Part of an ongoing series looking at all the many passages in the Bible that deal with wealth and poverty issues. You can see the links to the other passages in the series under the heading "The Bible and Economics" below.
I began looking at the "wealth" of material (ha!) found in Psalms on this topic back in September, offering findings from the first ten Psalms. Today, I'm looking between Psalm 39 to Psalm 49 (with the whole of chapter 49 being about wealth, poverty and wisdom).
Man is a mere phantom as he goes to and fro: He bustles about, but only in vain; he heaps up wealth, not knowing who will get it. "But now, Lord, what do I look for? My hope is in you... You rebuke and discipline men for their sin; you consume their wealth like a moth — each man is but a breath.
Hear my prayer, O LORD, listen to my cry for help; be not deaf to my weeping. For I dwell with you as an alien, a stranger, as all my fathers were.
Psalm 39: 6, 7, 11, 12
Blessed is the man who makes the LORD his trust, who does not look to the proud, to those who turn aside to false gods... Yet I am poor and needy; may the Lord think of me. You are my help and my deliverer; O my God, do not delay.
~Psalm 40: 4, 16
Blessed is he who has regard for the weak; the LORD delivers him in times of trouble.
The LORD will protect him and preserve his life; he will bless him in the land and not surrender him to the desire of his foes.
The LORD will sustain him on his sickbed and restore him from his bed of illness.
~Psalm 41: 1-3
And here's an odd one that I include because it is mentioning specifically wealth and gold, but I'm not sure exactly of the context. It appears to be praise for the new wife (the Psalm is called "a wedding song") being led to the king's chambers by a bunch of virgins...
Listen, O daughter, consider and give ear: Forget your people and your father's house.
The king is enthralled by your beauty; honor him, for he is your lord.
The Daughter of Tyre will come with a gift, men of wealth will seek your favor.
All glorious is the princess within her chamber; her gown is interwoven with gold.
In embroidered garments she is led to the king; her virgin companions follow her and are brought to you.
They are led in with joy and gladness; they enter the palace of the king.
~Psalm 45: 10-15
For what it's worth. Moving on...
Hear this, all you peoples; listen, all who live in this world, both low and high, rich and poor alike:
My mouth will speak words of wisdom; the utterance from my heart will give understanding...
Why should I fear when evil days come, when wicked deceivers surround me - those who trust in their wealth and boast of their great riches?
No man can redeem the life of another or give to God a ransom for him - the ransom for a life is costly, no payment is ever enough - that he should live on forever and not see decay.
For all can see that wise men die; the foolish and the senseless alike perish and leave their wealth to others.
Their tombs will remain their houses forever, their dwellings for endless generations, though they had named lands after themselves.
But man, despite his riches, does not endure; he is like the beasts that perish.
This is the fate of those who trust in themselves, and of their followers, who approve their sayings...
Do not be overawed when a man grows rich, when the splendor of his house increases; for he will take nothing with him when he dies, his splendor will not descend with him.
Though while he lived he counted himself blessed — and men praise you when you prosper - he will join the generation of his fathers, who will never see the light of life .
A man who has riches without understanding is like the beasts that perish.
~Psalm 49: 1-3, 5-13, 16-20
17 comments:
Do not be overawed when a man grows rich, when the splendor of his house increases; for he will take nothing with him when he dies, his splendor will not descend with him.
Though while he lived he counted himself blessed — and men praise you when you prosper - he will join the generation of his fathers, who will never see the light of life .
We all end up dead. Given the alternative, I'd rather be rich(er) on the way there than poor(er).
Richer than what?
this post is an excellent argument for why churches shouldn't engage in "social justice".
Drood, I've no patience today. You have one chance to make a salient point. If you're merely going to cast stones of stupidity, go away.
This post only cites scripture. Do you have a problem with that? I have not even made any commentary on the scripture, just post scripture.
Do you have thoughts on the actual post?
Richer than what?
I mean richer than poorer. For example, I'd rather earn $100,000 a year instead of $50,000. And I'd rather earn $50,000 instead of $25,000. "Richer" and "poorer" are comparative, rather than absolute terms.
Being richer would make me happier because I would have more freedom, especially from stress.
Here's an example. I just got back from work after leaving suddenly. My wife and the kids were stranded after our old, unreliable car broke down. I drove there, let my wife drive my car back home and nursed our jalopy back to the mechanic (where it left yesterday). I'm not sure what's wrong and I'm less sure how I'll pay to fix it. This causes me stress.
Now if I had $5,000 appear in my pocket, I wouldn't worry about that at all. If I had $15,000, I'd buy a new-to-us car and not worry about the old car. If I had $30,000 I'd buy a brand new minivan and have no concerns about transportation whatsoever.
If I had $300,000, I'd get out of debt and get into a good house. If I had $3,000,000, I'd have the house outright, in the neighborhood of my choice, and I'd probably put my kids through the private school of my choice.
If I had $10,000,000, I'd quit my job and never answer to a boss again. Now my current boss is a great guy and I don't get abused and I'm not really worried about losing my job. That situation, however, could change. But if I had that amount of money, I'd never worry about such things ever again.
If I were richer, my life would be better. I'd be happier. I wouldn't be happy as an absolute statement, but as a comparative statement, I would be happier because I would have less stress and more freedom.
Does that make sense?
Not to me, sorry.
To some level, certainly having resources can relieve stress and worries. If I have no way to feed my children nor provide them a safe place to live, I will likely have a pretty bad life.
But I don't buy into the notion that ever upward mobility brings happiness, at all. I think it's likely quite the opposite or at least neutral.
As I bet you know, studies have shown that happiness and security does not increase with wealth (after that basic level of being able to provide the necessities of life).
Consider...
"Psychologists have spent decades studying the relation between wealth and happiness and they have generally concluded that wealth increases human happiness when it lifts people out of abject poverty and into the middle class but that it does little to increase happiness thereafter."
In a global survey, people were asked to describe their level of happiness on a scale of 1 to 7. 1 was "not at all satisfied with my life" and 7 meant "completely satisfied." The average score for the American multimillionaires who filled in the questionnaire was 5.8. The average for the homeless in Calcutta, India was 2.9. However, those who were just above the 'homeless' band, the slum dwellers in Calcutta scored 4.6. Additionally the Greenland natives, the Inuit and from Kenya the Masai who herd cattle, scored around 5.8.
source
What do you think?
But I don't buy into the notion that ever upward mobility brings happiness, at all. I think it's likely quite the opposite or at least neutral.
As I bet you know, studies have shown that happiness and security does not increase with wealth (after that basic level of being able to provide the necessities of life).
I don't know what the people in the survey were thinking, but I know that I'm happier now than I was two years ago, when I had no idea how I was going to pay the rent. Stress over this issue made me unhappier than I am now. So as a comparative statement, my increase in wealth has made me happier.
I tried to emphasize this in my second comment, but apparently I didn't do so with sufficient vigor. So again: I'm not saying that money buys happiness. I'm saying that I would be happier if I were wealthier.
"Happiness" is static, fixed, and absolute statement. "Happiness" is a comparative statement. I'm saying that, all other things being equal, incrementally higher wealth will incrementally remove stresses from my life and make me incrementally happier. I don't expect to ever be "happy", or for even enormous wealth to induce such an ecstatic state. But I can be happier if I have fewer stresses on my life.
Example: the mechanic says that all he has to do is replace the power steering pump for $267. I was initially worried that I was facing a much more expensive repair. But I'm not as worried right now because I will only lose $267 instead of, let's say, $1,267. I am happier (again, as a comparative statement) now than I would be if I had to try to find the money for a $1,267 repair bill.
Example: the mechanic says that all he has to do is replace the power steering pump for $267. I was initially worried that I was facing a much more expensive repair. But I'm not as worried right now because I will only lose $267 instead of, let's say, $1,267. I am happier (again, as a comparative statement) now than I would be if I had to try to find the money for a $1,267 repair bill.
Counter example: the mechanic says that all he has to do is replace the power steering pump for $267. I realize that $267 will buy me a nice bicycle and I can SELL the car, ending up with MORE money for my family's needs.
Additionally, I no longer need car insurance, creating more real wealth for me.
Additionally, I will save on gas money and future repairs (which will be offset a little by necessary bike repairs, but bike repairs are much cheaper, so it's a definite win, there).
Additionally, I will now be getting exercise regularly, because I'm biking instead of sitting behind the wheel of a car sitting in traffic.
Additionally, that means one less car on the road, one less source of danger for my children and other people's children, one less source of pollution for my family and other families.
In that case, in many, many ways, downward mobility brings happiness, health and wellness.
I'm not disagreeing that a certain level of income can't make things better/people happier. But as the studies show: Once you have income to cover the necessities of life, additional income does not necessarily bring additional happiness or even comparative happiness.
I'm much happier now as a most-of-the-time walker (formerly bicyclist) than I was/am as a driver. Ask my family: When I get in the car, I turn into a miserable, miserable, mean ugly human being. Walking away from the car freed me from that slavery.
Hallelujah and amen...
Dan, that's an interesting counter example, but what do you do when it thunderstorms or you have to get your kids from place A to place B and yourself somewhere else at the same time?
I think it's nice to depend more on walking/biking if you can, but there are plenty of situations where driving is the only option. My sister-in-law lives way out in the country helping to take care of my mother-in-law, but her job takes her to all the surrounding small towns. She drives over 500 miles a week rain or shine, so a bicycle would not work for her at all.
I'm sorry if that sounded judgmental or prideful in any way, Miss Marty. I was offering a counter example just to show what COULD happen. For someone like me, I have been able to find more happiness in downward mobility, in this case, in NOT using a car so much.
When it rains, I either get wet or I take an umbrella. When it rains sideways/storms, well, I just get wet. and that has a bit of fun in it yet for this big kid.
Sometimes.
After I've dried off/warmed up.
If I have my kids with me, they complain or laugh, depending on their mood. We try to avoid being two places at one time.
I recognize that a bike/walking doesn't work for everyone. I was just offering one example of how downward mobility CAN bring happiness in a way that upward mobility can't.
Speaking only for myself, no amount of New Car/Nicer Car could bring the happiness that I find in a two mile hike to work - rain, snow or even these crazy 100 degree summer days.
You may keep your mechanized ice wind
and your chilled illusions of comfort.
Keep your indoor, in car, in sidious summer "life"
and rest easy in your climate-controlled hell.
But
give me the quiet honest cool
of a sweet night breeze
at the end of a hard warm summer day.
I'll gladly take respite from the sun's rays
in the smooth gray shade
of a gracious oak.
I will celebrate the splash of a spring fed creek
and the sprinkle of children at play
and the sudden summer shower
at the end of a long august day
and I will rest my head
soft and easy
on my pillow and sleep.
Sorry if I was giving you a hard time Dan. You didn't sound prideful even though I think you should be able to take pride in your downward mobility.
I guess I'm just getting old. Riding a bike during thunderstorms, especially the kinds we've been having in Houston lately, just isn't at all appealing to me.
How can you take your kids with you? You got extra seats on your bike or something?
Plus the heat and humidity here near the Gulf Coast is hell. Even the hot summers at Ft. Knox were a picnic for my son.
I recognize that a bike/walking doesn't work for everyone. I was just offering one example of how downward mobility CAN bring happiness in a way that upward mobility can't.
Speaking only for myself, no amount of New Car/Nicer Car could bring the happiness that I find in a two mile hike to work - rain, snow or even these crazy 100 degree summer days.
As a practical matter, getting rid of the car wouldn't work for my family. On the two days when my wife had to drop me off and pick me up at work, it added 1.3 hours to her day. And she's already exhausted.
If I had taken the car, then she'd be unable to run her errands during the day. She might be able to get to the overpriced grocery store a quarter of a mile away if she used the double stroller. But (1) infants shouldn't be out in the summer Texas heat, (2) it's been raining almost continuously here for a week, (3) and how much could she haul back from said overpriced grocery store if she had to pack it into a stroller that already contained two children?
So having one less car means a more stressful lifestyle, not less.
Your counter example simply wouldn't apply to us. If it works for you, good! But that's not everyone.
That's why I'm not saying that everyone is better off wealthier (although I suspect that most are). I'm just talking about me.
How can you take your kids with you? You got extra seats on your bike or something?
These days, I mostly walk places (as opposed to biking). When the kids were younger, they rode in a trailer pulled behind my bike.
As they've gotten older, if they want to go with me, they have either biked, walked or bused. Or they'll opt to wait for a ride from me or my wife to drive them somewhere.
My son is 19 now and he has been riding a bus to his summer job this year. Although he is working in hopes of getting a car eventually, he does his fair share of getting around on foot and on mass transit.
It works for me, is all I'm saying, and makes me a happier healthier person.
For other folk, there are plenty of other ways in which they find simplifying brings them more joy than upward mobility can or has. Cooking their own food, rather than McDonalds. Growing their own food (or some of it) rather than Walmart. Living in a smaller circle so that - even though they use a car, it's to drive 2 miles rather than 20. Reading library books rather than going to the movies. On and on the list can go.
The best things in life truly are free and, as Dorothy Day noted, the best things in life aren't things at all...
I used to ride the bus when I lived in a different part of the city and worked in downtown Houston. There was a bus stop about a couple of blocks from my house. I enjoyed that. In order to ride the bus now, I'd have to drive several miles to a park-n-ride.
Actually, I could walk to work now and used to and enjoyed it so much, but I had some really scarey encounters recently...several with dogs and one with a man...I've gone back to driving. I don't feel safe anymore.
I prefer the relatively safe confines of a motorized vehicle during Florida's afternoon thunderstorms.
Post a Comment