Investing for Retirement

[Wade]

This thing of nonaccumulation isn't as straight forward as it sounds. I recall a comment by a young man who lived in a rented apartment but had a savings account of around $10,000. This, of course, would go against Hertzler's philosophies. But he point out that another brother in the church owned a dairy farm. Operations like that are worth several million dollars at least. He questioned the validity of a philosophy that allowed the dairy farmer to keep his assets, but asked him to give his away.

So is it really cash that it wrong? Or assets in general? I think most of the people who hold to this philosophy also do not allow debt. So how would you ever buy a car or a house, if you can't save for it, or borrow money for it?

I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's beliefs, but I just don't see how it can possibly work out.

I think they assume you inherit it from your ancestors. (I'm not kidding, I've heard someone say before the scripture of "Land and wealth are an inheritance from fathers" to support this.)

A bigger question is just how much should we even own property? It was at one point taken by violence and injustice from a past owner. And property means we use land to the exclusion of someone else backed up by violent force.

Renting has given us as a family the opportunity to serve others continually with taking care of or fixing up their things. It is amusing at times when on-lookers say things or imply their is something wrong with us for doing good to others...

I think when our focus becomes more centered on our accumulation or lack thereof we have missed the point that Christ was making by these commands. I believe: He wants us to love our neighbours as our self and is pointing us to intentionally look for ways to serve. And rather taking a self assessment of our things we just need to be honest with ourselves.

And a note on my last post: We couldn't afford to participate in things we have been invited to not because of practicing non-accumulation but rather having huge debts from selfish living in the past.

[RZehr]

This thing of nonaccumulation isn't as straight forward as it sounds. I recall a comment by a young man who lived in a rented apartment but had a savings account of around $10,000. This, of course, would go against Hertzler's philosophies. But he point out that another brother in the church owned a dairy farm. Operations like that are worth several million dollars at least. He questioned the validity of a philosophy that allowed the dairy farmer to keep his assets, but asked him to give his away.

So is it really cash that it wrong? Or assets in general? I think most of the people who hold to this philosophy also do not allow debt. So how would you ever buy a car or a house, if you can't save for it, or borrow money for it?

I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's beliefs, but I just don't see how it can possibly work out.

In Hertzler's system, saving up to buy a vehicle would be allowed because a vehicle is a "tool" rather than a device for storing/accumulating wealth, in Hertzler's terms. (Barring antiques, cars in and of themselves tend not to store, much less accumulate, value!)

One could rent a house. But taxes may favor "ownership" to the point where a mortgage payment is comparable to rent, at which point people start stewardshipping their way into homeownership.

This is where the teaching or conversation almost always circles back to the starting point.
Because an excavator is a tool, a concrete pump is a tool, a barn is a tool, so on and so forth as long as that is your trade. And yet a business person in another industry could invest in a construction company or farm, and then it doesn't look like a tool anymore.
And the owner/operator with a paid for $500,000 concrete pump with no retirement savings has this box checked, while a general laborer at a large company does not have the box checked because he has $10,000 in a 401k account. Or if the general laborer buys a $50,000 rental house he now has an investment and no tool.

[Bootstrap]

I think when our focus becomes more centered on our accumulation or lack thereof we have missed the point that Christ was making by these commands. I believe: He wants us to love our neighbours as our self and is pointing us to intentionally look for ways to serve. And rather taking a self assessment of our things we just need to be honest with ourselves.

Amen. We don't need one single black-and-white answer for everyone, and the New Testament does not give us one.

So we struggle with this question, together, by the Holy Spirit. And perhaps we struggle with this question all our lives, keeping love and service front and center.

[lesterb]

This thing of nonaccumulation isn't as straight forward as it sounds. I recall a comment by a young man who lived in a rented apartment but had a savings account of around $10,000. This, of course, would go against Hertzler's philosophies. But he point out that another brother in the church owned a dairy farm. Operations like that are worth several million dollars at least. He questioned the validity of a philosophy that allowed the dairy farmer to keep his assets, but asked him to give his away.

So is it really cash that it wrong? Or assets in general? I think most of the people who hold to this philosophy also do not allow debt. So how would you ever buy a car or a house, if you can't save for it, or borrow money for it?

I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's beliefs, but I just don't see how it can possibly work out.

In Hertzler's system, saving up to buy a vehicle would be allowed because a vehicle is a "tool" rather than a device for storing/accumulating wealth, in Hertzler's terms. (Barring antiques, cars in and of themselves tend not to store, much less accumulate, value!)

One could rent a house. But taxes may favor "ownership" to the point where a mortgage payment is comparable to rent, at which point people start stewardshipping their way into homeownership.

This is where the teaching or conversation almost always circles back to the starting point.
Because an excavator is a tool, a concrete pump is a tool, a barn is a tool, so on and so forth as long as that is your trade. And yet a business person in another industry could invest in a construction company or farm, and then it doesn't look like a tool anymore.
And the owner/operator with a paid for $500,000 concrete pump with no retirement savings has this box checked, while a general laborer at a large company does not have the box checked because he has $10,000 in a 401k account. Or if the general laborer buys a $50,000 rental house he now has an investment and no tool.

You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I was told that at Shippensburg they would allow you to borrow money to buy a farm, but when you sold it or died, the proceeds would go to the church, not your family. That would be their way of having it all come out even in the end, I guess. So if a son was to take over his father's $2.5m dairy farm, he'd have to pay the church $2.5m for it.

No inheritances.

But the father could use his equity to get his sons started in farming.

[MaxPC]

This thing of nonaccumulation isn't as straight forward as it sounds. I recall a comment by a young man who lived in a rented apartment but had a savings account of around $10,000. This, of course, would go against Hertzler's philosophies. But he point out that another brother in the church owned a dairy farm. Operations like that are worth several million dollars at least. He questioned the validity of a philosophy that allowed the dairy farmer to keep his assets, but asked him to give his away.

So is it really cash that it wrong? Or assets in general? I think most of the people who hold to this philosophy also do not allow debt. So how would you ever buy a car or a house, if you can't save for it, or borrow money for it?

I'm not trying to denigrate anyone's beliefs, but I just don't see how it can possibly work out.

In Hertzler's system, saving up to buy a vehicle would be allowed because a vehicle is a "tool" rather than a device for storing/accumulating wealth, in Hertzler's terms. (Barring antiques, cars in and of themselves tend not to store, much less accumulate, value!)

One could rent a house. But taxes may favor "ownership" to the point where a mortgage payment is comparable to rent, at which point people start stewardshipping their way into homeownership.

This is where the teaching or conversation almost always circles back to the starting point.
Because an excavator is a tool, a concrete pump is a tool, a barn is a tool, so on and so forth as long as that is your trade. And yet a business person in another industry could invest in a construction company or farm, and then it doesn't look like a tool anymore.
And the owner/operator with a paid for $500,000 concrete pump with no retirement savings has this box checked, while a general laborer at a large company does not have the box checked because he has $10,000 in a 401k account. Or if the general laborer buys a $50,000 rental house he now has an investment and no tool.

There is also another side to investment: debt (thank you for mentioning that Wade.)

Debt is a burden. If one has to go into debt to enlarge his business, that debt plus interest counts against the profit line and any savings.

I started to comb through and list all the verses related to debt then realized someone may have already done this and indeed they have - though I can't attest to the list being complete. At least it will be a starting point. It's a KJV site but the meaning is the same as ESV.

Proverbs 22:7 - The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower [is] servant to the lender.

Romans 13:8 - Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.

Psalms 37:21 - The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again: but the righteous sheweth mercy, and giveth.

Romans 13:7 - Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute [is due]; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Luke 14:28 - For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have [sufficient] to finish [it]?

Luke 16:11 - If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true [riches]?

Proverbs 22:26 - Be not thou [one] of them that strike hands, [or] of them that are sureties for debts.

Exodus 22:25-27 - If thou lend money to [any of] my people [that is] poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury. (Read More...)

Luke 16:10 - He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

1 Corinthians 10:13 - There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God [is] faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear [it].

Matthew 6:33 - But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

Nehemiah 5:3-5 - [Some] also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth. (Read More...)

Proverbs 21:20 - [There is] treasure to be desired and oil in the dwelling of the wise; but a foolish man spendeth it up.
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bib ... -Debt_KJV/

[cmbl]

I don't think that any of the NT verses in the above wall of verses are actually talking about debt.

[MaxPC]

I don't think that any of the NT verses in the above wall of verses are actually talking about debt.

In the context of handling money and material goods in general; and avoiding debt in particular, the NT verses say quite a bit to me.

Debt, income, and investments are all part of the larger picture of stewardship of our material blessings in my experience.

[RZehr]

You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I was told that at Shippensburg they would allow you to borrow money to buy a farm, but when you sold it or died, the proceeds would go to the church, not your family. That would be their way of having it all come out even in the end, I guess. So if a son was to take over his father's $2.5m dairy farm, he'd have to pay the church $2.5m for it.

No inheritances.

But the father could use his equity to get his sons started in farming.

That seems like a way to negate multi-generational wealth building, but it really doesn't seem like a helpful or useful way to address Luke 12:33 and Mathew 6:19.
I'm also assuming that they'd be okay with the wealth being donated to CAM instead of the local church.

[RZehr]

A bigger question is just how much should we even own property? It was at one point taken by violence and injustice from a past owner. And property means we use land to the exclusion of someone else backed up by violent force.

And the earth was initially given by God to us all. So was it, or is it, ever really owned by anyone?

[Josh]

If debt is bad, is being owed money by other people bad?

We have a debt based money system - every dollar you have makes you a creditor and someone else a debtor for that amount. To completely avoid debt, you would have to live your entire life with bartering only.