Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 5 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
The Kingdom that Turned the World Upside Down  /  Chapter 24, How Christ's Teachings Disappeared  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 5
On wealth, the hybrid argued: “There is no Old Testament commandment that forbids storing up treasures on earth,” so it became acceptable; what does that reasoning suggest about how they handled Jesus’ direct teachings, and what heart-level desires might that reasoning protect?
Another way to ask: If they said wealth is fine because the Old Testament doesn’t forbid storing treasures, what does that show about how they treated Jesus’ clear commands? What desires in the heart might that excuse be protecting?

Direct Answer That reasoning suggests they treated Jesus’ direct Kingdom teachings as negotiable—keeping them only when they could be made to fit an Old Testament kingdom pattern, and otherwise “explaining” them away. It also seems to protect a desire for security, luxury, and social power that the “golden age” mindset promised.

Support from Transcript:

  • The hybrid “explained away all of Christ’s Kingdom teachings except where his teachings also fit the Old Testament model.”
  • Wealth logic: “There is no Old Testament commandment that forbids someone from storing up treasures on earth. Therefore… it was all right.”
  • It became acceptable “to retain or reach out for positions of earthly power.”
  • The new paradigm envisioned Christians enjoying “worldly power and luxuries.”
  • The Church taught class distinctions: nobility should not live like peasants, implying wealth and status were to be preserved.
Discussion Follow-ups What kinds of Bible arguments do we use today when we want permission to keep money or status? If Jesus’ teaching conflicts with our comfort, do we reinterpret Jesus—or do we rethink our desires?

Jumpstarter 5 of 10
Back Questions Next