Is it possible to become filthy rich without losing your soul?

[Edward62]

It’s not how much money you have, I think, it’s what you do with it.

The Vatican is very rich, but they certainly haven’t lost their souls… they use their monies to help all of us “little Catholics” out! They also do a great deal of charity work, and maintain the libraries and art galleries that are of such great value (not just financially but spiritually and intellectually).

There are ways of becoming rich that are questionable, no doubt. If you profit off the cruelty of others, or because people are deprived, then that’s not right. But it does not seem problematic to make an honest living providing a good or service that other people want to pay for. If God has given you a talent for, say, creating great literary works… and you publish your novel to international acclaim… then you’ll get some financial rewards for your labors. Is it wrong to have used your talent? Hardly.

Money, in itself, is not the root of all evil that it’s so tritely reputed to be. I’ve got a $5 bill sitting on my desk… it’s not going to send me to Heaven or Hell. If I donate that $5 to charity, then it’s good. If I put that money toward drugs, then it’s bad. But money here is only a tool… and it would be the same if I had $5 million.

 

[Nino]

Jesus said." it is easier for a camel to pass thru the eye of a needle then for a rich man to make it to heaven"…for years I also was troubled with this teaching…then as I studied politics and how the world turns it came as a bolt of light! In a religious,spiritual,God centered society …culture…trinkets,maxing out ones credit card for excess junk is never done…any extra money is given to the poor etc…but in a secular humanistic society,ie this world is all there is…then buy buy buy,debt,debt,debt…and so it is beneficial for many wealthy businessmen to push for a pagan world…thats what we see happening more and more…Jesus was married,Jesus faked his death,Christianity is full of contradictions…sooo,just worship the state and whomever is knighted as a leader and earthly savior…etc etc…notice also the age of the true hero is gone…gee the prez may have been unfaithful to his wife but he is a great leader for the people etc etc…ingnore the morals go for the material…so yes…it must be a temptation to jump on the secular bandwagon …my life savings would barely buy a kazoo for that band…sigh

 

[Galandriel]

Yes. St. Louis IX ring a bell?

The King of France!

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

anything is possible with God. but it’s hard to understand how you could become obscenely rich without worshiping money–mammon. it’s not like you can make billions without working for it.

 

[jman507]

anything is possible with God. but it’s hard to understand how you could become obscenely rich without worshiping money–mammon. it’s not like you can make billions without working for it.

If working for something, equated for worshipping it, we’d all be worshipping a false God, or be committing the sin of sloth.

 

[vern_humphrey]

A couple of points here:

1. Nobody has said that the “filthy rich” are worse than other groups. The question was raised as to whether the quest to become “filthy rich” is likely to lead someone into a situation where they are likely to make decisions that could put their soul in grave danger.

Which is the same as saying, rather snidely, that they are worse than other groups. If it was not you intention to suggest they are, why ask the question? And why ask it with the wording you used?

1. Second, the FBI data does not tell us about all crimes, just a subset of them. For example, the data does not tell us anything about white collar crime.

Actually, it does – check the category of fraud.

1. Finally, crime is a subset of immorality. Many immoral things are not illegal. For example, in the quest to become “filthy rich” one might be tempted to work 80 hours a week and neglect their families. This is not illegal of course, but it is immoral. Of course, I never said anything about the relative immorality of any socioeconomic group.

This clearly refutes your claim in 1, above. You are determined to “prove” the immorality of those you call “filthy rich.”

You might ask yourself why you are so obsessed with this.

 

[Amolibri]

to OP

You are determined to “prove” the immorality of those you call “filthy rich.”

 

[vern_humphrey]

…just as “others” are determined to prove the immorality of the “poor” … FBI stats. indeed!!!

No – I simply use the FBI UCR to show that crime is not concentrated among the “filthy rich.”

The posts on this thread have convinced no one of anything…as usual.

Because so many of us are consumed by envy of those who have more than we, and are determined to “prove” them immoral.

This is no different from a thread aimed at “questionning” the morality of Blacks, Jews, or Catholics. Those who are prejudiced will continue to attack the group they hate, regardless of logic and facts.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Because so many of us are consumed by envy of those who have more than we, and are determined to “prove” them immoral.

Your claim is that I raise this issue because I am envious. Ok, prove it. Prove that my motive is envy.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Your claim is that I raise this issue because I am envious. Ok, prove it. Prove that my motive is envy.

You’ve proved it yourself, first by asking a question that you, yourself, acknowledge is offensive, and then by your determined use of sophistry to “prove” the “filthy rich” are bad people.

 

[stinkcat_14]

You’ve proved it yourself, first by asking a question that you, yourself, acknowledge is offensive, and then by your determined use of sophistry to “prove” the “filthy rich” are bad people.

Two points:

1. You are the only person offended here. So give it rest.
2. I have not proven that people who have attempt become “filthy rich” are bad people. I raised the question of whether or not there are dangers. To date, nobody has refuted that hypothesis.

So you have not proven that my motive is envy.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Two points:

1. You are the only person offended here. So give it rest.

Actually, there are others who see what I see.

1. I have not proven that people who have attempt become “filthy rich” are bad people.

That’s true – in fact, we have shown that your prejudices against them are baseless.

I raised the question of whether or not there are dangers. To date, nobody has refuted that hypothesis.

Now, right there is proof of your obsession.

So you have not proven that my motive is envy.

If this were a jury trial, you’d want to have your toothbrush with you.

 

[stinkcat_14]

This clearly refutes your claim in 1, above. You are determined to “prove” the immorality of those you call “filthy rich.”

You might ask yourself why you are so obsessed with this.

Let’s look again at what I said:

Finally, crime is a subset of immorality. Many immoral things are not illegal.

I take it that there is no dispute here.

For example, in the quest to become “filthy rich” one might be tempted to work 80 hours a week and neglect their families. This is not illegal of course, but it is immoral.

I take it that you do not dispute that neglecting your family to become filthy rich is immoral. We know that this does occur among the people attempting to become “filthy rich”, what we don’t know is the likelihood of its occurance. I did not say in this case that person attempting to become “filthy rich” is more likely to neglect their family. Just that if they do, it is immoral. And of course, this type of immorality does not show up in government statistics.

You might ask yourself why are you so obsessed with this?

 

[vern_humphrey]

I take it that you do not dispute that neglecting your family to become filthy rich is immoral. We know that this does occur among the people attempting to become “filthy rich”, what we don’t know is the likelihood of its occurance.

You just can’t let it rest, can you? You just have to find something immoral about those who have more than you.

I did not say in this case that person attempting to become “filthy rich” is more likely to neglect their family. Just that if they do, it is immoral. And of course, this type of immorality does not show up in government statistics.

That’s a typical example – first you suggest they are probably immoral, and then you use criteria for immoralty where data cannot be found.

You might ask yourself why are you so obsessed with this?

I know why I’m here – I’m here for the same reason I’d be here if you were attacking Blacks, Jews, or others.

Ask yourself why you’re here. What is your motivation?

 

[stinkcat_14]

I know why I’m here – I’m here for the same reason I’d be here if you were attacking Blacks, Jews, or others.

If I attacked any of the groups you mentioned, would any of us here in this thread? No, this thread would be closed down.

Second, it is only your opinion that I am attacking this group.

 

[vern_humphrey]

If I attacked any of the groups you mentioned, would any of us here in this thread? No, this thread would be closed down.

Which is why I defend against such attacks.

Second, it is only your opinion that I am attacking this group.

Your own words prove that you are.

You can’t leave it alone – you just have to prove the “filthy rich” are guilty of something.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Which is why I defend against such attacks.

And who made you the judge?

 

[vern_humphrey]

And who made you the judge?

Who made you the judge?

 

[stinkcat_14]

You can’t leave it alone – you just have to prove the “filthy rich” are guilty of something.

We are all guilty of something. Now the relevant question is, are there particular sins that are correlated with the pursuit of wealth. That is the question that I am raising. That is a perfectly reasonable question.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Who made you the judge?

Who know the intent of my heart better, you or me?