The Christian Attitudes toward the Idea of Work

Seymour Flops

Diamond Member
Nov 25, 2021
12,670
10,127
2,138
Texas
What follows applies whether you believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the Bible stories are allegory, or that the Bible is pure fiction, swallowed by gullible Europeans. It is about the West's religion and how it influenced the way in which westerners view the idea of work.

The Bible's first mention of work is by God, who created the Heavens, Earth, and all else in six days, and then rested.

Adam and Eve were created and lived in a paradise in which they did not have to work. When they broke the rules, part of the consequences was that humanity would be expelled from that place of easy abundance and would be forced to work by hunger and by need. The purpose of work is to perform an activity that is either not preferred or is les preferred than others in order to change the nature of one's reality. In Eden, nothing in their reality needed to be changed. They had everything they needed, they wanted nothing, and the did no work for any of it. Upon the expulsion, the natural world was a place that was quite hostile to the human desire to survive, since they must survive by eating daily and taking shelter from the elements. By working, humans transformed that hostile place into a livable habitat.

If the Bible is an allegory, then the pre-human animals who lived by instinct were the Adam and Eves, never working, because they did not know what work was. Like Adam and Eve, food was in easy supply, thanks to prehensile limbs and tails, ability to smell prey, etc. Animals hunt and gather, but they do it as an instinct. Animals never take breaks from their tasks, because they don't understand them to be tasks. To torture the allegory further, by learning to use tools, to cook food, or preserve it and especially by learning to plant food instead of gathering edible parts of wild plants, they doomed themselves as evolved humans to be workers, maybe forever, but definitely for the foreseeable future.

Yet, the Jews have always been a very hard-working and well-educated race. During the centuries in which they had no homeland, they avoided agricultural work, choosing trades and professions instead. Hard to blame them with farmland being so easily confiscated by the newest anti-Jewish government. Why did the Jews decide that work was to their own benefit, when the Bible clearly presents it as a punishment?

Jesus himself never praised a person for being hard-working, as far as I know and I don't know it all. He praised faith in God and in himself. He asked his disciples to come and be fishers of men. Before that, they were fishers of fish, who earned a living for themselves by providing sustenance to those they traded with. Jesus was dismissive of the idea of fishers, wine makers, bakers and farmers as vital to providing human needs. He simply miracled food into great abundance on an as-needed basis, with a bit of condescension towards people who worried over minor things like eating.

Early Christians "worked" hard, but always under one form or another of a master's lash. Slavery, Feudalism, debt bondage, and other means by which humans are forced to toil to enrich anyone but themselves, were the standard lives of medieval Europeans. The church offered comfort in the form of a better (after) life to come. In my opinion, the work done by slaves and serfs should not be called "work," but by another word. I would use the word "toil," but it would need to denote forced labor, not working to produce so that the worker can consume.

More to come, but feel free to comment on what I've said so far.
 
Last edited:
So, anyway . . .

One thing about the Bible that I "called out" as a kid (before I understood that they Baptists I grew up with believed that the Bible was one hundred percent true and inspired by God Himself, was that God disdained Cain's offering while accepting Abel's. Why? As I understood it, it was because Cain raised his plant-based crops and took pride in them. He had turned God's admonishment to Adam that he would eat his food by the sweat of his brow as a punishment and turned it into a point of pride. Meanwhile, Abel lived by caring for the sheep that God provided through no particular effort on Adam's part.

'How could that have been fair?' was my reasoning.
 
What follows applies whether you believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, that the Bible stories are allegory, or that the Bible is pure fiction, swallowed by gullible Europeans. It is about the West's religion and how it influenced the way in which westerners view the idea of work.

The Bible's first mention of work is by God, who created the Heavens, Earth, and all else in six days, and then rested.

Adam and Eve were created and lived in a paradise in which they did not have to work. When they broke the rules, part of the consequences was that humanity would be expelled from that place of easy abundance and would be forced to work by hunger and by need. The purpose of work is to perform an activity that is either not preferred or is les preferred than others in order to change the nature of one's reality. In Eden, nothing in their reality needed to be changed. They had everything they needed, they wanted nothing, and the did no work for any of it. Upon the expulsion, the natural world was a place that was quite hostile to the human desire to survive, since they must survive by eating daily and taking shelter from the elements. By working, humans transformed that hostile place into a livable habitat.

If the Bible is an allegory, then the pre-human animals who lived by instinct were the Adam and Eves, never working, because they did not know what work was. Like Adam and Eve, food was in easy supply, thanks to prehensile limbs and tails, ability to smell prey, etc. Animals hunt and gather, but they do it as an instinct. Animals never take breaks from their tasks, because they don't understand them to be tasks. To torture the allegory further, by learning to use tools, to cook food, or preserve it and especially by learning to plant food instead of gathering edible parts of wild plants, they doomed themselves as evolved humans to be workers, maybe forever, but definitely for the foreseeable future.

Yet, the Jews have always been a very hard-working and well-educated race. During the centuries in which they had no homeland, they avoided agricultural work, choosing trades and professions instead. Hard to blame them with farmland being so easily confiscated by the newest anti-Jewish government. Why did the Jews decide that work was to their own benefit, when the Bible clearly presents it as a punishment?

Jesus himself never praised a person for being hard-working, as far as I know and I don't know it all. He praised faith in God and in himself. He asked his disciples to come and be fishers of men. Before that, they were fishers of fish, who earned a living for themselves by providing sustenance to those they traded with. Jesus was dismissive of the idea of fishers, wine makers, bakers and farmers as vital to providing human needs. He simply miracled food into great abundance on an as-needed basis, with a bit of condescension towards people who worried over minor things like eating.

Early Christians "worked" hard, but always under one form or another of a master's lash. Slavery, Feudalism, debt bondage, and other means by which humans are forced to toil to enrich anyone but themselves, were the standard lives of medieval Europeans. The church offered comfort in the form of a better (after) life to come. In my opinion, the work done by slaves and serfs should not be called "work," but by another word. I would use the word "toil," but it would need to denote forced labor, not working to produce so that the worker can consume.

More to come, but feel free to comment on what I've said so far.

For starters....

pretty much the entire book of Ecclesiastes is an ode to work. In taking joy in your toil and enjoying the fruits of your labors. All over Proverbs too.
 
So, anyway . . .

One thing about the Bible that I "called out" as a kid (before I understood that they Baptists I grew up with believed that the Bible was one hundred percent true and inspired by God Himself, was that God disdained Cain's offering while accepting Abel's. Why? As I understood it, it was because Cain raised his plant-based crops and took pride in them. He had turned God's admonishment to Adam that he would eat his food by the sweat of his brow as a punishment and turned it into a point of pride. Meanwhile, Abel lived by caring for the sheep that God provided through no particular effort on Adam's part.

'How could that have been fair?' was my reasoning.

Too simplistic by half. You are looking at the curse as a simple punishment but it is in fact more like a "mixed blessing"....

Man will grow crops by the sweat of his brow, a weighty curse indeed. But it comes with the satisfaction too of eating the fruits of his labors--see Ecclesiastes. God curses Eve with marriage (heh...not really but sort of) and painful childbearing. Ask almost any woman if that pain was worth it.

Now to the point I suspect you really want to make:

"That's not fair of God"

My first answer would be God has all the information; we do not.

My second would be: if God is God He can do with His created as He pleases. That is an unpopular answer but I cannot see what is false in it.
 
I just order stuff online and it gets delivered by a hard-working person. And I tip them well to do it.

Except Amazon, I don't have the opportunity to tip them...
 
Meanwhile, Abel lived by caring for the sheep that God provided through no particular effort on Adam's part.
Grin. Have you ever cared for sheep? Not an easy task. Further, Jesus did not present himself as the the Good Gardener, but as the Good Shepherd.
 
Too simplistic by half. You are looking at the curse as a simple punishment but it is in fact more like a "mixed blessing"....

Man will grow crops by the sweat of his brow, a weighty curse indeed. But it comes with the satisfaction too of eating the fruits of his labors--see Ecclesiastes. God curses Eve with marriage (heh...not really but sort of) and painful childbearing. Ask almost any woman if that pain was worth it.

Now to the point I suspect you really want to make:

"That's not fair of God"

My first answer would be God has all the information; we do not.

My second would be: if God is God He can do with His created as He pleases. That is an unpopular answer but I cannot see what is false in it.
As is often the case, your post is well done except the part where you guess at what point I'm really making.

When I make my point I will state it plainly.

Yes, people enjoy the fruits of their labors but only when the work is voluntary. The tone of God in the casting out story is not one of encouragement to enjoy work.
 
As is often the case, your post is well done except the part where you guess at what point I'm really making.

When I make my point I will state it plainly.

Yes, people enjoy the fruits of their labors but only when the work is voluntary. The tone of God in the casting out story is not one of encouragement to enjoy work.

Fair enough.

No, the curse was far from an encouragement, and Adam and Eve were going from a place of complete contentment to a place of labor (Adam) and pain (Eve). However--and again--there is no difference what the work is. We are all to work and/or labor and it's all to be dedicated to God. Here: "Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ."--Col 3:23-24

If work has no blessing attached and any work is a curse how do you explain the verses above and this one?

"You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be blessed, and it shall be well with you."--Psalm 128:2

The case for God choosing Abel and rejecting Cain for their professions seems weak. However the case from Romans 9--God's sovereign choice--is not. Note the Bible says Abel was elected not by works: verses 10-12

Not only that, but Rebecca’s children were conceived by one man, our father Isaac. Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad, in order that God’s plan of election might stand, not by works but by Him who calls, she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
 
Fair enough.

No, the curse was far from an encouragement, and Adam and Eve were going from a place of complete contentment to a place of labor (Adam) and pain (Eve). However--and again--there is no difference what the work is. We are all to work and/or labor and it's all to be dedicated to God. Here: "Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward. You are serving the Lord Christ."--Col 3:23-24

If work has no blessing attached and any work is a curse how do you explain the verses above and this one?
I never said that work had no blessings and that all work is a curse. I said that was the gist of the story of the fall and expulsion from paradise.

Yes, other parts of the bible talk about the glory of work. They are among my favorite passages, especially Ecclesiastes 9:10 from King Jimmy*

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.

"You shall eat the fruit of the labor of your hands; you shall be blessed, and it shall be well with you."--Psalm 128:2

The case for God choosing Abel and rejecting Cain for their professions seems weak. However the case from Romans 9--God's sovereign choice--is not. Note the Bible says Abel was elected not by works: verses 10-12

Not only that, but Rebecca’s children were conceived by one man, our father Isaac. Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad, in order that God’s plan of election might stand, not by works but by Him who calls, she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
I could talk about election, but I've never known anyone who believed in it. If you do, I'll start a thread about that.

So . . .

While the Catholic Church was in power and defined Christianity in Western Europe, work was indeed a curse for most people. The overwhelming majority of people worked in agriculture, on land they did not own, and for subsistence rather than for professional pay. They were serfs, differentiated from the Roman slaves (and American slaves), mainly in that the nobility that kept them, were not allowed to kill them or physically abuse them without the King's permission. During that time "The Church" as the Roman church certainly was in W. Europe, emphasized salvation through works, especially confession, penance, tithing, and the buying of indulgences.

At some point in Europe, what is now known as the "Protestant Work Ethic" was born. That way of thinking emphasized the value of work, specifically in building wealth for an individual, as an unselfish act that honors God's exhortation to "have dominion over the Earth."

Apparently, there is some dispute among historians as to which came first, a free economy, capitalism, or the Protestant Work Ethic. To me it is blatantly obvious:

The freeing of the economy was necessary for capitalism. Prior to free-market capitalism, the idea of a work ethic to produce wealth for an individual would have been laughed off of any feudal agricultural unit. How can a peasant/serf enrich themselves by plowing harder, working more hours, and taking interest in the quality of their work? That would enrich their masters, not them.

So, the protestants saw how successful their members could be in the free market and adapted the parts of the bible that indeed extol the blessing of work. That blending of religion and economic ambition led to the section of North America between French Canada and Spanish Mexico to be settled by people uniquely suited to survive and thrive in a land that had known little civilization and no industry prior.

That work ethic has so far survived the introduction of European style socialism, by our intellectuals. It still works, no pun intended.

It lives on in explicit form today in the "Prosperity Gospel" which has many people not only believing that God wants them to work hard and succeed, but that economic success is a measure of God's approval. Apparently, God will open that eye of the needle and let the wealthy in.

The great thing is, that whether the Christian religion is the authentic revealed truth of God, or just another offshoot of the original mono theistic religion, this attitude toward work has produced more benefit to mankind than anything except maybe the idea of economic freedom itself.

So, just a question or two:

Did Adam and Eve do any work in the Garden prior to the Fall?

Will we work in the afterlife?

Do you believe that we will rise in glorified bodies to rule the Earth with Jesus? If so, will we work?

I tell my fellow teachers who are Christians that, since I was once saved-always saved, I will be there with them. But since I have lived in the World since, I will likely have to still be a Department Chair (teacher joke).

*Please don't be offended that I call it "King Jimmy." My preacher used to say that to remind us that it was the original bible that is the infallible word of God and not the human versions, great though many of them are.
 
I never said that work had no blessings and that all work is a curse. I said that was the gist of the story of the fall and expulsion from paradise.

Yes, other parts of the bible talk about the glory of work. They are among my favorite passages, especially Ecclesiastes 9:10 from King Jimmy*

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.


I could talk about election, but I've never known anyone who believed in it. If you do, I'll start a thread about that.

So . . .

While the Catholic Church was in power and defined Christianity in Western Europe, work was indeed a curse for most people. The overwhelming majority of people worked in agriculture, on land they did not own, and for subsistence rather than for professional pay. They were serfs, differentiated from the Roman slaves (and American slaves), mainly in that the nobility that kept them, were not allowed to kill them or physically abuse them without the King's permission. During that time "The Church" as the Roman church certainly was in W. Europe, emphasized salvation through works, especially confession, penance, tithing, and the buying of indulgences.

At some point in Europe, what is now known as the "Protestant Work Ethic" was born. That way of thinking emphasized the value of work, specifically in building wealth for an individual, as an unselfish act that honors God's exhortation to "have dominion over the Earth."

Apparently, there is some dispute among historians as to which came first, a free economy, capitalism, or the Protestant Work Ethic. To me it is blatantly obvious:

The freeing of the economy was necessary for capitalism. Prior to free-market capitalism, the idea of a work ethic to produce wealth for an individual would have been laughed off of any feudal agricultural unit. How can a peasant/serf enrich themselves by plowing harder, working more hours, and taking interest in the quality of their work? That would enrich their masters, not them.

So, the protestants saw how successful their members could be in the free market and adapted the parts of the bible that indeed extol the blessing of work. That blending of religion and economic ambition led to the section of North America between French Canada and Spanish Mexico to be settled by people uniquely suited to survive and thrive in a land that had known little civilization and no industry prior.

That work ethic has so far survived the introduction of European style socialism, by our intellectuals. It still works, no pun intended.

It lives on in explicit form today in the "Prosperity Gospel" which has many people not only believing that God wants them to work hard and succeed, but that economic success is a measure of God's approval. Apparently, God will open that eye of the needle and let the wealthy in.

The great thing is, that whether the Christian religion is the authentic revealed truth of God, or just another offshoot of the original mono theistic religion, this attitude toward work has produced more benefit to mankind than anything except maybe the idea of economic freedom itself.

So, just a question or two:

Did Adam and Eve do any work in the Garden prior to the Fall?

Will we work in the afterlife?

Do you believe that we will rise in glorified bodies to rule the Earth with Jesus? If so, will we work?

I tell my fellow teachers who are Christians that, since I was once saved-always saved, I will be there with them. But since I have lived in the World since, I will likely have to still be a Department Chair (teacher joke).

*Please don't be offended that I call it "King Jimmy." My preacher used to say that to remind us that it was the original bible that is the infallible word of God and not the human versions, great though many of them are.

The story of Cain and Abel is about election. "Cain I have loved, Abel have I hated...". It is a lot more about election than it is about whether God prefers agriculture or sheep herders.
 
Did Adam and Eve do any work in the Garden prior to the Fall?
Adam's job was to maintain ("dress and keep") the garden.
Will we work in the afterlife?
Physical work will be done (weapons of war will be made into tools of production).
Do you believe that we will rise in glorified bodies to rule the Earth with Jesus? If so, will we work?
The resurrected church, the firstfruits, will teach and guide those resurrected during the millenial rule of Christ. How we will appear is uncertain.
 
So, anyway . . .

One thing about the Bible that I "called out" as a kid (before I understood that they Baptists I grew up with believed that the Bible was one hundred percent true and inspired by God Himself, was that God disdained Cain's offering while accepting Abel's. Why? As I understood it, it was because Cain raised his plant-based crops and took pride in them. He had turned God's admonishment to Adam that he would eat his food by the sweat of his brow as a punishment and turned it into a point of pride. Meanwhile, Abel lived by caring for the sheep that God provided through no particular effort on Adam's part.

'How could that have been fair?' was my reasoning.

I think the story is about the transition from hunter gatherers to agriculture. They no longer trusted in God's providence.
 

Forum List

Back
Top