Biola University
How is work connected to one’s purpose and meaning in life? What can churches do to foster a biblical view of work? How do certain lower paying jobs contribute to a person’s sense of purpose? We’ll answer these and more with our guest David Bahnsen around his new book Full Time: Work and the Meaning of Life.
David Bahnsen is the Managing Partner and Chief Investment Officer of The Bahnsen Group, a wealth management firm based in Newport Beach, California. The firm oversees $4 billion in client's assets. He is the author of several books including, Crisis of Responsibility: Our Cultural Addiction to Blame and How You Can Cure It, and Mis-Inflation: The Truth About Inflation, Pricing, and the Creation of Wealth.
Episode Transcript
Scott Rae: [upbeat music] How is work connected to a person's purpose and meaning in life? What can churches do to foster a biblical view of work? How do certain lower-paying jobs contribute to a person's sense of purpose? We'll answer these and more with our guest, David Bahnsen, around his new book entitled Full-Time: Work and the Meaning of Life. I'm your host, Scott Rae.
Sean McDowell: And I'm your co-host, Sean McDowell.
Scott Rae: This is Think Biblically from Talbot School of Theology at Biola University. David, so glad to have you with us. I... Well, your book was just terrific. Lots of good stuff in here that I'm looking forward to getting into.
David Bahnsen: Well, thank you so much for having me. Looking forward to discussing it-
Scott Rae: Yes
David Bahnsen: ... With you.
Scott Rae: So what do you see as the way that, in which the culture in general views work today?
David Bahnsen: Well, it's interesting because the book is actually sort of divided a little bit, or it was certainly inspired in my writing by the, dichotomy between how the culture views work and how the church views work. And, and in the year-plus change since the initial book came out, I've multiple times, reflected on the fact that if it were merely a problem with the church, that where my own view is that the church's view of work has become deficient, I'm not sure that I would have written the book, or at least written it when I did. I always had a passion for the church having a sort of refreshed and renewed vigor around a theology of work and vocational calling, and I know it's something, Scott, that's been meaningful in your, in your adult life and ministry as well. But what happened was the culture and its view of work that really animated me to write this book, I guess, more quickly than I otherwise would have. You know, maybe I could have, justified delaying a book for the church around a message of work for another decade or so, but out of the COVID moment, it occurred to me- ... That this existence of something called non-essential workers should have created-
Scott Rae: Mm-hmm
David Bahnsen: ... A lot more opposition than it did. But I don't actually mean by that necessarily something particular to COVID policy and the, and the healthcare response, all of those things that have their own kind of, you know, controversies and discussion in their own right. What I mean is the idea, wherever it was going to fit into COVID policy, just the basic idea that we have such a thing as non-essential workers, that, many people doing their rank-and-file jobs are non-essential, these production of goods and services, that there is a kind of caste system, that certain people have a really important or elevated work, and that a whole bunch of us do not. And that is not something that I think is traditionally acceptable in the American ethos. I think that there's historically been a much higher celebration of entrepreneurialism, of risk-taking, and yes, of basic hard work. And I sensed in the early part of this decade that was more and more going away. And then finally, I'll close my long answer to your short question with this.
Scott Rae: [laughing]
David Bahnsen: Really, elite pop culture, you think of, you know, The Atlantic and The New Yorker and other publications like that oftentimes take a bend ideologically that is very different than my own, but it is considered, you know, highbrow, high-quality writing and respectable, talented writers, what have you. I read just article after article in publications like that, suggesting that America was suffering through a mental health crisis, an alienation crisis, a time of, really severe, antisocial behaviors, problematic responses, whether it be with drugs and alcohol, suicide, depression, loneliness, really, you know, awful things that none of us as believers would want to see happening. And time and time again, these publications and this sort of cultural response was that work was the cause of these problems. And, and I became convinced that work was a solution to those problems.
Sean McDowell: All right, now I've got to, I've got to pivot and follow with that question: How is work a solution to depression, and loneliness, and alienation that we typically say is the result of either the breakdown of the family or maybe social media?
David Bahnsen: So I, disagree with the diagnosis that it is, [clears throat] caused by a breakdown of family, but I think that a breakdown of family is an additional component that we will see with a breakdown of spirituality, a breakdown of, a sort of moral culture, and that what you will see is a breakdown of family along with a breakdown of civic life, mediating institutions, church, you know, participation, and then along with this, in other words, these are all symptoms of the same problem, a breakdown of work, a breakdown of vocational calling. Now, why I feel very comfortable saying explicitly and unapologetically that I view work as a solution to many of these things is that I believe work provides purpose, and the vast majority, not all, I'm not getting into, you know, some of the nuances of clinical issues and where there's been abuse and certain traumas. I mean, I know that there are going to be exceptions. I'm obviously speaking at a macro, not micro level here. But at the macro level, I believe the source of most of these things comes from purposelessness.... Purposelessness that is often derived from one's own secularism, one's own unbelief, you know, from a flawed metaphysics. But nevertheless, work, because I believe it is God's created design for His people, has an inerrant purpose embedded in it. So by separating ourself from work or by stripping joy from work, or by trying to reduce work to something that is purely atomistic and purely transactional, we have taken away a great source of joy and something that is very cathartic in our lives. And as, you may have read in the introduction of the book, I wanted to write about this biographically, because I don't just believe intellectually or theologically that work is, provides purpose, and therefore, a great deal of emotional relief. I believe it personally, because for me, throughout my adult life, entering adulthood, going through the loss of my father and a, and a significant trauma and those sorts of difficulties, I discovered early on that work really did have that kind of therapeutic, benefit embedded in it. And of course, as I evolved in my faith and understanding of scriptures, I learned that this is all by design.
Sean McDowell: David, let me have a little fun with this and just push back. And if I said, "Well, wait a minute, you sound a little bit like a Marxist saying we are economic beings, and the root of our suffering is alienation from our work," what exactly would the difference be between Marx's diagnosis of the problem and a Christian diagnosis of the problem as you see it?
David Bahnsen: Yeah, I believe that Marx and I, on this point, are at polar opposites. [laughing]
Sean McDowell: [laughing]
David Bahnsen: Marx's view is that mankind is at war with nature. And so that that inerrant conflict is that the, quote-unquote, "proletariat," is having to do something that is, by his very being, at odds with what, mankind's soul yearns for. And my view is that mankind, by God's design in nature, was made to work, and in pursuing such, is doing something that is harmonized, not at war with nature. And so Marx and I would have very, opposite views. Nor, by the way, if you're defining an economic man in the same way, nor am I saying that mankind's efforts in work are reducible to, are merely reducible to output. I believe that the benefits I'm referring to, have compensation, very often. They have, material sustenance, they might have social strata, but, I'm not reducing it merely to any of those things. I'm referring to something that I consider ontological, that mankind, in his very soul, is made to be productive, and that out of that useful, creative, imaginative, resourceful spirit, which we get by nature of being made in the image of God, in other words, which we share with God, that provides mankind his very being, and from that, I derive this view of work. Obviously, this is all in stark contrast to Marx's view of the world.
Scott Rae: I think that, I think that was a pretty good answer. [laughing]
David Bahnsen: [laughing]
Sean McDowell: That was awesome.
Scott Rae: I'm delighted to hear you distance yourself from the Marxist view. [laughing]
David Bahnsen: [laughing] You must be very surprised, Scott, yes. [laughing]
Scott Rae: Not in the least.
David Bahnsen: [laughing]
Scott Rae: Now, l- you began to sh- provide a little theological framing for your view of work, as that kind of purposeful service. What would be the maybe the one or two clearest places in the Scripture that bring this out?
David Bahnsen: Well, I mean, I start, as I try to, with, awful lot of things these days, with Genesis chapter 1. And I think that particularly this subject, it's very important to start in Genesis 1, because there is, in Christian theology, a sequence in history. You know, we believe in a doctrine of creation, and then a, understanding of the fall, and then, you know, the, redemption, and we believe in a future glory, a new heavens and new earth. And so as a sort of just table stakes of Christian theology, we believe that God made us for a purpose, and that God made us to be with us. And, and it's what we refer to in my tradition as the Emmanuel principle. God made us to be in communion with Him, and in Genesis 1, He told us what this meant. When we refer to mankind as being made in the image and likeness of God, four times in two verses, it repeats that, and then goes on to define it as us being made to be fruitful, to multiply, and to fill the earth. And, and out of that, the, there is- out of that multiplicative, mandate, there is a creational mandate by which we rule over the earth, and steward it, and cultivate it, and so forth. And then it's, it's further defined into Genesis chapter 2 as well, the caring for the garden and whatnot. But even just sort of limiting what I'm talking about theologically to Genesis 1:26-31, mankind being made very good, with the rest of the creation being made good, was, defined in the context of mankind's unique ability to co-create with God.
Scott Rae: So-
David Bahnsen: And so I think too many Christians know that we are made in the image of God. We use the language, we like the vocabulary. There's something beautiful about it, and there's something elevated, but I don't know that enough people have contemplated it.... I know what it doesn't mean. It does not mean that I am omniscient or omnipotent like God, but what does it mean to be made in His image and likeness? And in Genesis chapter 1, it is entirely defined in the context of mankind as a creator, as as w- being made with the capacity to build, to do, to rule, to multiply. And I recognize a very important distinction, that we cannot create ex nihilo as God can. We- but we can create out of the creation of the world, out of the raw materials God gave us. So I think that our theology of work has to start in Genesis 1, and it makes it quite easy, Scott, too, I want to point out, 'cause I think you and I both have dealt with a lot of objections over the years, where people will say that sin changed this- ... That work is often referred to as part of the curse. And I think that really, deficient interpretation in Genesis chapter 3, takes on entirely different meaning when we start ourselves in Genesis 1 and realize that God created work and created mankind for work before sin entered the world.
Scott Rae: So how has the fall affected work then? Or, or has it?
David Bahnsen: Well, well, I think that in Genesis 3, the language that we're often used to using is really sufficient. Sweat of the brow, thorns and thistles. Work now carries with it, there will be, a challenge, there will be, obstacles, there will be a physical toil, there will be a stress and anxiety. But never is the underlying work the curse. This is actually, of all the things that are challenging in Christian hermeneutics, one of the easier things, because it was accompanied by another curse with another, you know, attendant analogy with women and the pains of childbirth. And I make the point in the book that I have never once, at any point in my life, heard someone suggest that in Genesis 3, children became a curse. We recognize the perfectly logical but also theological consistency of saying children are a blessing, but there will be pains in childbirth. Likewise, I believe what Genesis 3 established with the curse was that work is a blessing, but there will be pains or sweat of the brow in our work.
Scott Rae: Yeah, I think it's fair to say that, God cursed the ground in Genesis 3. That's different than God cursing work itself. And I think that your reflection on Genesis 1, I think, is particularly helpful. The idea that, we were created to be fruitful. We, we often take that, "Be fruitful and multiply," and we put those together referring to procreation, but, the author, I think, intended those as separate. To be fruitful had an economic and a vocational implication to it. It's, it's primarily an economic term, not a pro- not one that refers to procreation. So-
David Bahnsen: Well, well, I agree entirely, and I've also tried to make the point that when we decide to reduce it to something merely procreative, we've really done something, kind of bizarre if we believe that we were to fill the earth and not build any roads or any infrastructure or any, you know, civilization. In other words, mankind, embedded in the idea of multiplication, to which, to your point, the fruitfulness is an economic concept, the very procreation itself required allocation of resources. It required creation of new goods and services. And, and so from what we know just anthropologically about mankind, we would probably want a higher quality of life, more efficiency, you know, greater standard of living. But even if we don't get- go down that rabbit hole right now, the mere existence of filling the earth required not merely the actual procreation process, but also the activities that would sustain it.
Scott Rae: Yeah, yes. Excellent point.
Sean McDowell: David, you point us back to, Genesis 1 and 2 about how work is good. We're made in God's image. Working is a part of who God has built us to be, and we are fulfilled when we work in God-honoring ways. But also in Genesis 1, we have the Sabbath. So how does the notion of Sabbath fit into your understanding of work?
David Bahnsen: Well, I try to make the point in the book that it is one of the great, sadnesses of this conversation- ... That in a day and age in which people seem obsessed with what they call work-life balance, and they want this greater, you know, sort of, man-defined understanding of rest and recreation, and, they want their employer to provide yoga classes in the middle of the afternoon. And, and we've sort of used a lot of pop psychology-type understandings, to pervert what a normal work, context might look like, that we've done that at the same time that we've abandoned the Christian understanding of Sabbath rest. And, and I believe that a lot of Christians who have been comfortable holding on to the normative of taking a day of rest are willing to ignore the other normative, which is part of the same verse in Exodus chapter 20: "Six days shalt thou work," and then, "the seventh be the day of rest." So you're right, it is Genesis 1 that models the creation account, and in Exodus 20, it appeals to Genesis 1.... As the basis for the fourth commandment, and it connects the dots for us, so there's no ambiguity. Not only did God work six, rest one, not only did God tell us to work six and rest one, God did so because He did, and all of that is explicitly laid out for us in the fourth commandment.
Scott Rae: Now, David, to follow up on that, I mean, it's, it's-- I think you're right, that the dichotomy between work and family is a false dichotomy. But I wonder if keeping work and family in proper balance does at times require choices that we have to make. And I'm, you know, I was, I'm skeptical of the cultural notion that you can have it all in any sense, meaningful sense, this side of eternity, because it seems to me in a fallen world, we're, we have to make choices. And what would you say to the person who says, "Well, if I, if I really want to have a thriving career and a flourishing family, I've got to make choices from time to time?"
David Bahnsen: Well, I believe that this is something that most human beings intuitively and obviously know to be true, and we are tremendously comfortable with the reality of our finite nature, that we are limited by time and space, and we're inherently comfortable with it in seemingly every area of our lives except for when it comes to work. Then, all of a sudden, we have to create these big dichotomies and again, that phraseology of work-life balance that I hold in such contempt. [chuckles] That-
Scott Rae: Don't sugarcoat it there, brother. [chuckles]
David Bahnsen: Well, and I am holding back, actually. [laughing] that, I am a husband while I am at work, and that I am engaged in the vocational calling I'm engaged in when I'm at home or with my wife or on a date or whatever, and both of those things are true at once, is no more complicated than any other statement of mankind not being in two places at once. That we have to make choices, as you said, is a given in life because we are allocating scarcity, and far more scarce than capital is time. And that it requires wisdom for a Christian person interested in ethics and obedience. That there are times in which I might miss a kid's, school event because of something pressing with work, and times I might have to leave the office early to be at a kid's soccer game. These are prudential matters that I believe too many Christians, overly complicate because, to your point, they are, tempting to compartmentalize and make something perfect that can't be made perfect, and the reason is because of our finite nature. We, we are limited by time and space. However, ontologically, you know, our being does not change. The circumstances do. And so you have to have wisdom to know w- in certain cases of trade-offs, and priorities, and time and place, and whatnot. And I believe a Christian businessman closing one of the biggest deals of his life, m- and there's, some, you know, obstacles to overcome and a lot of people relying on a particular deal, and it's a substantive achievement economically or entrepreneurially, and they make a decision to have to miss a kid's, you know, school event, I would argue that they not only didn't do anything wrong, but they probably would have done something wrong to not make that decision. And likewise, when you're incredibly busy at the office and there's a lot of things you're working on, and yet you find out that your wife is really sad at home and needs you, and she's struggling with something, or your daughter's, you know, having a challenge and your presence is requested at home, you would be wrong to not prioritize. Those are just matters of Christian living that we have to make judgment calls in. I don't think we all get them right all the time. I know I haven't always got them right. But I do believe that when we say, "I need to have a priority system that tells me in all cases, family come first and work comes second," that's an extra-scriptural thing that is being done manipulatively. It is not that complicated to say that all at once, we want to, juxtapose and harmonize these various priorities of kingdom living.
Sean McDowell: I think it's fair to say there's... In the way you phrased it, that there's kind of competing decisions we have to make with finite resources. I'm 48 years old, and, you know, I start thinking about the number of years I have with my kids at home and work. And one thing I've heard people say to me a number of times is: "You know, I don't really have any regrets about not spending more time with my kids, but I have a lot of regrets about the time that I spent at work as opposed to with my kids." Do you agree with that? How do you make sense of that? Like, sometimes looking at the end pointing back gives a little bit of clarity of what's most or more important. Like, [chuckles] how would you approach that kind of, you know, framing?
David Bahnsen: Yeah, I mean, I actually did approach that exact framing in the book- ... And I said that we hear a lot the cliché that no man ever says at the end of his life, "I wish I spent more time at the office." And I say in the book, "I think a lot more people at the end of their life should be saying, 'I wish I spent more time at the office.' [chuckles] " So, so I'm essentially taking a very contrarian view here, that, celebrating-... A kind of marginalized view of our work, and then trying to baptize it a little bit with a certain extra pious regard for family, I find problematic, I find unconvincing. I do not want a person to say: "I got to the end of my life, I ignored my family, I failed in my duties as husband and father, but at least I know I was obedient as an excellent craftsman, or businessman, or engineer, or lawyer," whatever it is. The-- to me, just as much as we would repudiate that, we ought to repudiate the other side, if I'm correct, which I believe I am, that God called us to be both fathers, husbands, and diligent workers. And, and so this is a false dichotomy that says at the end of our life, we have to determine which one was important and which one was not. And I do believe that particularly in, the 20th century into the 21st century Christian Church, that too often we have, allowed ourselves to focus on one at the expense of the other, and I don't think that's wise.
Scott Rae: Now, David, you're pretty-- in the book, you're pretty tough on churches and pastors for the particular way that they approach work. What's the basic problem you see in the way churches are addressing this?
David Bahnsen: Well, I think, I think you're right that I am. I often, by the way, wish that we-- they weren't addressing, because I think that that might be better than the way in which sometimes it is addressed. I really do-- I did try my best to be civil, and charitable, and fair, and I put myself in a position of accountability, where I sent, in particular, Chapter Nine is a chapter that is specifically dealing with the work ethic of pastors, and I sent it to three sort of spiritual accountability partners to make sure that I was appropriate in my, in my tenor and tone, and they all replied that they thought I was holding back too much, that I was, you know, overly guarded. But to answer your question, what I'm most critical of is that when work is discussed from pulpits, it is almost always done with a cautionary tone. The presupposition is, work can be a real problem, let's all reel it back a little bit. And my view of the culture, when I see three point one million prime working age men missing from the workforce, when we see the, greatest number of people in their twenties into their thirties living at home in history, when we see the amount of video game playing and pot smoking and other, behaviors, and I think just this basic labor participation rate of twenty-five to fifty-four-year-old men being somewhere around eighty-three, eighty-four percent, the same number of men who were working in the Great Depression, I don't know who these pastors are preaching to. And, and so that's my criticism, is not that they're wrong to say the words, you know, "Don't work so much that you ignore your family." It's more to suggest that perhaps they're giving a sermon about the fears of tidal waves in Kansas. In, in other words, it's not gonna happen. Don't worry about it. You, you are spending, microphone time, preaching against something that is not the lowest hanging fruit of the spiritual needs of the congregation. And, and because I've been a Christian my whole life and been a church attender my whole life and visited so many churches, I felt that at some point, I'd developed a representative sample of my impression here that I was being fair, and that this is a systemic issue, that evangelical Christianity has decided to paint work as this thing we need to be very careful about, and very rarely, if ever, preaching about work as this thing we need to be embracing as a vital part of the kingdom of God.
Sean McDowell: David, I got a last question for you. I love my job. There's nothing I'd rather do unless the San Antonio Spurs called and wanted a point guard-
Scott Rae: [chuckles]
Sean McDowell: ... But I'm not holding my breath. I love my job. I know you love yours. You're passionate about what you do. There's probably a lot of people still listening and going, "You know what? I don't-- I'm dissatisfied with my job or my career path." Maybe there's some regret that's there.
Scott Rae: Or I'm, or I'm unemployed.
Sean McDowell: Or someone-- Yeah, good point, Scott, or somebody who's unemployed. What, what encouragement would you give to these listeners?
David Bahnsen: Well, I appreciate the question 'cause you allow me to tout the fact that now, a year after the book's come out, the publisher has done a new edition in paperback, where they allowed me to put a bonus chapter in.
Sean McDowell: Nice.
Scott Rae: So nice.
David Bahnsen: That's, that's about, almost thirty-five hundred words of me going through and answering the most common questions that came up- ... In the aftermath of the initial book. And this one, and derivatives of it, is on top of that list. You are exactly right, that you have a job you enjoy, I have a job I enjoy. I happen to have a job that I also am very sensitive to the fact, has made me a wealthy person. It carries with it a both social and economic strata that, it is not gonna be very uncommon for people who have that type of work and remuneration to say, "Oh, I like my job." Now, that's not to say everybody in high stress world of finance and whatnot, even if it's a glamorous position, they may not all like it, but it is a very different deal than a messenger who is working with his hands, who's hurting his back, who feels the, a tediousness in the work, or has a boss who they don't, you know, respect or look up to, or who doesn't listen to them. I recognize there are a lot of different situations people face that make the fundamental message of the book harder.... And yet what I'm suggesting is that we have to separate the circumstantial components from the underlying message, and then allow our circumstances to change out of the underlying message. That fundamentally, if work was something we were created to do, and that we do not have to enter it with a begrudging spirit or a resentful spirit, that ought to reshape and reform our attitude and allow us to then deal with those various frustrations. I may have achieved a certain material success in my work now, but I have had to go through all sorts of challenges and stresses and difficulties along the way. But my theology of work enables me to appreciate not merely the destination, but the journey itself. That's what I want for, people, especially young men and women entering the workforce or middle-aged people like myself. You said you're 48. I just turned 50 last year. The halftime message that I'm very critical of in the book was largely geared towards middle-aged men, suggesting that there was a systemic issue of men deciding, "Okay, I've, I've bought a house, I got my kids through college. I've-- I kind of climbed the ladder a bit, but, you know, none of that really left me fulfilled. What, what do I do now? Let's now pivot the second half of my life into something meaningful." And I fundamentally believe that's wrong, that what we did in the first half of our lives did have meaning, and it does give us purpose and cause for joy. There will be challenges, anxieties along the way. You know, when someone is unemployed, that could be one of the greatest anxieties we face. We have a responsibility. We feel a pressure. There's, can be tremendous material risks and concerns, as a provider with a family. But, all of those things reinforce the point I'm making. We are concerned when we're unemployed because it is good to be unem-- to be employed, and we want that employment to carry with it as much agency, as much satisfaction, as much opportunity as possible. So this is another one of the reasons why I feel it important to tether this message to a defense of a market economy, that the dynamism, the mobility, the opportunity that I would celebrate in a free society enables more people to enjoy work, to have more, optionality in work. So all of these things are really connected, but they're connected along the same theological lines, which is God's created design for us.
Scott Rae: David, this-- I appreciate your extended answer to that. That's very helpful, very insightful, and, we have, we have so enjoyed having you with us to talk about your book. A very important subject. As, as you mentioned, I've been working in this space for a long time and greatly appreciated the insight that you brought. And it's just, it's, it's really good stuff. So I want to commend to our listeners your book, Full-Time: Work and the Meaning of Life, by David Bahnsen. David, thanks so much for joining us. It's been a great conversation.
David Bahnsen: Thanks so much for having me, guys. Appreciate it.
Scott Rae: This has been an episode of the podcast Think Biblically: Conversations on Faith and Culture, brought to you by Talbot School of Theology at Biola University, offering programs in Southern California and online, including master's programs in Christian Apologetics, Science and Religion, Spiritual Formation, Old and New Testament, Theology, Marriage and Family Therapy, Pastoral Ministry. I may be forgetting one or two there, but I think that's most of them. In addition to undergrad programs in Bible Theology and Ministry. Visit biola.edu/talbot in order to learn more. If you'd like to submit comments, ask questions, or make suggestions on issues you'd like us to cover or guests you'd like us to consider, email us at thinkbiblically@biola.edu. If you enjoyed today's conversation with our friend David Bahnsen, give us a rating on your podcast app and share it with a friend. Join us Friday for our weekly cultural update. Thanks for listening, and remember, think biblically about everything. [upbeat music]
