Is it "theft" to keep high-value items that were abandoned in my home?

[JanR]

If we had no families, there would be no more Christians. There would be no Christian society. How is this not a fallacy, my friend?

No families, no cohesive units in which Christian values can be taught to children, and hence, no Christian society. Yes, folks can have children without having families – and there is no unity, no cohesion, no support, and often no parents around to teach values or anything else. No way a Christian society could exist under the condition of no families.

Not everyone is called to evangelize, and even evangelists have families.

Families are important – God himself established the family by putting a man and a woman together and telling them to multiply and fill the earth.

Life is a gift. We were meant to enjoy it. Enjoying life and living is a tribute and an honor to God, who gave us life and the ability to live it. He intended for us to live life fully. Living life fully and joyfully is a form of gratitude.

On the other hand, if one is called to be a monk or live the cloistered life, that’s what one should do. For those who are so called, living that way would nourish, not kill, their spirits. But only if they are called to that vocation, and it isn’t forced upon them.

We mustn’t read so much rigidity into these scriptural passages. The obvious intent of the teaching is to not be greedy, to not love material things above all else and everyone else, including God. It doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t own things, as long as we own them responsibly. Responsible ownership of private property also honors God, because it shows we are reasonable in exercising our freedom, and the free will He has instilled within us, and reasonable in exercising our right to have things we need and our privilege to have things which please us.

Enjoying the good things of this world is perfectly fine. It’s when we become obsessed with them or attached to them to the point where we use, abuse or neglect those we love, where we harm others to obtain more material things, where we behave ruthlessly and unethically in order to acquire more and more, and then try to keep it at all costs that’s disordered, and I think that’s what Jesus was trying to get across in his teachings about riches.

 

[JesusReadsHearts]

The original question was not whether it was moral to own the items at all. (If that were so, the question of whether it would be theft to keep them would be moot, wouldn’t it?) No, the question was whether it is moral to consider the items as part of the sale, since they weren’t removed prior to the last day to vacate before the new owner took possession.
*Is it “theft” to keep high-value items that were abandoned in my home? *
And if so, do I have an obligation to try to return the items or just to ensure they are available to be returned in the event that the abandoner still wants them?
The OP is basically stating that he/she SEES that the items are so expensive thus high-value" that it would possibly be considered THEFT (feelings of guilt) for keeping them. Let’s do our best not to use the eisegetical approach here. Judging from the answers in this thread, that is the exact understanding of the question unless you know the questioner and something was not added to the description.

 

[PetraG]

The OP is basically stating that he/she SEES that the items are so expensive thus high-value" that it would possibly be considered THEFT (feelings of guilt) for keeping them. Let’s do our best not to use the eisegetical approach here. Judging from the answers in this thread, that is the exact understanding of the question unless you know the questioner and something was not added to the description.

Where did you get that? Having taking occupation of a home that was once owned by someone else and also having vacated a property myself, too, I’d have said that cheap items with no apparent sentimental value are usually presumed to have been left because the previous owner didn’t want them (but thought that perhaps the next occupant would), whereas with expensive items it seems more likely that those items were left by accident. When people leave something expensive, they are more likely to mention that the items were left on purpose. It has nothing to do with feeling guilty. It has to do with taking something when you aren’t sure whether the original owner meant to keep it instead of including it in the sale of the home.

I’m only trying to look at this from the point of view of the person who left the items, which is the directive of the Golden Rule. As for guilt, it is like a smoke alarm. You don’t want a house without one, but you would go crazy if you were convinced you had a house fire every time the thing went off.

 

[JesusReadsHearts]

"Oh so that would mean that in the end it is possible anyway."
Jesus is referring to the camel not rich man. Once again it is a hyperbole. Riches can become a serious stumbling block to a person seeking eternal life. God blessed them for companionship with covenant, blessing, obedience, and mission." Gaining wealth and high value possessions was not the moral of the story.

Christopher Wright says " [The patriarchal narratives] thus portray the righteous rich as those who receive God’s blessing…and participate in God’s mission of blessing others. Given that…this is the first substantial appearance of wealth in the Bible, it is important to note that it is set in a very wholesome light – in companionship with covenant, blessing, obedience, and mission."

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

We agree that gaining wealth is not the goal, so that was not moral of the story. We both agree that riches can become a serious stumbling block.

I also think this is beautiful and summarizes what riches are for

it is important to note that it is set in a very wholesome light – in companionship with covenant, blessing, obedience, and mission.

I really think that is very true about wealth.

 

[JesusReadsHearts]

The OP did not see them as cheap items. He described them as high-value which basically states they are expensive. The OP is in his home and high-value items were abandoned. Now if you read some of the top answers, you will notice that he has someone else’s expensive items in their home.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

From a biblical standpoint, Jesus said it is difficult for rich people to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Based on that statement, we can assume that Jesus did not own enough property or high-value items to qualify him as being rich. Jesus would have no use for high-value items because He already owns everything and can get whatever He wants whenever He wants it. Case-in-point: water to wine and unlimited food supply. Jesus’ entire ministry was based on strengthening the Spirit over accumulating material things.

What are some examples of high value items. What about the computer and or phone you are using to be on these forums? Are all home owners rich and most likely not going to heaven because they own homes worth hundreds of thousands of dollars? Did I sin by buying my wife a engagement ring for $2000? My truck is old but it is worth at least $1000 if not $2000 dollars. Should I trade it for a bike worth only only $50? Or is a $50 bike a high value item? I think it would be in say… a poor third world country. What is high value?

 

[PetraG]

The OP did not see them as cheap items. He described them as high-value which basically states they are expensive. The OP is in his home and high-value items were abandoned. Now if you read some of the top answers, you will notice that he has someone else’s expensive items in their home.

I’m also saying that if I’d left expensive items behind, I’d consider it fair for the new owner to see them as part of the sale. That is the agreement we had when I sold the house. Maybe some people would feel so attached to their things that they’d shift the responsibility to the new owner to return them, but I wouldn’t.

Having said that, I’d say that the new owner of these things at least owes thanks to the former owner. You call them up, tell them the item or items were left. Then you ask, “Do you want them back? Because if not, I really feel I owe you a thank you.” But yes, I’d give them back if the owner asked for them. People make mistakes, and it is more merciful not to make them pay for them in a legalistic way. Having said that, I wouldn’t let something like this ruin a friendship if my friend bought a house from me and assumed the items came with the house. That would be me putting too much store on wealth.

 

[DeniseKYGirl]

Here is something to add, my friend:

Where is the biblical example of wealth as a blessing?

It is true that Abraham was blessed. It was also true that Abraham was wealthy (BTW Abraham was already rich before God called upon him. His father Terah was the chief officer or minister of the first king-King Nimrod of Babylon). But it is false to state that that the blessing was the wealth.

There are two things that are need to put this in proper context:

1. Abraham (Abram) was already rich before God called him (Genesis 12). Abraham was probably still a polytheist when he gained his wealth. There is no reason to believe that it was faith in God that resulted in wealth.
2. Abraham’s blessing had nothing to do with wealth. The primary blessing was the giving of a son through whom a great nation would come. The other blessing was the land. While this might look like wealth, the land was not really passed on to Abraham in his life. All he received was his grave. The land was something for his descendants to enjoy.

There is absolutely nothing in the Abraham story to suggest that financial wealth was a part of his blessing. Latching on to the story of Abraham really does not help those who hold to the prosperity gospel. It certainly does not provide something that could overturn the clear teaching of the New Testament that warns against desiring wealth.

Written by Stephen J. Bedard-Apologist Abraham was blessed

Let’s not forget about this: Galatians 3:14 these teachers ignore the second half of the verse: “that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” Paul is clearly reminding the Galatians of the spiritual blessing of salvation, not the material blessing of wealth.

 

[DeniseKYGirl]

Let me give an example of motorcycling. You can be a person who knows very little and passes the lollipop; hopefully you will survive. Or, you can take the Basic Rider Course and then you will be safer on the road. Perhaps you want to become more skilled, so you take advanced courses, go to track days, and practice low-speed skills on your own. The same applies to a Christian who can be a “basic rider”, an “intermediate rider” or an “advanced rider”. With Catholicism, there is the option to decide to be a “basic Catholic”, and there are apparently no consequences. Such an individual might go to Mass frequently, give money regularly (which is very important if you want to be in good standing), and live according to the Golden Rule, with attention to some other standards. Intermediate level might be participating in the ceremonies, elevated donation of funds, and giving a lot of time and energy to the Catholic cause. Advanced level would entail becoming a member of the Clergy, possibly taking a vow of poverty, a vow of celibacy, spending most of your free time blessing, visiting, and ministering to parishioners.

I find it interesting that there is so much room for “play” in how Catholics want to “play it” in terms of their spiritual lives. I suppose that since Constantine made Christianity the state religion, that made being a Christian a common, everyday thing that is to be incorporated into one’s routine, regardless of your position in society or level of devotion to the religion. Well, I am here to tell you that Jesus’ message on the pitfalls of being wealthy and clinging to worldliness didn’t change just because an institution (and a city-state) was generated based on some of the values he was attempting to impart to anyone who was willing to listen. Let me as you all a question: Are YOU willing to listen? Buddhist monks listen, and they are not even followers of YHWH, Jesus, the HS, etc…

What is the point in taking a vow of poverty, unless it makes you a more spiritual person? Why do only SOME of us want to be spiritually-advanced? Is it simply that being Catholic is a lot like being a motorcycle rider who gets to decide how much commitment is TOO MUCH commitment? Choose your own adventure, or just stay put in your nice, cushy (high-value) home and kick it.

 

[Annie]

You misunderstand the nature of holiness. People can live ordinary lives and become more holy than some monks and nuns have.

It is not how much stuff you have or how much time you spend or any of those things but how you do those things. You can do them in a holy way or not.

 

[DeniseKYGirl]

As he was dying, one of Buddha’s followers said, “Master, I have listened to all of your teachings and tried to apply them. But how can I know for sure that my efforts will pay off and I will finally find enlightenment?” Buddha said, “It makes me happy that you have been listening, but you must find your own path. That is the way. Seek, and you will find it.” So, in like manner, I say to YOU, Annie, that you must find your own path, even if it seems contrary to what anyone says or what you read. Do what you need to do, and if you are sincerely seeking the Kingdom, you will eventually find it. I can’t be a judge of your sincerity, but if you try something that doesn’t work, try going a different direction. It’s really your intuition (the Holy Spirit) that whispers in your ear what you should or should not be doing. You can “feel” what’s right and what’s wrong, but you MUST be carefully listening to your heart. May Jehovah be your guiding light.

 

[Annie]

You seem to be trying to say something to me, but I don’t know what it is. Do you think I lack something in Catholicism?

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

What is the point in taking a vow of poverty, unless it makes you a more spiritual person? Why do only SOME of us want to be spiritually-advanced? Is it simply that being Catholic is a lot like being a motorcycle rider who gets to decide how much commitment is TOO MUCH commitment? Choose your own adventure, or just stay put in your nice, cushy (high-value) home and kick it.

Quote snipped due to the character limit…

You did not answer my question, you are deflecting. Is the computer you are using or the phone you are using a “high value item”? To most the world it is. I am suggesting that perhaps you should look at the plank in your own eye, perhaps?

Your post is full of straw man arguments. I will address some of what you wrote and pose a challenge for you to think about too.

You seem to be jabbing at the fact that a lot of Catholics are only Catholic in Culture. While this is indeed true, I happen to be a ex protestant. Now, I know you probably do not consider yourself protestant (you wrote Non denominational under your religion in your profile) and that is fine with me. But I use to also be a non denominational “Bible only” Christian and I can tell you that the same cultural christianity thing is very prevalent in the “Non denominational” christianity world too. Living with Significant others while not married, having children out of wedlock, drunkeness and drug use, promiscuity, never reading The Bible, only going to church on Easter and Christmas, all the while claiming to be “Christian” is also very much present in the “non denominational christian” world. You cant con a con man. One is downright hypocritical to act as if cultural Christianity (Keep in mind Catholics consider themselves Christian whether you agree with that or not, with all due respect) is limited to The Catholic Church. When I have non denominational friends who post Christian sermons on FB one day and then videos of people getting beaten to a pulp in fights the next day, I am reminded of this fairly regularly. But I saw it in your variety of Christianity long before FB even existed.

Constantine did not make Christianity the state religion of rome. Emperor Theodosious the first did circa 380AD. He made Trinitarian Christianity the official religion of Rome. Now, emperor Constantine did in fact issue a edict that halted persecution of The Christians but he was in favor of Arian Christianity. The heresy going around at the time that Jesus was inferior to The Father. Kind of a lesser God, not eternal but created by The Father. Trinitarian Christianity prevailed because Jesus promised that The gates of hell would not prevail against The Church. Perhaps you have heard that “Constantine started The Catholic Church” or some other nonsense that many non denominational pastors like to preach (It seems history is not a subject taught to them when they go to Bible college to become pastors) It is very interesting and I recommend you do your own research on the matter. If you do not believe me, look up emperor Theodosious on google.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Part 2
I am not a rich man, I never will be unless I win the lottery. The most expensive thing I own is probably my truck, worth maybe $2000 if I am lucky. Probably less, as it is 20 years old. It is not charitable nor following the golden rule to say that somehow I am failing to live up to something that Jesus supposedly says (And He never even says it) when you do not even know my state in life, my income, what, if anything, I do with the money I have. Nor, what I even think about rich Christians. My point is that you are coming up with your own biblical interpretations to make The Bible say things that it simply does not say. Jesus never said that owning high value items is wrong.

Here is what I have seen: It is good and fitting for one to eat and drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labor in which he toils under the sun all the days of his life which God gives him; for it is his heritage. As for every man to whom God has given riches and wealth, and given him power to eat of it, to receive his heritage and rejoice in his labor—this is the gift of God. (Ecclesiastes 5:18–19)

In this book, written by king Solomon (a man God gave the gift of wisdom to) he warns of greed, so indeed a rich greedy person better be careful. But There is noting wrong with someone having material things as long as they remember it all belongs to God, and that we are only stewards of that money and material things. Look at the parable of the three servants who used the "talents"God gave them to multiply it. God said “well done” and gave them even more. Because they were good stewards of Gods money. IT IS ALL GODS MONEY AND MATERIAL THINGS, and this is what The Catholic Church teaches. We are simply stewards of it. You are on a really high horse, with all due respect, to come here trying to preach that somehow Catholics get Christs message of not being greedy and being good stewards wrong and you get it right.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Part 3

You ask “Am I willing to listen?” I say to you I do not need your false interpretations of scripture. I have way more reliable interpretations of scripture from 2000 years of worth of Catholic saints, a Holy Spirit inspired Magisterium, a Church instituted by our Lord Jesus Himself and clergy who actually have receive proper ordination to be ministers by the laying on of hands by the successors of The Apostles

Acts 6 3-6Brothers and sisters, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them 4 and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.”

5 This proposal pleased the whole group. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit; also Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas from Antioch, a convert to Judaism. 6 They presented these men to the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them.

This is the difference between a priest and a “preacher” one is properly ordained and the other might have went to a Bible school, learned some wrong interpretations of scripture, with no teaching in history (they probably were taught that Constantine made Christianity the official religion of rome in their bible schools too)

To you, I would say, stick around and listen. You may find that Catholics do not think or believe a lot of what you think we do.

 

[DeniseKYGirl]

PART 1

Laughing Boy: First of all, I hope that you are laughing with me and not at me as that would not be very Christian, would it? Whether or not Constantine was the actual person who made Christianity the “official religion” is just splitting hairs, but an interesting piece of trivia, nonetheless. Constantine was the one who set up the First Council of Nicaea, and - additionally - made Christianity legal, so that certainly qualifies him as the “Father of Roman Christianity”. Had he lived longer, he would have undoubtedly filled out and signed the paperwork himself.

You insinuate that I am stupid and should stick around and be educated, yet… since Catholics are so well-educated and solidly grounded in facts (particularly religious facts), it seems to me that ones such as yourself - who are of the highest caliber -should be completely capable of interpreting scripture (especially very simple statements made by Jesus that even a first grader could comprehend).

It absolutely does NOT take 2000 years to figure out that, in the story of the rich young man, Jesus is revealing his attitude about wealth. In this situation it is obvious that “wealth” doesn’t include common things that one needs to survive, pay bills, and get around. I don’t need to be a priest or high Church official to know that Jesus thinks people should not be SO attached to wealth that they can’t part with it (in favor of spiritual pursuits). Clearly, the young man chooses material things over an opportunity to work DIRECTLY with the Lord himself! The “interpretation” is crystal clear: Don’t put the material over the spiritual, and ESPECIALLY over Jesus!

You have set up a straw man situation, yourself, as you describe what is like to be a “non-denominational” Christian. It’s true that many claim Christianity, though few actually live by the principles prescribed by Jesus who is - dare I say it? - the main guy to focus on. Not all non-denominationals are like the straw man caricature you have created. Everyone is at a different level, with some doing well and others failing.

This Pauline notion that only some of us have to work on being spiritual doesn’t fly with me. Jesus taught basic concepts that we can apply to our lives, and rejecting materialism over treasures of the spirit was front and center. Teach, preach, witness, heal, and be “fishers of men”. How do we get a “free pass” from doing these things? Maybe YOU do, and so it seems that you have chosen the right religion. As a “freelancer” I prefer to use the very practical wisdom that Jesus gave me and apply it to my daily life. Understanding what was taught requires very little thought.

Proverbs 26:12 - “Do you see a man who is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.”

1 Thessalonians 5:21 - “Test all things; hold fast what is good.”

 

[DeniseKYGirl]

PART 2

I will say to you the exact same thing I said to Annie, and that is your heart will tell you how much is too much. If you get a new Dodge Ram 2500 when you should have helped a family member in need, then you are not applying Bible principles. It can come down to something as simple as that, really. It’s easy to look the other way, isn’t it? The Pope won’t put you in check, and neither will anyone else; it’s all on YOU, bro! It is not necessary to go up the chain of command to just SIMPLY do what you can feel (via the Holy Spirit) to be the right thing. It’s your intuition, and if you stay aware and awake, you will know how to do the right thing. I told Annie that she needs to follow her own path, and that is the same for you and me, as well. SO MANY people on this forum are desperate to defend their right to have nice things and pursue riches, but riches will NOT make you happy, and you can’t take any of them with you.

Read the last part of Ecclesiastes: “Everything is meaningless!” And when Jesus returns, the people will be eating, drinking, enjoying their lives, being given in marriage, and ALL those wonderful things you mentioned, but it will quickly come to a conclusion as all will be gathered around the throne and asked, “How much spiritual wealth have you accumulated?” Gather as much as you can, Laughing Boy, and don’t leave it up to somebody else because a “wise” man gave you permission.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Part 1
Not laughing with you or at you. Having a discussion and defending my faith, as this is a Catholic forum so for you to be here you most likely have a agenda. And by your jabs at Catholicism, it seems to be a anti Catholic one. Which you are free to have and we can have religious discussions all day. We can talk about what we think Jesus means. That is okay. Contrary to what a lot of non Catholics think that The Catholic church teaches(and some Catholics too) we absolutely can try to interpret scripture for ourselves. That interpretation just cannot contradict other parts of scripture and our revealed deposit of faith. Obviously, to me, a lot of the time your interpretations will contradict Catholic official teaching and even the few verses of Scripture that have been infallibly interpreted by The Catholic Magisterium (Unless you believe in The True presence of Christ in communion, what we call The Eucharist, and you believe that Malichi 1:11 is talking about The Holy Mass, etc. etc etc) You may not agree with the fact that we have a pope but if you are counting on your own interpretation of scripture over the 2000 years of saints who are way more brilliant that either you or I then you are saying that you have The Holy Spirit and they did not and you have made yourself your own pope, which a lot of non denominational tend to do. Believe me, I was one.

Yes, absolutely not all non denominationals are Cultural Christians only. Neither are Catholics. You made a blanket statement that Catholics seem to x,y,z. That was not very cool. So, I simply pointed out that your faith tradition has its flaws too. If you do not like that, then please do not do it to us as Catholics. I did not come on a Non denominational forum taking jabs at your faith. You did it here. But I am willing to have a civilized discussion because believe me, for every problem you have with my Church, I have one for yours. We can talk about them and be civil. It is not a straw man to point out that your criticism of our faith can also apply to lots of people of yours as well.

Do you really think it is splitting hairs that I pointed out the fact that Emperor Theodosious the first is the one that made Trinitarian Christianity The official religion of Rome not emperor Constantine? I dare to say, with all due respect, I think you only feel this way because you made a error that shows you have not studied Church history throughly. It is a very important historic fact when people falsely accuse a old emperor of being the true founder of our Church when in fact, that person was in favor of Arian Christianity instead of the true Trinitarian Christianity, which emperor Theodosious made the official religion of Rome. If Constantine was The True father of Catholicism then all Catholics would be arian, not Trinitarian. That is why it is not splitting hairs to point out the truth in this matter. Doesnt that sound like a important distinction?

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Part 2
Every single heresy that has ever existed in the history of The Church, Catholic or protestant has came to be by people assuming they know better then The Church Jesus founded and by their own false interpretation of scripture. That is the attitude of “follow your own path” which you told me to do in your last post, because God never intended for our relationship to be Just “Me and Jesus” our relationship with Christ is indeed a personal one. Jesus was all I had for a long time. Out relationship also involves being part of The Church He started and being somewhat obedient to those He put in charge “HE WHO HEARS YOU,HEARS ME” Luke 10:16 as Christ said to the apostles and of course we as Catholics believe that The Bishops are the successors to The apostles (Which is indeed Biblical, but that is for another discussion)

Was The Eunich from Ethiopia dumber then a first grader when he Asked phillip to help him interpret scripture?
Acts 8 30-31 30 So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?” 31 And he said, “How can I, unless someone guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

I do not think you are stupid, contrary, you have demonstrated that you are not. I said that you should stick around because you might find that Catholics believe something different then you were taught that we believe. Now, you do not think you know more about Catholicism then Catholics, do you?

I agree with 99% of what you are saying about wealth. Your straw man is saying that I am arguing a point that I actually agree with you on. That we should place our Trust in God not wealth. I agree that we should help a relative instead of buy the new Dodge ram 2500. I simply think your interpretation of scripture is wrong when you told the OP that “Jesus would not want you to own high value items anyways” I do not know what else I need to say to you to show that I do believe that Jesus taught against greed and putting our faith in material things instead of him. You just cant seem to accept the fact the there is nothing inherently wrong with having “high value items”. Well, The Bible does not say that being rich will send one to hell, in fact, Paul tells Timothy how to tell rich Christians how to act…

1st Timothy 6:17 17 Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment.

Would rich people not own “high value items”? I am not saying that the OP should have kept what they found, I was simply saying that your statement is based on a false interpretation of Jesus words when he said it is easier for a rich man to pass through the eye of a needle then to enter the kingdom of heaven. I agree with you that we should not put material things over spiritual. Where did I say otherwise? That is pretty much your strawman argument.