Neither Poverty nor Riches

A Biblical Theology of Possessions

Craig L. Blomberg, D. A. Carson

• Verlag: IVP Academic
• Jahr: 2015
• ISBN:
  9780830899333
• Thema: Théologie et religion
• Thema: Théologie chrétienne

Give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread. (Proverbs 30: 8) One of the most difficult questions facing Christians today is that of the proper attitude toward possessions. In wealthy nations such as Britain and the USA, individuals accumulate much and yet are daily exposed to the plight of the poor, whether the homeless on their own city streets or starving children on their TV screens. What action should we take on behalf of the poor? What should we do with our own possessions? In Neither Poverty nor Riches Craig Blomberg asks what the Bible has to say about these issues. Avoiding easy answers, he instead seeks a comprehensive biblical theology of possessions. And so he begins with the groundwork laid by the Old Testament and the ideas developed in the intertestamental period, then draws out what the whole New Testament has to say on the subject, and finally offers conclusions and applications relevant to our contemporary world. Neither Poverty Nor Riches is one book that all should read who are concerned with issues of poverty and wealth.

Chapter One

The Old Testament and material possessions: the historical books

From Eden to Sinai

Both Jews and Christians have consistently viewed the period from creation to God’s giving the Law to Moses as the first major era in history. The biblical account of this era spans from Genesis 1 to Exodus 19. This material, in turn, subdivides into three discrete sections. Genesis 1 – 11 narrates the creation of the world and primeval human history, highlighting in particular the fall of humanity into sin. Genesis 12 – 50 forms the patriarchal narratives, in which God begins to fashion a uniquely chosen people, the Israelites, by promising the land of Canaan and its blessings to Abraham and his offspring. Through this people, spiritual and material blessing would ultimately flow to all the world (Gen. 12:3). Exodus describes the fledgling people of God enslaved in Egypt and narrates their liberation under Moses’ leadership, roughly 400 years later. Chapter 19 ends with the Israelites’ arrival at Mount Sinai, from which God would reveal his Law and inaugurate a covenant with the people of Israel that would remain in force until the coming of Messiah.

Of all the major periods of Old Testament history, this first one discloses the least amount of detail about the role of material possessions in the life of God’s people, but it does present several foundational principles that dare not be overlooked. We may survey this material under the three headings corresponding to the three periods of time just noted.1

Genesis 1 – 11

The most important observation about the material world to emerge from the creation account in Genesis 1 is that God initially created it good. Seven times throughout the chapter, after each major stage of creation, the refrain recurs, ‘and God saw that it was good’ (Gen. 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31). The blessing and abundance of the garden were created for humans to enjoy. This emphasis contrasts sharply with beliefs in various other ancient religions, most notably in later Hellenistic thought, that the material world was corrupt from its inception (C. Wright 1995: 181-187). In distinction from the rest of the created order, God fashions humans uniquely in his own image (1:26-27) and gives them dominion, or stewardship, over all the earth (1:26, 28).

Because man is created in God’s image, he is king over nature. He rules the world on God’s behalf. This is of course no license for the unbridled exploitation and subjugation of nature. Ancient oriental kings were expected to be devoted to the welfare of their subjects, especially the poorest and weakest members of society (Wenham 1987: 33).

Again, unlike many Greco-Roman religions, Judaism and Christianity portray work as part of God’s good design for his people from the outset of human history.

As the only part of creation fashioned in God’s image, humans are far more than simply the most advanced species of animal. The immediate context of Genesis never defines what the image of God involves, although the concepts of dominion over creation and differentiation by gender appear juxtaposed with it. Jews and Christians alike have therefore regularly associated image-bearing with ruling over God’s material world and having a qualitatively unique capacity for interpersonal relationships, with the most perfect and intimate approximation of relationships within the Godhead being modelled in human marriage.2 The fall of humanity into sin (Gen. 3), Cain’s murder of Abel (Gen. 4) and the destruction of most of the human race in the flood (Gen. 6 – 8) demonstrate how corrupt God’s image in persons quickly became. And as part of God’s judgment against Adam, work now proved burdensome (3:17-19). But the prohibition against murder and the introduction of capital punishment as its penalty in Genesis 9:5-6 show that the image of God still remains even in fallen humanity:

‘Whoever sheds human blood,

by human beings shall their blood be shed;

for in the image of God

has God made all people.’

(Gen. 9:6)

The New Testament continues to affirm that all people are born with God’s likeness (Jas. 3:9) and understands the process of redemption to correspond to the renewal of the image of God in a person (Col. 3:10; cf. Eph. 4:24). Thus, a crucial requirement for the imago Dei also involves our capacity for a relationship with God that is shared by no other life-form (Wilson & Blomberg 1993).

Two opposite, extreme applications of this theology must both be avoided. On the one hand, humanity must never be reduced to the merely material. Modern ideologies that protest against ‘speciesism’ either ignore or reject this biblical distinction. On the other hand, the dominion over creation granted to humans does not confer on them the right to rape the environment or to show cruelty to animals, but gives them the responsibility to take care of all of the rest of the created order.3

Genesis 12 – 50

As God singles out one individual, Abram, to become, as it were, the father of a new country, he promises him,

‘I will make you into a great nation

and I will bless you;

I will make your name great,

and you will be a blessing.

I will bless those who bless you,

and whoever curses you I will curse;

and all peoples on earth

will be blessed through you.’

(Gen. 12:2-3)

These promises, with some variation in wording, are repeated throughout Genesis (esp. 12:7; 15:18; 17:8; 22:17), not only to Abram, but to his son Isaac and grandson Jacob. Early on, 13:2 describes how wealthy Abram became as the first provisional fulfilment of this promise. The rest of the book of Genesis unfolds as a narrative of the various steps and obstacles to inheriting the promise, including the important material portion of that promise, the land of Canaan (Clines 1978). Along the way, the riches amassed by the patriarchs are highlighted several times (cf. 20:14-16; 24:35; 26:13; 30:43; 47:27). Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all take turns sojourning in Canaan, but none is allowed to remain there permanently. Jacob’s son Joseph, because of the treachery of his brothers, finds himself in Egypt, even in prison. But ultimately God blesses him materially, too, as Pharaoh makes him second in command in all the land.

The wealth of the patriarchs must therefore be understood within its clear covenantal context. This wealth is tied directly to God’s plan to give his people a special land. In the Christian era, in which believers do not live in a uniquely promised land, we must take care not to assume that wealth necessarily, or even frequently, represents God’s blessing.4 What is more, Genesis also consistently stresses that the patriarchs gave generously of their wealth. Abram allows Lot to choose the more fertile land (Gen. 13). This act ‘is recognized by most commentators as being set out as a model for his descendants to imitate’ (Wenham 1987: 299), given the Lord’s immediate confirmation that he will make what is left for Abram into the land of divine promise (cf. Gen. 13:1-13 with 13:14-18). After defeating five kings of Canaan in battle, Abram gives a tithe of his spoil to the high priest of Salem, Melchizedek (14:20), and refuses to accept any possessions that would enable the king of Sodom to boast that he made Abram rich (14:23).5

Jacob’s mixed track record of obedience to God scarcely makes him an exemplary model of receiving riches as a reward for faithfulness, although Genesis 31:38-42 does remind us of the extent of his sacrifice in working for Laban.6 More noteworthy, however, are Jacob’s lavish gifts to his estranged brother Esau (32:13-16), intended as an informal peace-offering and thus given partly in the interest of self-preservation. These gifts nevertheless testify to Jacob’s generosity with the riches he had amassed. In 33:11 Jacob declares, ‘God has been gracious to me and I have all I need.’

Finally, Joseph comes to power in Egypt precisely to be a good steward of its rich grain harvests in preparation for the years of famine ahead (Gen. 41). But he had previously also languished in prison through no fault of his own. Joseph’s distribution efforts during that famine demonstrate one early fulfilment of God’s promise that his people would prove a blessing to the nations: ‘And all the countries came to Egypt to buy grain from Joseph, because the famine was severe in all the world’ (41:57).7

The preservation of the patriarchs throughout Genesis 12 – 50 is never an end in itself, or primarily a response to their levels of obedience to God, but rather God’s sovereign method of fulfilling his promises to gather a unique people together in a unique land. Those promises seem to be in jeopardy as the book of Genesis closes, but the next major stage in bringing them to fulfilment will comprise the storyline of the second book of the Pentateuch, Exodus.

Exodus 1 – 19

As the centuries passed, a new king arose ‘who did not know about Joseph’ (Exod. 1:8). The harsh labour inflicted on God’s people stemmed from this change in pharaohs and was unrelated to any change in the Israelites’ obedience.8 The bulk of the first half of Exodus, of course, tells the story of the liberation of God’s people under the leadership of Moses. The exodus forms a prominent theme in many modern liberation theologies, and it provides an important corrective for those who think of ‘salvation’ in either Testament as solely ‘spiritual’.9 Still, Exodus is clear that this liberation is holistic. Physically oppressed people are being physically liberated, but with an unambiguous spiritual objective – to let everyone know that Yahweh alone is God (Exod. 6:7; 9:16) and to create a covenant community of followers who will serve him by obeying his laws (Exod. 20 – 40). Contra much liberation theology, the people of Israel do not stay and revolt, but leave for a new land to which God has called them.10 And Exodus 13 introduces the consecration of the firstborn, beginning a tradition of giving that which is most valuable as an offering to the Lord. We may not keep and do as we please with all the good gifts God has given us.

Plundering the Egyptians shows that God wants his people to go into their new land with a measure of wealth (Exod. 11:2-3; 12:35-36). Some of this wealth would later be used to build the tabernacle. But it is this very cache of precious metals that also quickly lures the Israelites into idolatry. While Moses is receiving the Law on Mount Sinai, Aaron is leading the people below in fashioning the golden calf (32:1-6). In fact, the dominant method of providing physical sustenance for God’s people in the desert prevents them from becoming too well off. Introduced in 16:16-18 is the daily provision of manna. Individuals will collect varying amounts, based on their abilities, but God will ensure that no-one ever has too much or too little.11 Exodus 16:19-21 demonstrates that hoarding proves impossible; the manna simply spoils. But verses 22-30 show God’s miraculous provision on the sixth day of the week so that the food can be preserved over the Sabbath, and the people will not have to work by collecting their food on that day. Both of these phenomena ensure that they will remain wholly dependent on God for their needs, although not all of the people immediately accept these stipulations (16:20, 27-30). As Durham (1987: 226) summarizes,

Yahweh provides for physical needs each day, only to have some of his people attempt to hoard for the next day. Yahweh provides for the spiritual growth of his people by setting one day apart as special, only to have some lose the benefit by ignoring the day.

Of course, this arrangement is temporary, even in the history of Israel. It ceases with their entry into Canaan (Josh. 5:12). But the apostle Paul, centuries later, will find timeless truths here about avoiding extremes of riches or poverty in the Christian community as richer believers share with poorer ones (2 Cor. 8:15). We are reminded also of the fourth petition of the Lord’s Prayer: ‘Give us today our daily bread’ (Matt. 6:11), and of Jesus’ warning to let the day’s own trouble be sufficient for the day (Matt. 6:34 and par.).

From Sinai to Canaan: the Law of Moses

From the middle of Exodus to the end of Deuteronomy, the compiler of the Pentateuch narrates the Israelites’ wilderness sojourn. Into this historical framework, he inserts major sections dealing with the laws God gave his people in the covenant at Sinai.12 The Mosaic Law will form the legal charter for the children of Israel from this point forward until the coming of Messiah. New Testament writers consistently maintain that the Law is fulfilled in Jesus, who is that Messiah (e.g., Matt. 5:17; Luke 24:27, 44; Gal. 6:2; Col. 2:17; Heb. 8). No command issued to Old Testament followers of Yahweh necessarily carries over into the Christian era unchanged, but every command reflects principles at some level that are binding on Christians (2 Tim. 3:16; cf. Klein, Blomberg & Hubbard 1993: 278-283). With respect to laws affecting material possessions, one may distinguish two somewhat balancing themes within the Torah. On the one hand, the ownership of property enshrines a fundamental Judeo-Christian value. On the other hand, numerous safeguards relativize turning the ownership of property into an absolute value or into an excuse for selfishness. Tellingly, this second theme finds far more detailed elaboration than the first. Our survey of both themes can only highlight main passages because of the pervasiveness of the relevant legal material.13

Ownership of property

The very fact that God has promised Israel the land of Canaan, with its abundant natural resources, demonstrates his commitment to providing the blessings of the material world as a pre-eminent, good gift for his people (see, e.g., Num. 14:8; Deut. 6:3; 8:18). Numbers 26:52-56 further demonstrates the principle that all families and clans should receive an allotment of property proportionate to their size. In other words, ‘to a larger group give a larger inher...