Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
How Shall the Godly Respond to Passing on Affluence?
How Shall the Godly Respond to Passing on Affluence?
Dec 6, 2025 11:18 PM

I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me. With me are riches and honor, enduring wealth and prosperity. My fruit is better than fine gold; what I yield surpasses choice silver. I walk in the way of righteousness, along the paths of justice, bestowing a rich inheritance on those who love me and making their treasuries full.

Proverbs 8:17-21

The biblical wisdom literature makes it abundantly plain, as does the rest of the entire Bible, that it is God alone who grants both wealth and blessing. There are numerous ways to get wealth but the way of godly gain is by seeking God, and the way of his righteousness, alone. And those who are given wealth by God will usually have an inheritance to give at the end of their lives. This is summed up quite well in these words: “But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your ancestors as it is today” (Deuteronomy 8:18).

I have been thinking a great about the theology of wealth over the past two or three years. I have also been immersed in a discussion of the subject, with about twenty Christian businessmen and women, for the past two days at the Kuyper Business Summit in San Diego, sponsored by the Center for Cultural Leadership. I have e convinced that the Church has little or no balanced understanding, in the pulpit or the pew, about this subject. We either feel that seeking wealth is inherently wrong, and then deal with the attendant guilt feelings e with generating wealth, or we promote a “health and wealth” theology that stresses great wealth as the personal promise of God for every Christian who knows how to ask and receive by faith. Both are failed ideas theologically and thus badly distorted when applied to daily living.

Wealth is the blessing of God! He alone gives it. To some he grants the ability to gain wealth for his glory. This, in itself, means much more than merely attaining wealth so you can support your family and then give large sums to charity. (These are both good goals but not the whole picture!) Some are clearly called to make wealth as a divine calling. Indeed, I am convinced that many businessmen and women are so called by God to produce wealth but the Church has been of little or no help in creating the right context and support for this to actually happen in the right way. An alternative theology to these two extremes is to be found in the work of the Dutch Calvinist Abraham Kuyper, thus the name of the very event I am attending. Serious readers should explore Kuyper’s thought on this matter. John Schneider’s outstanding book, The Good of Affluence (Eerdmans), should also be a must read for serious consideration of this important subject. (Schneider is a professor at Calvin and presents, by far and away, the best short volume on this subject in our time.)

Two of the wealthiest Americans who ever lived represent a very different approach to affluence. One, Andrew Carnegie, viewed society as the source of wealth and thus considered it a moral obligation to give back to society from his wealth. He once said, “He who dies rich, dies disgraced.” This view is quite close to the view of most Christian pietists I know. John Wesley taught that we should make all we can, save all we can, and give away all we can. This is a partial truth and plainly does not have the whole of the biblical and wisdom tradition to support it. I have a friend who teaches "downward mobility" as a Christian principle. (Besides the fact there is no biblical support for the concept or the terminology it works with people who feel guilty about having too much! Besides that it sounds right to many people who have never followed it out to its conclusions.)

Warren Buffet, a contemporary wealth producer, holds another view. He suggests that society is responsible for what he has earned but concludes that “maintaining high taxes on large estates is morally imperative.” (It is more than ironic that Warren Buffet wants to see the government redistribute wealth via high taxes but he has also found ways to avoid many taxes, like so many who write this way. If these folks believed this mantra they could simply designate all their wealth freely to the government to redistribute it.)

So if wealth is given by God, and not society or good fortune, what about giving it away and more specifically, “What about inheritance?” That was our discussion last evening at the Kuyper Summit. The Scripture is anything but silent about inheritance. Consider Proverbs 13: 22, which says: “Good people leave an inheritance for their children’s children, but a sinner’s wealth is stored for the righteous.”

Buffet suggests, contrary to the biblical covenantalism that submits to Christ’s Lordship in all of life, that it is obscene to pass on too much wealth to anyone else except for what is needed to maintain a “modest existence.” What is often missed in this discussion of wealth and inheritance, by well-meaning Christians, is the requirement to handle the transfer of wealth with “strings attached.” The Bible does not teach that we should give all of our possessions to our children without clear biblical responsibility attached to the inheritance. Some children should not be given wealth just because they are our children. Wealth has massive pitfalls connected with it and if a child has not been properly taught, and has not responded correctly to the covenant promises, then they are not “entitled” to any wealth simply because of their DNA.

In our modern society Christians have bought into the notion of everyone deserving their shot at being wealthy. This is wrong. All of us are to “seek first the kingdom of God” and its is God’s hidden design to “add things” to us as he pleases (Matthew 6:33). Wealth is never to be divorced from virtue biblically. A covenantal view of wealth and inheritance will seek to train one’s children to understand the righteousness of God, in every personal and practical way possible, and then will take a long-range view of inheritance and wealth making. There is both power and responsibility in wealth. This is easily missed by children who are not correctly taught, which right now appears to be the majority of children from Christian homes. (I heard a survey last night about the “worldview” of children in Christian schools, not public schools, and it was shocking. The majority of “Christian” kids do not hold a Christian view of the world and thus do not understand how the world works morally.)

So making, and even inheriting, wealth is desirable. But it is also dangerous. Jesus said, “It is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 19:23). This danger does not mean wealth is never to be pursued or a great deal of Scripture has misled us. No, the answer is not found in pitting these kinds of verses against each other, into an either/or understanding, but rather, it is to seen in reading these statements as both/and promises. Not all of us will be extravagantly wealthy. Some Christians will be and they have extravagant responsibility as well as great opportunity. The Church has done almost nothing to help such people, except for seeking some of their money.

Many of us have more wealth, relatively speaking, than any generation who ever lived on this planet. I do not see this as bad, not at all. I see it as both good and dangerous. What we do with this wealth, and how teach the rising generation about it, is crucial. This subject desperately needs to be put on the table in our churches but few pastors are able to handle the subject since they have never been taught well in this area.

I am working on a plan whereby ACT 3 can help pastors (in particular) teach these biblical both/and promises more faithfully. Pray for me in this regard. We need both faithful wealthy Christians and able, biblically balanced pastors, to make this work in a balanced way. We cannot escape our present wealth as Americans unless we literally flee. (Some think this is the solution!) I believe we can learn to handle wealth in ways that honor God and preserve true piety at the same time. (The whole Old Testament stands as a witness to this fact!) The New Testament does not overturn this, but underscores it in new and more trans-cultural ways. Seeking this balance is my vision.

John H. Armstrong is founder and director of ACT 3, a ministry aimed at "encouraging the church, through its leadership, to pursue doctrinal and ethical reformation and to foster spiritual awakening." His home blog is located here.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
The Market Outlook for the Facts of the Matter
With two presidential debates and one vice presidential debate already behind us, fact-checkers across the nation must be pulling their hair out. A brief survey of factcheck.org sheds some important light on the many claims and figures that have been tossed around in the last two weeks, revealing little concern from either ticket for the facts of the matter. Why is this the case? And must we simply resign ourselves to this dismal state of affairs? Take a look at...
Mansa Musa and the Magic of the Free Market
A new study has produced an inflation-adjusted list of the richest people of all time. To give you an idea of just how rich the rich people on the list are consider that Sam Walton and Warren Buffett are the poorest guys to make the cut. The richest person in history, according to the study, was Mansa Musa I of Mali—an obscure 14th century African king. Musa, who made his fortune on salt and gold, would have an inflation-adjusted fortune...
Acton Commentary: Representation without Taxation?
“No taxation without representation” was a slogan taken up and popularized by this nation’s Founders, and this idea became an important animating principle of the American Revolution. But this was also an era where landowners had the primary responsibilities in civic life; theirs was the land that was taxed and so theirs too should be the rights to vote and be represented. Thus went the logic. But the question that faces us now, nearly two and a half centuries later,...
Samuel Gregg: Who’s Really Forgotten the Poor
On National Review Online, Acton Research Director Samuel Gregg offers an analysis of last night’s debate between President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney. Gregg begins with the assertion by Melinda Henneberger of the Washington Post that the candidates are ignoring poor and working-class Americans. Gregg responds: … what’s generally missing from the discussion of poverty in the context of this presidential election — though Romney did obliquely reference it in the second debate — is acknowledgment that: (1) the...
The Presidential Debate and Pandering to Women
I think somebody needs to admit that the level of pandering to women in this election is over the top. Whether it is Ann Romney awkwardly yelling, “I love you women” at the Republican National Convention, or the ridiculous “War on Women” meme from the left. The examples are just too many to cite and evaluate for one post. So much of it is focus driven and poll tested and here with us to stay, but the issue still needs...
What is Subsidiarity?
What is Catholic Church’s teaching on the size of government? And what is the principle of subsidiarity? Our friends at CatholicVote.org have put together a brief video to help answer these questions. ...
America’s Top Diplomat: Rich People Don’t Contribute to Economic Growth
“There are rich people everywhere, and yet they do not contribute to the [economic] growth of their own countries.” If such a statement were made by an activist at an Occupy Wall Street rally, most adults would chuckle and mend the budding young Marxist take a course in economics. But what do we do when the claim is made by Hillary Clinton at an event hosted by a former U.S. president and in front of an audience of global leaders?...
Acton Commentary: Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables
For many on the Catholic left, the confusion of “non-negotiables” in Church teaching with matters of prudential judgment has e all mon. In this week’s Acton Commentary (published October 17), Dr. Don Condit looks at how Vice President Joseph Biden’s “facts” about Obamacare were received by the Catholic bishops.The full text of his essay follows. Subscribe to the free, weekly Acton News & Commentary and other publicationshere. Politics, Social Justice and the Non-Negotiables byDonald P. Condit Vice President Joseph Biden’s...
Diversity Welcome, But Only within Very Strict Parameters
Gallaudet University is a unique institution. Founded in 1864 in Washington, DC to meet the educational needs of the deaf and hard-of-hearing, the school currently serves just under 2000 students in various capacities. As one might imagine, it is a munity, aware that they educate a group of people who have often been victims of discrimination. The school asserts: Gallaudet University as an institution embraces diversity… A university has an obligation to be a place where all views can be...
Are Protectionism and Patriotism Incompatible Principles?
This morning at Ethika Politika, I argue that “acting primarily for the sake of national interest in international affairs runs contrary to a nation’s highest ideals.” In particular, I draw on the thought of Vladimir Solovyov, who argued that, morally speaking, national interest alone cannot be the supreme standard of international action since the highest aspirations of each nation (e.g. “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”) are claimed to be universal goods. I would here like to explore his...