The Year of Jubilee
I've been taking some time off - partly for vacation, partly for a study break - to contemplate the upcoming year. I've been thinking about money. This is not unusual since money occupies a pretty important spot in all of our lives. I guess if someone had unlimited amounts of money they may think less of it...or perhaps not. That's another story. I've been thinking of it in the context of the church and the plethora of money managers - Christian and otherwise - who have risen to prominence in recent years teaching people how to manage their money wisely.
Let me start by saying it is a very good thing to manage one's money well. But, that's a bit like saying it is a very good thing to live a holy life. Having said that, let me ask this: what comes first, living a holy life or being set free from bondage to sin through Jesus? Well...in my humble opinion, one cannot live a holy life unless one is first set free from sin by Jesus - and even then it ain't so easy! So why do we assume that people are able to manage their money well when they haven't been set from from the bondage of debt?
When listening to some of these money managers (they'll remain unnamed - but you know who they are) I always walk away feeling shamed and condemned. They love to beat people up for spending their money "foolishly." However, I doubt very much that these men have ever been in the position of the people they so lightly abuse. Have any of them been unemployed for a year or two? Have any of them had serious sickness in their family that cost them dearly? Have any of them ever been a single parent? I very seriously doubt it.
Their concepts may be sound as all get out, but I believe people need to be set free from the bondage of debt before being told how to manage their money, just as people need to be set free from the bondage of sin before being discipled in their new life. This comes as a surprise to me, actually. I have long held out against my liberal friends who want to throw money at problems and people the idea that "if you give a person a fish, you've fed them for a day, but if you teach them how to fish, you've fed them for a lifetime." Sound principle, right? As I was praying the other day, this question popped into my head: "But is it Biblical?"
At first I thought, "Of course it is!" But, then I thought...and came to a different conclusion. The Year of Jubilee that God told the early Hebrews to celebrate every 50th year was a year of freedom. That is basically what jubilee means - freedom. (Actually, it comes from the Hebrew for blowing the shophar or ram's horn - but it signifies freedom.) It was a year of setting captives free, cancelling debt, and returning land to it's original owners. I guess it was a bit like having a "do over" every 50 years. It is instructive that God didn't make conditions about one's debt or slavery before setting them free, He just set them free from what bondage they were in.
Jesus refrenced the Year of Jubilee in Luke 4:16-22 (cf. Isaiah 61). This is usually thought of more in the spiritual sense with healing thrown in by some, but is it possible He meant more than this?
If I may be so bold, I'd like to draw some inferences from a well-known passage and apply this passage to money and debt as well as sin. In John 8:1-11, Jesus was confronted by teachers of the law and Pharisees who had (conveniently) caught a woman in adultery. They used this woman to try to trap Jesus into saying something that they could use against him. They asked Him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" Jesus, after writing on the ground, stood up and said, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." The accusers slowly wilted away until none were left. Jesus then asked the woman, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She answered that none condemned her and Jesus said, "Then neither do I condemn you....Go now and leave your life of sin."
All too often, the money managers get someone who is in tremendous debt and use this person as an illustration of how evil being in debt is. They don't care how they got there, they just want to use them to make their point. So, they take these people, and instruct them how to manage their money, but fail to remove the condemnation of the debt. In fact, they use condemnation and shame against those who come to them for help. Jesus didn't do this. He set the woman free - and after freeing her, instructed her to leave her life of sin.
The early church understood this. In Acts 2:45, we read, "Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." And in Acts 4:32-35, we read this amazing detail: "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."
I think this is something that we American Christians hate. First, we're rugged individualists for the most part and hate the idea of accepting "charity" from others. Second, we're selfish. We don't want to part with OUR money. We want people to be responsible and manage their money wisely - and we'll even provide priests of money management to help them. Of course, this is not a work of grace, so the priests are free to shame and condemn any and all who fail to live up to the ideal of American Christian moneyhood, but at least we get to keep OUR money.
We miss the point that when we came to Jesus, our possessions were no longer ours. Look at Acts 4:35b again - "No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own...." Does this mean that people can live foolishly and spend money poorly and we can do nothing about it? Frankly, yes they can. Just as a new believer (or an old one for that matter) can sin and we forgive them as the Lord forgives us. Going back to the concept of the Year of Jubilee - God didn't condemn the ones who were in debt, but he did warn those who were collecting the debts not to charge interest and not to worry about whether the year of Jubilee was close or not. In other words, if a person borrowed money in year 45, there was a good chance that that debt would be cancelled and never repaid. Don't fret, God said.
I wonder if asking people to manage their money well before setting them free from the bondage to debt is a bit like asking someone to live a holy life without first being set free from sin by Jesus. It is only by God's grace that we can live in freedom - be that freedom from sin or freedom from debt. This is the year of Jubilee at work in people's lives. What if the church paid off the debts of one single mom - and then paid for her to go through a money management course, and then offered to support her until she were able to stand on her own? Would this represent freedom? Would this speak volumes of the grace of God to this woman and her children? Would it burden the church too much to do this? If so, perhaps the chuch needs to learn how to manage their money more wisely.
Let me start by saying it is a very good thing to manage one's money well. But, that's a bit like saying it is a very good thing to live a holy life. Having said that, let me ask this: what comes first, living a holy life or being set free from bondage to sin through Jesus? Well...in my humble opinion, one cannot live a holy life unless one is first set free from sin by Jesus - and even then it ain't so easy! So why do we assume that people are able to manage their money well when they haven't been set from from the bondage of debt?
When listening to some of these money managers (they'll remain unnamed - but you know who they are) I always walk away feeling shamed and condemned. They love to beat people up for spending their money "foolishly." However, I doubt very much that these men have ever been in the position of the people they so lightly abuse. Have any of them been unemployed for a year or two? Have any of them had serious sickness in their family that cost them dearly? Have any of them ever been a single parent? I very seriously doubt it.
Their concepts may be sound as all get out, but I believe people need to be set free from the bondage of debt before being told how to manage their money, just as people need to be set free from the bondage of sin before being discipled in their new life. This comes as a surprise to me, actually. I have long held out against my liberal friends who want to throw money at problems and people the idea that "if you give a person a fish, you've fed them for a day, but if you teach them how to fish, you've fed them for a lifetime." Sound principle, right? As I was praying the other day, this question popped into my head: "But is it Biblical?"
At first I thought, "Of course it is!" But, then I thought...and came to a different conclusion. The Year of Jubilee that God told the early Hebrews to celebrate every 50th year was a year of freedom. That is basically what jubilee means - freedom. (Actually, it comes from the Hebrew for blowing the shophar or ram's horn - but it signifies freedom.) It was a year of setting captives free, cancelling debt, and returning land to it's original owners. I guess it was a bit like having a "do over" every 50 years. It is instructive that God didn't make conditions about one's debt or slavery before setting them free, He just set them free from what bondage they were in.
Jesus refrenced the Year of Jubilee in Luke 4:16-22 (cf. Isaiah 61). This is usually thought of more in the spiritual sense with healing thrown in by some, but is it possible He meant more than this?
If I may be so bold, I'd like to draw some inferences from a well-known passage and apply this passage to money and debt as well as sin. In John 8:1-11, Jesus was confronted by teachers of the law and Pharisees who had (conveniently) caught a woman in adultery. They used this woman to try to trap Jesus into saying something that they could use against him. They asked Him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law, Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" Jesus, after writing on the ground, stood up and said, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." The accusers slowly wilted away until none were left. Jesus then asked the woman, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She answered that none condemned her and Jesus said, "Then neither do I condemn you....Go now and leave your life of sin."
All too often, the money managers get someone who is in tremendous debt and use this person as an illustration of how evil being in debt is. They don't care how they got there, they just want to use them to make their point. So, they take these people, and instruct them how to manage their money, but fail to remove the condemnation of the debt. In fact, they use condemnation and shame against those who come to them for help. Jesus didn't do this. He set the woman free - and after freeing her, instructed her to leave her life of sin.
The early church understood this. In Acts 2:45, we read, "Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need." And in Acts 4:32-35, we read this amazing detail: "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all. There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need."
I think this is something that we American Christians hate. First, we're rugged individualists for the most part and hate the idea of accepting "charity" from others. Second, we're selfish. We don't want to part with OUR money. We want people to be responsible and manage their money wisely - and we'll even provide priests of money management to help them. Of course, this is not a work of grace, so the priests are free to shame and condemn any and all who fail to live up to the ideal of American Christian moneyhood, but at least we get to keep OUR money.
We miss the point that when we came to Jesus, our possessions were no longer ours. Look at Acts 4:35b again - "No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own...." Does this mean that people can live foolishly and spend money poorly and we can do nothing about it? Frankly, yes they can. Just as a new believer (or an old one for that matter) can sin and we forgive them as the Lord forgives us. Going back to the concept of the Year of Jubilee - God didn't condemn the ones who were in debt, but he did warn those who were collecting the debts not to charge interest and not to worry about whether the year of Jubilee was close or not. In other words, if a person borrowed money in year 45, there was a good chance that that debt would be cancelled and never repaid. Don't fret, God said.
I wonder if asking people to manage their money well before setting them free from the bondage to debt is a bit like asking someone to live a holy life without first being set free from sin by Jesus. It is only by God's grace that we can live in freedom - be that freedom from sin or freedom from debt. This is the year of Jubilee at work in people's lives. What if the church paid off the debts of one single mom - and then paid for her to go through a money management course, and then offered to support her until she were able to stand on her own? Would this represent freedom? Would this speak volumes of the grace of God to this woman and her children? Would it burden the church too much to do this? If so, perhaps the chuch needs to learn how to manage their money more wisely.
posted by Greg at 5:25 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home