosperity.

Our Complicated Relationship with Prosperity

Evangelicalism is a conflicted marketplace when it comes to prosperity. On the one hand, our suburban megachurches (not exactly known for frugality or architectural sparseness) continue to grow and reproduce while we prop up our subculture’s own version of internet influencers and self-help gurus by making their channels popular, their books bestsellers, and their brands lucrative.

On the other hand, we also enjoy scoffing at some of these folks’ obsession with image and unabashed displays of luxury. The Instagram account PreachersNSneakers — which features photos of well-known Christian spokespeople sporting expensive tennis shoes, ostensibly for the purpose of exposing their inappropriate extravagance — is just one example. And of course many evangelicals find the long-tenured cast of characters in the “health and wealth” movement a reliable stock for sarcasm and critique.

Americans are obsessed with money, and they’re obsessed with those who are thought to have too much of it. And American Christians are no exception. Perhaps there’s a double-mindedness at play here.

To be clear, the prosperity gospel — a theology of a Protestant subculture largely occupied by (but not limited to) Pentecostal and charismatic believers that posits financial blessings and physical health are God’s will for the faithful — is an especially pernicious plague in the world, now fully exported and a global affront to true Christianity. And its problems aren’t merely theological. The prosperity gospel movement exploits the poor and many others in ways implicit and explicit that often cross fully into the category of spiritual abuse.

When we couple this very real religious epidemic with wider (but also very real) concerns about social justice, income disparities, economic disadvantage, and the like, evangelicalism’s money problem makes total sense. Prosperity theology — ”health and wealth,” “name it and claim it,” and so on — turns God’s commands into formulas and faithful obedience into a kind of magic. The prosperity gospel twists biblical concepts into a counterintuitive mix of superstition and pragmatism. This heterodoxy ought to be rejected wholesale.

But what if our rightful concern with the prosperity gospel and our honest zeal against it has created a scorched-earth policy regarding money and material blessings that is, in its own way, problematic?

The Biblical Balance on Wealth

Are God’s provisions only to be thought of in purely spiritual terms — that is, are we to reject any material prosperity as not one of God’s blessings? Could our reaction to the prosperity gospel’s errors cause us to miss biblical truth about God’s provision?

The Bible, of course, says a multitude of things about money and material possessions, but Christian thinking on the subject these days appears to be somewhat selective. For instance, we all know that the love of money is an idolatry that leads to ruin (Eccl. 5:10; Matt. 6:24; 1 Tim. 6:10; Heb. 13:5). Paul names love of money in the same list of shameful immoralities that includes abuse and brutality (2 Tim. 3:2–5). Jesus also warns about riches constantly. The wealthy, it would seem, are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to perceiving his glory and the eternal riches of the kingdom (Mark 10:25).

But the Bible also has plenty of positive things to say about wealth — not about the love of it or the finding of one’s satisfaction in it, obviously, but simply about the fact of it. In the Old Testament in particular, we find ample evidence of financial and material provision being viewed as part of God’s blessings. The Wisdom Literature especially seems to regard wealth as (often) the result of good stewardship, hard work, and faithful diligence. Proverbs 12:27 is just one example: “Whoever is slothful will not roast his game, but the diligent man will get precious wealth” (ESV). Riches are also held out very often metaphorically as a reward for faithfulness (Ps. 112:3; Prov. 14:24; Isa. 60:5).

Job is an obvious example of a very rich man who is nevertheless regarded as righteous (Job 1:1–3). After he has undergone his unfathomable suffering, his restoration includes the reward of double his previous fortune. This comes from the hand of the Lord himself (42:10).

In the New Testament, where the warnings about riches seem to come more urgently, we nevertheless encounter wealthy people who support the ministry of Christ and his disciples. Joseph of Arimathea, who possessed a family tomb he offered to hold the body of the crucified Jesus and is identified as “a rich man” in Matthew 27:57, is just one example. A group of women financially supported Christ’s ministry out of their abundance, as well (Luke 8:3). And Lydia and other wealthy patrons helped sponsor the early church’s apostolic missionary efforts.

The problem with the prosperity gospel, then, appears not to be about prosperity per se. The spiritual dysfunction of this theology is largely about pragmatism, a turning of biblical principles into dubious formulas for wealth and accumulation. It is one thing to think of riches and material possessions as God’s blessings. It’s another thing entirely to think of them as God’s debt to our faithfulness (or to consider the lack of riches as an indicator of unfaithfulness).

Certainly the language of reward in the Scriptures may complicate the thinking here. When we come across verses about asking and receiving, we must take care not to misinterpret them as being about individualistic fulfillment or remove them from their spiritual and kingdom contexts. Similarly, passages on sowing and reaping or returns on investments often lend themselves to immediate financial or personal application, when their primary thrust is often about spiritual interest, heavenly rewards, or the stewardship of souls.

We can know that finances are not an automatic or reliable reward for faithfulness simply because there are too many of the faithful poor in the Scriptures! We can and should repudiate any theology that posits material goods as owed to anybody. And we can and should repudiate any vision of material goods that promotes greed, envy, vanity, and immodesty, not to mention stinginess or exploitation of the poor. The potential for sin is not in the money itself, but in how we think about it and what we may do with it.

How a Poverty of Thinking Impacts Our Churches

As church leaders, our vision of money — especially how we talk about it — has deep implications for our personal discipleship and the discipleship culture of our churches. What do we stand to lose, for instance, if in our rejection of the prosperity gospel, we unintentionally create a kind of shame around receiving such provision?

We could inadvertently deincentivize generosity among those in our midst who have more than others. If maintaining wealth is itself cast as greedy or otherwise sinful, we may be telling the wealthier among us that the church and its mission are not the place in which to invest one’s wealth, that their stewardship ought to be channeled elsewhere.

Consider: What do our better-resourced congregants think when we create unbiblical categories of sin around money and possessions? Will they feel unwelcome, ashamed, or even alienated from the values of the church? If we cultivate an unhealthy stigma around wealth, our wealthier members may have second thoughts about financial support of the church, opting instead to support charities and organizations that cheerfully receive their cheerful generosity.

Or they may even disengage from church altogether. If a church operates with a shame culture around money, it may ironically promote self-indulgence and self-interest in disengaged wealthier congregants, creating deep detrimental impacts on mission support and benevolence needs.

Think, too, of those in lower-income areas where successful businesses lead to job creation and other cascading effects of social uplift. By shaming wealth, the church may be confusing budding entrepreneurs and defusing the kind of passion that can have long-lasting, systemic improvements in contexts that most need them.

Additionally, casting a vision of money or material possessions as themselves sinful borders on a kind of Gnosticism that works against the real-world spirituality of the Scriptures.

It is much better instead to speak of money as a tool. Tools can help or harm. Many people in our world have been harmed by deformed thinking about and demonic use of this tool. But many others have been helped. To borrow a phrase from Martin Luther, let us take great care in our overcorrection, then, not to fall off the horse on the other side.

The evangelical problem with money can be remedied with a careful and biblical call for vigilance and balance, for grace and clarity. Pastors ought to remind their congregations — and themselves! — about the dangers of riches, about the particular vulnerabilities endemic to those who enjoy more of material provisions than others. As it traffics in self-interest and a kind of pragmatic legalism, the prosperity gospel is always lying in wait outside the doors of our hearts, so we need to teach biblical truth and encourage biblical wisdom in these matters at every turn.

But we ought not act out the now-clichéd misremembering of 1 Timothy 6:10, that “money is the root of all evil.” Along with sober-mindedness, encourage wholehearted generosity. Appeal to those who have much to remember in every way those who have little. To remember the poor is part of our fidelity to the gospel, in fact (Gal. 2:10). Every good gift comes from God. Nothing is to be rejected if it can be received with thanksgiving. Let us not dishonor the Giver by deeming any of his blessings as unacceptable.

________

Jared C. Wilson is assistant professor of pastoral ministry at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, director of the Pastoral Training Center at Liberty Baptist Church, and cohost of CT’s The Art of Pastoring podcast.

From Issue :Fall 2021: Giving Our All, September 28, 2021

*

[Original illustration at this number was added to HolwickID #11900]

How Much Rockefeller Left Behind

When John D. Rockefeller died, one man was curious about how much he left behind. Determined to find out, he set up an appointment with one of Rockefeller's highest aides and asked, "How much did Rockefeller leave behind?"

The aide answered, "All of it."

from Fredericksburg Bible Illustrator Supplements via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database deathwealth

Does Heaven Matter?

John 14:2

71 percent of Americans believe in an afterlife, but no one much talks about it. Does heaven matter? Heaven aroused great interest in the past.

Reasons for decline in interest:

1. Affluence has given us in this life what those in past expected in

heaven. Karl Marx criticized "pie in sky." Few Christians offer this

anymore.

2. Creeping paganism accepts death as the end of life on earth. Eternal

life would be a violent interruption. Groups of dying people do not

talk about heaven - it is seen as denial. Acceptance is key. >12/19/93

"What convulsion of values can have us holding up the prospect of

annihilation as brave and that of blissful eternity as cowardly?"

3. Older images of heaven (Biblical ones) have lost their appeal. Pearly

gates don't sell anymore. Huck Finn - "All a body would have to do was

to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever."

To those in distress, heaven offers hope. If we do not believe this, there is not much reason to be a Christian in the first place.

Yancey saw this hope among blacks in a nursing home. "This world is not my home, I'm just passin' through."

"When we get to heaven, many of us may be shocked at what it means to enjoy God."

===============

Full article:

"Heaven Can't Wait" by Philip Yancey

I have seen the electrifying results of what can happen when the reality comes alive.

A strange fact about modern American life: although 71 percent of us believe in an afterlife (says George Gallup), no one much talks about it. Christians believe that we will spend eternity in a splendid place called heaven. Percentages don't apply to eternity, of course; but for the sake of argument, assume that 99 percent of our existence will take place in heaven. Isn't it a little bizarre that we simply ignore heaven, acting as if it doesn't matter?

The past four annual volumes of the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature record a grand total of zero articles on heaven. Many articles concern old age, many are about death, some are on out of-the-body experiences, but none are about heaven. More surprisingly, the Religion Index to Periodicals references only a handful of articles on heaven: two, for instance, during the years 1981-82.

This modern situation differs from the past, when heaven aroused great interest. A good library will contain dusty 1,000-page anthologies from the nineteenth century, of poetic and prose imaginings of what heaven will be like.

What happened? At least three reasons may help explain the mystery.

1. Affluence has given us in this life what former generations longed for in anticipation of heaven. We now have (most of us in the West, at least) relief from pain, plentiful food, and surroundings of beauty and luxury. The biblical promise of such a state has lost some of its luster.

Karl Marx criticized religion as the “opiate of the people” because it promised the lower classes “pie in the sky” in order to lull them away from wanting it now. Marx's critique sounds quaint today, because few people are promising pie in the sky anymore; religious organizations such as the World Council of Churches and evangelical relief agencies instead encourage us to redistribute the pie here on earth.

2. A creeping paganism invites us to accept death as the culmination of life on earth, not as a violent interruption in an eternal life. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross (who happens to believe in an afterlife) described five stages of death, with an implicit assumption that the “Acceptance” stage is the most healthful and appropriate.

I have watched in hospital groups as dying patients worked desperately toward a calm stage of acceptance, denying the impulses of their instincts and conscience to reject the unnatural act of death. Strangely, no one ever talked about heaven in those groups; it seemed embarrassing, somehow cowardly. What convulsion of values can have us holding up the prospect of annihilation as brave and that of blissful eternity as cowardly?

3. Older images of heaven, the biblical ones, have lost their appeal. Walls of emerald, sapphire, and jasper, streets of gold, and pearly gates may have inspired Middle Eastern peasants, but they don't mean much to the world of Bauhaus. And religious leaders and artists have failed to create satisfactory new images. What will heaven be like? A place where “all a body would have to do was to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever” sounds as unattractive to most of us as it did to Huck Finn.

In this brief column I can only begin to raise questions. But it seems to me Christian communicators have a clear responsibility to project a new understanding of heaven into modern consciousness. If we fail, we forfeit one of our faith's greatest features.

To people who are trapped in pain, in economic chaos, in hatred and fear — to these, heaven offers a promise of a time, far longer and more substantial than this time on earth, of health and wholeness and pleasure and peace. If we do not believe that, then, as the apostle Paul noted, there is not much reason for being a Christian in the first place.

I have seen the electrifying results of what can happen when the concept of heaven comes alive. My wife, Janet, works with senior citizens in a part of Chicago recently judged the poorest community in the United States. About half of her clients are white, half are black. All of them have lived through harsh times: two world wars, the Great Depression, the waves of social upheaval that have affected major cities. And all of them, in their seventies and eighties, face the inevitability of death.

My wife has observed a remarkable difference in the way the whites and blacks face death. There are exceptions, of course, but the trend is this: many of the whites become increasingly more fearful and uptight. They complain about their lives, their families, and their deteriorating health.

The blacks, in contrast, maintain a good humor and spirit of triumph even though most of them have greater reason for bitterness and despair. Their lives were three-fourths over by the time the civil rights bills were passed.

Janet believes the difference is hope, a hope that traces directly to the blacks' bedrock belief in heaven. “This world is not my home, I'm just passin' through,” they say. These words and others like them came out of a tragic period of history, when everything in this world looked bleak. But black churches managed to instill a vivid belief in a home beyond this one.

Somehow, these neglected saints have learned to anticipate and enjoy God in spite of the difficulties of their lives. When we get to heaven, many of us may be shocked at what it means to enjoy God. For others, such as these elderly blacks, that joy will seem more like a long-awaited homecoming than a visit to a new place. Who knows, they may save a few hundred years' awkward transition.

__________

This article originally appeared in the September 7, 1984, issue of Christianity Today magazine.

#327

*

Does Heaven Matter?

John 14:2

71 percent of Americans believe in an afterlife, but no one much talks about it. Does heaven matter? Heaven aroused great interest in the past.

Reasons for decline in interest:

1. Affluence has given us in this life what those in past expected in

heaven. Karl Marx criticized "pie in sky." Few Christians offer this

anymore.

2. Creeping paganism accepts death as the end of life on earth. Eternal

life would be a violent interruption. Groups of dying people do not

talk about heaven - it is seen as denial. Acceptance is key. >12/19/93

"What convulsion of values can have us holding up the prospect of

annihilation as brave and that of blissful eternity as cowardly?"

3. Older images of heaven (Biblical ones) have lost their appeal. Pearly

gates don't sell anymore. Huck Finn - "All a body would have to do was

to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever."

To those in distress, heaven offers hope. If we do not believe this, there is not much reason to be a Christian in the first place.

Yancey saw this hope among blacks in a nursing home. "This world is not my home, I'm just passin' through."

"When we get to heaven, many of us may be shocked at what it means to enjoy God."

===============

Full article:

"Heaven Can't Wait" by Philip Yancey

I have seen the electrifying results of what can happen when the reality comes alive.

A strange fact about modern American life: although 71 percent of us believe in an afterlife (says George Gallup), no one much talks about it. Christians believe that we will spend eternity in a splendid place called heaven. Percentages don't apply to eternity, of course; but for the sake of argument, assume that 99 percent of our existence will take place in heaven. Isn't it a little bizarre that we simply ignore heaven, acting as if it doesn't matter?

The past four annual volumes of the Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature record a grand total of zero articles on heaven. Many articles concern old age, many are about death, some are on out of-the-body experiences, but none are about heaven. More surprisingly, the Religion Index to Periodicals references only a handful of articles on heaven: two, for instance, during the years 1981-82.

This modern situation differs from the past, when heaven aroused great interest. A good library will contain dusty 1,000-page anthologies from the nineteenth century, of poetic and prose imaginings of what heaven will be like.

What happened? At least three reasons may help explain the mystery.

1. Affluence has given us in this life what former generations longed for in anticipation of heaven. We now have (most of us in the West, at least) relief from pain, plentiful food, and surroundings of beauty and luxury. The biblical promise of such a state has lost some of its luster.

Karl Marx criticized religion as the “opiate of the people” because it promised the lower classes “pie in the sky” in order to lull them away from wanting it now. Marx's critique sounds quaint today, because few people are promising pie in the sky anymore; religious organizations such as the World Council of Churches and evangelical relief agencies instead encourage us to redistribute the pie here on earth.

2. A creeping paganism invites us to accept death as the culmination of life on earth, not as a violent interruption in an eternal life. Elizabeth Kubler-Ross (who happens to believe in an afterlife) described five stages of death, with an implicit assumption that the “Acceptance” stage is the most healthful and appropriate.

I have watched in hospital groups as dying patients worked desperately toward a calm stage of acceptance, denying the impulses of their instincts and conscience to reject the unnatural act of death. Strangely, no one ever talked about heaven in those groups; it seemed embarrassing, somehow cowardly. What convulsion of values can have us holding up the prospect of annihilation as brave and that of blissful eternity as cowardly?

3. Older images of heaven, the biblical ones, have lost their appeal. Walls of emerald, sapphire, and jasper, streets of gold, and pearly gates may have inspired Middle Eastern peasants, but they don't mean much to the world of Bauhaus. And religious leaders and artists have failed to create satisfactory new images. What will heaven be like? A place where “all a body would have to do was to go around all day long with a harp and sing, forever and ever” sounds as unattractive to most of us as it did to Huck Finn.

In this brief column I can only begin to raise questions. But it seems to me Christian communicators have a clear responsibility to project a new understanding of heaven into modern consciousness. If we fail, we forfeit one of our faith's greatest features.

To people who are trapped in pain, in economic chaos, in hatred and fear — to these, heaven offers a promise of a time, far longer and more substantial than this time on earth, of health and wholeness and pleasure and peace. If we do not believe that, then, as the apostle Paul noted, there is not much reason for being a Christian in the first place.

I have seen the electrifying results of what can happen when the concept of heaven comes alive. My wife, Janet, works with senior citizens in a part of Chicago recently judged the poorest community in the United States. About half of her clients are white, half are black. All of them have lived through harsh times: two world wars, the Great Depression, the waves of social upheaval that have affected major cities. And all of them, in their seventies and eighties, face the inevitability of death.

My wife has observed a remarkable difference in the way the whites and blacks face death. There are exceptions, of course, but the trend is this: many of the whites become increasingly more fearful and uptight. They complain about their lives, their families, and their deteriorating health.

The blacks, in contrast, maintain a good humor and spirit of triumph even though most of them have greater reason for bitterness and despair. Their lives were three-fourths over by the time the civil rights bills were passed.

Janet believes the difference is hope, a hope that traces directly to the blacks' bedrock belief in heaven. “This world is not my home, I'm just passin' through,” they say. These words and others like them came out of a tragic period of history, when everything in this world looked bleak. But black churches managed to instill a vivid belief in a home beyond this one.

Somehow, these neglected saints have learned to anticipate and enjoy God in spite of the difficulties of their lives. When we get to heaven, many of us may be shocked at what it means to enjoy God. For others, such as these elderly blacks, that joy will seem more like a long-awaited homecoming than a visit to a new place. Who knows, they may save a few hundred years' awkward transition.

__________

This article originally appeared in the September 7, 1984, issue of Christianity Today magazine.

#327

*

What's It Worth To You?

USA Today conducted a survey a couple of years ago and asked Americans in the top 1% income bracket how much they would be willing to spend on three intangible items: Great intellect, true love, and a place in heaven.

The super wealthy would be willing to spend an average of $407,000 for great intellect, $487,000 for true love, and $640,000 for a place in heaven!

*

from Sermon #15824, A Believing Heart, Dr. Bruce Emmert via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealth

Baby Doe and the Matchless Mine

Job 5:5

H.A.W. Tabor was one of the richest Americans of his time, having amassed tens of millions of dollars from his silver mines in Leadville, Colorado, during the 1870's and 1880's. His richest mine was called the Matchless. He lived an extravagant lifestyle, left his common-sense wife Augusta for a beautiful young temptress named Baby Doe, and thought it nothing to wager $3,500 on one poker pot. He gave away hundreds of thousands of dollars to every friend, moocher or confidence man who made a touch. He ran his mansion in princely style; he and Baby Doe bought furs, jewelry, carriages, furniture, art objects. Tabor did not bother to pay the bills. The store owners rarely pressed him. After all, wasn't he a multimillionaire?

When Congress demonetized silver in 1893 and made gold the only standard for money, Tabor lost his wealth overnight. All of their possessions were sold to pay off the debts and the Tabors ended up renting a small cottage in Denver for $30 a month. When they reached the point where there was not a nickel left to buy food, he dropped his pride and went to the Brown Palace Hotel where a dozen of his wealthy friends hung out. He saw a group of mining men sitting in a circle in the foyer. He knew all of them. They had been his pals for years. His old friend Stratton would never turn him down. He whispered over Stratton's shoulder, "Can you lend me $100?" Stratton waved a dismissing hand in the direction of the face at his shoulder, and said coldly: "Go away."

H.A.W. Tabor rushed out of the hotel and half ran, half stumbled along the street, tears flooding down his face. Stratton asked who the fellow was who had just tried to beg. "That was Senator Tabor." "What?" cried Stratton. "Tabor wanted a hundred?" He got up, ran down the street to overtake H.A.W., apologized by saying he had not recognized him, and pressed $500 into his hand. "Tabor, would you like to be postmaster of Denver?" (Tabor had donated the land the post office was on.)

He was an efficient postmaster for just over one year. One day in April 1899, while taking a stroll, he went into the Tabor Grand Opera House and stood gazing at the oil portrait of himself, which the new owners had allowed to remain hanging. Suddenly a sharp pain from a burst appendix cut through his side. As he was dying, he said to Baby Doe: "Whatever happens, hold on to the Matchless. It will give you back all that I have lost."

Baby Doe packed up her two daughters and moved back to the desolate mountain town of Leadville. They lived in the abandoned tool house, one room and a lean-to, its timbers rotting, its broken windows boarded up, freezing cold in winter. When their money ran out Baby Doe dressed herself and the girls in discarded miners' clothing. She wore an aged black dress and a man's overcoat which also served as her blanket at night. For years she kept the water out of the Matchless mine and guarded the property with a shotgun. Baby Doe lived deep into the twentieth century. She never left Leadville and became a ghost wandering around a ghost town. One winter night she froze to death at the mine where she had remained for 30 years, faithful to Horace Tabor and to his parting instructions: "Hold on to the Matchless. It will give you back all

that I have lost."

The one and only thing he never lost was Baby Doe's love.

#1597

*

What C. T. Studd Did With His Silver and Gold

Mark 10:21

{Commitment is never} more beautifully demonstrated than in the life of Cambridge University cricket star C.T. Studd, the greatest cricketeer of his day.

In his book {The King and the Kingdom,} William Barclay says that after Studd was saved and called to the mission field, he had the impression that he should dispose of the rather large inheritance his father had left him. He took literally Jesus' words, "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor" (Mark 10:21).

Studd immediately made out some checks to dispose of his inheritance: 5,000 pounds to D.L. Moody; 5,000 pounds to Salvation Army founder General William Booth; 5,000 pounds to George Muller; 5,000 pounds to Whitechapel Mission; and an additional five checks each for 1,000 pounds. But still Studd had money left over and he tried to give it to his wife but she refused it. Studd sent the remainder of the money to General William Booth and told Booth to say nothing about it to anyone. Studd then wrote in his diary that he could gladly say, "Silver or gold I do not have" (Acts 3:6).

__________

J. B. Fowler, {Basic Bible Sermons on Philippians}(Nashville: Broadman Press, 1991) 66-67

Blessing or curse?

In James Barries play, "The Will," a lovely young couple visited their attorney one day in London. The husband was beginning to prosper, and his wife was eager that he make a will. She wanted him to leave a part of his small fortune to certain charities in which they were both interested. Then he had two sweet maiden aunts who were dependent on him. These, too, must be provided for. Both husband and wife were so beautifully unselfish in their attitude that the gloomy office of the solicitor seemed to take on a new radiance. When they were gone, the lawyer felt as if springtime had paid him a visit. Ten years slipped by, and this husband and wife again came in the lawyer's office. The husband had continued to prosper during the ten years. He was far richer than he used to be. In consequence, his wife had become more vain and self-centered. She also gained in wealth till now she seemed not so much dressed as upholstered. This time she came with a different purpose from the one that first brought her. To use her own words, she came to see that her husband did not do anything foolish. By this she meant that she had come to see that her husband did not give a penny of his money away. Nothing was to be left to the orphanage-it would only encourage the children to grow up useless. Nothing was to be left to the old aunts-they were parasites anyway. When the couple had gone this time, the solicitor felt as if he has been nipped by a killing frost. Other years slipped by, and there is a final scene. The husband is again in the office of his solicitor, this time alone. He is far richer now than ever. Everything that he has touched has turned to gold. But there is no tenderness in his face, and no gladness looks out from his tired eyes. He glares at his solicitor, and spits out these tragic words: "My wife is dead; my son is a rotter; my daughter has run away with the chauffeur. Take this paper. It has the names of the men with whom I have sought most furiously for gold. Leave my

money to them with my respectful curses." In the eyes of the world, this man had won. The victory was his. But it was a victory that was shot through with tragic defeat.

from Source not recorded via Kerux Sermon and Illustration Database wealthstewardship

Not Enough To Be Upright and Moral

J.C. Penney was a man of advanced years before he committed his life fully to Jesus Christ. He was a good man, but primarily interested in becoming a success and making money. “When I worked for six dollars a week at Joslin's Dry Goods Store back in Denver,” he confessed as he looked back on his life, “it was my ambition...to be worth one hundred thousand dollars. When I reached that goal I felt a certain temporary satisfaction, but it soon wore off and my sights were set on becoming worth a million dollars.”

Mr. and Mrs. Penney worked hard to expand the business; but one day Mrs. Penney caught cold and pneumonia developed, which claimed her life. It was then that J.C. Penney realized having money was a poor substitute for the real purposes in living. “When she died,” he said, “my world crashed around me....I felt mocked by life, even by God himself.”

After several more fiery trials, J.C. Penney was financially ruined, and naturally, in deep distress. This is when God could deal with his self-righteous nature and his love for money. After his spiritual conversion he could testify of God's working.

“I had to pass through fiery ordeals before reaching glimmerings of conviction that it is not enough for men to be upright and moral men. When I was brought to humility and the knowledge of dependence on God, sincerely and earnestly seeking God's aid...a light illumined my being. I cannot otherwise describe it than to say that it changed me as a man.”

________

from James S. Hewett, ed., Parables, Etc. (Saratoga Press) quoted in 1001 Great Stories and Quotes by R. Kent Hughes (Tyndale) pp 215-16

It's Hard To Handle Money

Luke 3:14

Most folks find if hard to handle a lot of new money. A friend of mind from Mt Carmel, IL, told me an interesting story about what happened there after WW II.

A scientist had found a way to get the sulfur out of the oil deposits around there and all sorts folks were rich over night. At one time their county had more Cadillacs per capita than any other in the USA.

But this new wealth came at a price. It ruined just about every family who struck it rich. They could not handle it. Two who did handle it had interesting strategies. One gave every bit of it to his church and promptly forgot he ever had it. The other put all of it in trust for his grandchildren with the idea that maybe by then the family would learn to handle it.

Everything we make is available for free because of a generous community of supporters.

Donate