Update: 4/13/20
Now godliness with contentment is great gain. For we have brought nothing into the world. Neither are we able to take out anything. Instead, let us be satisfied with food and clothing. Now those who want to become wealthy fall into temptation, into a trap. They fall into many foolish and harmful passions, and into whatever else makes people sink into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people who desire it have been mislead away from the faith and have pierced themselves with much grief (I Timothy 6:6–10).I greatly rejoice in the Lord because now at last you have renewed your concern for me. You had indeed been concerned for me before, but there was no opportunity for you to help. I am not saying this because I am in need. For I have learned to be content in all circumstances. I know what it is to be poor, and I also know what it is to have plenty. In every way and in all things I have learned the secret of how to be well-fed or to be hungry, and how to have an abundance or to be in need. I can do all things through him who strengthens me (Philippians 4:10–13).
Let your conduct be free from the love of money. Be content with the things you have, for God himself has said, “I will never leave you, nor will I forsake you.” Let us be content so that we may have courage to say, “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can a man do to me?” (Hebrews 13:5–6).
There are numerous religious traditions that recommend detachment from both wealth and poverty. In the West, Stoicism rivaled Christianity in this regard. The phrase “stoic mentality” is still common in English. But the number of people who are serious students of Stoicism is limited, and it always has been. In contrast, the number of people who are been committed to Christianity is enormous.
1. A Detached Attitude
The problem comes in applying the principle of detachment that Paul described in these two passages, and the author of the epistle to the Hebrews reinforces. Christians believe that these texts possess moral authority based on the revelation of the Holy Spirit to inspired authors. These are not philosophical principles. They are not limited to a self-disciplined elite of philosophers. These principles are universal in scope, and they are morally binding on those people who profess Christianity. They demand an attitude of detachment from the common pleasures and comforts of this life. These blessings are legitimate. They are blessings from God (James 1:17), but possession of them does not define us as covenant-keepers. Covenant-keepers must not regard either their absence or their removal in their lives as a curse of God. The book of Job is a testimony to this outlook.
Paul had numerous ups and downs in his life. We learn of him first as a participant in the stoning of Stephen. We are told that Paul, then named Saul, participated. He was a young man (Acts 7:58). He became a persecutor of the church (Acts 8:3). The high priest authorized him to persecute Christians (Acts 9:1–2). He had been a student of Rabbi Gamaliel (Acts 22:3). He was a leader in the community, despite his youth. After his conversion to Christianity, he became the apostle to the gentiles. He was the first apostle to the gentiles outside of Jerusalem. In this capacity, he was subjected to repeated persecutions. He wrote of his own experiences: “For God is the one who said, ‘Light will shine out of darkness.’ He has shone in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the presence of Jesus Christ. But we have this treasure in jars of clay, so that it is clear that the exceedingly great power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not overwhelmed. We are perplexed but not filled with despair. We are persecuted but not forsaken. We are struck down but not destroyed” (II Corinthians 4:6–9). “From Jews I received five times the ‘forty lashes minus one.’ Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked. I have spent a night and a day on the open sea. I have been on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, in danger from robbers, in danger from my own people, in danger from the Gentiles, in danger in the city, in danger in the wilderness, in danger at sea, in danger from false brothers. I have been at hard work and in hardship, in many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often in fasting, in cold and nakedness. Apart from everything else, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches” (II Corinthians 11:24–28). The church has long believed that he was executed by the Roman authorities. He ended his final years in a Roman prison. So, his own life stands as a testimony to his willingness to suffer extensive persecution for the sake of the gospel.
We see in his life and in his epistles another confirmation of the pattern established by the Second Person of the Trinity in His incarnation as Jesus Christ. Quoting Paul, “He existed in the form of God, but he did not consider his equality with God as something to hold on to. Instead, he emptied himself by taking the form of a servant, and he was born in the likeness of men. He humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, even death of a cross!” (Philippians 2:6-8). What is unique about Christianity is this: suffering is a means of worldwide dominion. “Therefore God also highly exalted him. He gave him the name that is above every name. He did this so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend, the knees of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth. He did this so that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (vv. 9–11). Christianity does not teach suffering for suffering’s sake. It teaches suffering for victory’s sake. This victory is ultimately the victory of Jesus Christ over his enemies.
2. A Vision of Victory
This is the theological background to Paul’s statement: “Now godliness with contentment is great gain” (I Timothy 6:6). This contentment is based on a specific eschatology: the victory of Christianity in history and eternity. It is the contentment of someone who believes that he is part of an unstoppable program of progress. As a covenant-keeper, he participates in the expansion of the kingdom of God in history. Paul made this clear in I Corinthians 15. He cited Psalm 110, which is the psalm that spells out God’s footstool theology. It says: “The Lord says to my master, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your footstool.’ The Lord will hold out the scepter of your strength from Zion; rule among your enemies. Your people will follow you in holy garments of their own free will on the day of your power; from the womb of the dawn your youth will be to you like the dew. The Lord has sworn, and will not change: ‘You are a priest forever, after the manner of Melchizedek’” (Psalm 110:1–4). The epistle to the Hebrews specifically identifies Jesus Christ as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 7). Therefore, Paul applied the language of Psalm 110 to Christ’s victory in history. “But now Christ, who is the firstfruits of those who died, has been raised from the dead. For since death came by a man, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ, who is the firstfruits, and then those who belong to Christ will be made alive at his coming. Then will be the end, when Christ will hand over the kingdom to God the Father. This is when he will abolish all rule and all authority and power” (I Corinthians 15:20–24). [North, First Corinthians, ch. 17]
Paul’s vision of victory was unique in the ancient world. His optimism regarding the outcome of the efforts of kingdom-builders in history provided the psychological impetus for generations of evangelists and missionaries to risk their lives and suffer death at the hands of covenant-breaking leaders in covenant-breaking societies. The crucifixion of Christ was the model for Paul. The ministry of Paul in turn is the model for Christians who are devoted to worldwide evangelism. “Be imitators of me, just as I am an imitator of Christ” (I Corinthians 11:1). [North, First Corinthians, ch. 15] The goal of evangelism is not simply the conversion of souls. This goal is the transformation of society. Paul and the disciples believed that the ethical transformation of individuals leads to the ethical transformation of institutions. They did not believe that God’s redemption in history is souls-only redemption. They believed that redemption applies to every area of life in which sin prevails. This means every area of life. Ethical sanctification is progressive. It is not simply personal sanctification. Personal sanctification leads to the sanctification of those areas of life in which the converted Christian now possesses authority. This means family sanctification. It means business sanctification. God’s promise of social sanctification in Leviticus 26:1–13 and Deuteronomy 28:1–14 did not end when the Romans burned the temple of Jerusalem. It still is in force.
Paul’s vision of victory rested on a specific doctrine of providence. Paul and the apostles did not believe that the world is random. They believed that there is cause and effect linking biblical ethics and success. Moses taught this to the generation of the conquest. “He fed you in the wilderness with manna that your ancestors had never known, so that he might humble you and test you, to do you good in the end, but you may say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my hand acquired all this wealth.’ But you will call to mind the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the power to get wealth; that he may establish his covenant that he swore to your fathers, as it is today” (Deuteronomy 8:16–18). [North, Deuteronomy, ch. 22] This declaration identifies money and wealth as aspects of covenantal confirmation. It legitimizes the pursuit of money and wealth. But it denies the pursuit of money and wealth for their own sake. They are to be seen as God’s positive sanctions on obedience, both individual and corporate.
In no other ancient religions was the pursuit of wealth legitimized to the extent that it was among the Israelites and the Christians. This pursuit had to be covenantal. It had to be wealth through service. This was the covenantal/theological framework of Paul’s declaration of contentment. Contentment is great gain, he said. But this contentment is not the product of psychological techniques of mystical withdrawal from the world. Rather, it is the contentment of someone with a warrior mentality who knows that he serves a king who cannot be defeated in history. His setbacks in life are part of a divine strategy that began before the foundation of the world. Life is not random. It is providential.
Optimism is basic to entrepreneurship. Individuals do not know the future, which is uncertain. Everyone must deal with this uncertain future. There is no guarantee in advance that any venture will be profitable. But entrepreneurs possess a degree of optimism that is not common among the general population. The fear of public failure does not burden them. It does burden most people. This fear is an enormous barrier to entry. For those people who are not seriously afraid of failure in their economic ventures, this barrier to entry keeps competition out of the marketplace. This is an advantage to those who possess this degree of optimism.
What is true of individuals is true of movements. Part III of Ludwig von Mises’ 1922 book, Socialism, is titled: “The Alleged Inevitability of Socialism.” He understood just how powerful this idea was. “Nothing has helped the spread of socialist ideas more than this belief that Socialism is inevitable. Even the opponents of Socialism are for the most part bewitched by it: it takes the heart out of their resistance” (Socialism, III:I:1). Christianity as articulated by Paul has an even greater degree of optimism. It is an optimism based on the idea that God is absolutely sovereign. Paul articulated this clearly in the ninth chapter of his epistle to the Romans: the section on Rebecca and her as-yet unborn twins, Isaac and Esau. It pervaded all of his thought.
Because Christianity affirms the doctrine of God’s creation of the universe out of nothing, Christians who believe this doctrine have an advantage over all those who believe in a world that evolved out of impersonal chance by way of unbreakable impersonal law. There is no sovereign personalism in the humanists' universe. There was no creation because there was no Creator. There was no design. There was no purpose. They do not believe that social causation is inherently ethical, that the outcomes of cause-and-effect reflect a specific form of ethics. They do not believe that this ethics is grounded in the revelation of a God who is sovereign over history. So, from the point of view of economic theory, Christianity and humanism are in permanent disagreement.
Whenever Christians believe Paul’s doctrine of contentment, and whenever they believe his doctrine of the sovereignty of God, they possess an advantage in both economic theory and economic practice. They believe in a world which is not a level playing field, let alone a world which is tipped in favor of covenant-breakers. They believe in a world in which economic causation is tipped in favor of biblical ethics. They should also understand that there is no one-to-one relationship between doing the right thing and getting rich. If they are wise, they have read the book of Job. Chapter 1 reveals that Job was the most righteous man of his era, and he was also the richest man. But then God let Satan bring him low for a period of time. Why? To demonstrate a point. What was the point? God’s sovereignty in history. He answers to no one. He declared this in chapters 38 through 41. Then He restored Job to greater wealth than before, as we read in chapter 42.
Initially, Job made his famous declaration: “Then his wife said to him, ‘Do you still hold fast to your integrity? Curse God and die.’ But he said to her, ‘You talk as a foolish woman talks. Should we receive the good from God and not receive the bad?’ In all this matter, Job did not sin with his lips” (Job 2:9–10). He was verbally content with his new conditions. Only in chapter 3 did he fall into sin when he attempted to defend his righteousness against three of his four visitors, who invoked ethical causation as the reason for his afflictions. They were wrong, and God condemned them later for their words (43:7–10).
Joseph was treated badly by his brothers and by Potiphar’s wife. He did not complain. He maintained his integrity, and he also maintained his efficiency. There is no sign that he was discontented with his condition. God raised him up, incident by incident, service by service, until he was the second most powerful man in the land. He became the deliverer of his family, and he became the deliverer of Egypt. He did not lose hope, as far as the text reveals. He continued to perform efficiently in all that he did, despite the fact that he had been delivered first into slavery, then into a prison.
Paul did not grow discouraged, despite the visible setbacks in his ministry. There was a fundamental optimism in his outlook that guided him through a series of disasters that would have defeated most other men. He came back from these setbacks. They did not defeat him. Here was his life’s declaration: “It is my eager expectation and certain hope that I will in no way be ashamed, but that I will have complete boldness, so that now as always, Christ will be exalted in my body, whether by life or by death. For to me to live is Christ and to die is gain. But if I am to live in the flesh, that means fruitful labor for me. Yet which to choose? I do not know. For I am hard pressed between the two. My desire is to depart and be with Christ, which is far better, yet to remain in the flesh is more necessary for your sake” (Philippians 1:20–24). This reveals the extent of his contentment. For the sake of service to the church, he was content to live. But he preferred to die. This was a strong declaration of faith. It was a declaration of faith that is common to martyrs.
One of the characteristic features of successful entrepreneurs is that several of their ventures may fail before one of them is successful. The bankruptcy laws and the laws establishing limited liability corporations make bankruptcy only a short-term setback for people who are not embarrassed to lose in public. Henry Ford is a classic example. He went bankrupt twice before the Ford Motor Company became one of the great success stories of the early twentieth century. He had great self-confidence. The first two sets of investors who shared his confidence wound up with nothing. But he continued to persevere, and finally he was a success. Walt Disney went bankrupt in 1923. Milton Hershey went bankrupt twice before he created the candy company that bears his name. Their intense optimism regarding their own efforts led to their recovery. The cosmic optimism of Christians should lead to even greater rebounds from setbacks.
In his magnum opus, Human Action, Mises devoted considerable space to the question of why we act. This is the methodological heart of his book. It is the basis of his economic theory. He said that we act because we are discontented with our present situations. He began his book with this observation.
We call contentment or satisfaction that state of a human being which does not and cannot result in any action. Acting man is eager to substitute a more satisfactory state of affairs for a less satisfactory. His mind imagines conditions which suit him better, and his action aims at bringing about this desired state. The incentive that impels a man to act is always some uneasiness. A man perfectly content with the state of his affairs would have no incentive to change things. He would have neither wishes nor desires; he would be perfectly happy. He would not act; he would simply live free from care. But to make a man act, uneasiness and the image of a more satisfactory state alone are not sufficient. A third condition is required: the expectation that purposeful behavior has the power to remove or at least to alleviate the felt uneasiness. In the absence of this condition no action is feasible. Man must yield to the inevitable. He must submit to destiny. (I:I:2)
I disagree with Mises in equating discontent with human action. “But action can only be imputed to a discontented being, and repeated action only to a being who lacks the power to remove his uneasiness once and for all at one stroke. An acting being is discontented and therefore not almighty. If he were contented, he would not act, and if he were almighty, he would have long since radically removed his discontent” (Human Action, II:I:11) God acts, but He is not discontented. Covenant-keepers also act, but they should not be discontented.
Christianity teaches that we can have contentment along with uneasiness. There is always uneasiness in a world filled with sin. Christians believe that sin can be progressively overcome in history, and they dedicate their lives in specialized efforts to roll back sin. There is an inherent reforming element in Christianity. It begins with self-reform, but it extends beyond self-reform. So, what Mises spoke of as uneasiness as a motivational factor in human decision-making, Christians can and should agree. But this does not imply that Christians should be discontented. Paul was clear about this. We must separate our contentment with respect to the providence of God and our roles in this province from uneasiness about our own performance. Jesus was quite clear about this. “The apostles said to the Lord, ‘Increase our faith.’ The Lord said, ‘If you had faith like a mustard seed, you would say to this mulberry tree, “Be uprooted, and be planted in the sea,” and it would obey you. But which of you, who has a servant plowing or keeping sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, “Come immediately and sit down to eat”? Will he not say to him, “Prepare something for me to eat, and put a belt around your clothes and serve me until I have finished eating and drinking. Then afterward you will eat and drink”? He does not thank the servant because he did the things that were commanded, does he? Even so you also, when you have done everything that you are commanded, should say, “We are unworthy servants. We have only done what we ought to do”’ (Luke 17:7–10). This outlook is basic to the Christian faith. There is always room for improvement in our lives. This applies to every aspect of our lives. This is the meaning of progressive sanctification. This is the meaning of extending the kingdom of God in history.
We must distinguish conceptually between a lack of contentment and the lack of ease. We servants are always uneasy about the quality of our performance, but this should not make us discontented. Contentment has to do with acceptance of that which we cannot change, for better or worse, without violating our fundamental principles. If we suffer setbacks for doing the right thing, we should rejoice. Paul wrote: “Not only this, but we also rejoice in our sufferings. We know that suffering produces endurance. Endurance produces character, and character produces certain hope, and that hope does not disappoint because the love of God has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us. For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly” (Romans 5:3–6). Always we must go back to Christ’s death on the cross as our model for victory. His death on the cross was followed by his resurrection, and then, 40 days later, by His ascension to the right hand of God (Acts 1:3, 9).
A lack of discontentment about our circumstances enables us to escape a phenomenon known as the hedonic treadmill. This phenomenon has been explored repeatedly by psychologists and economists who are part of the sub-discipline of economic theory known as behavioral economics. Wikipedia defines this idea. “The hedonic treadmill, also known as hedonic adaptation, is the observed tendency of humans to quickly return to a relatively stable level of happiness despite major positive or negative events or life changes. According to this theory, as a person makes more money, expectations and desires rise in tandem, which results in no permanent gain in happiness.” The behavioral economist Dan Ariely devoted a section of his book, The Upside of Irrationality (2010), to this issue. “And in failing to anticipate the extent of our hedonic adaptation, as consumers we routinely escalate our purchases, hoping that new stuff will make us happier. Indeed, a new car feels wonderful, but sadly, the feeling lasts for only a few months. We get used to driving the car, and the buzz wears off. So we look for something else to make us happy: maybe new sunglasses, a computer, or another new car. The cycle, which is what drives us to keep up with the Joneses, is also known as the hedonic treadmill. We look forward to the things that will make us happy, but we don’t realize how short-lived this happiness will be, and when the adaptation hits we look for the next new thing. ‘This time,’ we tell ourselves, ‘this thing will really make me happy for a long time’” (p. 175).
Ecclesiastes recognized this a millennium before the birth of Christ. “Whatever my eyes desired, I did not withhold from them. I did not withhold my heart from any pleasure, because my heart rejoiced in all my labor and pleasure was my reward for all my work. Then I looked on all the deeds that my hands had accomplished, and on the work that I had done, but again, everything was vapor and an attempt to shepherd the wind. There was no profit under the sun in it” (Ecclesiastes 2:10–11). [North, Ecclesiastes, ch. 2] The fact that modern psychologists and at least some economists are beginning to deal with this issue is positive. They are slow learners, but at least they are learning. But, as they learn even more, and as they get their articles published in peer-reviewed journals, their exhilaration will not last long. They may get tenure, but they will not get permanent satisfaction. “For the wise man, like the fool, is not remembered for very long. In the days to come everything will have been long forgotten. The wise man dies just like the fool dies. So I detested life because all the work done under the sun was evil to me. This was because everything is vapor and an attempt to shepherd the wind” (Ecclesiastes 2:16–17). [North, Ecclesiastes, ch. 3] He who begins with dissatisfaction ends with dissatisfaction.
A Christian economist should not begin his analysis with dissatisfaction. He should begin his analysis with the biblical doctrine of purpose: God’s and then man’s. One of man’s purposes is to reduce uneasiness, as Mises said. This is not true of God in heaven. But it was true of Jesus in His time on earth. His time in the garden of Gethsemane on the night of His arrest is indicative. “He went a little farther, fell on his face, and prayed. He said, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from me. Yet, not as I will, but as you will’” (Matthew 26:39). That was not evidence of discontent. Rather, it was evidence of His uneasiness about the crucifixion. But He decided to accept the will of the Father with respect to this uneasiness. Conclusion: uneasiness is not the same as dissatisfaction. Dissatisfaction is a form of discontentment. Discontentment is the way of vapor. It is an attempt to shepherd the wind.
The apostle Paul was adamant about the benefit of being contented. He spoke of it as a gain. It surely is gain. It is a positive sanction. Men should seek this gain in history.
In the new heaven and the new earth, covenant-keepers will not be discontented. But they will still be decision-makers. This is why we must not identify discontentment as the source of human action. People are purposeful when they act to improve their situations. But this is not the same thing as saying that they are discontented with their situations. Perhaps most people are, but they are not supposed to be. It is possible for them to experience contentment in circumstances in which they are experiencing difficulty. They of course would prefer to escape this difficulty, but this does not mean that they despair over their present conditions. They should be looking for ways to serve God better in good times and bad times.
Paul found ways of being contented with his circumstances in life, whether they were positive or negative. He gained the self-discipline that this attitude creates in a person’s life. He did not give up. He did not give up because he did not give up hope. There was always hope of deliverance. Even when he faced death, he had hope in deliverance. Death would be the answer to his hesitancy between being with God and serving the church.
This outlook is favorable to entrepreneurship. There is a necessary optimism for a life of entrepreneurship. People who are discouraged about the prospects of their ventures are not going to start ventures. They are convinced that there is an opportunity for profit from each of these ventures. People who become discouraged after the failure of a single venture are forfeiting opportunities to have successful ventures. The willingness to suffer a public failure and even public humiliation is basic to a life of successful entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneurship can come in many forms. An evangelist is an entrepreneur. A foreign missionary is an entrepreneur. Evangelists and missionaries are optimistic people. This is why they are willing to sacrifice precious time in order to risk setbacks in programs of evangelism and foreign missions. Where this optimism is lacking, evangelism and foreign missions are lacking.
Paul had a vision of victory. That vision of victory was the source of his contentment. His contentment was great gain to him. I concluded his vision of victory was great gain to him as well. He possessed this vision of victory at the beginning of his ministry, which is a ministry of persecution. But because of the intervention of Jesus Christ in his life on the road to Damascus, this transformed his vision of victory as a Pharisee into his vision of victory as an apostle. The letters that he wrote to churches and individuals as an apostle became foundational in the creation of Western civilization. His vision of victory for the kingdom of God was not misplaced.
______________________________
The complete manuscript is here: https://www.garynorth.com/public/department196.cfm
© 2022 GaryNorth.com, Inc., 2005-2021 All Rights Reserved. Reproduction without permission prohibited.